US Ambassador to Lybia, along with 3 others, killed

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

You have no idea what I believe.

I think what you believe when it comes to the topics of Islam and Muslims in the Middle-East is fairly clear after reading your various one-liner posts, but if you didn't express yourself very well when posting those you could always, ya know, post your actual thoughts on the subject and clarify them?

[JimmytheT]

"How dare this film depict the Prophet and say that Islam is not a religion of peace. We will teach you by commiting acts of murder and violence against your fellow nationals at your embassies." -All the members of the 'Religion of Peace' violently protesting around the world.


I have no patience for religious bullies and thugs like this. I do not accept any form of apologetics for this nonsense. These people want to dictate what we read, what we watch, what we wear, and who we have sex with. They axiomatically respond with violence whenever something or someone offends their religious sensibilities. This religion is--more than any other right now--a threat to humanity, civilized society, and all the values that we in the west hold dear.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by JimmytheT

"How dare this film depict the Prophet and say that Islam is not a religion of peace. We will teach you by commiting acts of murder and violence against your fellow nationals at your embassies." -All the members of the 'Religion of Peace' violently protesting around the world.


I have no patience for religious bullies and thugs like this. I do not accept any form of apologetics for this nonsense. These people want to dictate what we read, what we watch, what we wear, and who we have sex with. They axiomatically respond with violence whenever something or someone offends their religious sensibilities. This religion is--more than any other right now--a threat to humanity, civilized society, and all the values that we in the west hold dear.

I read and hear this confusing method of thought quite often. On the one hand, "religious bullies" are condemned. "They", as you said, would be the ones "violently protesting" around the world right now. "They" would be the ones that respond with violence when someone "offends their religious sensibilities". Jihadists, radical Islamists, etc. This is all fair enough, and I doubt many would disagree (outside of those extremists, of course).

Then, from that sensible way of thinking, the jump is made to condemning the entire religion, and/or everyone that calls that religion theirs ("this religion is a threat to all humanity"). And, really, if you condemn the entire religion, you can't help but condemn all of its practitioners in the process, violent protesters or not. How can the ones that live their everyday lives by the tenets of this faith not themselves be a threat to our way of life if those very tenets by which they live are a threat to us?

Anyway, this is where I feel there's a bit of battle within the psyche of the one writing or talking. On the one hand, they realize a few thousand violent Muslims does not an entire population of Muslims make. Or, if they don't realize this, they want to be politically correct. Then, on the other hand, they respond viscerally, and xenophobically, to the violence and destruction, and blame the entire Islamic religion.

Watching people wrestle with their inner, latent Islamophobia is really quite fascinating . . .

[JimmytheT]

"Latent islamophobia"? I do not fear this religion, and it deserves the ridicule it gets as does any other faith.
Are you actually going to address my comment that Islam is indeed a Religion that was founded and spread by violence or are you just going to resort to more ad hominem?

This is a religion founded on the principles of violence. It is derived from the very texts that muslims base their faith on.
This religion, like any other, deserves is criticisms based on these texts, and the actions of its followers.

Have you read the Koran? do you see how its tenants are implemented in countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen or the Sudan?
It has well earned the contempt and ridicule that I or any other freethinker wish to hurl at it.


Where are the so-called moderate muslims condemning these actions? Just like in 2006 when muslims around the world were going bat#### insane over stupid cartoons in a Danish newspaper, and murdering scandanavians, they are still silent. They condemn the blashemers, but never condemn the followers of their religion commiting these awful crimes.

[JimmytheT]

I should tersely add that the problem with Islamic fundamentalists are the fundamentals of islam.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5NB6LGakiCA

[Coys1882]

I don't care what religion you follow - if you react like that to something someone says about what you believe, that's terrifying and incredibly primitive.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JimmytheT

Have you read the Koran? do you see how its tenants are implemented in countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen or the Sudan?

Those tenants should be evicted from our country! Tersely!

[Calgary4LIfe]

This is my interpretation of the events... I may be out to lunch.. but it seems that many posters here have no idea about the geopolitical ramifications of why this stupid movie was created in the first place.

So, why? Was it simply to 'show that Islam is violent'? No.

In my opinion, this movie was created to destabilize these new fledgling democracies. To ensure that democracy never happens in those nations. To ensure that radical clerics remain in control of the people. Why? Because they are 'easier to control' that way.

Many nations in the Middle East have had great democracies. Oil has been their enemy. Every nation that has tried to nationalize their oil (pretty much every nation anyways - I didn't go through each and every country to see if this happened in all) have been met with coups that removed these democratic governments, replacing them with radical Islamic leaders. This was done not only to effectively stop nationalization of oil by said countries, but to also have them support the US in the cold war.

What is really sad is that so many people look at the Middle East as this 'backwards' area. They fail to ever look up the history and the politics. How the Middle East was carved up arbitrarily at times by the West, how leaders from these nations were removed and replaced with radicals, and how the people in these nations lost their future, family, and essentially their whole world.

Yes, it is true.. there is real 'hate' for the west (particularly the USA) in the Middle East by many citizens (though definitely not all). However, why do you think this? Do some posters really believe it is about religion? That it is about hating the western way of life? Sure, there have been many clerics spouting off hate with regards to this simple nonsense, and they find their supporters. However, the vast majority of people that 'hate' the USA are in fact people who have been affected by US international policy.

Some of the hate in this thread against Islam is just ridiculous. I am Catholic, not a Muslim. I look back at my own religion, and see how corrupt it was (and often is at times!) with all the crusades (some were for the restoration, some were definitely for riches), the forced conversions, etc. What changed? What made Catholics (and other Christians) less 'violent' in this world? When most Christian countries became democratic, that is when.

You hear and listen to the news.. they portray Islam as a big scary threat. No. That is what they want you to believe. The real threat is supporting radicals and colonialism, and the ongoing deprivation of people's right to live, hold elections, and have just as much of a say in this world as anyone else in any other country.

Don't believe me... watch some non-western documentaries - or documentaries by people like John Pilger who actually try to find the truth and expose it. I may come off as some crazy 'conspiracy theory nut-job', but at least try and see what both sides have to say, rather than just one. Get the whole picture before you label a country, or a race, or a religion as 'wrong'. Get informed before you decide to jump on the hate bandwagon.

People around the world are starting to realize that they have lost freedoms in the last few decades. The wall-street protests were very much to do with this. They weren't some anarchists, or some people fed up because they lost their jobs or their stock portfolio tanked. People in the 'west' have lost their freedom, and that is really continually eroding.

What do I know.. I am just a nutty conspiracy theorist anyways.. Don't take my word for anything. Doesn't mean you can't at least stop thinking from a western-centric point of view, and garner all your history and information solely from western media (controlled by mega-corporations). If you watch CNN, you ain't getting the whole news. I never understood this until I was watching the invasion of Iraq. They had an interview with some reporter from Al-Jazeera, to get his take on what was happening. This reporter started talking and said: "This invasion of Iraq..." and was immediately cut-off by the CNN reporter. She 'corrected' him by telling him: "This is not an invasion. This is the liberation of Iraq". He responded with: "Who asked for this liberation? The Iraqi government? The military? The people?" Nobody in Iraq wanted the USA to come in and 'liberate' them. This is an invasion. Even the UN did not want the USA to do this. This is nothing but an invasion."

Looking back on Iraq now, are the people better off, or worse off? Few, if any, Iraqis will say that they have been liberated.

Yet, people act surprised when the Middle East burns the American flags, storms embassies, etc. Yes, these actions are not justified. However, it should come as little surprise. The USA installed Islamic radicals as dictators to control the people - bribing them, giving them power. Soldiers enforced the law. You are looking at 2 generations of people forced to live a certain way, to obey their clerics, etc.

Get the whole picture before you start labeling people as 'backwards', 'stupid', 'violent', etc. Every human being is the same. The only difference is that the conditions upon which you were raised up are different. Unfortunately, for many of these people, the conditions in which they had every right to grow up in were STOLEN from them.

What happens in nations with a high standard of living? Seems to me that religious people in high quality of life nations are more rare than the ones from poor nations. Christianity, for instance, is 'dying' in North America. However, it is still growing in South America, Africa and in parts of Asia like the Philippines. North American Caucasian priests are becoming rarer. They are being replaced by priests from backgrounds of countries that are more poor, because less people in North America are going to seminary school, and it is because less of the population is religious.

Anyways, it it is just my personal take. Maybe I have lots of valid points here, perhaps I am out to lunch. The important thing to get out of my post here is to just think for yourselves instead of just blindly listening to the media and forming an opinion that is just congruent to theirs. Form your own opinion by obtaining your own information - not just on what is happening this very instant, but take into consideration what has been happening there (and in many other places around the world) since the end of World War 2. Heck, go back to the days of colonialism to gain a better picture - because (in my opinion) colonialism has only changed from being obvious, to turning into a 'hidden' colonialism.

[kirant]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

This is my interpretation of the events... I may be out to lunch.. but it seems that many posters here have no idea about the geopolitical ramifications of why this stupid movie was created in the first place.

So, why? Was it simply to 'show that Islam is violent'? No.

In my opinion, this movie was created to destabilize these new fledgling democracies. To ensure that democracy never happens in those nations. To ensure that radical clerics remain in control of the people. Why? Because they are 'easier to control' that way.

While I agree with a lot of points that you made in your post, I will say that I would follow Occam's razor on this one - I think this guy is acting for the the same reasons Reverend Terry Jones acts...because he thinks it's right. He thinks a video this crazy actually has a place and is going to benefit (or alternatively, that he's an attention whore. Either seem accurate to both people). Maybe I missed an interview with him where he admitted something...but I can't see him wanting to actively destabilize an area. Though if he did, I admit he's got some pretty damn accurate predictions.

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Don't believe me... watch some non-western documentaries - or documentaries by people like John Pilger who actually try to find the truth and expose it. I may come off as some crazy 'conspiracy theory nut-job', but at least try and see what both sides have to say, rather than just one. Get the whole picture before you label a country, or a race, or a religion as 'wrong'. Get informed before you decide to jump on the hate bandwagon.

After having read and watched a lot of Pilger's stuff, I find you have to take it with a grain of salt. He does fight for the opposite side and provides an often ignored view, but he is also a media outlet himself and is prone to making his own bias. Freedom Next Time is pretty heavy with peculiarities in Pilger's writing and what stats he decides to bring to the table. Is it good to know more than one side? Undoubtedly. I just think we can't accept Pilger's version as more "truth" than another. It's quite an unfortunate situation, but in order to find the truth, you have to interpolate between different sources and discern what is bias reporting and what is actually happening.

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by JimmytheT

"Latent islamophobia"? I do not fear this religion, and it deserves the ridicule it gets as does any other faith.
Are you actually going to address my comment that Islam is indeed a Religion that was founded and spread by violence or are you just going to resort to more ad hominem?

Ah, yes, the classic ad hominem defense. When all else fails, ad hominem! Condemn an entire religion as a threat to humanity (what kind of person wouldn't fear a threat to humanity, Western civilization, and our very way of life, anyway?) based on the actions of a minority? That's not Islamophobic in the least, and is certainly not statistically insignificant when comparing it to the millions upon millions of peaceful Muslims across the world. Ad hominem! Who cares if you never even mentioned anything in your original post about Islam being "founded and spread by violence"! Let's just tell someone they didn't address it and type ad hominem!

This is a religion founded on the principles of violence.

What are the Five Pillars of Islam?

Have you read the Koran? do you see how its tenants are implemented in countries like Saudi Arabia, Yemen or the Sudan?
It has well earned the contempt and ridicule that I or any other freethinker wish to hurl at it.

Yes, I have read the Qu'ran. I have a translation right here on my bookshelf by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. And, yes, I see how Islamists have implemented various political ideologies (not sure if they've implemented any tenants) in those countries. However, the way Islam has been utilized as a political ideology in those countries, along with others like Iran, varies, and is dependent on the ideology of those human beings that have implemented it. Islam is not monolithic across the Middle-East.

Have you read the Qur'an? If so, which translation? Have you read any of the hadiths? It takes more than visiting the atheism sub-Reddit to properly earn the title of freethinker, and if you want to debate Qur'anic verse, I'll be here all day.

Where are the so-called moderate muslims condemning these actions

There have already been a few posts linking to articles where Muslims have condemned the actions done over this film. Could there be more? There certainly could be, though the reasons for there not being are likely fairly complicated. However, even if no Muslims anywhere publicly condemned what was being done (which is entirely untrue), that doesn't necessarily mean they must support what is being done in turn, and to think so is fallacious.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

[/B]

Maybe try watching the trailer or read up on it and than read a little about Mohamed from an unbiased source. From my understanding it is not accurate in the least and even to think that it may be is preposterous.

I have now watched the trailer. It seems like a failed attempt at humour more than anything else. One would hardly draw any conclusions about Islam from it. I actually doubt that there is a full movie somewhere. What was there was painful to watch.

Your second piece of advice is a little harder. How does one find an unbiased source?

[PowerPlayoffs06]

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

Ah, yes, the classic ad hominem defense. When all else fails, ad hominem! Condemn an entire religion as a threat to humanity (what kind of person wouldn't fear a threat to humanity, Western civilization, and our very way of life, anyway?) based on the actions of a minority? Etc. etc. more hypocrisy.

You're hilarious. How dare anybody condemn the entire populace based on the actions of a minority! Clearly, you're enlightened and better than that. You would never do anything so narrow minded, right?

Why does the city of Vancouver do this?

Vancouver embarrassed our country.

This is the 2ND time now this has gone on in this city. I think the excuse that it could have happened anywhere is just that, an excuse, at this point. Clearly this is ingrained in that city's culture somehow. You don't see this type of behaviour outside of Vancouver (besides Montreal) once, let alone twice. It has to be more than a mere coincidence.

Any of those quotes look familiar? They're all you condemning the entirety of the city of Vancouver and the Canuck fan base after "the 2ND time" the city rioted. But that's okay right? There's a history of violence there after big sporting events. It has to be more than a mere coincidence.

But to apply that same logic to a body of people who have rioted much more than just "the 2ND time" it's totally wrong. It must just be coincidence, or a small minority.

Watching you wrestle with your inner, latent Canuckophobia is really quite fascinating . . .

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Itse

How about you try using something called "an internet search engine"?

Sheesh. Fine. Let me Google that for you.

Islamic statements against terrorism

There is a very significant fatwa against terrorism issued by Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, one of the most reknowned and highly acclaimed muslim scholars, if not the most acclaimed.

Here's a picture of his crowd in Hyberabad (India, the man himself is btw a Pakistani.)

There were a reported 100 million people listening to him speak, and approximetely 2 million people tried to gather (with various levels of success) to hear him out.

Here's a picture...

And another from Bangalore...


Not sure where this is...


What message did these people come to listen to? Certainly not anything the terrorists like, because this guy has received numerous threats from Taleban and other terrorist organizations for his words. Stuff like:

Yes, these are the kinds of words that draw millions of muslims to them.

Basicly, if you bothered to google it yourself for five minutes, you would have pretty easily found out that there are hundreds if not thousands of statements against terrorism and terrorists by every possible sort of muslim to be found in the internet. There are propably millions of people in various peaceful muslim organizations which actively spread the word that terrorism does not belong in islam.

But because it doesn't fit with the US world view of islam it's not reported, and because people are too damned lazy to check things out for themselves, Americans and many other westerners continue to believe in the type of BS you do.

That was a pretty impressive link and I don't completely discount it but, I did notice that most of the statements were made shortly after 9/11 when the Islamic community was feeling a lot of heat.

The example you show was a guy speaking in India and I doubt he would be allowed to speak there if his message was any different. In fact because of their cold war with Pakistan I'm impressed they have the freedom to assemble. That speaks well for India.

Having said all that; you did make your point. There is evidence that moderate Islam has a voice and does use it.

[SeeBass]

Now this is a front row seat

[PIMking]

guys if you hate America so bad then put down the red box....

[JimmytheT]

HP Lovecraft said:
----------------------
"What are the Five Pillars of Islam?

Yes, I have read the Qu'ran. I have a translation right here on my bookshelf by Abdullah Yusuf Ali. And, yes, I see how Islamists have implemented various political ideologies (not sure if they've implemented any tenants) in those countries. However, the way Islam has been utilized as a political ideology in those countries, along with others like Iran, varies, and is dependent on the ideology of those human beings that have implemented it. Islam is not monolithic across the Middle-East.

Have you read the Qur'an? If so, which translation? Have you read any of the hadiths? It takes more than visiting the atheism sub-Reddit to properly earn the title of freethinker, and if you want to debate Qur'anic verse, I'll be here all day."
-------------------------------------------

Don't bother warning the disbelievers. Allah has made it impossible for them to believe so that he can torture them forever after they die. 2:6-7

Allah has sickened the hearts of disbelievers and increased their disease. He is a spiritual anti-doctor. 2:10

If you try to compose a surah that is better than those in the Quran, and then fail, Allah will burn you forever if you in the fire that he has prepared for disbelievers, whose fuel is men and stones. 2:24

Allah will shed human blood while angels praise him in heaven. (The angels question why Allah has to kill people; Allah says they'd understand if they knew everything like he does.) 2:30

They who disbelieve, and deny Our revelations, such are rightful Peoples of the Fire. They will abide therein." 2:39

Christians and Jews (who believe in only part of the Scripture), will suffer in this life and go to hell in the next. 2:85

"For disbelievers is a painful doom." 2:104

If someone murders your slave, then you get to kill one of his. If it was a male that was killed, you kill one of the killer's male slaves. If a female, you kill a female. Murder for murder. Slave for slave. It all works out swell with Allah's wondrous rules. (Oh, and if you don't follow them, you'll have the usual painful doom.) 2:178

Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (But if they desist in their unbelief, then don't kill them.) 2:191-2

Allah says that you must keep fighting until there is no more persecution and everyone on earth is a Muslim. Then you can stop killing people. 2:193a

War is ordained by Allah, and all Muslims must be willing to fight, whether they like it or not. 2:216

Nothing prevents non-muslims from believing in Islam. So it's their own fault when they are sent to their doom. 18:55

When Abraham's son, Ishmael, was old enough to walk, Allah told Abraham in a dream to sacrifice Ishmael. So Abraham asked Ishmael if it'd be OK with him, and Ishmael said, "Sure thing, Dad, go ahead and kill me for God. I won't even flinch." 37:102 [All three Abrahamic monotheisms share this disgusting celebration of a father intent on murdering his own child to show the love of his god]

Smite the necks of the disbelievers whenever you fight against them. Those who die fighting for Allah will be rewarded. 47:4


I give full credit to the followers of this religion who live in peace and ignore these few (out of hundreds of violent Koranic verses). The fact remains that there is a very large subsect of this religion that espouse violence against those that do not agree with them. Minority or not, their violent beliefs do not conflict with the basis of their texts. In fact they are the true followers of the religion if you chose to objectively analyze their scripture.

Furthermore, I find it impossible for the Koran to be so "mistranslated" that all these verses quoted would be so miscontrued as to miss the mark of violence so many times over.

I feel I have rightfully invoked Ad Hominem, but you are fallacious again in asserting that I use it as a defence in my arguments. Your first response to my post was incoherent blather that did not address my assertion (backed by bodies of evidence) that islam is inherently violent. Instead you accused me of being a latent islamophobe. It would be the same as me simply responding that you are a blatent islamaphile; yet I have chosen to point out the violence in the very text itself.

You also need to explain why in the contemporary world, the only religious group that responds with this level of violence over something that they deem blasphemous are muslims?

When in the past 30 years have the hindus burned embassies and murdered people over blasphemy towards them? The Christians? The Jews? the Jaines? The buddhists? the Shintoists? Etc.

There is a common threadto this religious violence of recent times that I do not think even you could deny deep down.

[PIMking]

there are some pretty gnarly parts of the bible too.

[normtwofinger]

[burn_this_city]

Those are some pretty hilarious translations that aren't even close to authentic.

[JimmytheT]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Those are some pretty hilarious translations that aren't even close to authentic.

Well, then, care to translate them properly for me? Will it actually make a contextual difference?

PIMKing said: "Bible has some pretty gnarly parts too"
Of course it does, and as text for "living your life" and an explanation forthe cosmos is equally ridiculous. This however has nothing to do with the argument at hand. One major religion's text containing vile nonsense does not excuse anothers.