Muslims - the Day of Islam and another 911

@Pangloss,

Pangloss;90930 wrote:

Right, we go to war in the name of "WMDs", oil, power, politics...everything BUT religion. What makes this better than going to war for religion? War is war...it is perpetrated by aggressors, fought necessarily by defenders, and does not depend on one reason or another for it to be justified or acceptable.

You can as a citizen disagree with your countries motives and actions and on many occassions I do but Muslims cant disagree they are bound by its dogmatic dictates.

We could by certain means end our aggressive nature but Islam cant change, its stuck in an age when we all lived by these principles. It only depends on muslims who ignore the excesses their faith demands and tread the moderate path. There are many out there but the few claim these excesses as gods will.

@xris,

xris;90817 wrote:

You accuse me of lying and making up new theories and then tell me your posts are answering my questions, what questions prompted you to tell me i was lying. I did not give you cause to reply in the manner you did, If you call me a liar, i do act in a certain manner.

I dont care what you see as the wrong approach, if you dont like my manner dont debate with me.

Hi Xris,

I have already given you one example in my previous posts, you implied shia and sunnis dont accept each other as muslims, and then i showed quite clearly how you are wrong. I also proved your points invalid regarding the non muslim tax, "islamic" colonisation, and terrorism.

I dont mind debating with you, but I feel you always start on a false assumption, so I feel compelled to initially remove the assumption, and then when it is gone, instead of actually having the debate, you move on to a different subject.

@ahmedjbh,

ahmedjbh;90976 wrote:

Hi Xris,

I have already given you one example in my previous posts, you implied shia and sunnis dont accept each other as muslims, and then i showed quite clearly how you are wrong. I also proved your points invalid regarding the non muslim tax, "islamic" colonisation, and terrorism.

I dont mind debating with you, but I feel you always start on a false assumption, so I feel compelled to initially remove the assumption, and then when it is gone, instead of actually having the debate, you move on to a different subject.

If you want to debate Shina and Sunni differences , i can if you wish? You did not show they had no differences you simple disagreed with me. I did not claim aggressive differences, but you claimed i did, but then you could not refer to where i said such a thing. It was pointless pursuing in my opinion when you simple disagree.

When muslims invade another country they demand a infidel tax that they need to pay or they are simple killed, its a submission tax. It becomes a matter of interpretation not worth pursuing

I notice you did not answer the question about restricted employment imposed by Islamic rule, why was that? but then again if you did not answer why ask again?

@xris,

xris;90910 wrote:

The problem is I understand only to well, that's what frightens me. I know the intrigue, the false peace agreements, the time to act peacefully, the relentless demand to expand Islam by any means possible. The trouble is the majority of moderate Muslims are themselves unaware of this master plan. Do you understand I dont want to see sharia or hear its voice when it advocates the murder of homosexuals and adulterers. This country left burning apostates a few hundred years ago, i do not want it recommended now or ever.

The false peace agreements? Please enlighten me.

The Qur'an does not teach Muslims to spread the religion by any means possible. Please bring your evidence for this.

You do not want to see Islamic shari'ah because you do not understand it. And the bits and peaces you've heard of go against your concept of morality so you label it as barbaric and backwards. The funny thing is, I've had this debate numerous times with non-Muslims and their responses are pretty much the same. I was excited about the Religion forum here as I thought students of philosophy would bring a bit of intellectual rigour to their critisisms of Islam. I guess not.

xris;90965 wrote:

We could by certain means end our aggressive nature but Islam cant change, its stuck in an age when we all lived by these principles. It only depends on muslims who ignore the excesses their faith demands and tread the moderate path. There are many out there but the few claim these excesses as gods will.

The Islam I've shown you is the moderate path, as shown by our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

xris;90990 wrote:

When muslims invade another country they demand a infidel tax that they need to pay or they are simple killed, its a submission tax. It becomes a matter of interpretation not worth pursuing

I notice you did not answer the question about restricted employment imposed by Islamic rule, why was that? but then again if you did not answer why ask again?

'Infidel' is a Christian terminology so I would suggest you not use it in relation to Islam. As explained before (which is becoming a bit of a pattern with you) the tax is about the same as zakat, the tax that Muslims pay. Non-Muslims are therefore no worse off. And they don't get killed if they don't pay, they go through the same penal system as a Muslim who does not pay zakat.

Restricted employment has been explained to you as well.

@josh0335,

I would really like to know more about the beautiful aspect of Islam. Anybody know some good sources, or does anybody have personal reflections to share?

@xris,

xris;90990 wrote:

If you want to debate Shina and Sunni differences , i can if you wish? You did not show they had no differences you simple disagreed with me. I did not claim aggressive differences, but you claimed i did, but then you could not refer to where i said such a thing. It was pointless pursuing in my opinion when you simple disagree.

When muslims invade another country they demand a infidel tax that they need to pay or they are simple killed, its a submission tax. It becomes a matter of interpretation not worth pursuing

I notice you did not answer the question about restricted employment imposed by Islamic rule, why was that? but then again if you did not answer why ask again?

Already been done my friend,refer to my earlier posts.

@josh0335,

josh0335;91031 wrote:

I was excited about the Religion forum here as I thought students of philosophy would bring a bit of intellectual rigour to their critisisms of Islam. I guess not.

on some subjects, not only Islam, yes, it seems to be impossible to have a discussion here because of the loud braying that always impedes any progress. those making the most noise are only drowning out the voice of reason in their own ears and will not be able to hear it.

however, there are on the forum many who are rational and tolerant, many who refuse to be duped by propaganda, many who sincerely want to learn, and some who continually go out of their way in the cause of truth, for islam and other issues as well. though it seems you are facing an army of ignorance, it is really only a very loud minority. the knowledge of scriptures and history that you bring, along with your even tempered, yet uncompromising responses, may be doing more to bring about communication and a better understanding between people than you realize.
there are many guest viewers who are not able to comment, and many forum members who listen rather than post, who may be gaining a whole new perspective from hearing what you have to say. and they are at the same time being exposed to the ignorant and baseless accusations you are up against, which will also help make your point. I am very grateful for the presence and participation of both you and Ahmed. I believe this is the jihad of today.

@Justin,

Who are blowing each other up right now in Iraq?

@Alan McDougall,

Arjuna;91039 wrote:

I would really like to know more about the beautiful aspect of Islam. Anybody know some good sources, or does anybody have personal reflections to share?

I like the following site, Mas'ud Ahmed Khan's Home Page. Particularly the essays of Abdal-Hakim Murad, you should see his name along the left. I think he's a lecturer at Oxford University in the UK. This site does use some Islamic terminology though, but if you do decide to read something and don't understand, please feel free to ask me and I'll help out where I can. Another decent site is Islam Awareness Homepage which is quite pleasant to browse through.

salima;91110 wrote:

on some subjects, not only Islam, yes, it seems to be impossible to have a discussion here because of the loud braying that always impedes any progress. those making the most noise are only drowning out the voice of reason in their own ears and will not be able to hear it.

however, there are on the forum many who are rational and tolerant, many who refuse to be duped by propaganda, many who sincerely want to learn, and some who continually go out of their way in the cause of truth, for islam and other issues as well. though it seems you are facing an army of ignorance, it is really only a very loud minority. the knowledge of scriptures and history that you bring, along with your even tempered, yet uncompromising responses, may be doing more to bring about communication and a better understanding between people than you realize.
there are many guest viewers who are not able to comment, and many forum members who listen rather than post, who may be gaining a whole new perspective from hearing what you have to say. and they are at the same time being exposed to the ignorant and baseless accusations you are up against, which will also help make your point. I am very grateful for the presence and participation of both you and Ahmed. I believe this is the jihad of today.

Thank you, you're far too kind with your words! I was just surprised by comments such as 'it is barbaric' in reference to some of Islam's practices in a philosophy forum. If we have two different standards of morality then of course we will have disagreements as to what is moral and what is immoral. This is philosophy 101 isn't it? What is the point of name calling? I do hope that people who choose to reflect will see that Islam is not an evil religion aiming to kill all non-Muslims.

@Justin,

Especially after 9/11 and the attack on civilisation it represents, and given the media's attention to people blowing up themselves and innocent civilians, it seems difficult to get beyond this regrettable aspect of Islam and to view it objectively, or to remember that a vast majority of Moslems are decent people who only want to raise their family and live in peace with each other, and who have an entirely different understanding of the Koran than do murders and thugs.
One can only hope that, through open communication and through honest attempts at understanding one another, all can work together to make our world a better and safer place in which to dwell.

@Justin,

You are right jgweed but I can't help but see this lesson on what is jihad as being apologetic in nature.

It's like if I took the word, torture and tried to revamp it to mean, you are treated with pleasantries, and pampering. Then went around trying to tell people this new definition of the word torture. What ultimately happens is a confusion. Then a person who gets tortured under the old definition comes screaming that they were tortured, everyone will be confused because of the new definition.

"You were tortured, wow lucky you..."

So you actually do a disservice to people when you say jihad doesn't mean holy war and it is nothing offensive towards infidels. When you hear them shouting in the streets saying jihad, jihad and holding up signs that say, death to the Americans. You can't help but be confused. If it such a peaceful word why is it being used in such a harsh manor? This is where the danger comes in. Because as soon as someone apologies for a thug using the word for violent means it leads the innocent person into a trap.

"Oh they are shouting jihad, well they must be on a peaceful mission, how beautiful. I guess we should support their endeavor. We shouldn't oppose them because jihad is a peaceful word, even though they might be holding firearms and signs that say death to the Americans, they are on a great holy path of peace."

@salima,

salima;91110 wrote:

on some subjects, not only Islam, yes, it seems to be impossible to have a discussion here because of the loud braying that always impedes any progress. those making the most noise are only drowning out the voice of reason in their own ears and will not be able to hear it.

however, there are on the forum many who are rational and tolerant, many who refuse to be duped by propaganda, many who sincerely want to learn, and some who continually go out of their way in the cause of truth, for islam and other issues as well. though it seems you are facing an army of ignorance, it is really only a very loud minority. the knowledge of scriptures and history that you bring, along with your even tempered, yet uncompromising responses, may be doing more to bring about communication and a better understanding between people than you realize.
there are many guest viewers who are not able to comment, and many forum members who listen rather than post, who may be gaining a whole new perspective from hearing what you have to say. and they are at the same time being exposed to the ignorant and baseless accusations you are up against, which will also help make your point. I am very grateful for the presence and participation of both you and Ahmed. I believe this is the jihad of today.

Salima what you read here is a small reflection of what many non Muslims are feeling. If not by peaceful dialogue, we come to an understanding, the feelings will fester and erupt into open anger. We can not ignore the questions being asked and if i am branded a bigot then so be it, but my intentions are not to brand Islam as the enemy but to assist in its understanding. Click on the web and see the accusations of the mob, can you? would you? debate with them, or reasoned people who are trying to show respect. If you notice I never bring your Prophet into the debate, for fear of causing you anguish, lets tread softly by all means but lets not ignore the itch in the hope it will go away.

@Caroline,

Caroline;89607 wrote:

Why woudn't the FBI taking an interest? (If that's true).

Why would you think it doesn't?. As Ernest Hemingway put it, "It has the ring of truth".

@ahmedjbh,

ahmedjbh;91045 wrote:

Already been done my friend,refer to my earlier posts.

I thought you required me to debate Shia and sunni differences ? The link tells us that it has not always been easy even in modern times. Is this sufficient for you to accept that the killing of muslim by muslim is not as a result of the invasion of Iraq ?Shi'a?Sunni relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

@xris,

xris;91249 wrote:

Is this sufficient for you to accept that the killing of muslim by muslim is not as a result of the invasion of Iraq ?

Well, clearly the Ba'athist police state - terrible as it was - had effectively deterred the worst of the sectarian violence we now see in Iraq.

So whatever problems the invasion solved, Sunni on Shia violence was not one of them (at time of writing).

@Dave Allen,

Dave Allen;91254 wrote:

Well, clearly the Ba'athist police state - terrible as it was - had effectively deterred the worst of the sectarian violence we now see in Iraq.

Thats because Saddam was sunni and now they are grieved to have lost their power. The insurgents are sunni, also and they need the conflict to be extended for their own purpose. We where completely naive to the hidden hatred that lurked in Iraq.

@xris,

xris;91257 wrote:

The insurgents are sunni,

There's no one ideology governing insurgents. Some are Sunni, some Shia, some Wahabbhist, some secular...

@Dave Allen,

Dave Allen;91258 wrote:

There's no one ideology governing insurgents. Some are Sunni, some Shia, some Wahabbhist, some secular...

I dont think your find shia insurgents blowing up shias.

@Justin,

I don't think you'll find "blows up shias" is a synonym for "insurgent".

@Dave Allen,

Dave Allen;91262 wrote:

I don't think you'll find "blows up shias" is a synonym for "insurgent".

well when you consider they bare the brunt of the bombings and the vast majority of the insurgents are sunni, you can understand my statement. Egyptians , Syrians or Sudanese make up the majority and the 50% of the suicide bombers are saudis.

They have found that many of the insurgents are not really clear on the objectives or the reason for the Jihad. Many suicide bombers are blackmailed into doing it and many young naive youths are driven by motives not associated with Iraq. In Afghanistan the number coerced into suicide bombings is even higher. Im not being anti Muslim in my understanding, as i think Muslims should be concerned at the death toll of muslims, who bare the greatest burden of this horrific activity.

Philosophy Forum

Muslims - the Day of Islam and another 911

Quick Links

My Account

able2know