ISIS!

[goDel]

O, i took an intermission to reread the thread. Was curious to see what you consider to be "every breath" and where I defended Islam and all that. I must say my post on the enlightenment was pretty clever, if I may. And the thing about moral objectivism was funnily misunderstood, but still amusing in a nerdy way. ;P

 

Let me help you though: if i don't address some of your "points", it's mostly because I think those points are aimed at some strawman you're arguing with. Who has some beliefs which aren't mine, or anyone elses in this thread. Example: "Do you really see no parallel between ISIS and Muhammad's actions and teachings?" Answer: who said I saw no parallels? And what do you mean with parallels? Do I have to respond to this? And what does it mean if there are parallels?

 

Personally, if you really want to know, I'm having a hard time with Salafism. Especially in a multi-cultural (western) society. And that might be part (!!!!!!) of the reason why there are plenty youngsters living Western societies who radicalise and go to Syria. Because in salafist communities you see the dehumanising aspect of denouncing all the non-believers many people lazily attribute to Islam in general.

 

I also think it's funny that you think I should take your criticisms of islam seriously, when you basically compared it to scientology and argued that because you don't have to know some scientologist to see what scientology is about, you also don't have to invest in getting to know some muslims to know what islam is about.

[LimpyLoo]

1) I guess I meant every breath in the last 3-4 days

I honestly can't remember the content of your posts before that

 

2) okay so, I guess I can't keep track of everyone's individual opinions

You seemed to disagree with my first post yesterday

And then you said talking about Islam isn't helping to understand ISIS

So no I don't know all your opinions on this stuff

I got a strong sense that you disagreed with my first post

Which was mostly about this topic

I guess I just love strawman

*shrugs*

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

Edit: we might just be misunderstanding each other

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[goDel]

Ueh, yeah. I don't think I've said talking about Islam doesn't help in understanding Isis. (and I havent seen anyone making that point, tbh) I said you were overgeneralising. And yes, overgeneralising doesn't help. Sounds trivial to me. Beats me why you translate that to not talking about Islam at all. Must be those strawpeople who morphed your mind into thinking that way.

 

Most of the discussion, at some point i believe, came from the argument that islam was to blame for isis, or something of that nature. To which some people argued strongly against.

 

And most of the "blame islam" kind of arguments I've seen so far are way too superficial, over-generalising and often unhelpful in even understanding what the actual problems are (shall we bring in the nazi's again?). That doesn't mean I (or other people) are giving "islam" a blank check, or anything. That means, imo, that the discussion needs more room for nuance and context, instead of bulletpoints about "islam is bad because mohammed is violent".

[LimpyLoo]

Nvm I need a nap

[LimpyLoo]

1) The reason I jumped back into this thread

is because I read two pages worth of "this has nothing to do with Islam"

And "ISIS aren't even Muslims"

 

2) Nobody wants to ban religion (at least not me)

Or to "stop people from having it around"

I'm not a fascist

Dialogue is the solution

I just want people to call a spade a spade

Or to simply acknowledge that it's not this benign lit-crit seminar

that most of the left wants it to be

 

3) so here we are, back to square one:

You think ISIS is cynically using Islam as a pretext to be monsters?

I don't think the facts support that view

ISIS recently stoned to death some of their own members for adultery

So what was their REAL motivation, if it wasn't enacting Sharia?

Why do they only seem to act in accordance with scripture?

(Again, fashioning their entire world, brick by brick, after the actions and teachings of Muhammad...or at very least the Hadith)

 

Where is he evidence to support your claim?

I am happy to be convinced, but at the moment I don't see it

 

4) "They'll find some other way to justify their actions"

There are lots of examples of Islamists losing their faith and forsaking violence and oppression (Maajid Nawaz is the first name that springs to mind, but there are a surprising many)

But I have yet to encounter even ONE example of an Islamist losing his faith

And then continuing to be a monster under a new pretext

 

Please, show me what convinced me of your view

I think you want to believe this has nothing to do with religion

Because you are a tolerant, culturally-sensitive person

(Which of course is a very good thing to be)

And this perhaps conflicts your desire to respect other cultures

(Again, a good thing)

 

But as I said before:

We can strive (with our actions and words) to make this world a liberal utopia

Or

We can make liberal sounds and try not to offend anyone

 

But it appears that we can't do both

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

Edit: And I will gladly concede that, historically, religion has been used as a pretext

To commit atrocities and exploit people

From Zen Buddhism in Japan during WW2

To pre-Martin Luther Christianity

To the very foundation of Mormonism

To Eastern faux-gurus wanting to get laid and/or rich

Etc etc

But I don't see the any evidence that ISIS is such an example

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[usagi]

 

Lol sponsored ad in tapashit is for wargaming.

 

Lane: same question as I put earlier to limpy.

 

Chen, agreed that you're pretty much always calm and calculated.. as much as we may disagree strongly about politics, i appreciate and respect that.

 

Guess im still pretty pissed about the "Get to know some muslims in your neighborhood" statement from Usagi, as if just because I believe Islamic extremism is a real thing (as by the way, the majority of the world, scholarly research and status quo agrees w me on- see Islamic fundamentalism on Wiki), it means im an ignorant hick- pretty fucking ridiculous.

 

 

if that pisses you off then you have a learning problem. read that statement and ask yourself if that's something to get your tits in a twist about. I didn't call you a hick, you just got mad about the possibility of being seen as one. not my problem m9. but if you're going talk basic uninformed shit - which, by the way, is not referring to the existence of Islamic extremism, which does exist; it's all your remarks about how to deal with the problem which follow from that which are ludicrous - then you're gonna get told.

 

too many self-declared problem-fixers around these days, seriously.

[Lane Visitor]

 

 

Lol sponsored ad in tapashit is for wargaming.

 

Lane: same question as I put earlier to limpy.

Chen, agreed that you're pretty much always calm and calculated.. as much as we may disagree strongly about politics, i appreciate and respect that.

 

Guess im still pretty pissed about the "Get to know some muslims in your neighborhood" statement from Usagi, as if just because I believe Islamic extremism is a real thing (as by the way, the majority of the world, scholarly research and status quo agrees w me on- see Islamic fundamentalism on Wiki), it means im an ignorant hick- pretty fucking ridiculous.

if that pisses you off then you have a learning problem. read that statement and ask yourself if that's something to get your tits in a twist about. I didn't call you a hick, you just got mad about the possibility of being seen as one. not my problem m9. but if you're going talk basic uninformed shit - which, by the way, is not referring to the existence of Islamic extremism, which does exist; it's all your remarks about how to deal with the problem which follow from that which are ludicrous - then you're gonna get told.

 

too many self-declared problem-fixers around these days, seriously.

Lol ok.. What were my remarks in this thread on how to deal with the problem? Pretty sure we mostly talked about my initial post of the tragic news out of Saudi Arabia, and from there I just got bitched at by you apparently for my sentiment that there seem to be a good amount of watmmers who have knee jerk apologist or relativist responses whenever the issue of Islamic extremism is brought up, and then of course the groundbreaking argument of whether ISIS are followers of Islam or not lol

 

(Of course I did mention that there are many clerics around the world who are condemning the preaching of radicalism, and thats a helpful thing- to approach the problem from inside.)

 

Somehow along the way, all of this turned into you pulling out the "you should really get to know some Muslims" card. The disconnect there is so laughable its not even funny.

 

If by acknowledging that Islamic extremism is a relevant issue in our current global events related to ISIS and that I consider ISIS followers of an extremely radical form of Islam (which is pretty much common knowledge lol), that makes me person in need of being cultured and informed by Muslims in my neighborhood-then wow, don't even know what to say.

 

Essentially, what I'm hearing you say, is that ISIS has no real connection to Islam, even though their goal is an Islamic caliphate and they ask non-Sunni/non-Muslims to recite Koran passages to spare their lives and force ppl to convert to Islam by sword- still, after all of these very straightforward details, you'd like for people to blind themselves from that reality by not putting two things together for the sake of not putting Islam under a bad light? Sounds to me like blind ignorance and promotion of censorship for the sake of saving face-- but it gets more absurd, because there are countless Muslims around the globe who clearly realize the problem of Islamic extremism and they know it needs to be addressed and stamped out. But you are here wanting people to not acknowledge it exists, to not use the phrase and to not be outraged by the reality if it. And frankly, I find that disturbing.

 

Trust me, I get the concern that placing the word Islam next to extremism or radical or fundamentalist carries it under along with it from a symbolic sense, but actual terrorists dont give a shit whether we use the word terrorist or Radical Muslim or whatever, theyre still ok with their crusade no matter what.

[chenGOD]

1) The reason I jumped back into this thread

is because I read two pages worth of "this has nothing to do with Islam"

And "ISIS aren't even Muslims"

 

2) Nobody wants to ban religion (at least not me)

Or to "stop people from having it around"

I'm not a fascist

Dialogue is the solution

I just want people to call a spade a spade

Or to simply acknowledge that it's not this benign lit-crit seminar

that most of the left wants it to be

 

3) so here we are, back to square one:

You think ISIS is cynically using Islam as a pretext to be monsters?

I don't think the facts support that view

ISIS recently stoned to death some of their own members for adultery

So what was their REAL motivation, if it wasn't enacting Sharia?

Why do they only seem to act in accordance with scripture?

(Again, fashioning their entire world, brick by brick, after the actions and teachings of Muhammad...or at very least the Hadith)

 

Where is he evidence to support your claim?

I am happy to be convinced, but at the moment I don't see it

 

4) "They'll find some other way to justify their actions"

There are lots of examples of Islamists losing their faith and forsaking violence and oppression (Maajid Nawaz is the first name that springs to mind, but there are a surprising many)

But I have yet to encounter even ONE example of an Islamist losing his faith

And then continuing to be a monster under a new pretext

 

Please, show me what convinced me of your view

I think you want to believe this has nothing to do with religion

Because you are a tolerant, culturally-sensitive person

(Which of course is a very good thing to be)

And this perhaps conflicts your desire to respect other cultures

(Again, a good thing)

 

But as I said before:

We can strive (with our actions and words) to make this world a liberal utopia

Or

We can make liberal sounds and try not to offend anyone

 

But it appears that we can't do both

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

 

1) When the organizations that represent the vast majority of Muslims around the world say that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam, I'm more inclined to take their word for it than that of someone who has done some googling.

 

2) Good.

 

3) They're not using Islam as a pretext to be "monsters", they're using Islam as a pretext to gain control and power. Again, many Islamic scholars have said that ISIS' actions are against the Quran, and since the hadith are much more akin to the bible (as in they were collected stories that were compiled well after Muhammed's death), they can be abused in many ways.

This is a good article, with some good reference work linked that demonstrates how ISIS is actually not acting according to the Quran:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kashif-n-chaudhry/did-prophet-muhammad-warn_b_7702064.html

 

4) So in other words, once they stop fighting, they return to normal behaviour. This is not something unique to "Islamists" - throughout history and to the current day, people do all sort of horrendous things in conflict scenarios. I don't know if you believe that these sorts of acts are limited to ISIS, but rest assured, they are not.

 

4a)The reason I believe ultimately that this has nothing to do with religion is because throughout history, groups of people have used many different means to achieve the same goal - power and control. Religion is a superficial veil in this case, and trying to solve the problem through identifying the root cause as religious is futile.

This is not wishing not to offend anyone, it's simply understanding that we have limited resources, and wasting them on this aspect of the situation is exactly that - a waste.

 

Again, I pose the question: Let's say for the sake of argument, that ISIS is actually Islamic - so what? You've already said in this thread that the majority of Muslims don't want sex slaves and beheadings. So how does identifying ISIS as Islamic actually move you any closer to solving the problem?

[chenGOD]

 

Trust me, I get the concern that placing the word Islam next to extremism or radical or fundamentalist carries it under along with it from a symbolic sense, but actual terrorists dont give a shit whether we use the word terrorist or Radical Muslim or whatever, theyre still ok with their crusade no matter what.

 

 

Yes, but the people who are not terrorists, and are actual Muslims, do give a shit. Which is why it is the organizations that represent the vast majority of Muslims around the world who are saying that ISIS have nothing to do with Islam.

[goDel]

Again, I pose the question: Let's say for the sake of argument, that ISIS is actually Islamic - so what? You've already said in this thread that the majority of Muslims don't want sex slaves and beheadings. So how does identifying ISIS as Islamic actually move you any closer to solving the problem?

I want to respond to this, because I don't believe Limpy can free himself from his "calling a spade a spade" mindset, and I'm interested in trying to move this discussion into other territories.

 

Part of the Isis problem has to do with the failed multi-cultural society thing many politicians talk about, i believe. (With part of the isis problem i mean people in western societies radicalising and either going to syria to join isis, or stay home and recruit people or plan terrorist attacks)

 

The failed multi-cultural society thing seems mostly a European debate, but I believe this will become a more prominent talking point in the U S as well. Seeing how the discussion on immigrants develops against the backdrop of the recent shooting by the radicalised couple. Would be interested to hear a us perspective on this, btw.

 

I referred to salafism being worrisome earlier. And it's the salafist thing which seems like a crucial part of why this multi-cultural (european?) society has failed (although there are arguments to be made in the opposite direction: it's a succes, but it just isnt and wont ever be perfect). How does a multi-cultural society function when a tiny group of people (salafists), denounce western values and in the extreme cases dehumanise everyone with a different set of beliefs? Should a multi-cultural society allow groups of people who actively oppose the fundaments of what it means to live in a multi cultural society and retract themselves from that society even though they still choose to live in it? If you oppose those multi-cultural values, it might be better to find some other place to live.

 

I don't have any solutions here, but I just want to create room for having Islam as some part of the problem, and also a part of the solution. (Which goes beyond islam/religion is bad)

 

I'm not saying "Islam" made people do it. I'm questioning whether there can be a set of (organised) beliefs Incompatible with living in a multicultural society. And with organised I mean that (salafist) communities can set up their own schools/ support systems such that they become largely cut loose from the rest of society ( and with that, creating a space for radical ideas to develop).

 

This is a difficult point, i guess, because it touches directly on core freedoms people have. And should have, perhaps. But I'm not sure whether the existing ideas on freedom are helpful in solving this part of the isis problem. Although it might not be those ideas about what freedom is which should be redefined. It might just be that the politics surrounding this debate need to evolve in order to deal with this problem.

 

Sorry for my incoherent thinking, i guess. But this post is sort of an attempt to have religion being part of a mostly political problem (when it comes to the failed multi cultural society).

[chenGOD]

Yes salafism is worrisome, but in my opinion the issue you present is only related to ISIS tangentially. What I mean is that I've read reports of up to 25% of the foreign fighters ISIS has recruited as not being Muslims at all, or being newly converted Muslims and not hard-core conservatives.

 

I think I live in a good example of how a multi-cultural city can be a success. Yes we have some issues with offshore foreign investors driving up prices in the housing market, but that's largely it, barring a few racists who demand that signs for private shops be in the official languages of Canada only. Now we only have one Salafi mosque in Vancouver, the rest are all Sunni except one Sufist mosque. So maybe it really is more dangerous in other places with a larger Salafi presence? But really, Salafi or not, you break the law in a country like England, you get punished by English law. Religious tribunals are fine for settling family disputes like inheritance, but other things like rape and murder should be dealt with through English law. And this is not hard to do, the UK Muslim population equals about 5% of the total population - and given that Salafis are "radical Islamists", they must make up a very tiny percentage of the population. The EU population is about 6%, and expected to grow to 8% by 2030. That's all Muslims right, not just Salafi. So I don't really see them being a huge problem - especially when you take into consideration the wide views on Islam that are held by European Muslims. We already know that in the US you are far more likely to be the victim of random gun violence than a Muslim terrorist attack.

 

I think the idea of a failed multi-cultural society is also largely false - like when you get Trump saying shit like there are places in London that are no go zones for non-muslims. It's largely a factor of the loud and ignorant bigots, but when you look at polling data, there's a high percentage of people who have favorable views on Muslims in England, Germany, and France. But of course reasonable numbers and data don't make for exciting news headlines.

 

I dunno, ultra late night rambling.

[LimpyLoo]

1) Godel-- I do partially agree with you

But the "failed multi-cultural society" hypothesis doesn't explain why oppressed or poorly-integrated minorities tend not to commit giant atrocities worldwide

(And the ones that do are disproportionately Muslim)

 

But I do agree that cross-cultural friction can further entrench people in their beliefs and values

 

2) Chen--you said 3-4 pages ago that ISIS had nothing to do with Islam

(I think you even said "they're not Muslims")

I was just taking exception with that, that's all

 

And I do agree that ISIS wants power and control (of course)

But I also think they are as sincere in their devotion to Islam as they claim to be

What do they do with their power and control?

They try to make the world look like the most brutal passages of the Koran

They systematically implement its teachings, adultery stonings and all

 

Do you really stand by the phrase "this has nothing to do with religion"?

Because that's about as shaky a claim as I've ever heard

 

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

I can't imagine there are specific stats to be found on 'disenfranchised sub-populations who unilaterally attack random civilians, by religious affiliation'

 

I mean, perhaps I'm wrong

But there seems to be a severe lack of Tibetan Buddhist terrorists

If 'failed multi-culturalism' was the deciding factor, we'd expect to see terrorists evenly distributed amongst poorly-integrated sub-populations

But we see nothing of the sort

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

I am saying that we don't see terrorists evenly distributed, adjusted for population size

 

But we don't even see a few Native American terrorists, we see zero

Or Tibetan Buddhists

Take your pick

Pick any disenfranchised sub-population you want

Adjust for population size all you want

'Failed multi-culturalism' doesn't produce terrorists

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

A Google search of 'Native American terrorist/terrorists/terrorism' yielded nothing

There is no 'per capita' adjusting to make that zero anything besides zero

 

What if religious beliefs actually do account for terrorism?

It would sure explain a lot...

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[chenGOD]

2) Chen--you said 3-4 pages ago that ISIS had nothing to do with Islam

(I think you even said "they're not Muslims")

I was just taking exception with that, that's all

 

And I do agree that ISIS wants power and control (of course)

But I also think they are as sincere in their devotion to Islam as they claim to be

What do they do with their power and control?

They try to make the world look like the most brutal passages of the Koran

They systematically implement its teachings, adultery stonings and all

 

Do you really stand by the phrase "this has nothing to do with religion"?

Because that's about as shaky a claim as I've ever heard

 

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

 

2) yes I stand by my statement. Again, for the tenth time, it's not just me saying it. And again, just because someone claims to be some thing, doesn't necessarily make them that thing. They systematically implement a few select parts of the Hadith (not the quran). Which, as I wrote earlier, is a collection of fables written well after the death of mohammed. There have been reports of wide spread drug use in isis. Is that the sign of a devoted follower of Islam?

 

The worst part of all this is that a few months ago you had people saying "the Islamic world needs to condemn isis" (which they had been, though I guess their protestations weren't visible enough for the "west"). Now that they have done it in a much more vocal manner, you still have people saying that isis represents Islam.

 

Also, you still haven't answered my question.

[may be rude]

sorry guys for insisting that a religion of a billion people should be eradicated. i thought maybe we could do that while/before taking care of the isis problem but i see now that maybe we should just take care of isis with the help of muslims and then maybe address some logical discrepancies within their religion after

 

np man

[chenGOD]

Lol no Native American terrorists. There are virtually none left to organize a terrorist movement. Im sure you are well aware of the historical reasons why there is not a Native American terrorist movement.

 

If your theory is that Islam lends itself to terrorism then you have to ignore the IRA, Buddhist terrorism in SE Asia, acts of Christian terrorism, secular terrorist organizations, and last because it's specific to America, but certainly not least, the very real possibility of being a victim of a shooting, disproportionately carried out by white males.

Stop being scared of the "monster".

[LimpyLoo]

Chen I didn't say ISIS represents Islam

 

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[LimpyLoo]

 

np man

You think I want to eradicate people?

Are you fucking serious?

How in the fucking world do you make the leap from criticizing religious beliefs to wanting to eradicate Muslims?

Are you fucking stupid, mate?

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[Guest]

I heard turkish-islamic citizens in Germany are mostly open to all kinds of arts, mostly Autechre and

fans.

[LimpyLoo]

Here's a story to warm up this thread:

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/kenya-al-shabaab-muslims-protect-christians-bus-ambush-blamed-somalian-militants-1534377

 

 

Sent from my pee-pee using poo-poo

[Guest]

I wonder, if Friedrich Nietzsche wrote "Der Antichrist" (I love that book, but today is not the era where we are allowed to be proud to see religions as overcome) today again, but changed it to islam, if he would be send to prison today. I am convinced that would happen in Germany.