|
Please attempt to distinguish between extremists and non extremists to avoid starting the inevitable waste of time that is "can Islam be judged by its believers?" - KwarK |
On May 23 2013 04:23 SiroKO wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:10 GeneticToss wrote:
I don't know how you can call it Islamic fundamentalism when there is nothing in the Qu'ran that justifies killing innocent people. It just doesn't make sense to me. Call it a radical political sect of Islam if you want but not Islamic fundamentalism.
More importantly though, I'm sorry for this soldier's death and I hope justice is done. Islamic faith is not only based on the Qu'ran, besides Takfiri would disagree with you. Takfiri actually believes in a litteral interpretation of the Qu'ran and Sunna, which lead them to murders. So you actually couldn't be more wrong, you are in fact at the exact opposite of the truth. Litteral interpretation of the old testament+talmud and qu'ran+sunna justify murders in all sort of circumstances.
Where in any of the religious works you've described is a prescription for literal interpretation? There are none, and therein lies the problem in your reasoning. Literalism is an atextual dogmatic mode of religious thought that seeks to subvert the vast majority of established scholastic religious tradition, meaning it, in itself, amounts to an extremist and fringe perspective, both in Christianity and Islam.
|
Btw I'm very concerned with the CL final in wembley in 3 days.
Seems like the perfect spot and the perfect time to make a hit.
|
On May 23 2013 04:22 Steveling wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:18 Makro wrote:
we have plenty of that type of guys waiting for a moment like this in europe unfortunately, my condolences for the familiy of the soldier That's sadly true, even here, as peaceful as we are, in the last couple years the islamist immigrants are showing disturbing activity(hence the rise of that fascist party). Why can't we ship em all where they came from?
Wish we could. But im affraid we just have to bare the sight of them bearing signs like "behead those who insult islam"
And now one of them shouting allah Akbar, hatching a head off, in broad daylight. while pretty much warning everybody that "you will not be safe"
No Wonder people like brevik felt he needed to save his country. He wont be the last, im pretty sure of that.
|
Waiting until the bigger picture becomes clear before making associations isn't being PC, it's called being prudent and intelligent in ones' judgment. Deb and Finkelkraut would certainly get along swimmingly though, that much is true.
You're not being prudent and intelligent in your judgment farv, you're pushing a certain storyline first to prove your moral superiority and second because of your irrational fear of "Islamophobia." Just what about saying jihadis are jihadis is anti-Islamic, by the way? Did I say Islam is a joke faith based partially on a moon worship cult in Arabia or something? That's true by the way (the moon part not the joke part). Saying that would be anti-Islamic.
Saying that people who yell the jihadi motto are jihadis, anti-Islamic?
And in your prudent and intelligent responses farv, you haven't considered the possibility that they are psychopaths whose psychopathy caused them to latch onto a violent form of Islam, in which case everyone would be right. Wouldn't that be nice?
At the end of the day farv we both know that these guys are jihadis and will be shown as such even beyond your standard of a doubt, you're just moral posturing because of your intense need to feel morally superior through PC thinking.
|
On May 23 2013 04:24 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:13 soon.Cloak wrote:On May 23 2013 04:08 EatThePath wrote:On May 23 2013 03:55 soon.Cloak wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 EatThePath wrote:On May 23 2013 03:28 blobrus wrote:On May 23 2013 03:26 HaRuHi wrote:
So random guy kills guy that is paid to kill. What an outrage... How incredibly insensitive. People die all the time, what do you want him to say? It's a glib comment, but the implication is a valid critique on media coverage and personal perspective. "People die all the time". So now murder should be treated like a regular death? The implication is that soldiers are equal to murderers. That's valid to you? And aside from all of that, being right doesn't make you any less insensitive. If your parents got killed, it would be insensitive to tell you that they deserved it, even if they did. So "What we want him ti say" is that it's sad, and if he feels anything else, he can keep that to himself. Seriously... You have missed the point. Whether or not haruhi has caused offense, he questions the global relevance of the event, and probably the way moral lines are drawn, but I'll let him speak for himself. How many people are murdered every day that you never hear about? Are you offended that they aren't even noticed? What is a regular death? Is dying from preventable hunger or disease a regular death? Aren't you offended about that too? Not to get too off topic, but the original response was "How incredibly insensitive". Do we agree to that? If we do, then I think we agree that no defense of the first post was necessary. No this is the right train of thought, I'm glad you steered there. My point is that haruhi shouldn't be shushed. His comment does no harm to anyone, and possibly gets someone thinking. It seems at best vapid to point out personal offense, at worst aggressively closed-minded. I also took it as an opportunity to amplify the sentiment: Why do I care? Should this be a focal point? How is it being presented, and is there something missing? I believe you should always ask these questions and take issue with anyone who implicitly dismisses them. I hope that explains it. Note that since the thread was started, the title has changed from "terror attack" to "soldier was beheaded", a factual notification instead of a political viewpoint.
It's insensitive. That's enough of a reason that he shouldn't say it. I can also make a post about how I'm happy that 9/11 happened and that the Americans deserved to die, but I shouldn't, even though it doesn't hurt anyone, because it's insensitive (unless you consider insulting someone "hurting them", in which case the original post also was hurtful to anyone that is/knows a soldier, and would be insulted to hear that soldier compared to a common murderer).
If you want to start a thread discussing biased media coverage and a lack of direction of focus, in order to make people think, that makes sense. But to hijack a thread about a murder to espouse your beliefs about that is wrong.
|
On May 23 2013 04:20 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:13 K_Dilkington wrote:On May 23 2013 04:03 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2013 03:56 K_Dilkington wrote:On May 23 2013 03:51 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 DeepElemBlues wrote:
They shouted Allahu Ackbar because that's what Muslim jihadis yell when they're doing jihad.
The spine-breaking bends some people will undertake to not look at what's right in front of their eyes. Geez.
Get back in your scoliosis brace farv, you're hurting yourself. Because it is impossible for crazies to yell whatever the fuck they want after they've spilt blood? Get back to your Anti-Islamic neckbrace Deb, you're craning a bit too much. Right, so if I say i did something because of X you automatically assume that's not the case? Interesting logic. Stop making excuses for extremism, being tolerant against intolerance doesn't make any sense to me. No, you have no idea what you are talking about. Yelling "Allahu Ackbar" does not make me a Muslim anymore than saying "In Nomine Patris" makes me a Roman Catholic. At this current juncture, there is no reasonable way to judge the "authenticity" of these mens' religious motivations insofar as the committal of this crime is concerned, and the way you and the likes of Deb are oh so quick to immediately judge them as card carrying Muslims speaks volumes in terms of how easily the public is manipulated with surface level proclamations. In the event that these men are found to be involved in Islamic extremism outside this terrible act, your indictments will be justified. In the meantime, you are simply a puppet. You are just writing jibberish. You're right that saying "In Nomine Patris" doesn't make you a Roman Catholic but that's not what I stated. If you kill someone and call on Allah, or the Christian God it's not illogical to assume there's a connection. To automatically assume that someone is trying to decieve is irrational. Where does not assuming anything fall on the scale between the rational and irrational? Assuming these killers can be tied to an entire religion because they uttered two words during their attack is sloppy at best and downright ignorant at worst. Do you have some information we don't as to the confirmed identity of these individuals? Passports, interviews, sworn statements, background checks, etc.? No, you don't. Farv is right in that anybody can say anything for any reason. Taking what two psychopathic murderers say at face value sounds irrational to me.
There are eyewitness reports stating the men made political statements. That speaks to motivation behind this attack. Sure they could be lying, but at this point it seems correct to take their statements at face-value. Obviously they will be checked out and interviewed by police.
I don't see why you are jumping through logical hoops attempting to come up with a convoluted theory as to why these perpetrators would be lying about their motivations for their actions. If they gave another reason for the attack, such that it was personal and that the man was known to them and they were giving him payback for some grievance, would you jump through similar hoops about how the men could be lying? I doubt it.
The men told eyewitnesses they were Muslims. They said 'it was God's will' and "We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you." So now are you going to claim these eye-witnesses are lying?
|
Meh
Another episode in the vicious circle of violence
Mass media coverage will encourage more persecution to muslims/arabs, fueling the rise of more extremists (0.000000001% of muslims/arabs? altough the world will certainly not perceive it that way) who might participate in more extreme acts of this kind...
As if the economic crisis did'nt create enough tensions amongst poor communities already.
Gotta sell the news!
|
On May 23 2013 04:26 knOxStarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:22 soon.Cloak wrote:On May 23 2013 04:21 knOxStarcraft wrote:
Religion can cause people who aren't insane to commit acts of insanity, or maybe being religious makes them insane. Not sure if that's the case here, of course, but I wish people would stop trying to defend religion like it's OK. Aww, cmon, we were trying to avoid this turning into a religion thread  Well people seem to be offended when people bring up the possibility that religion is a big contributing factor in this case, which it very well might be. Given that fact, how can we avoid talking about religion at all in this thread?
I guess you're right, it had to happen eventually...still, I'd say 50/50 that this thread gets closed because of that.
|
On May 23 2013 04:15 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:05 AnomalySC2 wrote:On May 23 2013 03:41 Lycaeus wrote:On May 23 2013 03:32 AnomalySC2 wrote:
They should be executed in the most painful manner possible. Does nothing but show your own degree of inhumanity. They deserve to be shown humanity after brutally stabbing and decapitating a random soldier in the middle of a street for no apparent reason? Having someone film it makes it just that much more disgusting to me. I don't think executing someone in the most painful manner possible is "showing humanity", but that might just be me.
That was my point...why show people whom are as evil as it gets compassion?
|
On May 23 2013 04:28 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +Waiting until the bigger picture becomes clear before making associations isn't being PC, it's called being prudent and intelligent in ones' judgment. Deb and Finkelkraut would certainly get along swimmingly though, that much is true. You're not being prudent and intelligent in your judgment farv, you're pushing a certain storyline first to prove your moral superiority and second because of your irrational fear of "Islamophobia." Just what about saying jihadis are jihadis is anti-Islamic, by the way? Did I say Islam is a joke faith based on moon worship or something? At the end of the day farv we both know that these guys are jihadis and will be shown as such even beyond your standard of a doubt, you're just moral posturing because of your intense need to feel morally superior through PC thinking.
You're not being prudent and intelligent in your judgment Deb, you're pushing a certain storyline first to prove your intellectual superiority and second because of your irrational fear of Islam. Just what about saying that saying "Allahu Ackbar" does not necessitate Islamic adherence is anti-Islamaphobic, by the way? Did I say Islamaphobia is a joke fear based on moon worship or something?
At the end of the day Deb, we both know that waiting more than 12 hours before proclaiming that these men are jihadis is not a PC nor illogical decision, you're just politically posturing because of your intense need to feel intellectually superior through knee jerk, prescriptive thinking.
|
In my opinion, this wasn't a religious fueled attack at all... So, I don't understand why the discussion is mainly on religion at all? The only religious aspect you can even garner out of this was the statement he was shouting. His entire argument/justification has nothing to do with religion or any element of religion. He was merely a man praising his lord before he performed a sin. (Like repenting at the time of his action)
|
On May 23 2013 04:26 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:23 SiroKO wrote:On May 23 2013 04:10 GeneticToss wrote:
I don't know how you can call it Islamic fundamentalism when there is nothing in the Qu'ran that justifies killing innocent people. It just doesn't make sense to me. Call it a radical political sect of Islam if you want but not Islamic fundamentalism.
More importantly though, I'm sorry for this soldier's death and I hope justice is done. Islamic faith is not only based on the Qu'ran, besides Takfiri would disagree with you. Takfiri actually believes in a litteral interpretation of the Qu'ran and Sunna, which lead them to murders. So you actually couldn't be more wrong, you are in fact at the exact opposite of the truth. Litteral interpretation of the old testament+talmud and qu'ran+sunna justify murders in all sort of circumstances. Where in any of the religious works you've described is a prescription for literal interpretation? There are none, and therein lies the problem in your reasoning. Literalism is an atextual dogmatic mode of religious thought that seeks to subvert the vast majority of established scholastic religious tradition, meaning it, in itself, amounts to an extremist and fringe perspective, both in Christianity and Islam.
Aren't you trying to twist things around ?
Why Muhammed behavior and actions couldn't be reproduced today considering he is referred to as :
1). being a "perfect man"
2). the last prophet of an eternal religion which is all about absolutes and intemporal truths, morals etc....
On May 23 2013 04:30 AeroGear wrote:
Meh
Another episode in the vicious circle of violence
Mass media coverage will encourage more persecution to muslims/arabs, fueling the rise of more extremists (0.000000001% of muslims/arabs? altough the world will certainly not perceive it that way) who might participate in more extreme acts of this kind...
As if the economic crisis did'nt create enough tensions amongst poor communities already.
Gotta sell the news!
The killers are actually an extremly tiny minority, which is to be expected regarding murderers, but the ones who support or at least no condemn these actions are far from being a tiny minotiry, at least in France.
After Muhammed Merrah murders in France, his page rapidly got tens of thousands of French muslim Facebook supporters, a lot of them under the age of 18.
|
You're not being prudent and intelligent in your judgment Deb, you're pushing a certain storyline first to prove your intellectual superiority and second because of your irrational fear of Islam. Just what about saying that saying "Allahu Ackbar" does not necessitate Islamic adherence is anti-Islamaphobia, by the way? Did I say Islamaphobia is a joke faith based on moon worship or something?
Just where is this irrational fear of Islam? I'm one of the least Islam-scared people around. What exactly is scary about Muslims farv? Put me on the chair Dr. Farv, let's find this non-existent fear of Muslims I have.
I just want to know how, exactly, pointing out jihadis are jihadis is "anti-Islam." Are not jihadis a stain on Islam? Isn't pointing out they're jihadis separating them from the rest of the Muslims who aren't jihadis?
At the end of the day Deb, we both know that waiting more than 12 hours before proclaiming that these men are jihadis is not a PC nor illogical decision, you're just politically posturing because of your intense need to feel intellectually superior through knee jerk, prescriptive thinking.
I'm making the obvious conclusion based on the obvious facts, and everyone knows that those of us saying they're jihadis are right. You're the one making it political by bringing in Islamophobia as part of your knee-jerk, prescriptive thinking farv. What is our crime farv, that we were right too soon? Or that you're just afraid that since we're right, Islamophobia will rise? So we must deny reality to avoid an unpleasant outcome? That may or may not happen anyway? It's not set in stone, this "if they are jihadis Islamophobia will rise so don't call them jihadis, it's too soon, evidence be damned" concern.
I made no political implications about them being jihadis. I just said they were jihadis. Which is obvious no matter how much smoke you blow with non-sequitirs about "anti-Islam." Go read that post implying Muhammad was a child raper, now that's "anti-Islam."
You created the political football of "Islamophobia" out of thin air and proceeded to run with it. Not me.
|
On May 23 2013 03:58 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 03:51 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 DeepElemBlues wrote:
They shouted Allahu Ackbar because that's what Muslim jihadis yell when they're doing jihad.
The spine-breaking bends some people will undertake to not look at what's right in front of their eyes. Geez.
Get back in your scoliosis brace farv, you're hurting yourself. Because it is impossible for crazies to yell whatever the fuck they want after they've spilt blood? Get back to your Anti-Islamic neckbrace Deb, you're craning a bit too much. I'm just operating on history, farv. The number of times your hypothetical has been true: zero. The number of times "Allahu Ackbar" has been completely accurate in proving motivation: all the times. So trot out that Islamophobia card all you want, I'd rather be called an Islamophobe by ostriches than be an ostrich myself. Ostriches don't know what Islamophobia is anyway.
You're condemning an entire religion with over 1.5 billion followers because a fraction of a fraction of them are misguided if not crazy. You're justifying your racism with extremism.
|
man just get a room you two...
//edit: farv and Deepelem
Still a better lovestory than Twilight.
|
On May 23 2013 03:28 Asshat wrote:
Seems like every criminal act performed by a muslim is called an act of terror these days.
Random muslims kill guy screaming "die fucker"
Random muslims kill guy screaming "Allah is great"
See the difference. Not muslims at fault, its the extremists of course, but when they are killing someone in the name of Allah shit is different then a simple murder imo.
My heart goes out to the soldiers family and heres hoping the sick fuckers are "accidently" harmed.
Also, sleep safe my british bretherin, I miss my isles.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On May 23 2013 04:42 brobrah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 03:58 DeepElemBlues wrote:On May 23 2013 03:51 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 DeepElemBlues wrote:
They shouted Allahu Ackbar because that's what Muslim jihadis yell when they're doing jihad.
The spine-breaking bends some people will undertake to not look at what's right in front of their eyes. Geez.
Get back in your scoliosis brace farv, you're hurting yourself. Because it is impossible for crazies to yell whatever the fuck they want after they've spilt blood? Get back to your Anti-Islamic neckbrace Deb, you're craning a bit too much. I'm just operating on history, farv. The number of times your hypothetical has been true: zero. The number of times "Allahu Ackbar" has been completely accurate in proving motivation: all the times. So trot out that Islamophobia card all you want, I'd rather be called an Islamophobe by ostriches than be an ostrich myself. Ostriches don't know what Islamophobia is anyway. You're condemning an entire religion with over 1.5 billion followers because a fraction of a fraction of them are misguided if not crazy. You're justifying your racism with extremism.
At what point did he condemn the whole religion?
The whole point of describing someone as a Jihadist is to differentiate them for the rest of the religion.
|
On May 23 2013 04:30 soon.Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 04:24 EatThePath wrote:On May 23 2013 04:13 soon.Cloak wrote:On May 23 2013 04:08 EatThePath wrote:On May 23 2013 03:55 soon.Cloak wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 EatThePath wrote:On May 23 2013 03:28 blobrus wrote:On May 23 2013 03:26 HaRuHi wrote:
So random guy kills guy that is paid to kill. What an outrage... How incredibly insensitive. People die all the time, what do you want him to say? It's a glib comment, but the implication is a valid critique on media coverage and personal perspective. "People die all the time". So now murder should be treated like a regular death? The implication is that soldiers are equal to murderers. That's valid to you? And aside from all of that, being right doesn't make you any less insensitive. If your parents got killed, it would be insensitive to tell you that they deserved it, even if they did. So "What we want him ti say" is that it's sad, and if he feels anything else, he can keep that to himself. Seriously... You have missed the point. Whether or not haruhi has caused offense, he questions the global relevance of the event, and probably the way moral lines are drawn, but I'll let him speak for himself. How many people are murdered every day that you never hear about? Are you offended that they aren't even noticed? What is a regular death? Is dying from preventable hunger or disease a regular death? Aren't you offended about that too? Not to get too off topic, but the original response was "How incredibly insensitive". Do we agree to that? If we do, then I think we agree that no defense of the first post was necessary. No this is the right train of thought, I'm glad you steered there. My point is that haruhi shouldn't be shushed. His comment does no harm to anyone, and possibly gets someone thinking. It seems at best vapid to point out personal offense, at worst aggressively closed-minded. I also took it as an opportunity to amplify the sentiment: Why do I care? Should this be a focal point? How is it being presented, and is there something missing? I believe you should always ask these questions and take issue with anyone who implicitly dismisses them. I hope that explains it. Note that since the thread was started, the title has changed from "terror attack" to "soldier was beheaded", a factual notification instead of a political viewpoint. It's insensitive. That's enough of a reason that he shouldn't say it. I can also make a post about how I'm happy that 9/11 happened and that the Americans deserved to die, but I shouldn't, even though it doesn't hurt anyone, because it's insensitive (unless you consider insulting someone "hurting them", in which case the original post also was hurtful to anyone that is/knows a soldier, and would be insulted to hear that soldier compared to a common murderer). If you want to start a thread discussing biased media coverage and a lack of direction of focus, in order to make people think, that makes sense. But to hijack a thread about a murder to espouse your beliefs about that is wrong.
I don't really want to have this argument; if you are capable of figuring this out, you will eventually, and I don't need to help you. If you aren't, then I'd be wasting my time. And it's not really on topic. So I'll just leave you with two things.
Why is your sensitivity a relevant criterion for whether someone can share their viewpoint?
I believe it makes you a better human to have a more sophisticated understanding of your empathy than "it's sad when people die".
|
On May 23 2013 04:42 brobrah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2013 03:58 DeepElemBlues wrote:On May 23 2013 03:51 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2013 03:49 DeepElemBlues wrote:
They shouted Allahu Ackbar because that's what Muslim jihadis yell when they're doing jihad.
The spine-breaking bends some people will undertake to not look at what's right in front of their eyes. Geez.
Get back in your scoliosis brace farv, you're hurting yourself. Because it is impossible for crazies to yell whatever the fuck they want after they've spilt blood? Get back to your Anti-Islamic neckbrace Deb, you're craning a bit too much. I'm just operating on history, farv. The number of times your hypothetical has been true: zero. The number of times "Allahu Ackbar" has been completely accurate in proving motivation: all the times. So trot out that Islamophobia card all you want, I'd rather be called an Islamophobe by ostriches than be an ostrich myself. Ostriches don't know what Islamophobia is anyway. You're condemning an entire religion with over 1.5 billion followers because a fraction of a fraction of them are misguided if not crazy. You're justifying your racism with extremism.
I just said above that jihadis are a stain on Islam.
I know you didn't see it, but how could you think that what you quoted was a condemnation of all Islam anyway?
Calling people racist the way you do is scummy. I'm a racist? Go sell it to someone who will buy it.
|
Wait, people are saying we shouldn't rush to judgment that the perpetrators are jihadists? That's like a woman finding her husband balls deep in someone else and saying that he is not an adulterer. Good lord.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
