reply to post by Ersatz
Hey, when someone calls me naive, and says I am 'unable to cogently refute facts' and 'suffering from some form of cognitive dissonance' and
'refuse to acknowledge reality', I take it as I see it. I haven't used the same terms on you, because I find it highly unlikely that you would be
suffering from any such thing, and to say that you are would be somewhat insulting.
I am curious that considering how you claimed I was obsessed with certain 'irrelevant' words and their meanings, it is YOU who still bring up (a
faulty concept of) taqiyya in almost every one of your posts directed to me. I hope this short list will clarify and put an end to this particular
line of back-and-forth:
* Taqiyya is the practice of hiding the truth about one's beliefs when one needs to guard against what they fear (and there is backing from the
* Taqiyya is allowed in Islam (and while some anti-shiite groups may disagree with this, I am willing to accept it).
* (You claim) Taqiyya is the practice of lying when done by a 'true believer'
* (You claim) these doctors were practising taqiyya (although at no point did they claim to be using it, and at no point did they hide their supposed
* Neither were these doctors performing any kind of taqiyya, nor were they following Islam.
You tell me what 'muslims' do, yet considering that one of the major definitions of a muslim would be someone who follows the Islamic faith, where
the only scripture is the Quran and the authentic Hadith (which again, some who call themselves muslim don't follow), and also considering that these
books disallow certain things, then if a person goes against these things, which is more authoritative on Islam and muslims? The person, or the
scripture? Because I can tell you the exact opposite: Muslims say the use of kafir for all non-muslims is incorrect, muslims make friends with
non-muslims, and they don't disguise or nurse any such hatred, etc.
Originally posted by Ersatz
Islam, naturally, is the totality of Islam, the whole of the Quran at least.
And Wahabism and extremism are part of Islam.
The only way you can have Islam not be extreme is to reject large parts of it, which really would mean it isn't Islam but a castrated
You seem to be twisting words to suit your own agenda (that some people do wrong things, and since they are a part of Islam, thus Islam as a whole is
to blame). Wahabism is heavily criticised, even (especially by) muslims for it's innovations and extremist ideology. One of the early examples in the
video you linked to was the punishment of throwing homosexuals from a high place- something which has no backing from the Quran or Hadith (which the
Documentary agrees with), and then they attempt to justify it with a passage that translates as calling them 'lowest of the low', when the word in
arabic has no connection to height, just character.
The documentary is an video edited in such a way as to have maximum effect desired by the ones who made it. I can make no judgement as to whether or
not anybody stood up to question anything, or where the audience was from, or their characters.
There are no high profile protests because the media doesn't care to give it any profile. Why should anyone march on Mecca, when it is not Islam to
blame? According to the Quran, there is no such thing as 'moderate Islam' or 'extremist Islam'. There is only 1 kind of Islam, and one of the
names for Islam and muslims given in the Quran is "the Middle way" or "the people of the middle way", so 'moderateness' is implied in the
About John Quincy Adams, he was not a muslim, didn't seem to have any close muslim connections, and while he appears to have travelled quite a bit, I
see nowhere in any of his biographies mention of any visit to 'the middle east' or 'the orient' or any 'mohammaden country'. He studied at
Leiden University, and also at Harvard University, but it seems he studied law, and nothing about the Islamic religion. How was he informed about
As for your claim that Khomeini's word still being unchallenged and undisputed in the Muslim world....I really don't know what to say. Where on
earth did you get this absurd piece of information? From some shrine to Khomeini? During his life, as well as after his death, there was lots and lots
and lots of opposition (both shi'a and sunni) to much of what he says. Khomeini is famous for only one reason: His role in the Islam Revolution in
Iran, and his leadership of Iran.
[edit on 6-9-2008 by babloyi]