Terror attacks in Paris.

[Crypto2015]

The Islamic terrorists in Indonesia are AL Qaeda and ISIS, same as the rest of the world, the rest of the Indonesians live relatively peacefully. I'm not claiming the government of Indonesia is anything great, just saying the Muslim majority is not in the habit of going on killing sprees on Hindus, Buddhists, and Christians. And the few Islamic terrorists are more likely to be attacking government troops, not the common people.

You live in denial, my friend. In the video below you can see how a group of Indonesian Muslims (not ISIS not Al Qaeda) demolishes a Christian church before its congregation, with the connivance of the Indonesian government.

 

[Lyndon]

You claimed they were killing non believers and this is your evidence??

 

[Town Heretic]

The context just makes it look even worse. By the way, murder is a crime according to Islam, but killing unbelievers during jihad is not murder.

You need to read the full thing for context. Justification for holy war is pretty specific.

Also, civilians are not innocent according to Sharia law because they pay taxes that are used to fund the French army.

Well, no. That's not a valid/orthodox understanding of the application. That's why Muslims, both laymen and scholars, are condemning the violence done in Paris.

Also, Islam does not try to obtain forced conversions to Islam.

I know and it's noted in that article I linked to.

However, the special taxes that are collected exclusively from the non-Muslims in addition to the constant harassment to which non-Muslims are subjected, result in conversions to Islam.

You're talking about the jizya? That imposition has varied over the course of history and I don't know of any modern Islamic state that still imposes it. That whole dhimma system has been left by every recognized Islamic state, though I'm sure some of the extremist splinters might seek to impose it, provided they allowed those outside of Islam to remain within their territories. Another reason to assist in ousting ISIS (and another reason to be capable of distinguishing between the fanatics and the orthodox, peaceful majority of Islam).

Why do you think that former Christian countries such as Egypt and Turkey are now predominantly Muslim?

Where are you getting this notion from? The highest estimated percent of Christians in the past century was in 1927, when it came in, officially, at about 8.3% Now it depends on who you believe. As low as five and as much as twenty percent claimed. Turkey had a vital Christian community, comprising 19% of the population about the same time as the heyday of Egypt. But then you had the Armenian genocide and the exchange with Greece of populations also related to war and genocide. I don't know why you'd ever call either of those Christian countries. They have smaller minorities of Christians, but that happens in all sorts of places, as does the growth of Christianity in all sorts of places, especially Africa, where one in four people are now Christian and which, coupled with Latin America, combine for about a billion of the world's current Christian population.

 

[Lyndon]

Excellent Australian article on why France is getting all the attention Lebanon and other nations who experienced similar tragedies are not;

https://newmatilda.com/2015/11/14/p...rability-and-our-selective-grief-and-outrage/

 

[Twilight Hue]

still dos not explain why they would kill innocent people

They don't think rationally like we do. Lives are meaningless and valueless in their eyes and don't regard suffering and pain as anything worth considering. When "people" get to that point, they are no better than a feral animal of the wild.

 

[Lyndon]

So much for the value of "rational" thinking.

 

[esmith]

Well it seems that France has stepped up and French President Francois Hollande has condemn the attack as an "act of war" and vow that France "will be merciless toward the barbarians of Islamic State group.". Seems that at least one country has decided that they have had enough. Now let's see if the major powers in the world will side with France and seriously take the attack to ISIS. The allied powers did this before in WWII against a common enemy and basically reduced the Axis to rubble. If the "kid gloves" come off and the full weight of a new "allied" power brings their military to bear ISIS does not stand a chance. The resulting conflagration will, as it did in WWII, cause the lives of non-combatants and the loss of "allied" lives; However until their allure is terminated this senseless killings will continue. No, you will not eradicate all of the Islamic extremest, those will have to be dealt with on an ongoing war (which is going to happen anyway). ISIS has been using their exploits via social media to recruit followers and monetary donors; therefore if ISIS is dealt a devastating defeat they lose their allure.


Yeah I'm proposing "Total War" against ISIS.

 

[IndigoStorm]

Do nothing in what sense? Some are fleeing with the families they mean to save. Some are fighting. Most are condemning. What are we doing? What are you doing? What could you do if your country wasn't doing anything? It's just too easy to suggest that every Muslim is obligated to somehow, in some unexplained way, "do something".

A billion Muslims with absolutely NO influence over what a so called handful of radicals do.

What did the French masses do when they were dissatisfied with their monarchy? What did the Russians do about Tsar Nicholas II? What did the Allies do about Hitler?

Surely out of a figure of one billion, at least a couple of hundred fighters can be found to surround and wipe out ISIS in and around Syria?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

They don't think rationally like we do. Lives are meaningless and valueless in their eyes and don't regard suffering and pain as anything worth considering. When "people" get to that point, they are no better than a feral animal of the wild.

Don't insult wild animals in such ways. They have more empathy and compassion than the most base of humans. There are many feral cats in my neighborhood and they show more love than many humans do. Dolphins and whales are also known to help drowning humans or humans otherwise in distress.

 

[MARCELLO]

I really do not know what to answer...The muslims I have encountered are much more better than christian western.

 

[Iti oj]

[

A billion Muslims with absolutely NO influence over what a so called handful of radicals do.

What did the French masses do when they were dissatisfied with their monarchy? What did the Russians do about Tsar Nicholas II? What did the Allies do about Hitler?

Surely out of a figure of one billion, at least a couple of hundred fighters can be found to surround and wipe out ISIS in and around Syria?

french monarch =one head
isis/terrorist = hydra
allies were an army and no one went to war just to stop Hitler.
several hundred wouldn't be enough .
they are a disarmed population of civilians .

 

[Jumi]

Let's not kid ourselves that they kill European civilians because they hate the so-called West, Shabab pledged allegiance to ISIS and did a similar massacre in Kenya killing kids at the University.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32169080

So also with Boko Haram.

 

[Town Heretic]

A billion Muslims with absolutely NO influence over what a so called handful of radicals do.

How many Christians impact what Westboro does? How many anyones impact extremists? And that's a billion and a half world wide. This isn't Germany before WWII, though being concentrated doesn't always appear to be much of a help depending on the particulars.

What did the French masses do when they were dissatisfied with their monarchy? What did the Russians do about Tsar Nicholas II?

Nothing for a very long time. Typically, that sort of revolution has more to do with an increasingly dissatisfied and powerful merchant/middle-class channeling the growing, impotent rage of the lower class. That merchant class becomes the power afterward, for the most part. Or, it's complicated, historically speaking. If you really want to speak to it that way.

What did the Allies do about Hitler?

Now you've changed the model, or you'd be asking what the Germans did about the Nazis, which was mostly nothing though most Germans weren't Nazis and many were disgusted by them. At its height of popularity, only about ten percent of the German population were members of the Nazi party. That's eight out of eighty million people. So if you have an army and play to the right prejudices you can take power and cow a majority with relative ease, apparently. At least for a while.

Surely out of a figure of one billion, at least a couple of hundred fighters can be found to surround and wipe out ISIS in and around Syria?

Are you under the impression that the only people dying and fighting in the conflict with ISIS are from Western powers? Are you under the impression that most of them are?

 

[esmith]

A billion Muslims with absolutely NO influence over what a so called handful of radicals do.
Surely out of a figure of one billion, at least a couple of hundred fighters can be found to surround and wipe out ISIS in and around Syria?

You do realize don't you that ISIS forces are a trained military force. What do you consider a "couple hundred fighters" to be? 200,300,400,500,.......10,000? Now suppose you got your "couple hundred fighters", how long do you think it will take to train the common "line infantry"? How long do you think it will take to train the (in western terms) non-commissioned officers? How long to train the "officers". Now back to the "line infantry", it will require training in a host of combat related specialties such as mortar crews. You do realize that it requires rear echelon and their training to support font line troops don't you? Where are you going to get and train these? Now let's consider the experience level of your "couple hundred". It is a hard fact that during combat that the "new guys" life expectancy is very short in comparison to the "veteran" and it took the "veterans" time to teach the replacements how not to get killed or wounded. Where do you get your "veterans". So, I think you get the idea don't you that your idea of rounding up a "couple hundred" volunteers has zero chance of working let alone surviving in a combat situation.

 

[Jumi]

a "couple hundred" volunteers has zero chance of working let alone surviving in a combat situation.

Right. Idealism doesn't carry far on the battlefield.

 

[Crypto2015]

You need to read the full thing for context. Justification for holy war is pretty specific.



Well, no. That's not a valid/orthodox understanding of the application. That's why Muslims, both laymen and scholars, are condemning the violence done in Paris.


I know and it's noted in that article I linked to.


You're talking about the jizya? That imposition has varied over the course of history and I don't know of any modern Islamic state that still imposes it. That whole dhimma system has been left by every recognized Islamic state, though I'm sure some of the extremist splinters might seek to impose it, provided they allowed those outside of Islam to remain within their territories. Another reason to assist in ousting ISIS (and another reason to be capable of distinguishing between the fanatics and the orthodox, peaceful majority of Islam).


Where are you getting this notion from? The highest estimated percent of Christians in the past century was in 1927, when it came in, officially, at about 8.3% Now it depends on who you believe. As low as five and as much as twenty percent claimed. Turkey had a vital Christian community, comprising 19% of the population about the same time as the heyday of Egypt. But then you had the Armenian genocide and the exchange with Greece of populations also related to war and genocide. I don't know why you'd ever call either of those Christian countries. They have smaller minorities of Christians, but that happens in all sorts of places, as does the growth of Christianity in all sorts of places, especially Africa, where one in four people are now Christian and which, coupled with Latin America, combine for about a billion of the world's current Christian population.

You are wrong at so many levels. I wish you were right about Islam, but unfortunately, you aren't. Let's start with the conditions that must be met in order to declare holy war (jihad) against the non-Muslims:

"Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] said: I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against people till they say none has the right to be worshiped but Allah, and whoever said [this] he saved his life and property from me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah" (Bukhari, Jihad, no. 2946, cf. no. 25 and 1399)

So, Jihad can be waged against all those who refuse to accept Islam.

"The caliph fights all other people until they become Muslim . . . because they are not a people of the Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) (though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol-worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (p. 603, o9.9)." (From the Sharia law of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence).

 

[Town Heretic]

You are wrong at so many levels.

Said the fellow who lamented the passing of Christian Turkey and Egypt?

I wish you were right about Islam, but unfortunately, you aren't. Let's start with the conditions that must be met in order to declare holy war (jihad) against the non-Muslims:

"Allah’s Messenger [Muhammad] said: I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against people till they say none has the right to be worshiped but Allah, and whoever said [this] he saved his life and property from me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah" (Bukhari, Jihad, no. 2946, cf. no. 25 and 1399)

So, Jihad can be waged against all those who refuse to accept Islam.

Again, I invite anyone disinterested in cherry picked attempts to make as orthodoxy a thing refuted by the larger Islamic community, by scholars like Oxford professor Tariq Ramadan and an outpouring of semilar condemnation and rejection from Muslims around the world, to resist the human impulse to fear and lump sum the other.

Or, it's odd that only a sliver of radical Islam appears to agree with you and that modern history fails to support any orthodox movement in Islam to see it accomplished.

Now, as to jihad. First you have to understand that it isn't always or necessarily armed conflict. Jihad is advancing Islam. An illustration from a bit by the Islamic Supreme Council of America:

• "Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is very rare. To highlight this point, the Prophet Mohammed told his followers returning from a military campaign: "This day we have returned from the minor jihad to the major jihad," which he said meant returning from armed battle to the peaceful battle for self-control and betterment.
• In case military action appears necessary, not everyone can declare jihad. The religious military campaign has to be declared by a proper authority, advised by scholars, who say the religion and people are under threat and violence is imperative to defend them. The concept of "just war" is very important"

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., has condemned the attacks as contrary to Islamic teaching and "heinous".

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Indonesian President Joko Widodo condemned the attacks.

Or, to put the difference Islam has with your efforts to paint it: 24 reasons ISIS are wrong: Muslim scholars blast Islamic State

"Over a hundred Muslim scholars and clergymen from all over the world have released on Wednesday an address to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, accusing the self-proclaimed caliph and his army of heinous war crimes and violation of fundamental principles of Islam, illiterate use of Islamic scripture torn from the context and perversion of the rules of morality and Sharia law.

The absolute majority of the essentials detailed in the letter – 20 out of 24 – have to do with acts forbidden in modern Islam. They deal with many aspects of noble human life: prohibiting such acts as killing of the innocent, prisoners and emissaries (journalists included), denying women and children their rights, the re-introduction of slavery, torture, disfiguring the dead and destroying graves, harming or mistreatingbelievers of other religions of the Scripture, starting armed insurrection, declaring caliphate“without consensus from all Muslims,”as well as issuing fatwas (legal rulings, interpretations of the Islamic law) without proper religious education, mastery of the Arabic language, “oversimplify[ing] Sharia matters” and even “ignoring the reality of contemporary times.”"

Link: https://www.rt.com/news/190468-muslim-scholars-islamic-state/

"The caliph fights all other people until they become Muslim . . . because they are not a people of the Book, nor honored as such, and are not permitted to settle with paying the poll tax (jizya) (though according to the Hanafi school, peoples of all other religions, even idol worshippers, are permitted to live under the protection of the Islamic state if they either become Muslim or agree to pay the poll tax, the sole exceptions to which are apostates from Islam and idol-worshippers who are Arabs, neither of whom has any choice but becoming Muslim (p. 603, o9.9)." (From the Sharia law of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence).

I get why you have to, but you're ignoring the simple fact that the jizya just isn't a part of any recognized Islamic state. If you want to talk about history it has value, but then the Christian West had its draconian measures against other faiths, historically. Not sure what the value of the discourse is in speaking to the present.

 

[Crypto2015]

Said the fellow who lamented the passing of Christian Turkey and Egypt?


Again, I invite anyone disinterested in cherry picked attempts to make as orthodoxy a thing refuted by the larger Islamic community, by scholars like Oxford professor Tariq Ramadan and an outpouring of semilar condemnation and rejection from Muslims around the world, to resist the human impulse to fear and lump sum the other.

Or, it's odd that only a sliver of radical Islam appears to agree with you and that modern history fails to support any orthodox movement in Islam to see it accomplished.

Now, as to jihad. First you have to understand that it isn't always or necessarily armed conflict. Jihad is advancing Islam. An illustration from a bit by the Islamic Supreme Council of America:

• "Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is very rare. To highlight this point, the Prophet Mohammed told his followers returning from a military campaign: "This day we have returned from the minor jihad to the major jihad," which he said meant returning from armed battle to the peaceful battle for self-control and betterment.
• In case military action appears necessary, not everyone can declare jihad. The religious military campaign has to be declared by a proper authority, advised by scholars, who say the religion and people are under threat and violence is imperative to defend them. The concept of "just war" is very important"

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization in the U.S., has condemned the attacks as contrary to Islamic teaching and "heinous".

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and Indonesian President Joko Widodo condemned the attacks.

Or, to put the difference Islam has with your efforts to paint it: 24 reasons ISIS are wrong: Muslim scholars blast Islamic State

"Over a hundred Muslim scholars and clergymen from all over the world have released on Wednesday an address to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, accusing the self-proclaimed caliph and his army of heinous war crimes and violation of fundamental principles of Islam, illiterate use of Islamic scripture torn from the context and perversion of the rules of morality and Sharia law.

The absolute majority of the essentials detailed in the letter – 20 out of 24 – have to do with acts forbidden in modern Islam. They deal with many aspects of noble human life: prohibiting such acts as killing of the innocent, prisoners and emissaries (journalists included), denying women and children their rights, the re-introduction of slavery, torture, disfiguring the dead and destroying graves, harming or mistreatingbelievers of other religions of the Scripture, starting armed insurrection, declaring caliphate“without consensus from all Muslims,”as well as issuing fatwas (legal rulings, interpretations of the Islamic law) without proper religious education, mastery of the Arabic language, “oversimplify[ing] Sharia matters” and even “ignoring the reality of contemporary times.”"

Link: https://www.rt.com/news/190468-muslim-scholars-islamic-state/


I get why you have to, but you're ignoring the simple fact that the jizya just isn't a part of any recognized Islamic state. If you want to talk about history it has value, but then the Christian West had its draconian measures against other faiths, historically. Not sure what the value of the discourse is in speaking to the present.

Are you joking? First of all, Egypt used to be 100% Christian before being invaded by the Muslims. Who do you think the Coptic Christians are? They are the true owners of that occupied country. Iran, on the other hand, was 100% Zoroastrian. They are also an occupied country. Have you ever heard of the Byzantine Empire, a.k.a. the Eastern Roman Empire? The Byzantine Empire was 100% Christian. It is called Turkey now. The same can be said of many other countries.

Also, I cannot believe that you have mentioned CAIR as a human rights organization. CAIR was created by the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamic supremacist organization that pioneered 20th century Islamic terrorism and sanctions violence against civilians. CAIR founders have praised terrorists to Muslim audiences and said that suicide bombers are acting on behalf of Islam. CAIR board members have called for the overthrow of the United States and the imposition of Islamic law. CAIR has suggested applying Sharia punishment (ie. the death penalty) to users who criticize Islam on the Internet. Federal Judge Jorge A. Solis said that there was evidence to show that CAIR has an association with the Holy Land Foundation, Islamic Association for Palestine, and Hamas. Critics of CAIR, including six members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, have alleged ties between the CAIR founders and Hamas. The founders, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad, had earlier been officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP) and were described by a former FBI analyst and a US Treasury Department intelligence official as "intimately tied to the most senior Hamas leadership."

I will keep destroying your other assertions tomorrow.

 

[Lyndon]

Right wing propaganda..........

 

[Crypto2015]

You have also mentioned that ISIS is not Islamic because it tortures people and enslave women and children, among other things. This is 100% Islamic!!! Take a look at Muhammad:

There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man) (Sahih Muslim 3901).

Qur'an (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee"

Qur'an (23:5-6) - "..who abstain from sex, except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess..."

Qur'an (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."

what about torture?

So the apostle called Burayra to ask her, and Ali got up and gave her a violent beating, saying “Tell the Apostle the truth.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 734)

“…they brought them along and questioned them while the apostle was standing praying… The people were dismayed at their report…and so they beat them. When they were beaten soundly…” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 436)

Narrated Abdur Rahman ibn Azhar: “I saw the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) …a man who had drunk wine was brought (before him) and he ordered them (to beat him). So they beat him with what they had in their hands. Some struck him with whips, some with sticks and some with sandals. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) threw some dust on his face.” (Abu Dawud 38:4474)

They were caught and brought to him (the Holy Prophet). He commanded about them, and (thus) their hands and feet were cut off and their eyes were gouged and then they were thrown in the sun, until they died. (Sahih Muslim 4131 -this account is also confirmed by at least three other narrations).

When he [Muhammad] asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr bin al-Awwam, “Torture him until you extract what he has.” So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad bin Maslama and he struck off his head.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 764) - This story is also confirmed by Ibn Kathir, vol 3 p. 268.