Replying to Questions On Islam

Well that is a worthy cause. No Islam most certainly is not terrorism. Yet it is clear that the Islamic world view IS more conducive to terrorism and I think the main reason is that its support for a theocratic forms of goverment makes Islam a more useful tool for power than world views that do not support theocratic forms of government.

My point is not that there is anything inherently wrong or evil in Islam itself, but that it is rightly on trial in the court of world public opinion right now where it must prove that it is compatable with the principles of tolerance and religious liberty, which is fundmentally opposed to that of theocratic government. If cannot be compatable with tolerance and religious liberty then it is inevitable that the rest of the world must ultimately refuse to tolerate it.

Now I do think that Islam is no less compatable with religious liberty than many forms of Christianity. It has a fine historical tradition of tolerance, but just like these less tolerant form of Christianity there is maturity to be gained and attitudes to be changed.

I am not defending terrorism, iam defending islam from both terrorists and people like you who say islam = terrorism.

Well that is a worthy cause. No Islam most certainly is not terrorism. Yet it is clear that the Islamic world view IS more conducive to terrorism and I think the main reason is that its support for a theocratic forms of goverment makes Islam a more useful tool for power than world views that do not support theocratic forms of government.

Some of these terrorists you exterminate happen to be innocents who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or simply people who disagree with your government.

I have exterminated no one, and I have explained that I highly suspect collusion between these terrorists and those who have initiated this so called "war on terrorism". And that is the thing to notice - that terrorism can never serve the interest of people and freedom but will only server the interests of those who want to wield power through fear for the purpose of oppression. Terrorism can only provoke an atmosphere of less trust, less freedom and more violence.

I said its a tactic, i didn't say its a good tactic that is encouraged in my religiousity. Iam not defending terrorism here.

The point is that it is not a legitimate tactic in the accomplishment of any worthwhile goal it is the evil means of people who pursue evil ends.

That is true, most americans are against Gwantanamo and its gona be closed soon (hopefully), but the damage may have already been done. And iam pretty sure that there are several versions of gwantanamo around the world.

To talk of damage you have to presume that there was something better before it to be damaged. Guantanamo happened because the instinct to think that uncivilized behavior on the part of others justifies uncivilized behavior in response. But public opinion has now examined that instinct and decided that it is wrong. That is improvement not damage, and it suggest that in the end the terrorists will fail.

Again iam not defending terrorism.

You are defending terrorism when you make this ridiculous equivalence that says that fighting against terrorism is no difference that terrorism itself.

I am not defending terrorism, iam defending islam from both terrorists and people like you who say islam = terrorism.

The extermination of terrorists is not terrorism, it is vermin control.

Some of these terrorists you exterminate happen to be innocents who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or simply people who disagree with your government.

Is that what your religion teaches you? Some people think that murder is a tactic for getting what they want, but these murders should be executed. Some people think that kidnapping is a tactic for earning money, but such human refuse needs to be disposed of. Terrorism is not a legitimate tactic for any purpose. It is pure evil and a society which does not understand this, does not deserve to exist.

I said its a tactic, i didn't say its a good tactic that is encouraged in my religiousity. Iam not defending terrorism here.

Like you said:

Terrorism is the attack on the innocent public in order to create fear for a political purpose, often to blackmail the governments responsible for the safety of these people.

Thats the tactic.

The realization that Gwantanamo was not acceptable is a demonstration of how a democracy like the US regulates and impoves its own behavior. There is simply no comparison of this to what was done by Sadam Hussein or Al-Qaeda.

That is true, most americans are against Gwantanamo and its gona be closed soon (hopefully), but the damage may have already been done. And iam pretty sure that there are several versions of gwantanamo around the world.

No you are just defending terrorism which I cannot honestly say is any better.

Again iam not defending terrorism.

So basicly you respond to terorism by being more terorists?

If these events help terrorists, then don't do them. And if these terrorists will do such things to their own people and then blame you for it then let them. Atleast you would be innocent of such accusations. But if truly are doing such things, then those terrorists are right as much as you are. I see both Al-Qaeda and US (government not people) as terrorists. Al-Qaeda with their suidal bombers blowing them selves up inside mosques and churches and US (again government not people) with their secret prisons and their abuse of 'Spreading democracy and human rights' in order to make things run their way.

LOL Yes this is typical terrorist propaganda. They murder the innocence to provoke fear, disgust and anger and then call anything done about them terrorism. The extermination of terrorists is not terrorism, it is vermin control.

Not that what George W. Bush can be justified. I am highly suspicious of what he did and question whether he might actually have been involved in the terrorist attacks especially because of the blatant opportunism in what was done afterwards. I further suspect that he has no desire to destroy Al-Qaeda because they are too useful a tool for justifying armed intervention by which billions of dollars can be made by friends in the Oil and Weapons Industry.

So basicly you respond to terorism by being more terorists?
How would you feel if country x opened its own version of Gwantanamo and filled it up with americans, british and french?

I am sure that all victims of terrorists and their families would certainly wish that they were at Gwantoanamo rather than where they are now. So yes indeed I think we would trade something that was so much more civilized by comparison. There were for example no children at Gwantanamo.

The realization that Gwantanamo was not acceptable is a demonstration of how a democracy like the US regulates and impoves its own behavior. There is simply no comparison of this to what was done by Sadam Hussein or Al-Qaeda.

Terrorism is a tactic,

Is that what your religion teaches you? Some people think that murder is a tactic for getting what they want, but these murders should be executed. Some people think that kidnapping is a tactic for earning money, but such human refuse needs to be disposed of. Terrorism is not a legitimate tactic for any purpose. It is pure evil and a society which does not understand this, does not deserve to exist.

You can't start a war on terrorism by following the same tactics because as you said these things encourage and strengthen terrorists, which is happening.

Obviously. But we must give no credit to the ridiculous propaganda that anyone is doing any such thing. But of course since you think terrorism is just a tactic for getting what you want then you think that those people flew planes full of civilians into buildings full of civilians because they were particularly clever.

Don't misinterpret what iam saying, i am not defeding nazism.

No you are just defending terrorism which I cannot honestly say is any better.

The examples you give are examples of injustices due to disrespect and fear, but terrorism encourage these things because how should we respond to terrorism except with contempt and fear.

So basicly you respond to terorism by being more terorists?
How would you feel if country x opened its own version of Gwantanamo and filled it up with americans, british and french?
Would you check if those were terrorists or would you start world war III on that country and say 'Even if these are heartless rapists and criminals they deserve a just trial and a good treatment'

The truth is that these terrorists want such events to ocurr and if others don't actually persecute the people they parasitically feed upon then they will do such things to their own people themselves to maintain the level of fear and disrespect in society (blaming it on their enemies of course) because that is the environment in which this disease thrives.

If these events help terrorists, then don't do them. And if these terrorists will do such things to their own people and then blame you for it then let them. Atleast you would be innocent of such accusations. But if truly are doing such things, then those terrorists are right as much as you are. I see both Al-Qaeda and US (government not people) as terrorists. Al-Qaeda with their suidal bombers blowing them selves up inside mosques and churches and US (again government not people) with their secret prisons and their abuse of 'Spreading democracy and human rights' in order to make things run their way.

Terrorism is a tactic, you can't start a war on terrorism by following the same tactics because as you said these things encourage and strengthen terrorists, which is happening. And don't believe that anyone actually gives a damn about fighting terrorism outside their borders. Before terrorism there was communism, before that there was nazism, and before that there was spreading civilized way of life. They just need something to make you accept the decisions they make just like terrorists intentionally misinterpret islam to justify suicide bombing of civilians. Iam pretty sure once the enthusiam of fighting terrorism wears off and people stop blindly accepting decisions because of 'terrorism threats' someone will come up with another excuse for such actions.

Don't misinterpret what iam saying, i am not defeding nazism. You had the right to fight that system and your victory over it benefited the entire world. Iam just saying that they always come up with an excuse for their actions. Sometime its valid, like when they were fighting nazism. Sometimes they make it up to justify their doings, like the soviet union and US cold war. I prefer US's point of view on things, but that doesn't mean that i see communists as criminals and blood thirsty bastards. Both soviet union and US used their people's hatred for the other system to force their point of view on third world countries who might have prefered a different view. The ones who were trully hurt were 3rd world countries that ended up in the middle.

It does not speak well of your religion that you would rationalize this with such propaganda for it calls into question whether your religion is capable of intilling a proper distinction between good and evil in its believers.

Iam not sure i understood that part.

Note: I was told that earning mycents from this forum might be a glitch and when its fixed the mycents will be deducted, so don't count on any mycents you get from this discussion =)

I dunno about you but i see giving an order to turn a muslim cemetary into a museum qualifies as terrorism. Isolating a country because you didn't like the election's outcome qualifies as terrorism. kidnapping people and torturing them to death with no trial or any respectful treatment just because you think they are gona hurt you qualifies as terrorism.

Yes many people like to redefine words for the purpose of propaganda and propose ludicrous equivalences to justify themselves. The rapist and serial killer calls what he does "love". And the the criminals in the prisons call themselve victimized. But whatever lies that people might wish to tell themselves for their own self delusion, a rational society cannot believe such nonsense.

Terrorism is the attack on the innocent public in order to create fear for a political purpose, often to blackmail the governments responsible for the safety of these people. It is akin to kidnapping someones child and demanding ransom if they want to see their child alive again. These are the action of the lowest scum of the earth and pure evil. It does not speak well of your religion that you would rationalize this with such propaganda for it calls into question whether your religion is capable of intilling a proper distinction between good and evil in its believers.

The examples you give are examples of injustices due to disrespect and fear, but terrorism encourage these things because how should we respond to terrorism except with contempt and fear. The truth is that these terrorists want such events to ocurr and if others don't actually persecute the people they parasitically feed upon then they will do such things to their own people themselves to maintain the level of fear and disrespect in society (blaming it on their enemies of course) because that is the environment in which this disease thrives.

Unfortunatly most of the things you said are ture, yes Islam had better times ofcourse, the time of the prophet and Imams (for shiaas). After the death of mohammad and Imams there were some who came out with wrong conclusions and started tricking muslims for their own benefits. Personally iam against any religous rule wheter it was islamic, christian or jewish. A religion is supposed to be perfect, free of any flaws otherwise its not a religion. Any political system using islam as a front is damaging islam because there is no ruling in the world without flaws, whether its America, Briton, France.... All have flaws in their systems(bribes, dirty tricks...). So when anyone uses any religiousity as a front it damages it.

Inshort, Islam didn't change, some of its followers did.

One is that Muslims prove themselves more willing to force their religion on everyone in their community

Depends on who you are talking about, there are muslims who will kill non-muslims (Al-Qaeda), muslims who ignore non-muslims and live isolated from them (they don't like or hurt you). And there are muslims who are open minded and treat non-muslims the same way they treat muslims.

But you cannot expect us to believe that it is a coincidence that all these terrorists are muslim.

There are many terorists that you don't see them as terrorists. Ones who aren't muslims, you don't here about them because either they exist in small groups in some 3rd world countries that noone knows about or you don't hear about them because of biased media coverage. I dunno about you but i see giving an order to turn a muslim cemetary into a museum qualifies as terrorism. Isolating a country because you didn't like the election's outcome qualifies as terrorism. kidnapping people and torturing them to death with no trial or any respectful treatment just because you think they are gona hurt you qualifies as terrorism.
Here is a question, if muslims took over half your country and kicked you out of your house because muslims used to live their 1000 years ago, wouldn't you call that terrorism?

Edit: just to clearify muslims never did that , iam just looking for an anwser

Also in Islam you don't have to be a muslim to enter heaven, i dont' think alot of religiousities say the same thing...
People who were born in africa or before islam came couldn't be judged for islamic religious duties because well they don't know about them. If you are a non-muslim you will be judged, according to islam, for things you did in life. For example you don't need a messenger from God to know that killing,stealing or hurting others is bad. In other words, you can pretty much die fighting muslims and still enter heaven. Example, some american soldiers in Iraq died while killing muslim resistors, not muslims terrorists, muslims who were defending Iraq from the american invasion. If those soldiers were good in their life, they enter heaven.
You might find it hard to accept the view of islam iam offering, especially with all the ****s claiming to be followers of islams and going 'All americans will burn in hell' or 'All non believers in islam must convert or die'... thats not islam.
What you see on the news is not Islam, its a bad version of islam, the version of extremists and flamers.

Yes unlike most people here I am quite well aware that there was a time when it was Islam that was the more tolerant religion than Christianity. But that golden age of Islam is long in the past and for whatever reason Islam turned against the enlightened ideas of that time toward a more closed-minded fundamentalist view of their religion. Perhaps there is a potential for a more peaceful and tolerant religion in Islam still, but not if there isn't a message in Islam that can be seperated from the cultural baggage so that Islam can allow the culture can change for the better.

While i rather stay out of religious debates on the internet, some flames here were too much to accept. First of all Islam doesn't mean submission t comes from the word Salam in arabic meaning peace. As for all the terrorists which happen to be muslims, thats not islam. Every religiousity has extremets and since Islam is the punching bag of politicians atm you only hear about Muslim extremests. There are christian, Jewish as well as non-religious terrorists and extremists but you don't hear about them as much.

But you cannot expect us to believe that it is a coincidence that all these terrorists are muslim. It is not. It is in fact directly linked with the fact that the only theocratic societies in the world (since Tibet was conqured) are Muslim. I think that this proves two things. One is that Muslims prove themselves more willing to force their religion on everyone in their community and the second is that people can see quite clearly that Islam is a more useful tool for power and the domination of people than other religions. In the west we have a adopted a secularist philosophy that no religion should be used as a tool of power in that way. We have done so unanimously in the west because everyone really benefits, both the religious who can pursue their religious efforts with more honesty and less corruption and the government who can answer the needs of people less clouded by dubious religious sentiments.

While i rather stay out of religious debates on the internet, some flames here were too much to accept. First of all Islam doesn't mean submission t comes from the word Salam in arabic meaning peace. As for all the terrorists which happen to be muslims, thats not islam. Every religiousity has extremets and since Islam is the punching bag of politicians atm you only hear about Muslim extremests. There are christian, Jewish as well as non-religious terrorists and extremists but you don't hear about them as much.

Also in Islam you don't have to be a muslim to enter heaven, i dont' think alot of religiousities say the same thing...
People who were born in africa or before islam came couldn't be judged for islamic religious duties because well they don't know about them. If you are a non-muslim you will be judged, according to islam, for things you did in life. For example you don't need a messenger from God to know that killing,stealing or hurting others is bad. In other words, you can pretty much die fighting muslims and still enter heaven. Example, some american soldiers in Iraq died while killing muslim resistors, not muslims terrorists, muslims who were defending Iraq from the american invasion. If those soldiers were good in their life, they enter heaven.
You might find it hard to accept the view of islam iam offering, especially with all the ****s claiming to be followers of islams and going 'All americans will burn in hell' or 'All non believers in islam must convert or die'... thats not islam.
What you see on the news is not Islam, its a bad version of islam, the version of extremists and flamers.

Also i hope that the starter of this topic didn't believe the flames without doing some research, because from his main post he said he understood.
Edit: sorry for the bad enlish

Well, I'm not a Muslim and not of any particular religion but I would like to share my thoughts on this topic.

What is happening in the Islamic world has actually happened in the Christian world too. What happened to paganistic religion when Christianity arrives? How about the persecutions conducted against scientists/explorers? How about the split between Cahotlics and Protestants and the subsequent persecutions? And other religions in the world has done this kind of stuff as well.

What people fail to understand is the power of religion. In the West, there is a separation of state and church. Why do you think there is such a rule? Unfortunately, in the Muslim world, there is yet a separation of state and the Islamic religion. And I do believe that unless there is such a separation, the current conflict that we are witnessing is not going to stop. And the only way this separation can happened is by Muslims themselves. They would have to decide when and how.

The conflict in the Middle East is further encouraged by political factors over resources and control over land. Religion is used as a front. The people in the Middle East just want to live their lives peacefully and America wont let this be, a logical extension to what the British has been doing for the last 2 centuries. If you think that Muslims can change this for themselves than you have been swayed to the right by the media machine. Christians are making their own extremists in Texas CHURCHES by mindlessly converting the young into extreme Christianity. Encouraging these divides is the media, because those at the top don’t want our society to ever unite because they like to divide and conquer; wake up. Just like the ROMANS, MUGHALS and EGYPTIANS and many others have done since day one.