|
Please don't use this thread as a platform to argue about religion. -semioldguy |
On September 13 2012 20:30 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 19:17 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 18:35 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 18:07 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 17:43 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 17:30 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 15:35 starfries wrote:
I think a better way to precipitate real change is to cater to the more level-headed majority. if we show them they have no reason to hate us, then less people will support violent extremist movements. the ones that are left will lack influence and the resources to pull off major acts of terrorism. I mean, your average Muslim in America is not going to shoot you for drawing a picture of Mohammed - but it's not because you've been taunting him with pictures of Mohammed every week. it's because he knows you're just a guy like he is, not some kind of monster. This I feel is a very good post. I feel the western world(and USA in particular) need to realize this and stop creating ammunition for the terrorist groups to then fuel in the heart of just the average muslim(and arab too). The obvious sad part about it is, there is really no short term solution to do this. At some point, western world needs to just step up and be the bigger man. So when people suicide bomb you for drawing their prophet, you think the solution is to stop drawing their prophet? How about when they then proceed to suicide bomb you for opposing their political interests, will you do what they want? How about when they suicide bomb you for not worshipping their deity, will you convert? At what point will you realize that the cowardly strategy of appeasement simply boils down to giving violent criminals what they want out of fear? I'm not saying that you should refrain from that. The solution isn't to tip toe around certain ethnic groups, but it most certainly isn't about bombing everyone between yourself and a terrorist organisation. My point is, going into countries, killing civilians and going "woops" doesn't help. We didn't exactly do that in Libya, yet here we are... While that is true, I'm more speaking in a general scope on this, mostly due to the talks of Al Quada likely being behind/linked to the attack. The goal of al-Quaeda is to destroy the US economy so that they can turn the world into an Islamic kingdom.Given this, refraining from offending them achieves nothing, unless you are arguing that we should prevent terrorism by voluntarily converting to Islam and replacing our government with a Wahhabi caliphate. I suppose that would stop offending them. Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 19:17 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 18:35 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 18:07 Zarahtra wrote:
I feel you are acting like muslims as a whole are evil human beings that cannot be reasoned with. That's just shortsighted, like I said, they have a very good reason to hate the western world, and we need to stop giving them the reason. If we don't, there will always be a minority of truly evil people that will keep exploiting that hate and getting those people armed. Now you tell me, if I killed your mother and you had a gun in your hand, would I walk away alive? starfries was specifically talking about offending Muslims with mass mockery. It's one thing to suggest that we should refrain from invading Arab countries and killing civilians. It's quite another to suggest that we should refrain from offending a group to prevent them from engaging in terrorism against us. I'd argue my point is closely related to starfries's. Their hate for the western world stems both from some peoples lack of respect we have for their culture and religion and the killing of civilians. You missed the fact that their hatred stems also from the fact that their religion specifically instructs them to wage holy war on unbelievers and unite everyone under Islamic rule.The idea that "respecting" violent criminals will appease them is incredibly naive. It just means they'll find a different excuse for their crimes. User was warned for this post
My main point is, I very much doubt all Al-Quaeda members grew up hating USA and felt it was their mission in life to blow themselves up. Some undoubtably do, but western countries need to stop making it easier for them to recruit others.
While I certainly don't think people should roll over against terrorism, you need realize that sometimes the actions taken to exterminate terrorism, instead grows it. I like Cenk Uygur a lot, and he made a similar point(expressed a lot better and with data at hand) a few months back(this concerning Yemen): Linkie
|
|
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Those pictures are quite touching.
|
On September 13 2012 21:23 Velr wrote:
Why? For us reading in the media about who made it and then telling it here whiteout any way of knowing better?
In short; the blame towards Israel in this thread was nothing more than ignorantly scapegoating the first given target with a mob mentality. When it comes to Israel, Islam and basically any other group that is in the news, a lot of people feel that way, so I am not surprised. Because even if it's a lie, people will ignore that fact because it is comfortable for them. It's nice to ignore when you are dead wrong.
Spreading hate on the basis of a lie is wrong. Spreading it on the basis of truth is questionable. The attacks on the embassies were planned acts of Islamist extremists, that used the actions of a somewhat disturbed provocateur as an excuse.
|
wow, thanks for posting those pics. Quite moving. I actually feel awful now about some of the views on this thread, because I was inclined to agree with them.
|
On September 13 2012 21:39 Zarahtra wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 20:30 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 19:17 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 18:35 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 18:07 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 17:43 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 17:30 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 15:35 starfries wrote:
I think a better way to precipitate real change is to cater to the more level-headed majority. if we show them they have no reason to hate us, then less people will support violent extremist movements. the ones that are left will lack influence and the resources to pull off major acts of terrorism. I mean, your average Muslim in America is not going to shoot you for drawing a picture of Mohammed - but it's not because you've been taunting him with pictures of Mohammed every week. it's because he knows you're just a guy like he is, not some kind of monster. This I feel is a very good post. I feel the western world(and USA in particular) need to realize this and stop creating ammunition for the terrorist groups to then fuel in the heart of just the average muslim(and arab too). The obvious sad part about it is, there is really no short term solution to do this. At some point, western world needs to just step up and be the bigger man. So when people suicide bomb you for drawing their prophet, you think the solution is to stop drawing their prophet? How about when they then proceed to suicide bomb you for opposing their political interests, will you do what they want? How about when they suicide bomb you for not worshipping their deity, will you convert? At what point will you realize that the cowardly strategy of appeasement simply boils down to giving violent criminals what they want out of fear? I'm not saying that you should refrain from that. The solution isn't to tip toe around certain ethnic groups, but it most certainly isn't about bombing everyone between yourself and a terrorist organisation. My point is, going into countries, killing civilians and going "woops" doesn't help. We didn't exactly do that in Libya, yet here we are... While that is true, I'm more speaking in a general scope on this, mostly due to the talks of Al Quada likely being behind/linked to the attack. The goal of al-Quaeda is to destroy the US economy so that they can turn the world into an Islamic kingdom.Given this, refraining from offending them achieves nothing, unless you are arguing that we should prevent terrorism by voluntarily converting to Islam and replacing our government with a Wahhabi caliphate. I suppose that would stop offending them. On September 13 2012 19:17 Zarahtra wrote:On September 13 2012 18:35 sunprince wrote:On September 13 2012 18:07 Zarahtra wrote:
I feel you are acting like muslims as a whole are evil human beings that cannot be reasoned with. That's just shortsighted, like I said, they have a very good reason to hate the western world, and we need to stop giving them the reason. If we don't, there will always be a minority of truly evil people that will keep exploiting that hate and getting those people armed. Now you tell me, if I killed your mother and you had a gun in your hand, would I walk away alive? starfries was specifically talking about offending Muslims with mass mockery. It's one thing to suggest that we should refrain from invading Arab countries and killing civilians. It's quite another to suggest that we should refrain from offending a group to prevent them from engaging in terrorism against us. I'd argue my point is closely related to starfries's. Their hate for the western world stems both from some peoples lack of respect we have for their culture and religion and the killing of civilians. You missed the fact that their hatred stems also from the fact that their religion specifically instructs them to wage holy war on unbelievers and unite everyone under Islamic rule.The idea that "respecting" violent criminals will appease them is incredibly naive. It just means they'll find a different excuse for their crimes. User was warned for this post My main point is, I very much doubt all Al-Quaeda members grew up hating USA and felt it was their mission in life to blow themselves up. Some undoubtably do, but western countries need to stop making it easier for them to recruit others. While I certainly don't think people should roll over against terrorism, you need realize that sometimes the actions taken to exterminate terrorism, instead grows it. I like Cenk Uygur a lot, and he made a similar point(expressed a lot better and with data at hand) a few months back(this concerning Yemen): Linkie
No they just hate everyone that don't share or believe in their same belief and ideology. They hate anything and anyone that steps or sneezes anywhere near their principle which in this case was their religious prophet
moral of story from this event some users here need to learn: It is ok to hate the extremist. Bunch of ignorant pricks. But it is not OK to hate on an entire religion or group as the pictures above have shown. Not everyone in a group they are affiliated with are a hateful bunch.
I was saddened to hear the news of the attack. Now I'm just not feeling well from all the bigoted hate. This is almost as bad as the beginning of 9/11 where US people were throwing rocks and shit at people that had a shred of Arabic heritage
|
because it is totally relevent to the above pictures and touches on some truths of the matter
![[image loading]](http://www.atheistcartoons.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/somethingdoesnt.jpg)
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Jihad is not generally read to mean "war against everyone". It's been declared via fatwa's by a small number of religious scholars that the militant adhere to. It's as if Catholics could follow whichever bishop they wanted to instead of the pope. One stupid bishop could stamp his approval on a new age of crusades and the followers could justify it by saying "but it's the work of god."
Jihad is one of the most misunderstood terms in the West.
|
I'm far from the thought all christians are innocent and don't commit crime, but some more extreme muslims get too angry at some religious provocation. They need to relax more, and let no innocent people die.
|
On September 13 2012 22:55 darkness wrote:I'm far from the thought all christians are innocent and don't commit crime, but some more extreme muslims get too angry at some religious provocation. They need to relax more, and let no innocent people die.
Religion is still too influtial within the society of those parts of the world. So you will have in influx of more religious people and with that more extreme religious people ( still a minority but nonetheless bigger than elsewhere ). There exist very religious christians and also a few fundamentalist christians as well BUT within our societies they are outnumbered by such a larger number and don't have any role in goverment that this doesn't matter because there voice will never really be heard or taken seriously. When Christianity was more influential politically a few hundred years ago it wasn't much better here either.
|
On September 13 2012 22:38 Tewks44 wrote:wow, thanks for posting those pics. Quite moving. I actually feel awful now about some of the views on this thread, because I was inclined to agree with them.
The riot was huge. The "we're sorry" people are so tiny compared to the people who rioted. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're sorry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the riot. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're sorry, we were wrong Islam is fine"?
|
Starting not to judge a Religion 1.8 Billion or just about 1/8 of all mankind is following based on some extremists and the pack mentality evolving during riots.
|
On September 13 2012 23:24 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 22:38 Tewks44 wrote:wow, thanks for posting those pics. Quite moving. I actually feel awful now about some of the views on this thread, because I was inclined to agree with them. The riot was huge. The "we're sorry" people are so tiny compared to the people who rioted. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're sorry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the riot. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're sorry, we were wrong Islam is fine"?
No of course. You're supposed to do the same thing than you did (that you should have done in fact...) when you compared the 1.5 billion muslim with the size of the riot. Put things in perspective.
EDIT : To be more accurate, after the riot you should have say :
"The muslim community is huge. The "we're angry" people are so tiny compared to the people who live peacefully. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're angry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the muslim people. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're angery, we were wrong Islam is evil!"?"
But you just hate. Classic, but exhausting...
|
|
|
On September 13 2012 23:31 Agathon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 23:24 Silidons wrote:On September 13 2012 22:38 Tewks44 wrote:wow, thanks for posting those pics. Quite moving. I actually feel awful now about some of the views on this thread, because I was inclined to agree with them. The riot was huge. The "we're sorry" people are so tiny compared to the people who rioted. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're sorry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the riot. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're sorry, we were wrong Islam is fine"? No of course. You're supposed to do the same thing than you did (that you should have done in fact...) when you compared the 1.5 billion muslim with the size of the riot. Put things in perspective. EDIT : To be more accurate, after the riot you should have say : "The muslim community is huge. The "we're angry" people are so tiny compared to the people who live peacefully. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're angry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the muslim people. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're angery, we were wrong Islam is evil!"?" But you just hate. Classic, but exhausting...
When did I compare every muslim to the rioters? I'd love to see where I said that.
All I'm saying is the riot had way more people than the "anti-riot" did. Am I wrong?
|
So just so people are on the up and up, there are some reports coming out right now that the actors have distanced themselves from the film, saying that a lot of the derogatory dialogue and statements made in the film were dubbed over to include the Prophet and Mohammed.
Also, to the people who can't understand the angry reactions, please try and understand that this is a culture and part of the world that has been maligned and exploited by the West - British and U.S. - for a long time. Also, they see this trailer of a film that they think is going to be distributed to thousands of theater around the U.S. basically maligning the figure that is a symbol for their religion, principles, and way of life.
Even sadder still is that this film and trailer may have been released just to incite this kind of violence. Whoever perpetrated this act specifically deserves our criticism, not Muslims as a whole.
|
On September 14 2012 00:03 suspiria wrote:
So just so people are on the up and up, there are some reports coming out right now that the actors have distanced themselves from the film, saying that a lot of the derogatory dialogue and statements made in the film were dubbed over to include the Prophet and Mohammed.
Also, to the people who can't understand the angry reactions, please try and understand that this is a culture and part of the world that has been maligned and exploited by the West - British and U.S. - for a long time. Also, they see this trailer of a film that they think is going to be distributed to thousands of theater around the U.S. basically maligning the figure that is a symbol for their religion, principles, and way of life.
Even sadder still is that this film and trailer may have been released just to incite this kind of violence. Whoever perpetrated this act specifically deserves our criticism, not Muslims as a whole.
I agree, we should be angry with the murderous mob and with the idiots releasing this BS film with it's intent to have riots started in the first place.
|
"Islam is a cancer, period," he repeatedly said in a solemn, accented tone.
Any hate is cancer, period.
Too much hate already on this post, don't forget what started it, a guy who deliberatly released a movie which was going to have consequences. And in top of that, a shit-ass movie.
|
On September 13 2012 23:58 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 23:31 Agathon wrote:On September 13 2012 23:24 Silidons wrote:On September 13 2012 22:38 Tewks44 wrote:wow, thanks for posting those pics. Quite moving. I actually feel awful now about some of the views on this thread, because I was inclined to agree with them. The riot was huge. The "we're sorry" people are so tiny compared to the people who rioted. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're sorry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the riot. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're sorry, we were wrong Islam is fine"? No of course. You're supposed to do the same thing than you did (that you should have done in fact...) when you compared the 1.5 billion muslim with the size of the riot. Put things in perspective. EDIT : To be more accurate, after the riot you should have say : "The muslim community is huge. The "we're angry" people are so tiny compared to the people who live peacefully. Notice how the pictures are so close up - trying to show less people, because the "we're angry" (protest?) pales in size comparison to the muslim people. What are we supposed to do now? "Oh, looks like they're angery, we were wrong Islam is evil!"?" But you just hate. Classic, but exhausting... When did I compare every muslim to the rioters? I'd love to see where I said that. All I'm saying is the riot had way more people than the "anti-riot" did. Am I wrong?
Your right, but it's not all what your saying.
"Oh, looks like they're sorry, we were wrong Islam is fine". So you considere it's bad, am I wrong?
And if you think this way, it's because you didn't put in perspective the number of rioters and the 1.8 billion muslim. Muslims who didn't killed anybody (and don't hate USA) are way more than the rioters.
I'm just using the same arguments to proove the opposite of what you're saying.
|
On September 13 2012 22:47 BluePanther wrote:
Jihad is not generally read to mean "war against everyone". It's been declared via fatwa's by a small number of religious scholars that the militant adhere to. It's as if Catholics could follow whichever bishop they wanted to instead of the pope. One stupid bishop could stamp his approval on a new age of crusades and the followers could justify it by saying "but it's the work of god."
Jihad is one of the most misunderstood terms in the West.
If you knew how Islamic denominations are formed, you would understand that saying:
"Jihad is"
is in itself ignorant.
The awful truth is that depending on the reading and which hadiths are ignored and which are embraced, both views of Jihad (internal and external) are true.
Hadiths are either well sourced, or poorly sourced, but that doesn't matter.
If you have a scientific report on what Jihad means, I can still choose to believe that my best friend knows better.
The reliability of a hadith has no meaning. People will pick the ones they want. The problem is that there are so many that you can paint any picture you like.
The truth, is that a muslim terrorist is no less accurate about Islam than a pacifist muslim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RA0bJ.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/cvmEV.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fqpeE.jpg)
