I know not all Muslims are Islamists, but...

[Assad91]

You found it difficult to answer? I could not guess what your answer might be. I do not prejudge so....

And so, I ask again:-
Supposing that you are a parent, and you have (say) a ten year old son, and you are walking past a street meeting where a Muslim leader of some sort is advocating action against (say) homosexuals and/or other infidels (right word?) in your community, would you:-
1. Take him forward to listen, and encourage the speaker's viewpoint?
2. Tell him not to take any notice of such extremist hatred, and warn him against such bigotry?

What would you do?

Number 1, totallllllly. Than take him home and put a bomb on him and send him off his way.

 

[dust1n]

I think old badger was implying it might be the other way around!

You cannot divorce the act from its motive and its motive was based in radical Islam.

Just like the pope and the catholic chruch has had to apologise, answer for and do something about the paedophilic priests.... so should Islam apologise, answer for and do something about the horrendous things that occur because of the radicalisaed or perverted aspects of its existance.

So, the Catholic church had to apologize for covering up crimes around the world, and that is relevant to the average Muslim who has absolutely nothing to do with terrorist institutions? Unless, you think Muslims are all in on covering up the crimes of terrorism... What an awesomely glaring double standard.

 

[oldbadger]

Hi, and thanks.

Do you mean Brazilians? I don't think the word "islamistas" (the literal adaptation into Portuguese) is used with any frequency at all, or that it would be often understood to mean anything different from "Muslim".

Brazilians are generally fairly relaxed about mixing cultures, ethnies and ancestries. As for the political aspects, mostly everyone here is somewhat resigned to a degree of irrelevancy in our own politics. Even our Muslims, I assume.

Hi.... and thanks for that....

It sounds as if Brazilians use such terms in a totally different way to the Brit press. I don't think any polite reasonable English person would call a Muslim an Islamist..... well..... unless they had been convicted of a terrorist crime. Our use of these words may well have adapted as a result of our media reports.

Hence, this is how I believe the OP has written about both words as differing from each other.

 

[LuisDantas]

You have significant political and cultural clashes with Muslim immigrants and their descendants, don't you?

 

[oldbadger]

Number 1, totallllllly. Than take him home and put a bomb on him and send him off his way.

Thankyou. I wonder how other members will interpret your reply?

 

[dust1n]

Fatwas against terrorism? We don't want your fatwas....... we want the muslim communities to work hand-in-hand with all groups (that includes homosexuals, women, christians, agnostics ..... the whole populace.... everybody!) to reduce and if possible eliminate all this crime and terror.

That Fatwa is exactly in the right direction.

"Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- A fatwa, or religious ruling, issued this week is roiling theological waters after it took aim at those notorious for targeting others: terrorists.

The anti-terrorism fatwa by renowned Muslim scholar Muhammad Tahir ul-Qadri pulled no punches, declaring that terrorism was "haraam," or forbidden by the Quran, and that suicide bombers would be rewarded not by 72 virgins in heaven, as many terrorist recruiters promise, but with a suite in hell.

Qadri, the founder of the Minhaj-ul-Quran International, an Islamic movement with centers in 90 countries, told a news conference in London, England, on Tuesday that his decree categorically condemns terrorism and suicide bombings in the name of Islam.

"Until now, scholars who were condemning terrorism were conditional and qualified what they said," Qadri said in a phone interview, noting that his 600-page ruling left no room for interpretation. "I didn't leave a single, minor aspect that, in the mind of radicals or extremists, can take them to the direction of martyrdom."

The 59-year-old Pakistani scholar called his fatwa an "absolute" condemnation, going as far as to label the terrorists themselves "kafirs," a term in the Quran meaning "unbeliever."

"This fatwa has the potential to be a highly significant step towards eradicating Islamist terrorism," Quilliam, a counter-extremism think tank based in London, said in a statement.

Manan Ahmed, assistant professor of Islam in South and Southeast Asia at the Institute for Islamic Studies in Berlin, agreed, calling the fatwa "unprecedented."
"This is a landmark theological study -- a careful and systematic treatment of a thousand years of legal tradition dealing with armed resistance against the state, rules of engagement, aspects. The fatwa itself ... is categorically and comprehensively against terrorism in any form and for any cause," Ahmed said.

Many skeptics questioned whether an intellectual dismantling of al Qaeda's religious philosophy could have any impact on recruiting terrorists in places like Pakistan, where many potential foot soldiers don't have access to education, much less academic discourse.

Ahmed says it can.

"This is not an academic or an intellectual argument alone. This is a theological argument, based in the Qur'an and Sunnah [practice of the Prophet]," Ahmed said. "What it provides are easily available argumentation and proof for the millions of preachers across Pakistan, who can, in turn, incorporate this into their weekly sermons."

Ahmed says where it will undoubtedly leave an indelible mark is online. Just this week, U.S. Army Brig. Gen. John Custer, head of intelligence at the U.S. military's Central Command, told the CBS program "60 Minutes" that "without a doubt, the Internet is the single most important venue for the radicalization of Islamic youth."
In the recent case involving five young Americans from the Virginia area, known as the "D.C. Five," who are in a Pakistani jail potentially facing terrorism charges, the so-called ringleader Ramy Zamzam allegedly had contact with radical Islamist Web sites. Last week, 24 year-old Afghan-born American Najibullah Zazi pleaded guilty to conspiring to blow up high-density targets in New York City. Prosecutors allege he, too, communicated online with terrorists.

Salman Ahmad, the lead singer of the Pakistani rock band "Junoon" and author of "Rock & Roll Jihad: A Muslim Rock Star's Revolution," says it's young men in the West who can be influenced the most by Qadri's arguments.

"The fatwa by the Pakistani Islamic scholar is an important positive religious ruling and it has been made in the West, where a lot of young impressionable Muslim kids are being brainwashed by the terrorists to commit murder and suicide in the name of Islam," Ahmad said.

"It's about time Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda realize that Muslims will not allow their faith and identity to be hijacked by a bunch of thugs masquerading as holy men.""

Some experts see fatwa as significant blow to terrorist recruiting - CNN.com

 

[dust1n]

Thankyou. I wonder how other members will interpret your reply?

I found it relatively funny, considering it played off a loaded rhetorical question in a humorous way.

I also find it relative funny how far some are willing to go in criticizing billions of people they've never met based on what they don't do, despite higher poverty (to deal and cope with) than the British population, and ability to actually be able to do anything anyways.

I wonder how many who are having fun attempting to criticize the "average" Muslim for being much like the average person have actually themselves made any strives to reduce violence or racial tensions in their own community...

 

[Sunstone]

Facts are facts - Men who call themselves Muslims are murdering innocent people on the streets in the name of Islam....

What other religion is doing this today?

Perhaps a few more insightful questions would be, "Given that a relative handful of Muslims engage in violence in the name of their religion, why is it only a handful? Why does not even 1/10th of 1 percent of the world's Muslim population follow them by engaging in violence in the name of their religion? What is it that causes the overwhelming majority of Muslims worldwide to eschew committing violence in the name of their religion despite many provocations to do so?"

Once you have figured out why the vast majority of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims behave as they do, then you will be in a much better position from which to discern why a relative handful of Muslims depart from the norm.

 

[oldbadger]

You have significant political and cultural clashes with Muslim immigrants and their descendants, don't you?

Yes. I just wrote half a page about how bad our society and culture can be, and just erased the lot. Enough to say that we need to sort out our values significantly. But we need to stand up, admit to our shortcomings and then sit back down together and find harmony..... together. All of us! Together! Exclusion of one group (like homosexuals?) or religion or nationality or colour or gender is unnacceptable.

No more killings, exclusions, victimisations, harrassments, assaults, threats, or any of it. And our government has started to wake up, I reckon, just this week.

I hope we can sort this all out.

 

[Sunstone]

I wonder how many who are having fun attempting to criticize the "average" Muslim for being much like the average person have actually themselves made any strives to reduce violence or racial tensions in their own community...

The average person, regardless of whether you are discussing religion or politics, is most typically a moderate. And moderates are not known for their activism either for or against something. It's hard enough to get them to vote in elections, let alone get them to take to the streets to protest extremism.

 

[Katzpur]

I think the Brit press tends to use the word 'Islamist' when reporting terrorist attacks that Muslims were involved in.

Because of that, the Brit press might not refer to a reasonable peaceful Muslim as an 'Islamist'. So....... people who read Brit papers and follow Brit media might tend to separate those two words. Octavia lives in the UK.

This might be wrong of the press, but..... well...... what do you think?

Maybe that's where Octavia came up with her terminology. You'd probably have more insight into that than I do. Calling any Muslim an Islamist just strikes me as kind of uninformed, just as calling him a Muhammadan would.

And how do you think that the Muslim community and its leaders could help to reduce such 'Islamist' crimes?

Honestly, as a non-Muslim myself, I really don't have any idea. I do believe that most Muslims abhor these crimes as much as the rest of the world does, though. I always find it unfortunate that so many people paint all Muslims with the same brush as they do terrorists.

 

[Assad91]

Brits are fooled by their media. You play into their hands. Why else would the media call a well known extremist to talk instead of the real leaders?

 

[oldbadger]

Maybe that's where Octavia came up with her terminology. You'd probably have more insight into that than I do. Calling any Muslim an Islamist just strikes me as kind of uninformed, just as calling him a Muhammadan would.

Hello again....... I've never heard of the term Muhammadan, ever. It's strange how different our terminology is in various regions, I think.

But..... yes..... that's how our press seems to use the word 'Islamist'.

Honestly, as a non-Muslim myself, I really don't have any idea. I do believe that most Muslims abhor these crimes as much as the rest of the world does, though. I always find it unfortunate that so many people paint all Muslims with the same brush as they do terrorists.

I agree. I've known many Muslims very well (worked with them) and they are very reasonable, decent people. You mention about people 'painting all Muslims'. I tell you what..... people do generalise a great deal, and it's very bad. But in this thread a Muslim painted all 'non-believers' in a certain way, as well. Humans 'paint' whole groups of people in gross generalisations..... so seriously stupid.

 

[oldbadger]

Brits are fooled by their media. You play into their hands. Why else would the media call a well known extremist to talk instead of the real leaders?

Sometimes we are, yes. We have a lot to put right, here.
Are you ever fooled? Do you have a lot to put right, where you live?
We don't know which country you live in, so nobody can comment upon what deviousness you might be subjected to. Just out of curiosity I wonder whether or not you live in a Muslim Country?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Thankyou. I wonder how other members will interpret your reply?

I would suspect he was being sarcastic. I would also wonder why you asked the question in the first place.

 

[Godobeyer]

there is a different between islamistes and Terrorists killing people by the name of Islam.

islamistes is wrong label .

For the terrorists ,they had no problem to eleminate the other who disagree with them "muslim or non-muslims"

So for sure we (all muslims ) need to fight the terrorists , by idealogy or gun .

 

[Katzpur]

Hello again....... I've never heard of the term Muhammadan, ever. It's strange how different our terminology is in various regions, I think.

Actually, I think the term "Muhammadan" was used (incorrectly) back in the early and mid-1900s. I believe many Christians knew so little about Islam that they referred to its followers as "Muhammadans" instead of "Muslims." I know I heard the term as a small child, and only later came to realize that there really is no such word.

I agree. I've known many Muslims very well (worked with them) and they are very reasonable, decent people. You mention about people 'painting all Muslims'. I tell you what..... people do generalise a great deal, and it's very bad. But in this thread a Muslim painted all 'non-believers' in a certain way, as well. Humans 'paint' whole groups of people in gross generalisations..... so seriously stupid.

Yeah... tell me about it. We humans love to characterize entire groups of people by finding the worst possible examples in that group and claiming that all members of the group are like the worst ones. ("So seriously stupid" is a good way of putting it.)

 

[oldbadger]

Actually, I think the term "Muhammadan" was used (incorrectly) back in the early and mid-1900s. I believe many Christians knew so little about Islam that they referred to its followers as "Muhammadans" instead of "Muslims." I know I heard the term as a small child, and only later came to realize that there really is no such word.

When I was a kid, (1950's) I think that was the first time I heard the word Mussulman. It was in a London restaurant and an Eastern man came in with a group of people. A man with a loud voice said , 'What's a Mussulman doing it here!?' In England the press tend to use 'Moslem', and so I thought that was correct, but an RF member suggested I not use it months ago. So now, if somebody uses a word I would not, I look to see what country they live in, because it might be ok there.

Yeah... tell me about it. We humans love to characterize entire groups of people by finding the worst possible examples in that group and claiming that all members of the group are like the worst ones. ("So seriously stupid" is a good way of putting it.)

Humans seem to polarise into groups. In Essex county, England, there are two towns close by each other, Basildon and Billericay. In the 60's the youths from both towns often set out to kick hell out of each other. What about football supporters? I have heard that Ozzies and Kiwis have attitudes about each other; maybe an Oz member could verify that. I don't think there are any Kiwi members....

 

[oldbadger]

there is a different between islamistes and Terrorists killing people by the name of Islam.

islamistes is wrong label .

For the terrorists ,they had no problem to eleminate the other who disagree with them "muslim or non-muslims"

So for sure we (all muslims ) need to fight the terrorists , by idealogy or gun .

Hi........

Question:- What do you think of the word 'Moslem'? Is it wrong?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

there is a different between islamistes and Terrorists killing people by the name of Islam.

islamistes is wrong label .

For the terrorists ,they had no problem to eleminate the other who disagree with them "muslim or non-muslims"

So for sure we (all muslims ) need to fight the terrorists , by idealogy or gun .

Well said. I agree that 'Islamist' and 'Jihadist' are unfortunate terms.