ISIS!

[cwmbrancity]

are you of European descent?

 

 

good amount of watmmers in these threads looove to downplay islamic extremism and the brutality of islamic law-run societies that stone women to death, behead and crucify people for dissent etc etc, by bringing up anything they can on what the US or west does to its citizenry lol.. it's really funny actually, so damn predictable.

 

i have to believe that you are all playing the devils advocate out of jackassery rather than actually passing these types of things off as "oh it's all relevant when you look at the US"

 

 

have you heard of the protestant Reformation?

 

are you familiar w/Calvinism and its traditions?

 

the stats for deaths across Europe during the 16th century make a lot of the Middle East's bs look like child's play in comparison

 

i'm not baiting you, just sayin, horrors are a consistent feature of mankind & as Judge Holden says in Blood Meridian, "war is God"

[usagi]

^ don't bother with these guys, bran. the only thing that'll shine some light in the darkened recesses of their minds will be some eye-opening real-life experiences, words on a screen won't do anything.

[may be rude]

the christian church has been directly behind huge and heinous shit time and time again.

 

terrorists arent muslim, they're fucked in the head. we're at war with the mentally ill.

[cwmbrancity]

then we're at war with ourselves

 

: Hugh Latimer, Bishop of Worcester, 16th Oct 1555:

 

context - speaking to Nicholas Ridley, Bishop of Oxford, on the commencement of their burning at the stake for being Protestants....

 

"Play the man, Master Ridley; we shall this day light such a candle, by God's grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out"

 

props 4 Anglo-Saxon stiff upper lip n all eh

 

(apologies in advance, ye of Anglo-Saxon crews)

 

multi edit buffle

[Lane Visitor]

.

[Lane Visitor]

 

are you of European descent?

 

 

good amount of watmmers in these threads looove to downplay islamic extremism and the brutality of islamic law-run societies that stone women to death, behead and crucify people for dissent etc etc, by bringing up anything they can on what the US or west does to its citizenry lol.. it's really funny actually, so damn predictable.

 

i have to believe that you are all playing the devils advocate out of jackassery rather than actually passing these types of things off as "oh it's all relevant when you look at the US"

 

have you heard of the protestant Reformation?

 

are you familiar w/Calvinism and its traditions?

 

the stats for deaths across Europe during the 16th century make a lot of the Middle East's bs look like child's play in comparison

 

i'm not baiting you, just sayin, horrors are a consistent feature of mankind & as Judge Holden says in Blood Meridian, "war is God"

 

 

so what? it's not the 16th century anymore. there wasn't something called human rights then. there was no UN. there was no advanced technology, medicine, global communication or enlightenment. but all of that has now happened on many parts of the globe, as humanity has mostly evolved from that kind of barbarism. totally not even relevant.

 

the christian church has been directly behind huge and heinous shit time and time again.

 

terrorists arent muslim, they're fucked in the head. we're at war with the mentally ill.

 

Love how people call out the church for the huge and heinous shit they're behind and connect corruption to one whole religion when it's Christianity, but refuse to even recognize or identify the religion of an Islamic terrorist. Just because someone has perverted their faith and used their religion in the name of evil doesn't eradicate their identity as a follower of that religion. It's just an extreme version of it. I think what you're trying to say is they're not being "Islamic" or a "true Muslim" by committing acts of terror, which ill agree with. But to ignore a very real issue and pass off religious fundamentalism as nothing to do with religion with rather a case of mental illness is simply pure ignorance of the matter.

 

^ don't bother with these guys, bran. the only thing that'll shine some light in the darkened recesses of their minds will be some eye-opening real-life experiences, words on a screen won't do anything.

 

Haha, you've been in these threads quite a bit yourself man, discussing dark stuff.. way to paint out those you disagree with as some kind of basement-dwelling creeps. nice

[cwmbrancity]

you're correct its not the 16th Century, but its still humanity ;)

 

atrocities arent unique to the Middle East, just look at this planet during the 20th Century too

 

not many winners then either if you tally up the dead & it was the century you were born in

 

I'm not out to trip you up, just a few historical pointers

 

regeneration through violence is part of nature, if you'd like to read a superb distillation of that fact read the novel Blood Meridian or just nose around at what lurks at the center of every galaxy (said in Stephen Hawking robot voice)

[cwmbrancity]

ere's a you-lubed version:

 

[Lane Visitor]

 

 

atrocities arent unique to the Middle East, just look at this planet during the 20th Century too

 

 

 

This is the problem here as I see it. We're all so terrified to point out obvious issues for fear of not seeming "fair" or "equals". That's a bunch of non-sense. A sweeping statement like "atrocities aren't unique to the middle east" in a thread ABOUT ISIS and discussing Islamic terrorism is simply knee-jerk defensiveness. Clearly no one with common sense believes that atrocities are unique to the Middle East, and we're not claiming that when we talk about the current events of the very real atrocities that are currently going on in the middle east, just like quoting from my previous post, no one is "talking about Muslims or Islam in general when they talk about radical islam." Stop the relativism for crying out loud mane.

[usagi]

 

^ don't bother with these guys, bran. the only thing that'll shine some light in the darkened recesses of their minds will be some eye-opening real-life experiences, words on a screen won't do anything.

 

Haha, you've been in these threads quite a bit yourself man, discussing dark stuff.. way to paint out those you disagree with as some kind of basement-dwelling creeps. nice

 

 

so what, cos I post in this thread like you I hold the same simple-ass reactionary views as you? nah, buddy.

 

you and people who talk like you are painfully uninformed. I doubt you have any first-hand experience with any of the things you have expressed opinions about in this thread. it's not even about the opinion you hold necessarily, but the way you 'elucidate' it and hold on to it like you're certain.

[Lane Visitor]

This whole exercise of this relativist non-sense is like if I walked into a Mexican restaurant on Cinco De Mayo cuz I felt like some tacos and friends and I wanted to go there to celebrate Cinco De Mayo, and someone standing near the door looked at me with cunning eyes and said "Hmm, you feel like Mexican food eh? Well, ya know, there's NOTHING wrong with Chinese food- there are Chinese restaurants in town too, buddy, but whatever, go ahead walk in, have your Mexican food, ignoramus."

[Lane Visitor]

 

 

^ don't bother with these guys, bran. the only thing that'll shine some light in the darkened recesses of their minds will be some eye-opening real-life experiences, words on a screen won't do anything.

 

Haha, you've been in these threads quite a bit yourself man, discussing dark stuff.. way to paint out those you disagree with as some kind of basement-dwelling creeps. nice

 

 

so what, cos I post in this thread like you I hold the same simple-ass reactionary views as you? nah, buddy.

 

you and people who talk like you are painfully uninformed. I doubt you have any first-hand experience with any of the things you have expressed opinions about in this thread. it's not even about the opinion you hold necessarily, but the way you 'elucidate' it and hold on to it like you're certain.

 

 

Just curious, what do I seem certain about that bothers you? your response here is kind vague and non-specific.

 

and what are these simple-ass reactionary views that i hold that you speak of?

[usagi]

get to know some Muslims in your neighbourhood. I dare you.

[cwmbrancity]

 

 

 

atrocities arent unique to the Middle East, just look at this planet during the 20th Century too

 

 

 

simply knee-jerk defensiveness.

 

 

 

could we settle on devil's advocate?

[Lane Visitor]

get to know some Muslims in your neighbourhood. I dare you.

 

Dude, are you serious? Now you're just trolling right? I've mentioned like 2 times in the last few hrs the whole "not talking about Muslims or Islam in general" disclaimer that should really be intuitive by now. Are you seriously trying to bully people that make statements that even just use the phrase Islamic extremism as it relates to ISIS, Suadi Arabia's Islamic law-enforced punishments, etc? Do you know what extremism means? Are you familiar with what religious fundamentalism is?

 

Not even going to play that game man. 2 good friends of mine i've known since high school are Muslim, and ive known many. so don't fucking go there. im not a redneck just because im not an apologist for religious extremism. Nice try.

 

Don't be a bully, little child.

[chenGOD]

I think the point is, calling it Islamic extremism still puts it under a Muslim blanket, when it clearly has nothing to do with Islam. Just because they're using Islam as means to justify their barbarism doesn't mean they actually are.

It's much the same as Buddhist extremists in Myanmar or Sri Lanka justifying their bullshit under the guise of Buddhism.

ISIS are terrorists. What they do is terrorism.

 

Waits for caze to say "but it is Islam because..."

Yet you have 70,000 clerics condemning it, saying its not Islamic practice.

 

Then caze will say they have no moral authority.

 

So then we can bring in people who act under Christian guise and commit acts of terrorism.

 

My point is: terrorists are terrorists, and that's what we have to deal with. Anything else is really just window dressing. What are they after? Power and control. Are they doing it in ruthless ways? Hell yes. But so what? The "west" has used atrocities to maintain power and control until the present day.

[usagi]

 

get to know some Muslims in your neighbourhood. I dare you.

Dude, are you serious? Now you're just trolling right? I've mentioned like 2 times in the last few hrs the whole "not talking about Muslims or Islam in general" disclaimer that should really be intuitive by now. Are you seriously trying to bully people that make statements that even just use the phrase Islamic extremism as it relates to ISIS, Suadi Arabia's Islamic law-enforced punishments, etc? Do you know what extremism means? Are you familiar with what religious fundamentalism is?

 

Not even going to play that game man. 2 good friends of mine i've known since high school are Muslim, and ive known many. so don't fucking go there. im not a redneck just because im not an apologist for religious extremism. Nice try.

 

Don't be a bully, little child.

you learnt nothing from your friends, then. or you didn't really expose yourself to the community they're a part of. either way, the point is not that you're being criticised for not being an ISIS apologist (lol whatever that means), but rather that you lack the understanding to talk about Islam and Islamic extremism at large. your posts miss the mark so often it's beyond a joke.

 

lol @ the bullying shit. I don't know that the person reacting to having their dilettante opinions criticised on an internet forum by crying bullying can call the other guy a "child"... without sounding like a child.

[Lane Visitor]

 

 

get to know some Muslims in your neighbourhood. I dare you.

Dude, are you serious? Now you're just trolling right? I've mentioned like 2 times in the last few hrs the whole "not talking about Muslims or Islam in general" disclaimer that should really be intuitive by now. Are you seriously trying to bully people that make statements that even just use the phrase Islamic extremism as it relates to ISIS, Suadi Arabia's Islamic law-enforced punishments, etc? Do you know what extremism means? Are you familiar with what religious fundamentalism is?

 

Not even going to play that game man. 2 good friends of mine i've known since high school are Muslim, and ive known many. so don't fucking go there. im not a redneck just because im not an apologist for religious extremism. Nice try.

 

Don't be a bully, little child.

you learnt nothing from your friends, then. or you didn't really expose yourself to the community they're a part of. either way, the point is not that you're being criticised for not being an ISIS apologist (lol whatever that means), but rather that you lack the understanding to talk about Islam and Islamic extremism at large. your posts miss the mark so often it's beyond a joke.

 

lol @ the bullying shit. I don't know that the person reacting to having their dilettante opinions criticised on an internet forum by crying bullying can call the other guy a "child"... without sounding like a child.

Gonna just ignore your comments about my exposure to different cultures, religions, etc cuz its pure hilarious lol.. Feel free to fantasize that im some sort of inbred hick if thats what fills your cup :D

 

Regarding my "understanding" of the topic, I'm pretty sure we all don't have to have phd's in a topic in order to be able to discuss them, but i think you realize that. Oh maybe really, its that youre just trying to imply that im stupid? Nice attack on someone just because you disagree with them...

 

Actually, I still have no idea what we're arguing about.. You seem to have a problem with the way I post things here, or as you say my certainty about things lol.. Well im fairly certain that beheadings mandated as punishments for political dissent is fucked up and worthy of being outraged which is why i posted. Not sure if its that which youre picking a fight w me over.. Honestly, until you can mention something specific, solid, or reasonable thing that you actually disagree with me on, I'm just going to write your weird responses off as just psycho-babble.

[Lane Visitor]

I think the point is, calling it Islamic extremism still puts it under a Muslim blanket, when it clearly has nothing to do with Islam. Just because they're using Islam as means to justify their barbarism doesn't mean they actually are.

It's much the same as Buddhist extremists in Myanmar or Sri Lanka justifying their bullshit under the guise of Buddhism.

ISIS are terrorists. What they do is terrorism.

 

Waits for caze to say "but it is Islam because..."

Yet you have 70,000 clerics condemning it, saying its not Islamic practice.

 

Then caze will say they have no moral authority.

 

So then we can bring in people who act under Christian guise and commit acts of terrorism.

 

My point is: terrorists are terrorists, and that's what we have to deal with. Anything else is really just window dressing. What are they after? Power and control. Are they doing it in ruthless ways? Hell yes. But so what? The "west" has used atrocities to maintain power and control until the present day.

I respect this well thought out and tactful post that actually discusses specifics. Thank you.

 

In many ways, I actually do agree with you that terrorists should not be able to claim themselves as Muslim, and spoil that word or concept for others who actually practice the faith in good name.

 

Unfortunately, that's not how it works- As much as it would be ideal, I don't think we can really say something las definitive as "they're not Muslims". ISIS, for example, has already claimed themselves to be, and identify as Muslim. That in itself, imo, constitutes as belonging to the faith. They may have an insanely extreme interpretation of the religion and the Koran, but that doesn't mean it has nothing to do with religion--in fact if anything, its an example of religion run amok--too much religion, and an extreme focus on hand-selected parts of it that are other-wise written off as not relevant today.

 

You can't really walk up to a Christian Identity follower or Satmar (super ultra othodox Jews- almost a cult ) and told them they're not Christian / Jewish, just because you didn't agree with their weird or radical interpretation of the religion, because by identifying, theyve chosen to practice in their own extreme/odd way, but to say that their motivations have nothing to do with religion just because its extreme is preposterous.

[chenGOD]

Of course that's how it works - there are guidelines and practices, and social norms that dictate what something is.

Just saying you belong to something doesn't mean you actually are it.

 

And it's not just me saying it: http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/08/21/muslim-leaders-have-roundly-denounced-islamic-s/200498

 

If you don't think the head of the organization that represents 1.4 billion muslims doesn't count as someone with moral authority, along with the Islamic equivalent of the Vatican, then this discussion is pointless.

[Lane Visitor]

I understand what you're getting at, and I get that Muslim leaders have renounced groups like ISIS, and that's great, but I just think it's absurd to not even use the term Islamic extremist / ism or Radical Islam, as they're used to describe exactly what they mean to describe-- very extreme/radical interpretations of the religion. I get that passing them off simply as Muslims or simply practicing Islam with no further context doesn't do the religion justice, but to not even be able to use the phrase "radical Islam" or "Muslim extremist" is simply putting extreme political correctness before logic and truth. Sorry, but that's just about all that is.

 

If there is an apple that is rotten and gone bad, we still refer to it as an apple, just a bad apple.. If someone tried to claim that because they are bad apples, that they're not apples at all... or even more absurd, that we shouldn't even refer to them as bad apples because it's under the blanket of apples, that would be plain silly.

[goDel]

If you're frustrated about politics having a different relationship to "logic and truth", I don't think any kind of argument can help you. That's simply politics. And you can interpret this the cynical way: "politics have no relationship with logic and truth". Or the real-politik way: "politics is about finding a balance between all kinds of logics and truths (and interests)".

 

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. You can either accept that some politicians take other interests into account than you'd share, or you can bash your head against a brick wall like some extremist defending his own "logic and truth" as the one and only.

[Lane Visitor]

If you're frustrated about politics having a different relationship to "logic and truth", I don't think any kind of argument can help you. That's simply politics. And you can interpret this the cynical way: "politics have no relationship with logic and truth". Or the real-politik way: "politics is about finding a balance between all kinds of logics and truths (and interests)".

 

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. You can either accept that some politicians take other interests into account than you'd share, or you can bash your head against a brick wall like some extremist defending his own "logic and truth" as the one and only.

 

Ahh, so you're agreeing that it's politics over logic here when someone like Chen tries to correct me for using the term radical Islam or Muslim extremist. I'm just using a widely accepted term that's accurate which many people use to discuss the topic at large lol, not the one bashing my head against a wall.

 

It's just a little maddening when we can't even use the correct phrase to identify something.. what phrase shall we use instead to describe the ideology at large then? until someone wants to invent a new word and by all means do so, but stop trying to censor a perfectly suitable and valid phrase. it's not about defending my truth.. what we're discussing here is people who want to mangle language and redefine phrases and identities, motivated by what i can only suspect as a nearly psychotic extent of sensitivity to where we can't even articulate what we're talking about, which is what i think is silly.

[goDel]

politics over logic? no, there is no politics over logic, imo. there are various logics and the politics you describe seem to use a different one than you are. that's not politics over logic. that's just a different logic.

 

again, where do you want to go with this argument? what are you trying to accomplish? would a world where your logic would prevail be any different? and in what way? please help me see why you'd even consider having this argument.

 

 

edit: i'm not interested in the whole whether or not radical islamism is "right in the academic sense" debate. i'm only interested in the consequences of using one label over another. because to me "radical islamism" is just a label (carrying a set of associations and consequences). would it help the situation in any way if politics start using "radical islamism"?

[Lane Visitor]

politics over logic? no, there is no politics over logic, imo. there are various logics and the politics you describe seem to use a different one than you are. that's not politics over logic. that's just a different logic.

 

again, where do you want to go with this argument? what are you trying to accomplish? would a world where your logic would prevail be any different? and in what way? please help me see why you'd even consider having this argument.

 

 

edit: i'm not interested in the whole whether or not radical islamism is "right in the academic sense" debate. i'm only interested in the consequences of using one label over another. because to me "radical islamism" is just a label (carrying a set of associations and consequences). would it help the situation in any way if politics start using "radical islamism"?

 

But it's not "my" logic..

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism

 

It's already pretty established lol.. I'm not really arguing anything- just using a phrase to describe something related to the topic of this thread- you may instead want to ask why Chen is trying to argue with me on something already logically ingrained and perfectly reasonable...