Muslims - Moderate or fanatical in disguise?

Originally posted by koji_K

I agree to an extent, but when you have these things with any race throughout history, combined with people in positions of authority who are willing to take advantage of the situation, you have always gotten violence and destruction, regardless of race or religion.

I'm not defending the actions of these Muslims, but if it seems like I am, it's only because I'm calling it like I see it. I don't believe there is something inherent to Islam which causes this behaviour, the fault lies deeper, in the traits that all humans share and under the right circumstances will be brought out. Perhaps if there is a fault with Islam in particular, it is only that it is a young religion for its size, but I think it's naive to think that just because a group of people isn't Muslim, they aren't capable of violent riots and the like.
What demographic in human history hasn't had a phase marked by violence?

No doubt Islam is a young religion. Unfortunately, it still promotes violence and destruction, which has been removed from most other religions. The Westerns leaders are not to blame for this, but the leaders of Islam itself. If you can show me evidence proving that Western leaders are taking advantage of this and promoting violence within Islam, please do show me.

Islam poses a very real risk to the free world as we know it. We may not have the perfect or best society, but it's certainly the best we have for now.

In the past, for many people, violence was the only option. but we live in a different world now. These Muslims are rioting in Western countries, there is no need for this.

I'll end it there, as not to go off on a rant

Originally posted by intrepid

Sounds like a text book answer to me. I lived through those times and some of it was about rights. Most weren't.

Text book answer? It's reality!

Anyway, you proved my point to a certain extent; however, you care to show me the ones that "weren't" about rights/freedom and that were caused significant destruction/unrest i.e. one race/religion affecting many people/races/countries?

Originally posted by James Daniel
Text book answer? It's reality!

Anyway, you proved my point to a certain extent; however, you care to show me the ones that "weren't" about rights/freedom and that were caused significant destruction/unrest i.e. one race/religion affecting many people/races/countries?

OK, could you unscramble that for an older person? I have no clue what you are asking.

Its not Islamophobia its the fact people have woken up from it. Its either one thing or the other, a moderate is not really a true Muslim and those who fully study it become extreamists and taken in fully what the Koran says. People have woken up to the fact that their is an enemy who opposses everything we believe as they do us. Muslims who live by westeren law are not really doing thier religion a service as would a middle eastern Muslim that is why they would like their laws introduced in Britain. But I would hate to have two laws one for one type of one for another person. So if you have a despute with a Muslim and you steel a chocolate bar from a muslim shop keeper would you have to go to Muslim court in Britain knowing their law if found guilty will involve amputation. Im not sure if I agree.

But if one wants to stay in that environment and impose this seperate court of law then there are plenty of Muslim countries to go back to. As you would find Jews and Christians forced out of theirs and treated as second class. Its not like 7million Americans live in Iran to find work and practice Christianity.

Okay America has imigrated soldiers to Iraq. It would have been better to have let Saddam and Iraq sort it self out and the people who opposed him could have protested the same way as they do for these cartoon depictions. Maybe they could have overthrown Saddam themselves, but maybe no one wanted to not even their own people. So It would make sense to leave the Muslims alone and if they are happy beheading people and amputating hands and covering up the women then its because they have a lot of nutters in that region that need to be under this system. In the UK we do not have the death sentence but America does, that is becasue America has more nutters than the UK. Although the UK is catching up.

Anyway could say more but can't be bothered may not be back for a reply.

[edit on 21-2-2006 by The time lord]

Sorry, intrepid, it's been a long day and it is getting late, so I am not as cohesive as I normally am.

My point is, you have confirmed that yes, we have had our times, but for different reasons - our main reason being for increased freedom and rights. You follow that by stating that many were for other reasons.

What I am asking, is do you have proof to back up your opinion that these were for other reasons (similar to the Muslims reasons now) and that they caused significant destruction/upheaval (just like the Muslims today)?

Originally posted by James Daniel
What I am asking, is do you have proof to back up your opinion that these were for other reasons (similar to the Muslims reasons now) and that they caused significant destruction/upheaval (just like the Muslims today)?

Thanks. Yes there were protests for Black and womens rights, rightly so. However there were more ideological protests, Vietnam for one. Sorry vets, I don't want to open old wounds. You will counter that the Islamic protests are due to religion. That is just another ideology imo. Good things came out of those bad times, especially now where people can disagree with this war and still not diss the servicepersons. Islam may just be going through their modern growing years.

I understand where you are coming from, intrepid, but that was an armed intervention, what we see today is civil unrest, caused by a small minority in an attempt to enforce their way of life on a population that would rather live peacefully.

What has France, Britain or Belgium done to warrant such destruction of our towns and cities?

Why is it necessary for Muslims to segragate themselves from other races and religions, causing mistrust? The majority seem unwilling to integrate with the other races/religions around them, which causes friction. I have yet to witness this with any other religion or race, other than those FORCED to share the same land.

Maybe I am wrong due to my experiences, but my opinion is fully backed up by the evidence around us and my personal experience chatting with ex and existing Muslims. Perhaps you can enlighten me further by providing more specific examples of OUR past mistakes, bearing in mind that anything similar to the Muslims today were committed at an entirely different time in history within a completely different society to what we have today.

Lets remember here also, that many of these rioting Muslims were born and breed in Western society, and are causing massive violence, destruction and upheaval for no apparent reason. Thats also putting aside the attrocities Muslims commit in other countries and the statements their leaders make on almost a daily basis (Iran for example).

Originally posted by James Daniel

No doubt Islam is a young religion. Unfortunately, it still promotes violence and destruction, which has been removed from most other religions. The Westerns leaders are not to blame for this, but the leaders of Islam itself. If you can show me evidence proving that Western leaders are taking advantage of this and promoting violence within Islam, please do show me.

And we come to the crux...
Yes, Islam is young... and it still has its faults... but they are often ignored just like some tenants of Christianity are ignored...
(sold your daughter lately? stoned any adulterers?)
Islam is the same thing...

When I talk with my Islamic aquantances... they all agree... islam is still evolving... and still splintering... the trend is obvious. They personally ignore much of "islamic law" and that would normally mean that they were due punishment or death... so you have a built in hypocrisy, that will erode the fundamental basis of Islam, If it doesn't evolve... and they all say the same thing... newer generations will tell if Islam is to be accepted in this world... or if it will eat itself to death... the veiwpoint of Islam is anything but constant...

For a religion that prides itself for remaining true to its beliefs... it sure does have some inconsistant ones... ask any 10 mullahs about a social question, and I do beleive you would recieve 20 different answers...

Also... for those that keep pointing to the violent roots of islam...
well, yes... but for clarification... it was a violent time... warlords everywhere...and beheading was sort of the crucifix of the day...
the prophet was confronted with trying to win converts among bloodthirsty murderers and assasins... he did a great job if you ask historians... he turned one of the most uncivilized people on this earth into some of the best doctors, and thinkers...

but let us not forget some of our western past shames...
the spanish inquisition... (everyone fears the spanish inquisition... the inquisition....what you say... the inquisition... here to stay... bopbop do wop)

The real problem that we are seeing is one of the war drum of propaganda...

It doesn't change the simple fact that the muslims that i know, do not want to kill me now, or ever... and shamefully... they could give a rats patootie if I convert... they are always open to answering questions about islam... but you can tell when you ask something that they dont agree with...
they just say (as christians would also say) "some beleive that, but i dont"

Moderate muslims are truly just like you and I... I think the question truly is; what percentage are moderate?

but whatever the percentage... we need to be careful not to push them to the extremists side... and by painting with broad brushes, you are doing just that... (being a tool for the Mullahs)

If this is true, then why must we give in to their demands? Why must we put up with this behaviour? Does this mean we should allow this to escalate, as it seems to be doing? And most importantly, can you really be a Muslim, yet not follow the righten laws/rules?

The real Muslims who practice Islam are the ones preaching violence and destruction, the ones actually doing the destruction, etc. These are the ones that must be dealt with and in a strict manner, as with any other threat to our civilisation. This does not mean we should round up every Muslim, but we should be taking care of the ones causing/promoting the destruction. If the other Muslims are really as peaceful as they claim, they will allow this.

Anyway, its late here and I see that I am beginning to rant, so I'm going to rest on it now and come back in the morning for a refreshed discussion

Have a nice night and thank you for the peaceful discussion. It's nice to hear others opinions and thoughts on the matter.

Trust me if ALL muslims were fanatical, there would be a different issue. Think of how many there is...

Originally posted by jsobecky

Then they should have been rioting against those things. Also, these problems are present worldwide, yet only the fanatical muslims are rioting because of them.

Not really... in other parts of the world, we see the same things based, like the cartoons, on flimsy pretexts, where the people face the same situation. In China, the disenfranchised rioting, supposedly because of the Japanese textbooks, would be one recent example.

And in a way, they were rioting against these things (poverty, frustration, etc). It's just, in their minds, they see the West as being responsible for them, exactly because they suffer from ignorance. Just as the Chinese farmers, who dont share in the prosperity of their urban neighbours, have to rely on the pretext of WW2 era anti-Japanese sentiment to express their underlying frustration with being poor while Japan and the rest of China prosper.

Whew i go to sleep and wake up and theres 2 whole new pages. I knew this would take off sooner or later.
Thankyou all for your discussion, some of it was pretty insightful. I'm glad the 'stop hating muslims' talk has mostly stopped now
Alot of comparisions are being done between muslims and christians, and other cultures, as to whether they do in fact act differently to us when put under stress. I think this is a key issue and should be discussed further. When i'm not too busy i'll try and make a post about this. Thanks!
- Toby

Originally posted by T0byI'm glad the 'stop hating muslims' talk has mostly stopped now

"Stop hating Muslims"....seriously, only an insignificant minority of Muslims are actually extremist or "fanatical," it's just a fact. There are over one billion Muslims in the world and not even 1 percent of them engage in or support any kind of violence. I'm sure you'll do a comparison between Christians and Muslims under pressure that will focus on the western world, but how about you focus on Christian militias in Africa committing genocide? Or how about you look and see that the largest genocides occurred under China, Russia, and Germany, not Muslim again. The point is not to blame those countries either, but to realize that violence can rear it's ugly head in any situation.

And the catalyst to violence is a belief that there is a fundamental difference between all [blankl] and all [blank], and that person A will represent the side of [blank]. How many times have we seen this kind of thought lead to widespread despair and agony, whether it be by Nazis, communists, fascists, Christian or Muslim extremists? And every time, people try to use race, religion, economic class, or some other minor difference to generalize large groups of people and pose the "us vs. them" mentality.

Are people just afraid of what they do not know about? I think so, and I think this fear perpetuates violence and support of it, whether you are on the side of all Westerners are bad or on the side of all Muslims are bad.

Good post jamuhan, i'd have to agree with you on most of that.
I'm sure everyone is well aware of other countries historys and things like that. It's just that this is happening right now in our time so i guess this is where the attention is.
If the extremist % is really so low, then i suppose we have nothing to worry about.
I'm only wanting some creative and informative discussion on what the dangers are from the muslims at this point of time. ( No not all muslims just the extremists blah blah )

A quick question - what is the % of extremist muslims compared to christian extremists? And by that i mean ones that are in an ongoing violent battle against others not like them.

Christian militias in Africa commiting Genocide. The injustice of that sentence simply appals me. Christian minorities in Africa are genocided daily only so a Muslim propagandist can come and say it's the opposite. Hey, does Sudan ring a bell Jam?

But hey, Muslims are masters at that, like when they claimed the Holocaust was a huge money making scheme, a piece of a big war against Islam (and had those 2 bit revisionist neonazi textbooks printed by the millions in the middle East and taken as fact in their Madrassas), not to mention parading with "God bless Hitler" signs. No I don't hate Muslims, but I do hate Islam which is a virulent ideology placing 1 billion people in a quagmire of Jihad and intolerance against other faiths daily.


[edit on 21-2-2006 by Nakash]

Originally posted by Nakash
Christian militias in Africa commiting Genocide. The injustice of that sentence simply appals me. Christian minorities in Africa are genocided daily only so a Muslim propagandist can come and say it's the opposite. Hey, does Sudan ring a bell Jam?

I understand that you have a personal frustration since you are Jewish. And, the Sudanese pastoralists, who are predominantly Arab, are committing genocide on farmers who are predominantly non-Arab, which would be along the lines of ethnicity, but both are Muslim! Do some research, and you'll find statements such as this:

Black African Muslims of Darfur have reportedly come under systematic bloody attacks by their Arab brethren. The United Nations estimates that up to 50,000 African Muslims of Darfur have died in the hands of an Arab militia known as Janjaweed reportedly backed by the government of Sudan.

www.worldpress.org...

If you want examples of genocide among Christians in Africa, research current events in Nigeria or the Rwanda genocide.

[edit on 21-2-2006 by Jamuhn]

First, I am not Jewish, second, the minority in Darfur consists of Animists and Christians according to UN figures (posting a link to this soon enough, wait). Third Christians are oppresed daily in Nigeria, if they strike back against people tearing out babies from pregnant women's wombs over a cartoon (ie: this week
) I don't blame them. Muslims have no problem dishing out misery but hate it when they are subject to the consequences of their actions. Also, Rwanda has no Muslim majorities (Most Rwandans are Catholics, it was not a religious war either, a consequence of Belgian colonial mistakes)

May I add that the Darfur situation is a perfect mirror of the Caliphate mentality. Those Janjaweed call their vitims "slaves" and "Raisin heads" Just like Mahomet did.


[edit on 22-2-2006 by Nakash]

Originally posted by James Daniel
If this is true, then why must we give in to their demands? Why must we put up with this behaviour? Does this mean we should allow this to escalate, as it seems to be doing? And most importantly, can you really be a Muslim, yet not follow the righten laws/rules?

No we shouldn't give in to demands... but we should decide to be respectful for other reasons (the USA did take the high ground here)
As far as the Danish press, that was in bad taste, and was inciteful to say the least...
I truly think it was a measured action to try to "blur the lines" and develop even more animosity towards the entire islamic faith... and it is working...

As long as they keep the riots in the areas where they mostly kill fellow muslims, then let them bitch and groan, until they realize the only ones they are hurting over the long run, are themselves... otherwise... use force that is neccessary to disperse them...

If you look, you can see that there has been a dramatic effort (by some element) to get smart, thinking people to lose the distinction of "good muslim/bad muslim".

This will make it easier to start a "holy war" which is what i think 2 particular sides really want badly (the hardline islamic leadership, and the jewish zioist movement, of which certain elements of USA power players belong) I dont know for sure... but there is no doubt that the rioters are being played... but by whom?

As far as the question of whether a muslim can be a muslim without following all the various sectarian tenants, I can't say if the Chrisitan parellels are acurate...

If you consider all the splinters of Christianity, and the fervent belief by some (church of christ for instance) that anyone that doesn't beleive exactly the way they do, is doomed to eternal damnation (even other christians) then we can probably assume that there are also segments within islam that beleive very strongly (church of christ) and segments that believe in a much more lax and evolving beleif of islam (methodists or nondenominational)

If you look at countries like Morroco, and then at countries run by Taliban... you wouldn't event think they were the same religion... so I feel it is a safe bet...

[edit on 22-2-2006 by LazarusTheLong]

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
As far as the question of whether a muslim can be a muslim without following all the various sectarian tenants, I can't say if the Chrisitan parellels are acurate...

My thought on that is that whether they are directly comparable TODAY or not, is certainly questionable. I don't know of any Christian Movement that is violently and overtly trying to spread their message and convert or kill those different than them.

However, there have been in the past and I believe there will be in the future.

I believe the Christian Reconstructionist movement is covertly active and attempting to do the same thing that these extremist Muslims are attempting to do, using different (less obvious and clumsy) tactics. They both want the world to bow down to some ideological "religious" standard.

What is Christian Reconstructionism?

The Foundational Doctrines of Christian Reconstructionism

1. "God's covenant with Adam required him to exercise dominion over the earth and to subdue it (Gen. 1:26 ff) under God according to God's law-word."

2. "The restoration of that covenant relationship was the work of Christ, His grace to His elect people."

3. "The fulfillment of that covenant is their great commission: to subdue all things and all nations to Christ and His law-word."

The size of the group?

The size of the group is unknown. Most Reconstructionists are active on the social and political front rather than affiliated with a particular denomination. The character of the movement is also difficult to pin down since it is more an intellectual trend than organizational. The difficulty of determining the size of the group has compounded especially in recent years. Many Reconstructionists will admit that the movement has been defunct since 1985, splintering into several factions. Another complication is the fact that many Reconstructionists would only recognize it politically, and not necessarily religiously. For example, Pat Robertson's views have always been characterized as Reconstructionist in theory, yet he repeatedly denies allegiance to the movement.

I believe Bush is a Reconstructionist, and that his beliefs are behind some of his strange political actions. The thing is, most of them will deny it and call themselves Christians.

It's exactly the same thing that's going on in the Muslim world. The extremists call themselves Muslims when in truth, they're far removed from mainstream Islam.

If you need a more recent example, then I submit for your inspection the situation of Elohim City. The origin of the Oklahoma City Bomber plans...

I know this is all in the past... and i dont care who beleives me... but I have figured out more than any mainstream media... and mostly by accident...

Elohim City is a bastion of Christian Militants, that feel the NWO (or somesuch) will prevent them from worshiping the way they want, so they have ostracized themselves away from civilization... they are strongly aryan focused, and have had the FBI watching (and trying to instigate) for some action that can get them in trouble...

Terry Macveigh (was an elohim "lurker" but not member) was given the idea of blowing up the fed building by an FBI agent provacateur... the agent thought he was giving it to someone directly connected to Elohim city...

the fact either way is that a Christian militant extremist caused the Oklahoma City bombing
and then of course... the origin of that bombing was David Koresh, in Waco.

So we got wackos also... there is another group that is buying land like crazy in Texas...

While I co-owned a New Age Bookstore we recieved veiled and direct threats from well intentioned Christians all the time... some of them would be described as death threats... (but always from another angle)
one guy said, that "god would make sure we ended up dead in a dumpster"...

yes, thanks to the peaceful, loving and considerate Christians in this country, we had to pay extra to make sure there was always multiple people on staff, so that they could walk each other to their cars... (sometimes Customers would volunteer to stay to close, on nights we had threats.)