• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Daesh" ... the name that ISIS hates. So, let's use it!!

Should we refer to ISIS as "Daesh" from now on

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 75.0%
  • No

    Votes: 4 25.0%

  • Total voters
    16

Tiapan

Grumpy Old Man
Tribal groups of the middle east have been killing each other for millennia, it is their tradition. After all its only 100 years since they were basically camel jockeys. They breed like rabbits because so many are expected to die young, multiple wives because of the depleted number of males etc. They are just another fringe social experiment that occurs regularly the same as Rwanda and Pol Pot in Cambodia a few years back. We are horrified at the beheadings but are they really any worse than the gas chamber or electric chair practiced by "civilized" states such as the USA.
Iraq was defined by the British and French after WW1, where economics rather than demographics decided borders. I believe this is the root cause, Iraq should be split into three, Kurdistan in the North, Shiastan in the east, and Sunniland in the west. Many religions talk of peace yet practice war, under the pretext of "protecting" their particular brand of "holy literature", which has extensive descriptions of how to conduct war "in the name of" so and so. Remember these countries have some of the lowest education levels in the world, they are taught by wrote learning rather than taught to think, so are easily manipulated.
Education and competitiveness of the west has led to some disillusioned well educated youth to give up being a small fish in a big pond and idealistically seek to join these tribal loonies in the fanciful belief of becoming a big fish in a small pond. I wonder how many had their illusions shattered on arrival, having their phones and passports confiscated and thrown in at the deep end to kill or be killed. Having killed they are now permanently trapped.
My opinion is let them kill each other, it is their tradition, then we can clean up whats left. We could Nuke the entire middle east and they would simply pop up again some where else such as Pakistan or Indonesia etc.
Although the appalling acts of 911, Beirut, Istanbul, Bali and most recently Paris etc are despicable acts of violence, the actual chance of being killed by a terrorist is less than being struck by lightning, yet the west spends billions "defending" itself and restricting personal freedoms causing factionalism and marginalization of minorities that help perpetuate the problem.
It is the ideology that must be attacked and reckoned with, that can only occur through education.
Cheers
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Daesh is just the Arabic version of ISIS, they don't hate it. It literally means the same thing as ISIS/ISIL.

According to at least one source, Daesh was using the word to refer to themselves for awhile, but then quit. After quitting, according the source, they started cutting out the tongues of people who still used the word Daesh to refer to them. So, perhaps, they do indeed hate the word. If so, it's likely because of its association with another word that appears to be a somewhat round about way of calling someone a bigot.
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
Yeah another thread about not calling IS, IS.

It really is cute.


Again learn to read and more importantly understand what you are reading.
 

dust1n

Zindīq
Alright, to clarify, because this was driving me crazy.

"
The main misapprehensions about the word currently circulating in our media boil down to the following list:

  • That daesh is an Arabic word in its own right (rather than an acronym) meaning ‘a group of bigots who impose their will on others’
  • That it can be ‘differently conjugated’ to mean either the phrase above or ‘to trample and crush’
  • That one of the words in the acronym also means ‘to trample or crush’
  • That it is an insult or swearword in its own right
  • That is has different meanings in the plural form
Read around a bit, across several UK and US broadsheets, and you will quickly spot the same misinformation being repeated almost word for word: publications are either quoting each other as supposed reliable sources on the story, with acknowledgments, or simply repeating each other’s lines without explicitly referencing them. In most cases, the explanation is not only wrong, it doesn’t actually make sense. But why all this speculation? Why so much mystery? Why are phrases like ‘rough translation’ and ‘possibly linked to this word’ being used, making the story out to be as elusive and contested as many of the political developments on the ground in Syria? Clearly none of these journalists or their researchers have accessed an Arabic/English dictionary (there are many freely searchable online) nor – even easier – contacted an arabophone, to check these basic facts.

So what does Daesh really mean? Well, D.A.E.SH is a transliteration of the Arabic acronym formed of the same words that make up I.S.I.S in English: 'Islamic State in Iraq and Syria', or 'لدولة الإسلامية في العراق والشام' ('al-dowla al-islaamiyya fii-il-i’raaq wa-ash-shaam'). That’s the full name chosen by the organisation, and – when used in full – it’s definitely how they want to be referred to. In Arabic, just like in English, that phrase consists of six words, four of which make it into the acronym (‘in’ and ‘and’ are omitted) : 'دولة dowla' (state) + 'إسلامية islaamiyya' (Islamic) + 'عراق i’raaq' (Iraq) + 'شام shaam'. That last word, 'shaam', is variously used in Arabic to denote Damascus (in Syrian dialect) ‘Greater Syria’ / the Levant, or Syria – hence the US-preferred acronym ISIL, with the L standing for Levant. In Arabic there is a single letter for the sound 'sh', hence our transliteration of the acronym having five letters, not four. And the vowel which begins the word 'islaamiyya' becomes an 'a' sound when differently positioned in a word, hence the acronym being pronounced 'da’ish' when written in Arabic, and the 'a' coming over into our transliteration of the acronym. Of course the amazing Arabic letter 'ع' which begins the word for 'Iraq' is unpronounceable to an anglophone, and can’t be written in Latin letters, hence the use of an 'e' (or occasionally an ’e) in the transliteration....

And so if the word is basically 'ISIS', but in Arabic, why are the people it describes in such a fury about it? Because they hear it, quite rightly, as a challenge to their legitimacy: a dismissal of their aspirations to define Islamic practice, to be 'a state for all Muslims’ and – crucially – as a refusal to acknowledge and address them as such. They want to be addressed as exactly what they claim to be, by people so in awe of them that they use the pompous, long and delusional name created by the group, not some funny-sounding made-up word. And here is the very simple key point that has been overlooked in all the anglophone press coverage I’ve seen: in Arabic, acronyms are not anything like as widely used as they are in English, and so arabophones are not as used to hearing them as anglophones are. Thus, the creation and use of a title that stands out as a nonsense neologism for an organisation like this one is inherently funny, disrespectful, and ultimately threatening of the organisation’s status. Khaled al-Haj Salih, the Syrian activist who coined the term back in 2013, says that initially even many of his fellow activists, resisting Daesh alongside him, were shocked by the idea of an Arabic acronym, and he had to justify it to them by referencing the tradition of acronyms being used as names by Palestinian organisations (such as Fatah). So saturated in acronyms are we in English that we struggle to imagine this, but it’s true.

All of this means that the name lends itself well to satire, and for the arabophones trying to resist Daesh, humour and satire are essential weapons in their nightmarish struggle. But the satirical weight of the word as a weapon, in the hands of the Syrian activists who have hewn it from the rock of their nightmare reality, does not just consist of the weirdness of acronyms. As well as being an acronym, it is also only one letter different from the word 'daes داعس' , meaning someone or something that crushes or tramples. Of course that doesn’t mean, as many articles have claimed, that 'daesh' is 'another conjugation' of the verb ‘to crush or trample’, nor that that is 'a rough translation of one of the words in the acronym' – it’s simply one letter different from this other word. Imagine if the acronym of 'Islamic State in Iraq and Syria' spelt out ‘S.H.I.D’ in English: activists and critics would certainly seize the opportunity to refer to the organisation as ‘****’ – but I think it’s safe to say that no serious foreign media outlet would claim that '****' was another conjugation of the verb 'shid', nor a rough translation of it. Of course, that analogy is an unfair one, given the hegemonic global linguistic position of English, not to mention the heightened currency of scatological words; but there is a serious point to be made here about the anglophone media’s tendency to give up before it’s begun understanding non-European languages.

And obviously understanding things outside of English, and explaining them to each other via our (social)media hive mind is hugely important on many levels: in the broadest sense, it allows us to attempt to take our place as global citizens, and feeds our connection to other humans on planet Earth. Sadly, the story of the word 'Daesh' is neither the only nor even the worst example of anglophone media failing us in this regard. But there’s something specifically important in this particular story which is being overlooked as a result of all the lazy journalism around it: the use of this word is part of a multi-pronged, diverse range of efforts by Arabs and Muslims to reject the terrorists’ linguistic posturing, their pseudo-classical use of Arabic, their claims to Quranic authority and an absolute foundation in sacred scripture, as reflected in their pompous name. This ridiculous claim has of course been masterfully and witheringly deconstructed at the Islamic level, but at the secular level, satire is a crucial weapon in the fight against these maniacs: there is a fertile tradition of Syrian and satire as not only defiance but coping strategy, and which has been quite under-reported. In satirical Arabic media (and conversation) various diminutives of the word have also gone viral – elegantly diminishing their subject, belittling them, patronising and relegating them to a zone beyond any formal naming in a single sweep...

So the insult picked up on by Daesh is not just that the name makes them sound little, silly, and powerless, but that it implies they are monsters, and that they are made-up."

https://www.freewordcentre.com/blog/2015/02/daesh-isis-media-alice-guthrie/
 

agorman

Active Member
Premium Member
I thought it was "Dagesh", with "g". I have a Muslim friend who told me that's their true name. Maybe he was wrong; I don't know.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
DAISH

Dowlatul Islaam fil Iiraaq wa Shaam


It means the same DAISH and ISIS

U want to make them angry?
Say Khawarij!
It works all the time


The terrorists wants people to call them Dowlatul Islaam, without shortage daaish.

I call them retarded trolls
So, what does "Khawarij" mean, specifically? After looking it up it seems to mean "revolt" or "rebels", but why would that make ISIS mad?
 
Top