Islam: What the West Needs to Know

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]pat wrote:
Do you think I deserve to die for this belief? And, does doctrinal islam condemn me to death for my beliefs?[/quote]

Nobody deserves to die for a belief, Pat. But it doesn’t sound like you’re talking about “beliefs” here, but rather about actions. You, for example, likely don’t feel threatened by the beliefs of Muslims (which are not, after all, so very different from the beliefs of Jews or Christians), but rather by specific actions taken by a tiny minority of the holders of those beliefs.

So I suppose the reaction of “doctrinal Islam” would depend on what you, personally, chose to do in order to “undermine the spread” of Islam. Do you plan on flying up to New Jersey, seeking out Tablighi Jamaat missionaries, and beating them up, stealing their Qur’ans and tearing up their little Embracing Islam brochures? That would be one way to undermine the spread of Islam.

Do you plan to seek out Muslim immigrants to the United States and Europe, threatening with death unless they leave? That would be another way to undermine the spread of Islam.

Or how about getting a rifle, camping out on the borders of non-Muslim countries, and shooting every Muslim-looking refugee you see. That would, quite directly, undermine the spread of Islam.

In this case, yes, Islam would condemn you. So would Christianity and Buddhism and half a dozen other religions. And if you did shoot refugees, depending on the jurisdiction, yes, you would probably be sentenced to death.

But perhaps you have in mind a method of undermining the spread of Islam by peaceful, non-violent means. If so, fine, but don’t be upset if such a method is also used to undermine the spread of Christianity into Muslim lands. Christianity being, after all, perceived as just as great a threat by some Muslims as Islam is evidently perceived by you.

102

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:

It’s his lack of consistency. It’s his failure to argue in good faith. It’s his refusal to understand any line of reasoning that does not place the U.S. squarely in the wrong. It’s his habit of turning every single thread, regardless of initial subject, into yet another U.S. foreign policy thread.

Every single problem in the world today is mostly America’s fault, because we’re the lone Superpower in the world. As if everybody on the planet gets along swimmingly until the U.S. blunders in and screws it all up.

His reasoning is so distorted, it’s like a logical Rube Goldberg Machine. The idea of proximate cause flows over him like water off a duck. Because no matter what the issue, in the end it’s the U.S.'s fault. Always.

He will change his entire operating philosophy from thread to thread, and even sometimes mid-thread, to ensure that the U.S. always remains at fault.

Remember, he’s a “libertarian socialist”, whatever the fuck that means. Too much U.S. action, and the libertarian in him is offended. Too little, and it’s the socialist that’s offended. Thus, he’s offended no matter what the U.S. does.

He does not hold any other country to the same standard that he does the U.S… Not Europe, not Russia, not China. Nobody else. It is understandable when any other nation makes mistakes, but not the U.S…

The U.S. must be perfect, absolutely flawless in its legislation, decision making, judicial review, and execution. It must perfectly anticipate every consequence that might occur, even decades down the line, to ensure that nobody is upset.

Naturally, it’s no problem at all when other nations misjudge even contemporary consequences of their actions, but the U.S. is held responsible for deaths in 2008 resulting from U.S. policy from 1972.

When people or nations react to the U.S. and cause harm, it’s the U.S.'s fault. But the U.S. cannot ever react to other nations or people, or that too is the U.S.'s fault.

When we can twist his arm into admitting that Russia or China or even the E.U. has done something evil, it’s okay. No really, because citizens in those countries were dragged along at gun-point by totalitarian regimes. U.S. citizens are voting tax-payers, thus we shoulder the blame of U.S. mistakes while citizens of every other nation on the face of the Earth are absolved when their governments screw up.

But not me. I killed an Iraqi in cold-blood this afternoon because I vote and pay taxes, while a Chinese citizen’s hands are washed clean of the blood of a Sudanese.

Varq, you say lixy is not an “ignorant motherfucker”. I would agree, to a very specific point.

Lixy is highly educated in the arguments of how the U.S. is always and forever responsible for every lamentation the world over since WWII.

However, it is as if he then closed his mind forever, because he makes zero effort to understand the other side of the coin. He has very little understanding of concepts that put U.S. actions into context and explain why we just might not be the devil-incarnate.

Why bother? His world is very simple and neat when there’s a big, bad wolf on which he can conveniently push all blame.

Lixy is very knowledgeable about one side of the argument, yet willfully ignorant of the other. His critical thinking skills are about as sharp as a butter knife, to boot. Have you seen him when someone nails him in an argument? It’s like a computer freezing up.

So Varq, when lixy comes on this site and unceasingly throws up half-truths, exaggerations, and the occasional outright lie in order to slander my nation, then blames its citizens – me – for its actions, and then either shifts his entire philosophy in order to spin, twist, and writhe his way past any and all logical arguments opposed to his or plugs his ears and screams like a toddler, you don’t get the least bit annoyed?

In fact, you get annoyed at us when we get annoyed at him?

Further, you think our annoyance with lixy is due simply to him criticizing America, or his religion, or his residence?

Wow, thanks for giving us the benefit of the doubt, Varq. I’d hate to tell that I’m not voting for Obama or Hillary, because I think you might conclude that I hate blacks and feminists.

My disliking lixy can’t possibly be because he spends hours making literally thousands of posts unfairly bashing the hell out of my nation – and by proxy, myself – in bad faith?

Sheesh…[/quote]

Varqanir,

Read TGun’s post. Then, read it again.

I would highlight the best parts, but it is all the “best parts”.

103

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:

Varqanir,

Read TGun’s post. Then, read it again.

I would highlight the best parts, but it is all the “best parts”.[/quote]

I have read it, will reread it a bit later, and will respond after that. I don’t agree with all of it, but I do agree that it’s a well-written, well thought-out post.

104

It is a lovely post, eloquent even. It perfectly summarizes the way I’ve described the same thing, devoid of the time and effort…which is 'damned if we do, damned if we don’t lol

105

[quote]aussie486 wrote:
Varqanir wrote:

The politics forum is one of the smarter ones on T-Nation, but it still has its share of ignorant motherfuckers.

  No its not, far from it but i do agree with the bit about ignorant motherfuckers but it has more than its fair share of them, just have a quick scan of the threads and it is self evident.

  this forum has always been the drain all the crap flows down, from holocaust deniers to every other fruitcake, what had struck me about this sewer has been the number of people who post here that don't post anywhere else, do some of you guys actually lift weights.

  I'm sure if admin could they would get rid of this forum but at this stage they can't but it is slowly going down the forum index, with a little bit of luck it will disappear in the future.

[/quote]

I agree. This forum has really declined.

106

[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
And anyway… Lixy’s views, though they aren’t always the most popular, are a lot more informed than many other posters’. The politics forum is one of the smarter ones on T-Nation, but it still has its share of ignorant motherfuckers. Whatever else he may be, Lixy is not an ignorant motherfucker.

I don’t know what it is about him that rubs so many people here the wrong way. Is it because he’s Muslim? Because he’s posting from Europe? Because he’s highly opinionated and dares to criticize the good old U.S. of A.? I can’t figure it which it is, but it bugs me sometimes.

Yes, he criticizes the U.S., but that’s not the problem. Lord knows we have plenty of posters here that are hyper-critical of the U.S., yet aren’t dumped on like lixy.

It’s his lack of consistency. It’s his failure to argue in good faith. It’s his refusal to understand any line of reasoning that does not place the U.S. squarely in the wrong. It’s his habit of turning every single thread, regardless of initial subject, into yet another U.S. foreign policy thread.

Every single problem in the world today is mostly America’s fault, because we’re the lone Superpower in the world. As if everybody on the planet gets along swimmingly until the U.S. blunders in and screws it all up.

His reasoning is so distorted, it’s like a logical Rube Goldberg Machine. The idea of proximate cause flows over him like water off a duck. Because no matter what the issue, in the end it’s the U.S.'s fault. Always.

He will change his entire operating philosophy from thread to thread, and even sometimes mid-thread, to ensure that the U.S. always remains at fault.

Remember, he’s a “libertarian socialist”, whatever the fuck that means. Too much U.S. action, and the libertarian in him is offended. Too little, and it’s the socialist that’s offended. Thus, he’s offended no matter what the U.S. does.

He does not hold any other country to the same standard that he does the U.S… Not Europe, not Russia, not China. Nobody else. It is understandable when any other nation makes mistakes, but not the U.S…

The U.S. must be perfect, absolutely flawless in its legislation, decision making, judicial review, and execution. It must perfectly anticipate every consequence that might occur, even decades down the line, to ensure that nobody is upset.

Naturally, it’s no problem at all when other nations misjudge even contemporary consequences of their actions, but the U.S. is held responsible for deaths in 2008 resulting from U.S. policy from 1972.

When people or nations react to the U.S. and cause harm, it’s the U.S.'s fault. But the U.S. cannot ever react to other nations or people, or that too is the U.S.'s fault.

When we can twist his arm into admitting that Russia or China or even the E.U. has done something evil, it’s okay. No really, because citizens in those countries were dragged along at gun-point by totalitarian regimes. U.S. citizens are voting tax-payers, thus we shoulder the blame of U.S. mistakes while citizens of every other nation on the face of the Earth are absolved when their governments screw up.

But not me. I killed an Iraqi in cold-blood this afternoon because I vote and pay taxes, while a Chinese citizen’s hands are washed clean of the blood of a Sudanese.

Varq, you say lixy is not an “ignorant motherfucker”. I would agree, to a very specific point.

Lixy is highly educated in the arguments of how the U.S. is always and forever responsible for every lamentation the world over since WWII.

However, it is as if he then closed his mind forever, because he makes zero effort to understand the other side of the coin. He has very little understanding of concepts that put U.S. actions into context and explain why we just might not be the devil-incarnate.

Why bother? His world is very simple and neat when there’s a big, bad wolf on which he can conveniently push all blame.

Lixy is very knowledgeable about one side of the argument, yet willfully ignorant of the other. His critical thinking skills are about as sharp as a butter knife, to boot. Have you seen him when someone nails him in an argument? It’s like a computer freezing up.

So Varq, when lixy comes on this site and unceasingly throws up half-truths, exaggerations, and the occasional outright lie in order to slander my nation, then blames its citizens – me – for its actions, and then either shifts his entire philosophy in order to spin, twist, and writhe his way past any and all logical arguments opposed to his or plugs his ears and screams like a toddler, you don’t get the least bit annoyed?

In fact, you get annoyed at us when we get annoyed at him?

Further, you think our annoyance with lixy is due simply to him criticizing America, or his religion, or his residence?

Wow, thanks for giving us the benefit of the doubt, Varq. I’d hate to tell that I’m not voting for Obama or Hillary, because I think you might conclude that I hate blacks and feminists.

My disliking lixy can’t possibly be because he spends hours making literally thousands of posts unfairly bashing the hell out of my nation – and by proxy, myself – in bad faith?

Sheesh…[/quote]

Good post.

107

Great post.

And Zap is right, this forum has lost it, as was predicted.

Anytime a poster overwhelms a forum with agenda driven drivel, the results are predictable. It’s not only the cyber jihad driven message, it’s the volume.

108

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

And anyway… Lixy’s views, though they aren’t always the most popular, are a lot more informed than many other posters’. The politics forum is one of the smarter ones on T-Nation, but it still has its share of ignorant motherfuckers. Whatever else he may be, Lixy is not an ignorant motherfucker.

I don’t know what it is about him that rubs so many people here the wrong way. Is it because he’s Muslim? Because he’s posting from Europe? Because he’s highly opinionated and dares to criticize the good old U.S. of A.? I can’t figure it which it is, but it bugs me sometimes.

[/quote]

Contrary to popular belief I don’t hate Lixy. I don’t not even dislike Lixy, hell there is even a part of me that likes him despite not really knowing him. Our debates get spirited, sure. Does he piss me off sometimes? You bet. So what though, if I ever go to Stockholm I wouldn’t even mind even looking him up for a lunch or something; if he’d go. That doesn’t mean I’ll agree with him or won’t debate him. I’ll debate him and get nasty if I feel I must. But in the end, we’re all just folks trying to get bigger, stronger and faster. And we have different world views.

I tell you this about Lixy, he got himself famous on this forumn…Nobody has ever started a thread with my name in it, but then again, I am a reasonable person :slight_smile:

109

To add on to what Tgun wrote. Lixy comes across as a smart kid who is very heavily into ideology without a lot of critical thinking. He kind of reminds me of John Candy in Peace Corps after the communists capture him, brainwash him then turn him loose with Mao’s little red book.

As annoying as he sometimes can be, Lixy is good to have around, because there are quite a few people like him in Europe. He is an education in European thinking. Besides it is fun when he encounters something he has to think about and can’t just parrot some ideological line.

Lixy’s weakness as a debater, is he doesn’t know how to argue opposite sides of a debate. This why he gets annoying, he is good at throwing his ideological slant into everything but he doesn’t ever see the other side.

One of the more annoying features of Lixy is the way every thread he interjects a this is America’s fault slant. Nothing is ever anyone elses fault if America is involved.

Lixy thinks that the entire world is just as liberal as Sweden and everyone wants to get along like one big happy family. But the mean Americans keep getting in the way.

110

This will be my last post on this topic:

Yeah go ahead, keep bashing him.

I’m sure he has his biases, but are you saying you have none??? The majority of you, I will not take names, but the majority of you will just accuse him of being ignorant, biased and one sided. Fair enough, that is your observation.

But again, are you saying that you no bias? All of you are sitting here, watching a movie on your computer, without getting up, studying some bit about Islam. You pick out hadith and Quran, watch some commentary on a movie, without picking up the Quran and reading it yourself from front to back. Don’t expect your comments about the Quran then to be taken seriously by ANY muslim.

You know why? Because it sounds exactly like it is: You’ve taken a few verses out of the Quran, and commented on them. Thats it. Cherry picking, taking out what you don’t like or what you think is against your ideals, and stomping all over it. You will ignore all of the rest of it, because once again, you have your own bias.

In the first post of this thread, I posted proof after proof against this movie. But no one will pay attention, and again, because you choose to ignore it, because you choose to ignore whatever contradicts what you believe.

I will not watch this movie. Ever. Because I know that what is within it is ABSOLUTE garbage. I know the people who were in that documentary and they as much knowledge and understanding of Islam as some new bigshot squat rack curler who thinks he has suddenly got the whole lifting game under his belt.

If you want yourself to be less ignorant than who you claim to be, pick up the Quran, stop making excuses and actually read the book instead of pointing at it from far away and saying “Oh look at those Muslims, get them out of my country. Look what their religion does to them.”

Study the religion from it’s source material, then come argue when you have something to argue about.

And Lixy, I will be PMing you soon.

111

[quote]Shoebolt wrote:

{text}

And Lixy, I will be PMing you soon.[/quote]

You seem to be overfocused on the issue of the Koran, as posters have moved on to a general critique. But taken as is, your primary complaint seem to be that others won’t pick up the Koran and relevant materials, go in with an open mind, and learn away before taking a position on the matter.

Damn good advice, and not just on the issue of the Koran.

Such good advice that, in your PM, to Lixy, you should recommend he engage in such practices. There isn’t a poster here who is more guilty of your general gripe that people won’t do their homework on issues before jumping in and opining on them.

But does your blade cut both ways? Surely your sage piece of advice of “actually reading the [relevant material] instead of pointing at it from far away and saying [general unsupported ideological bromides]” applies to the forum’s worst offender of said principles, your valentine Lixy?

113

Because I love stirring shit up:

An Arabic Christian in the Middle-East’s criticism of Islam and the War on Israel.

ElbowStrike

114

[quote]Chushin wrote:
Shoebolt wrote:
Doesn’t seem they’re familiar with the religion you are describing, does it?
[/quote]

And that, Chushin, is the crux of the matter.

No, they are not. Any more than the Crusaders or the Conquistadores were familiar with the religion in whose name they murdered, plundered and invaded.

The mullahs and imams commanding the people who do the bombings and the beheadings while screaming Allahu akbar don’t deserve to call themselves Muslim, any more than the hooded and cloaked men who erect burning crucifixes and lynch black men in the dead of night deserve to call themselves Christian.

Yes, there has been condemnation of atrocities by real Muslims and their leaders. September 11 was roundly condemned. Suicide bombings are roundly condemned. I don’t think it’s the fault of the moderate Islamic world that the actions they condemn receive more air time (and therefore more attention) in the United States than their condemnations.

And as has been stated before, assuming that Al-Jezeera speaks for all Muslims is like assuming that Fox News speaks for all Americans.

115

[quote]aussie486 wrote:
No its not, far from it but i do agree with the bit about ignorant motherfuckers but it has more than its fair share of them, just have a quick scan of the threads and it is self evident.

  this forum has always been the drain all the crap flows down, from holocaust deniers to every other fruitcake, what had struck me about this sewer has been the number of people who post here that don't post anywhere else, do some of you guys actually lift weights.

  I'm sure if admin could they would get rid of this forum but at this stage they can't but it is slowly going down the forum index, with a little bit of luck it will disappear in the future.

[/quote]

I always assumed the purpose of the “Politics and World Issues” forum was to take the politics and world issues out of the Off-Topic forum.

If this forum were removed, then “off-topic” would go to shit.

ElbowStrike

116

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Chushin wrote:
Shoebolt wrote:
Doesn’t seem they’re familiar with the religion you are describing, does it?

And that, Chushin, is the crux of the matter.

No, they are not. Any more than the Crusaders or the Conquistadores were familiar with the religion in whose name they murdered, plundered and invaded.

The mullahs and imams commanding the people who do the bombings and the beheadings while screaming Allahu akbar don’t deserve to call themselves Muslim, any more than the hooded and cloaked men who erect burning crucifixes and lynch black men in the dead of night deserve to call themselves Christian.

Yes, there has been condemnation of atrocities by real Muslims and their leaders. September 11 was roundly condemned. Suicide bombings are roundly condemned. I don’t think it’s the fault of the moderate Islamic world that the actions they condemn receive more air time (and therefore more attention) in the United States than their condemnations.

And as has been stated before, assuming that Al-Jezeera speaks for all Muslims is like assuming that Fox News speaks for all Americans.[/quote]

I have to disagree with you here, Varq. The basic premise of religion is that faith is superior to reason. The whackjobs have COMPLETELY surrendered their reason, usually to someone who ‘interprets’ the holy books ‘appropriately’.

To have faith is to accept a concept into your consciousness while having no empirical or logical reason for doing so. Having surrendered their will, the victims become putty in the hands of the leader/master.

IMHO, religion was created so someone could exert power over others, turning them into robots. Think of O’Brian in Orwell’s 1984.

119

[quote]Chushin wrote:

Hey Mr. V.,

Thanks for the response; it’s helping to further spur my thinking.

Ok, so I’m willing to seriously consider the perspective you present. But that leads me to bunches of questions, some of which are likely not answerable. These are sincere questions, not an attempt to prove I’m “right” or something.

Some examples: What’s the rough % of “true” & “fake” Muslims? How does that translate to absolute numbers? How can it be that “mullahs and imams” (ie, LEADERS) could have gotten it SO wrong? Why are there so many of these “fake” mullahs and imams? And how did they rise so high if they’re so mistaken? Don’t the “real” Muslims have anything to say about this?

Perhaps condemnations have taken place, but I don’t get the impression that “real” Muslims march in the streets, work hard to be heard, “call out” the “fakes,” etc. Not even when people riot, destroy and kill over cartoons, or an author is “sentenced” to death for writing a novel. In short, I, at least, have not been so impressed with the forces of “good” Islam.

And what of the Prophet’s alleged bloody history? Are we to believe that a “religion of peace” came from him? At a minimum, doesn’t the Islamic acceptance of “self-defense” just provide a rationale for anyone who wants to use violence?

I could go on and on, of course, but I guess in the end it seems less important to me what “true” Islam is than what “actual” (ie, as practiced in today’s world) Islam is. You’ve got to admit there’s a whole lotta suffer’n goin’ on around the world under the banner of Islam these days… [/quote]

Good post.

120

[quote]Chushin wrote:
Some examples: What’s the rough % of “true” & “fake” Muslims? How does that translate to absolute numbers? [/quote]

What’s a “true” or “fake” Muslim?

As far as anyone’s concerned, a Muslim is someone who professed the following words: “There is no God but Allah, and Mohamed is [one of] his prophet[s].”

Then comes the four other pillars: Daily prayer, fasting from dusk till dawn on the month of Ramadan, giving out a ratio of your wealth to the poor every year and finally the pilgrimage to Mecca if you can afford it (physically and financially).

Nobody knows the “true” Muslim from the hypocrite but God Himself.

But if by “fake” you mean the whackjobs who interpret the religion in the same way as the folks in the OP’s video, based on my own experience I’ll say a few thousands. But then again, I’ve never been to either Afghanistan nor Pakistan…

How did Catholic priests get from Jesus’ message to molesting kids? Why did followers of Moses turn to usury? I can’t tell you. But it certainly is a fascinating topic.

Someone sitting in Tripoli or elsewhere with little interaction with Christians might even ask why there are so many pedophiles in the Church.

Wahabism is probably the single most important factor to consider when trying to answer your questions. The Al-Sauds formidable wealth and their control over the Holy cities are also key aspects. Do some homework, then feel free to ask more specific questions.

You are seeing things from your own perspective. A counterpart to your blindness, might say the same thing. i.e: that s/he doesn’t get the impression Americans are marching in the streets or working hard to be heard when bombings, invasions and carnage are done in their name (and on their dime!).

Could either do more? Sure. But don’t expect mass media coverage to give you a remotely correct “impression” of what is going on. By its very nature, a corporate news outlet will look for the sensational and spectacular. A bunch of people with signs peacefully marching simply isn’t front page material. A few things you can do to get a better perspective: travel around majority-Muslim countries (and I don’t mean with a helmet, M-16 and other military gear), seek Muslims and hang out with them (the more numerous and varied, the more accurate the image will be), and last but not least get your news from non-profit media as much as possible.

For the record, and albeit not having the audacity (or is it arrogance?) to call myself a “real” Muslim, I march in the streets and work hard to be heard. Of course, I’ve had the privilege of having a decent education, and studying the Quran and Hadith on my own (instead of having it shoved down my throat). Many people didn’t have that luxury I suppose. Couple that with the fresh wounds of colonialism, oppressive regimes and the situation in the Occupied Territories then apply Murphy’s law to get a feel of the situation.

The religion came from God. The prophet was a mere messenger. Mohamed, albeit a remarkable person, was a mere mortal and had weaknesses just like any other human.

Mohamed didn’t conquer Arabia by the sword alone. It is the Islamic message of harmony, equality and compassion coupled with his charisma and modesty that united what was before him a chaotic region.

What I find hard to believe is that anyone would believe Islam would have survived to this day if it was really as the OP’s video portrays it. I mean, it is like expecting Nazism to have millions of adepts today. People are naturally inclined to peace.

I’ll speak of what I know best: Morocco! Islam didn’t reach my country by the sword. It was a fellow by the name of Idriss Ben-Abdellah who, in the 8th century, was fleeing the Abassides (who just had slaughtered his whole family) with nothing but beasts and a sidekick named Rachid). They were offered refuge by the indigenous Berbers. Idriss taught them about Islam and the religion spread virally. So much so that, the locals put his 11 year old son on the throne of the newly formed Islamic Kingdom of Morocco - the second totally independent Islamic territory from the Caliphate after Al-Andalus (modern-day Spain). Do you honestly believe a guy preaching death and division would have stood a chance? Do you think a guy in the 8th century (allegedly direct descendant of Ali) knew more about the core of the message of Mohamed than some Californian dude?

I don’t understand the question.

Sure, that is a legitimate issue.