Muslim topic  permalink

The Enemy Within

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 57
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by JP (U10590564) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within.  

    Another popularist theory amongst Muslims, who appear to give the impression this is a policy exclusive to the west.

    Other countries and individuals are also practice this. I have read of "scholars" who have advised Muslims not to have innoculations as it is a western plot to kill off Muslims. The west, the enemy within.

    Iran, and their mouthpiece press tv are alwyays demonising the west and those in Iran who are calling for reform. Ahmadinajad blames everything on the west. The west, the enemy within..

    Muslim "scholars" and speakers like Mehdi Hassan in the UK have been caught telling how the ku**ar are corrupt and like cattle, and oh and so much more. The west, the enemy within.

    Not exclusively the domain of anyone, unless of course, you know different.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    The State, whether Iranian or British always behaves thus, it has no morality. Iran is structured in the same way as Britain, it has a Central Bank, it also prints money from nothing and it too is a 'democracy'.

    The first modern State was post revolutionary France, it too slughtered huge numbers of of the population when they refused to accept the Revolution. This is followed by all States that model themselves after post revolutionary France.

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by kranker (U6190354) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    "much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within"

    I suspect a more mundane reason for, say, the security rigmorole at airports: the Government, the airlines, and the airport authorities have to be seen to be doing all they can else some ambulance chasing lawyer will sue the pants off them.

    Some Muslims do form an enemy within. It's their choice.

    Regards

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    The State cannot be sued for failing to provide 'security'. The State grabs more power for itself, it takes away individual liberty bit by bit. If economic problems exist, the State will invent an enemy and increase its security appratus to prevent the general population from causing problems for the State, external wars are also wonderful for not only making profits for well placed companies in arms manufacture and security but also for gelling the population behind the State.

    from wikipedia
    The stockholm syndrome:
    In psychology, Stockholm syndrome is a term used to describe a real paradoxical psychological phenomenon wherein hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors; sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors as an act of kindness.

    Most people who defend their State but are actually victims of it display the above syndrome towards it.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    Hi Ray of Sun,

    Did you ever post under the name of Brightray?



    Can you lay out how your preferred political system would operate in your own words?

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by letstryagain (U3477711) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within.  

    Another popularist theory amongst Muslims, who appear to give the impression this is a policy exclusive to the west.

    Other countries and individuals are also practice this. I have read of "scholars" who have advised Muslims not to have innoculations as it is a western plot to kill off Muslims. The west, the enemy within.

    Iran, and their mouthpiece press tv are alwyays demonising the west and those in Iran who are calling for reform. Ahmadinajad blames everything on the west. The west, the enemy within..

    Muslim "scholars" and speakers like Mehdi Hassan in the UK have been caught telling how the ku**ar are corrupt and like cattle, and oh and so much more. The west, the enemy within.

    Not exclusively the domain of anyone, unless of course, you know different. 

    8th Pillar of Islam, victimhood

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Abubakar55 (U14258389) on Wednesday, 15th June 2011

    much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within.  

    Seems reasonable to me, quite why JP thinks Iran doesn't do this I have no idea.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by JP (U10590564) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within.  

    Seems reasonable to me, quite why JP thinks Iran doesn't do this I have no idea. 


    I think Iran doesn't do what?

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by SeLion (U1749809) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    Did you ever post under the name of Brightray? 

    Of course he did, same unthinking parroting of his anarchist heroes, same singular failure to answer even the simplest questions about "his" ideas

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by ocoste (U1912512) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    and then geezers like this pop up with their threats of 'Jihadist renaissance' and break all the muslim conspirecy theories in half.

    www.bbc.co.uk/news/w...

    as time runs out for the MB and after years of debate, I've come back full circle, the 'trouble with Islam', is Islam itself, and it presents a clear and present danger to the West!!!

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    Zwahiri if he ever got a chance would setup a bank and democracy, he works for the CIA and MOSSAD.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by ocoste (U1912512) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    Zwahiri if he ever got a chance would setup a bank and democracy, he works for the CIA and MOSSAD.  Ray: your comments are proof positive that brain washing is very effective in some mosques and/or koran schools AND there is just no point talking to some Muslims!

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by JP (U10590564) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    It gives absolution and keeps things whiter than white.

    If they are "good", they are Muslims and Islam gets the credit, if they are "bad" they work for the CIA et al.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    ocoste

    I would be happy not talking to you, who is equally brainwashed by your mass media, the telescreen tells you Zwahiri is now leader of Al qaeda and you just accept it as truth because the alternative would mean your leaders lie to you and they would never do that would they, its like a teenager finding out his parents are not perfect like he/she imagined, you love of the State is scary.

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by SeLion (U1749809) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    he works for the CIA and MOSSAD. 

    So he draws two salaries - does that make him a double slave smiley - whistle

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by martg44 (U14046142) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    ocoste

    I would be happy not talking to you, who is equally brainwashed by your mass media, the telescreen tells you Zwahiri is now leader of Al qaeda and you just accept it as truth because the alternative would mean your leaders lie to you and they would never do that would they, its like a teenager finding out his parents are not perfect like he/she imagined, you love of the State is scary. 
    english.aljazeera.ne...

    Ray,
    Please provide an alternative news source you feel comfortable with and I'll be happy to have a look.

    Martg.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by GabriellaOssman (U14812622) on Thursday, 16th June 2011

    and then geezers like this pop up with their threats of 'Jihadist renaissance' and break all the muslim conspirecy theories in half.

    www.bbc.co.uk/news/w...

    as time runs out for the MB and after years of debate, I've come back full circle, the 'trouble with Islam', is Islam itself, and it presents a clear and present danger to the West!!!  
    From your link:

    "we must continue on his path of jihad to expel the invaders from the land of Muslims and to purify it from injustice," Zawahiri said.

    The guy says he is going to purify the land from injustce....his current methods seem to be bombs in crowded places that kill innocent bystanders, non-combatants including women and children - which is clearly injustice. So he is going to to purify the land from injustice by committing injustices. That makes sense to you does it Ocoste?

    Ocoste - do you usually take the words of immoral murderers seriously? Here's a tip for you - you can't believe what murderers say - they tend to be slightly deranged, irrational, lacking morals and generally don't follow the same rules as the rest of us Muslims and non-Muslims.

    By the way, do you have some evidence from the Quran (chapter and verse please) to say killing non-combatants, women and children is part of Islam or are you just being naughty and making that up?

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Hi SeLion,

    I thought it was likely Brightray, but you can never be sure. Posters that believe in massive Zionist/banker/freemason conspiracies have been fairly common here over the years but people that believe the Islamic state is some quasi-anarchic institution is pretty rare. Really only Brightray and Beanie/Soupie come to mind. But I was hoping he might just admit it since this board seems to be closing for good soon and why would it matter to keep that fact hidden and then also I could go refer back to stuff that he had said on the subject in the past assuming they were hypothetically the same person.

    Ray of Sun,

    I still have the same question for you. Can you explain how your preferred political model would work especially considering a world population of 7 billion, intricate trading networks, water control issues, the exponential increase in decision makers and the impact that might have on disputes.

    I will say this: Brightray's original model would have resulted in the deaths of BILLIONS of people over the course of a few decades, it would be a disaster on pretty much every level. That poster never gave a serious thought to the economic, political and legal logistics of such a system.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by ocoste (U1912512) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    is this news source more to your liking Ray?
    www.epakistannews.co...

    btw, i don't 'love the state' far from it, and yes I know they lie! Iraq - weapons of mass destruction being perfect example. HOWEVER, that does not mean I can't distinguish from when facts or truth is reported such as this, and can equally dismiss the ludicrous claims you make, like he works for CIA?

    You need to check what people are putting in your tea!

    Gabby: "So he is going to to purify the land from injustice by committing injustices. That makes sense to you does it Ocoste? " Nope, but then I'm not delusional or religiously brainwashed. The whole concept of Jihad don't make sense to me either Gabby! smiley - smiley

    "Ocoste - do you usually take the words of immoral murderers seriously?" Yes, absolutly when they have already commited terrible atrocities. I think these people should be taken seriously, but maybe not as you think. I'd be sending SEAL and SAS squads to 'seriously go and have a word with them'!

    No qualms whatsoever!

    Sura 2:187-189 “And kill them wherever ye shall find them, and eject them from whatever place they have ejected you; for civil discord is worse than carnage: yet attack them not at the sacred Mosque, unless they attack you therein; but if they attack you, slay them. Such the reward of the infidels...Fight therefore against them until there be no more civil discord, and the only worship be that of God: but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against the wicked.”

    2:216 “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you....

    Many of these quotes should be self-evident what the meaning is. Of course they will be some that say that what they mean is not what they read like. Muslim clerics and their apologists are saying “the command to kill non-Muslims is not for today” it was only for a certain time. Where in the Qur’an does it say this? It does not say or teach the commands to kill the “infidels”, “unbelievers” “Jews” and “Christians” was only for a previous time. ” Nowhere. why should we accept this rhetoric? There is proof in the Qur'an that it is actually to continue and increase.

    Sura 9:29-33 “Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.”

    Sura 8:57 “So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.”

    Sura 8:12 “Remember your Lord inspired the angels with the message: “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.”

    Sura 9:39 “If you do not fight, He will punish you severely, and put others in your place”

    Sura 9:123: “Believers! wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbours, and let them find you rigorous: and know that God is with those who fear him.”

    Mmmm! Maybe we all need to be asking our Muslim neighbours how do you feel about this?

    I could go on and on Gabby, but works calls. but NO, I never made any of it up, some wee delusional bearded guy who believed in flying donkey's did some 1400 years ago... Unfortunately!


    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    ecoste

    Zwahiri is a non entity, insignificant! He is given a platform by his supposed enemies, another famous spokesman for Al-Qaeda:

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    surprisingly he is Jewish and his family are heavily involved in the ADL. He is MOSSAD.


    look up Operation Gladio and the Lavon Affair to see how States or Power creates false Terror to acheive their own strategic and geopolitical aims.

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    netherdutch

    "I will say this: Brightray's original model would have resulted in the deaths of BILLIONS of people over the course of a few decades"

    Can you give details of this please, you seem to know alot about these things and I want to get a handle on it, like you 'obviously' claim to have?

    Thanks in advance

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Is this Brightray?

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by ocoste (U1912512) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Ray: re=arrange these words, straws, at, clutching!

    www.youtube.com/watc...

    Aye, he looks Jewish to me. Are you speaking for all muslims in your rejection of him as a 'revert' to the 'pure faith'??


    Why not have a bash at answering the question I posed about Jihad teaching's being 'for all time' and NOT limited to times gone past!

    The very same jihad teachings that are the motivations for muslim terrorists around the globe!

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    I have already discussed Surah 9:

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    As for Sura 2:187-189, i think you mean 2:191 (which I have already discussed somehwere else: www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb... , because here is what Sura 2:187-189 says:

    187. Permitted to you, upon the night of the Fast, is to go in to your wives; -- they are a vestment for you, and you are a vestment for them. God knows that you have been betraying yourselves, and has turned to you and pardoned you. So now lie with them, and seek what God has prescribed for you. And eat and drink, until the white thread shows clearly to you from the black thread at the dawn; then complete the Fast unto the night, and do not lie with them while you cleave to the mosques. Those are God's bounds; keep well within them. So God makes clear His signs to men; haply they will be godfearing.

    188. Consume not your goods between you in vanity; neither proffer it to the judges, that you may sinfully consume a portion of other men's goods, and that wittingly.

    189. They will question thee concerning the new moons. Say: 'They are appointed times for the people, and the Pilgrimage.' It is not piety to come to the houses from the backs of them; but piety is to be godfearing; so come to the houses by their doors, and fear God; haply so you will prosper. 


    As for Sura 8:57, why not try also reading the preceding verses:

    55. Surely the worst of beasts in God's sight are the unbelievers, who will not believe,

    56. those of them with whom thou hast made compact then they break their compact every time, not being godfearing

    57. So, if thou comest upon them anywhere in the war, deal with them in such wise as to scatter the ones behind them; haply they will remember. 


    and the perhaps continue reading the surah:

    58. And if thou fearest treachery any way at the hands of a people, dissolve it with them equally; surely God loves not the treacherous.

    59. And thou art not to suppose that they who disbelieve have outstripped Me; they cannot frustrate My will.

    60. Make ready for them whatever force and strings of horses you can, to terrify thereby the enemy of God and your enemy, and others besides them that you know not; God knows them. And whatsoever you expend in the way of God shall be repaid you in full; you will not be wronged.

    61. And if they incline to peace, do thou incline to it; and put thy trust in God; He is the All-hearing, the All-knowing

    62. And if they desire to trick thee, God is sufficient for thee; He has confirmed thee with His help, and with the believers

    63. and brought their hearts together. Hadst thou expended all that is in the earth, thou couldst not have brought their hearts together; but God brought their hearts together; surely He is All-mighty, All-wise 


    p.s. whose translation are you using? because that is the 1st time i have ever seen 2:191 (which you wrongly called 2:187-189)translated with the words "civil discord" and "carnage" . . . very odd

    Perhaps try going to the site mentioned in the message of the 1st link and look at the numerous other translations and you will see the discrepency:

    Al-quran.info

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by mac_aveli (U1830093) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Hi J P / R o S

    Message 1/4

    The Enemy Within …… A K A “The Trojan Horse”

    Madrassa schools perhaps ?

    Message 4 :-

    “”””Most people who defend their (mental) State but are actually victims of it display the above syndrome towards it.””””

    My brackets !!

    The above quote describes the defensive double think of institutionalised, fundamentalists IMHO.


    Regards mac BAA

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by GabriellaOssman (U14812622) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Luckily for you Ocoste - neither are the majority of Muslims delusional or religiously-brainwashed so glad you agree the problem is extremists rather than normal law-abiding Muslims.

    If the concept of self defence/ jihad does not make sense to you then I can only assume you are a pacifist, in which case the statement about sending in SEALS and SAS is a lie - unless you were hoping the SEALS would garland the extremists with flowers perhaps as opposed to kill them - since killing people who violently attack you makes no sense to you.

    Yes - people usually call others apologists and various other names when they can't think of any rational way to refute the points made. Name-calling is nothing new in debates when you have run out of rational arguments.

    I think you meant Quran 2: 190 - 193 rather than 2: 187-189.

    2:190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.

    2:191 And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.

    2:192 But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

    2:193 And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.

    Note the words "fight those who fight you" a.k.a self defence
    Note the words "but do not transgress limits" a.k.a a proportional response to people who fight you.

    So fighting is prescibed - but the Quran has already stated it is only within set limits.

    Now do you have a rational point to make to refute the fact that suicide bombing kills non-combatants, women, children, the elderly who are not engages in fighting in battle, and that Islam therefore does not allow the killing the killing of non-combatants, women, children, the elderly? Or are you going to use the running away to work excuse to get out of answering?

    Do you have a rational point to refute the fact that the verses were revealed during a time of battle and oppression against the Muslims and it is rational to assume that statements made in a particular situation do not apply if circumstances change? Are you going to claim that statements you make apply in every situation - e.g. if you tell someone you are in love with them, does that statement apply to the whole of mankind?

    So yes the meanings of all the verses you quoted are self-evident to the rational majority of law-abiding Muslims - they apply to the situation where Muslims are violently attacked and need to fight the people attacking them - so the SAS and SEALS if they did go in, would unsurprisingly be fought. It is only extremists like you and Al-Qaeda who change the meaning to permit suicide bombing of non-combatants. Luckily you are both in a minority in your interpretation.

    If you need proof that your interpretation is in the minority, indeed go speak to your Muslim neighbours or refer to the Gallup survey that shows:

    Muslims and Americans are equally likely to reject attacks on civilians as morally unjustifiable.

    Large majorities of Muslims would guarantee free speech if it were up to them to write a new constitution AND they say religious leaders should have no direct role in drafting that constitution.

    Muslims around the world say that what they LEAST admire about the West is its perceived moral decay and breakdown of traditional values -- the same answers that Americans themselves give when asked this question.

    When asked about their dreams for the future, Muslims say they want better jobs and security, not conflict and violence.

    Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam.

    www.gallup.com/press...

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by ocoste (U1912512) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Gabby: it's no excuse, I really do have to work! I'll try to reply in full later but in the meantime, I take issue with your closing comment,

    "Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam. "

    I'd mirror that statement from a westerner, and say 'right back at you'!.

    I don't respect Islam, and don't feel I need to.

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Jack-in-the-Green (U14769647) on Friday, 17th June 2011


    much of the hysteria covering Terrorism is designed to control the domestic population, while using security as an excuse and selecting Muslims as the enemy within.  

    Where is the evidence for this point of view? Nobody in central government or the security services, ie in a position to know, is saying this are they? Aren't these all the conspiracy theories of bedroom jihadists who don't know their ass from their elbow?

    I also haven't really seen any evidence of this hysteria. Where is it? Nobody is hysterical, the response has been measured and calm on the whole, people have gone about their business, terrorists have been jailed not lynched.

    And control us for what? The government already did control us, what extra controls did they need that they've now gained? They've gained a small amount of ground recently in taking away certain civil liberties, but those are being dismantled by central European law. And compared to the level of control exerted by commercial companies over our privacy and data, government is a small threat.

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Friday, 17th June 2011



    I don't respect Islam, and don't feel I need to.
     


    Whatever you feel, you might at least have enough integrity to not distort the message of its text in an effort to try and give credence to the misrepresentation enagaged in by the very same people you take issue with i.e. the terrorists.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    netherdutch

    I am not Brightray, can you show how his ideas if implimented would cause the death of billions please? It sounds like hyperbole and this is why I ask.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by martg44 (U14046142) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    ocoste

    I would be happy not talking to you, who is equally brainwashed by your mass media, the telescreen tells you Zwahiri is now leader of Al qaeda and you just accept it as truth because the alternative would mean your leaders lie to you and they would never do that would they, its like a teenager finding out his parents are not perfect like he/she imagined, you love of the State is scary. 
    english.aljazeera.ne...

    Ray,
    Please provide an alternative news source you feel comfortable with and I'll be happy to have a look.

    Martg. 
    Ray,
    Any at all?

    Martg.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by GabriellaOssman (U14812622) on Friday, 17th June 2011

    Gabby: it's no excuse, I really do have to work! I'll try to reply in full later but in the meantime, I take issue with your closing comment,

    "Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam. "

    I'd mirror that statement from a westerner, and say 'right back at you'!.

    I don't respect Islam, and don't feel I need to.
     
    I agree that Muslims who have a negative generalised view towards Westerners should change that, and respect the positive aspects of Western society. I see lots to respect in Western society, which makes sense as I am a product of Western society as well as Islam

    "I don't respect Islam, and don't feel I need to. "

    Ok - if you prefer instead to make sweeping generalisations and lies aboiut Islam and Muslims - i.e. disrespect Islam and Muslims - that's your right. No doubt this attitude is working out to your satisfaction, which is why you continue to pursue it.

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Saturday, 18th June 2011

    "I agree that Muslims who have a negative generalised view towards Westerners should change that, and respect the positive aspects of Western society."

    The west is not monolithic, there are many strands of thought and action which are western which are critical of other aspects of western thought, just because these are not given equal time by the corporate mass media it does not mean it does not exist.

    Power bankers and elites have captured the west and present it as if their views are universal and dominant, they are not.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by Jack-in-the-Green (U14769647) on Saturday, 18th June 2011


    Power bankers and elites have captured the west and present it as if their views are universal and dominant, they are not.
     

    And the East of course. The East has always been dominated by moguls and sheiks, dictators, dynasties and religious elites. You'll rarely see such obscene wealth in the west as you do in the East.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by NoDoubts (U14758139) on Saturday, 18th June 2011





    Sura 2:187-189 “And kill them wherever ye shall find them, and eject them from whatever place they have ejected you; for civil discord is worse than carnage: yet attack them not at the sacred Mosque, unless they attack you therein; but if they attack you, slay them. Such the reward of the infidels...Fight therefore against them until there be no more civil discord, and the only worship be that of God: but if they desist, then let there be no hostility, save against the wicked.”

    2:216 “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you....

    Many of these quotes should be self-evident what the meaning is. Of course they will be some that say that what they mean is not what they read like. Muslim clerics and their apologists are saying “the command to kill non-Muslims is not for today” it was only for a certain time. Where in the Qur’an does it say this? It does not say or teach the commands to kill the “infidels”, “unbelievers” “Jews” and “Christians” was only for a previous time. ” Nowhere. why should we accept this rhetoric? There is proof in the Qur'an that it is actually to continue and increase.

    Sura 9:29-33 “Make war upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God, or in the last day, and who forbid not that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, and who profess not the profession of the truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.”

    Sura 8:57 “So if you gain the mastery over them in war, punish them severely in order to disperse those who are behind them, so that they may learn a lesson.”

    Sura 8:12 “Remember your Lord inspired the angels with the message: “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.”

    Sura 9:39 “If you do not fight, He will punish you severely, and put others in your place”

    Sura 9:123: “Believers! wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbours, and let them find you rigorous: and know that God is with those who fear him.”


    I could go on and on Gabby, but works calls. but NO, I never made any of it up, some wee delusional bearded guy who believed in flying donkey's did some 1400 years ago... Unfortunately!


     
    Thanks Gabriella and Ayub for throwing light on the verses mentioned above in quotation in context of revelation of the Quran.
    Another issue that comes up frequently is this " flying donkey " phenomenon.
    If this is still an issue today then imagine what " headline news " it made when made public about 1400 + years ago?
    Well as far as I know,no one ever,in the history of Islam had extreme hatred for Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and whatever else he stood or represented more than the Quraysh especially Abu Jahl, Abu Lahab and their allies.
    People like these were looking for all cracks to dig; a microscopic chink in the armour lets say.
    Well how was this matter then laid to rest after ALL THE RATIONAL minds were convinced that the prophet (God forbid ) was mad and that this claim had indeed proved to them that he was a charlatan?
    Well the proof of the pudding........................
    Anyway to cut a long story short the mighty delegation of idol worshippers asked the prophet that hence you said you have been to Jerusalem and back in a single night; a journey at that time which should take approximately a month, and since you have never been to Jerusalem in your life and therefore know nothing about it's layout, can you describe such and such etc etc ?
    Oops.......NOW WE GOT HIM;YES!!!!. UH? UH? COME ON;SPEAK UP WE ARE WAITING........
    And then the man with " the flying donkey " Al Buraq - not a donkey by the way - made history.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Sunday, 19th June 2011

    Ray of Sun,

    If you never posted under the name of Brightray like you claim, what would be the use in me discussing the shortsightedness of his political models? You would have no idea who the poster was that I was talking about nor know the specifics that he discussed. I would rather hear what your preferred political model was instead especially since you spend so much time on these boards decrying the current system.

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by Abubakar55 (U14258389) on Sunday, 19th June 2011


    Power bankers and elites have captured the west and present it as if their views are universal and dominant, they are not.
     

    And the East of course. The East has always been dominated by moguls and sheiks, dictators, dynasties and religious elites. You'll rarely see such obscene wealth in the west as you do in the East. 
    They do hide it well don't they?

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by jakswan (U14812274) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    When asked about their dreams for the future, Muslims say they want better jobs and security, not conflict and violence.

    Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam.  


    Some Muslims want that, a minority have read the Koran wrong and have killed many innocents.

    Respect needs to be earned not given and the West I'm sure will change it's view when innocents are not killed in the name of Islam and when they stop going bonkers over a cartoon, name of a teddy bear, one of its members says he believes evolution etc.

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Monday, 20th June 2011


    Respect needs to be earned not given and the West I'm sure will change it's view when innocents are not killed in the name of Islam 


    How many inocents have been kille by "the West" in the name of freedom and democary . . . . If respect needs to be earned, as you say, then the West has a lot of making up to do before it starts preaching to people, because while its good to its own, it has been nothing short of atrociousto the rest of the globe

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by jakswan (U14812274) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    The West has made mistakes certainly and any distasteful parts are marginalised and ridiculed, e.g. the BNP, not that they are anyway comparable to Bin Ladden and co.

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    The West has made mistakes certainly and any distasteful parts are marginalised and ridiculed, e.g. the BNP, not that they are anyway comparable to Bin Ladden and co. 
    who's talking about something as tame as the BNP?

    Look up what the British Government are and have been doing to the people of Diego Garcia

    What the United States has been doin across the globe since the Second World War,

    the numerous puppet states installed by way of western backed, and sometimes even western exectuted, military coups in Latin America, Africa and Asia

    the number of deformed babies being born in fallujah as a result of their use of depleted uranium


    Seriously, what terrorist who kill innocents do is bad and damn right wrong and detestable . . . but what western STATES have been carrying out has been nothing short of horrific systematic and enduring violence bullying and oppression . . . someone somewhere was bound to snap eventually and turn homocidal and vengence seeking on the people responsible for so much of their pain.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    The State as it exists around the world, including the so called democratic ones are all Totalitarian, they have little or no limits on their power to curtail individuals freedom, nothing is beyond its scope, it can overnight interfere in the way animals are slaughtered, to the way you can be arrested by the Police and the leghth of time they can hold you without charge. All these things can be done without protest from the governed.

    In addition to this it seems clear from analysing the State, that despite its high taxes which means the State monitors all aspects of peoples economic activity, the revenue collected is not enough to run the various services that the State runs. Apart from massive wastage and substandard services the State also borrows money to make ends meet. The taxes collected go towards paying Interest. This means that the money lenders or bankers actually rule the State from behind the scenes, they get bailed out by the tax payers if they mess up and the elected politicians serve the bankers whether they know it or not, they also serve as a buffer against the bankers. The politicians get blamed for the mess created by the bankers, thus the bankers are protected by the politicians.

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by jakswan (U14812274) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    Look up what the British Government are and have been doing to the people of Diego Garcia 

    That is news to me have any links with more info. If it is criminal then we can exercise free speech to get it changed by taking action. As with the rest of your post.

    someone somewhere was bound to snap eventually and turn homocidal and vengence seeking on the people responsible for so much of their pain. 

    I see how the West has played a part but the method for fighting back is going to be counter productive, would you at least agree with that?

    Unless moderate Muslims can win the debate inside Islam then Islam and the West will remain on a collision course.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by RayofSun (U14818146) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    "Unless moderate Muslims can win the debate inside Islam then Islam and the West will remain on a collision course."

    Ironic that 'the west' is becoming more of a police state and 'moderate' anti statists are excluded from any debate within the west.

    see
    www.ifeminists.com/e...

    voices like the one from the above website are excluded from any debate within the increasingly Totalitarian police states being constructed in the west.

    "Defying Hitler is a mesmerizing memoir written by the German journalist Sebastian Haffner (a pseudonym for Raimund Pretzel) shortly after he emigrated from Germany to England with his Jewish wife in 1938. In it, Haffner explores a question similar to one that has haunted me since 9/11. He examines how a highly cultured and civilized nation could slip so quickly into the barbaric totalitarianism of Nazi rule. My version of this question is, how could America, a nation with deep roots in individual freedom, so quickly slide into a police state?

    No mystery surrounds the motives of ambitious politicians or their lackeys, such as bureaucrats, but an abrupt pivot of society requires the acceptance or acquiescence of a majority of people who are neither. Key to the explanation for Nazi Germany and current America is the steady and profound reshaping of society's institutions, from the school system to law enforcement, from the courts to the hospitals. The institutions began to express a different vision of society; for example, instead of expressing the rule of law and due-process protections, the courts came to embody the opposite."






    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Monday, 20th June 2011

    Look up what the British Government are and have been doing to the people of Diego Garcia 

    That is news to me have any links with more info. If it is criminal then we can exercise free speech to get it changed by taking action. As with the rest of your post.  


    Yeah i didn't know about it either untill i heard Noam Chomsky mention it in one of his talks and also (strangely enough) the lead singer from the Fun Loving Criminals mentioned it on the Wright Stuff once (although, being an ex US military personel, he didn't mention the expulsion of its inhabitants by the British governement and focused more on th activities of the US base which is built there)

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    You are right that we should be doing something about tackling this injustice, because it does strike me as strange the complete silence (our media hardly ever reports it) and unawareness or lack of interest in something which is so within our power to change (since our government is the one with the ultimate say on this matter, and we are funding its continued actions). . . especially when compared to the number of what I view as lost causes which most activists engage in.

    I see how the West has played a part but the method for fighting back is going to be counter productive, would you at least agree with that? 

    As I said I'm not fan of the tactics of thhe terrorists, so yeah I fully agree on that.

    Unless moderate Muslims can win the debate inside Islam then Islam and the West will remain on a collision course.  

    That's where I disagree, it is not about wining any debate, that seems to Imply its somehow an Islamic problem (i.e. they are doing this out of Islam), because the number of Muslims involved in these violent acts of terrorism compared to the number who don't is incomparable . . . think about it, there are reportedly about 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, if the problem was Islamic, and we were somehow "losing the debate", it would be much much much bigger than it is.

    The problem in actuallity is one of people looking at the injustices committed and losing it.

    Within Islam this is called not having "Sabr" (meaning patience and endurance) and therefore wanting a quick fix (whether it be a quick fix to the situation or to your feelings about it). But considering that the need for Sabr is one of the things which is so oft repeated in the Quran, we can see why the majority of the 1.57 billion have not been swayed by this thinking, and are instead more focused on enduring and being patient believeing that if they just do right, by the grace of God, things will get better.

    However the longer these injustices go on, the more numbers of people will divert from the path and start wanting to cause a change "by hook or crook" as the say; but that isn't a muslim thing, or Islam, that is human nature, people can only tolerate being held down or used and abused for so long before something in them caves.

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 46.

    Posted by jakswan (U14812274) on Tuesday, 21st June 2011

    That's where I disagree, it is not about wining any debate, that seems to Imply its somehow an Islamic problem (i.e. they are doing this out of Islam), because the number of Muslims involved in these violent acts of terrorism compared to the number who don't is incomparable . . . think about it, there are reportedly about 1.57 billion Muslims in the world, if the problem was Islamic, and we were somehow "losing the debate", it would be much much much bigger than it is. 

    Not so sure I'm with you on it being a little problem as this problem is not just limited to terrorism. The clash with the West comes from its position on freedom of speech and expression.

    So a nutjob burns a book in the US and people die as a result. A few cartoons, the name of a teddy bear all seem to result in friction.



    Within Islam this is called not having "Sabr" (meaning patience and endurance) and therefore wanting a quick fix (whether it be a quick fix to the situation or to your feelings about it). But considering that the need for Sabr is one of the things which is so oft repeated in the Quran, we can see why the majority of the 1.57 billion have not been swayed by this thinking, and are instead more focused on enduring and being patient believeing that if they just do right, by the grace of God, things will get better. 


    I have a feeling there is feeling of growing unrest in the West from 'ordinary people'.

    I think it is as a result of what you describe here, they see moderates that very often condemn extremists but there is always a 'but...' and yes the patience just comes across as you not dealing with it.


    However the longer these injustices go on, the more numbers of people will divert from the path and start wanting to cause a change "by hook or crook" as the say; but that isn't a muslim thing, or Islam, that is human nature, people can only tolerate being held down or used and abused for so long before something in them caves. 


    No I do not think that is fair India, China, South America, Japan do not react in this way. The West has had World Wars before with some of these cultures and we have not seen this brand of terrorism.

    I think the bottom line is that I'm not going to win a debate with an extremist Muslim a moderate Muslim will be able to win that debate.





    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by Abubakar55 (U14258389) on Tuesday, 21st June 2011

    Hi Jakswan
    I have a feeling there is feeling of growing unrest in the West from 'ordinary people'.  
    I have not noticed this, despite the media generally fanning the flames of "Muslims are mad, bad and dangerous" for many years.

    I think 'ordinary people' have shown remarkably good judgement on the whole and many realise or suspect that the powers that be are feeding them a load of male cow poo.

    I think it is as a result of what you describe here, they see moderates that very often condemn extremists but there is always a 'but...' and yes the patience just comes across as you not dealing with it. 

    Why the BUT ?

    Is it because these Muslims are excusing the acts of violence?

    Or is it because they agree with the aims of the terrorists but don't agree with their methods?

    There is nothing wrong with wanting Scotland to be an independent Country, the SNP are well supported, but SNLA is not nor should be:
    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    Are you suggesting that SNLA were a problem only to be addressed by SNP?

    No, of course you are not, its a very dumb suggestion.

    But come to Muslims and the rules change, all the Mosques in UK condemned the 7/7 murders but that is not enough, those outside Islam have somehow decided Muslims know about and are hiding terrorists or potential terrorists.

    This is absolute rot, complete and utter rubbish, this is what happened when a potential terrorist appeared at our Mosque:

    www.telegraph.co.uk/...

    [happy ending, Andrew has changed his ideas and is working against terrorism:
    www.thisisbristol.co... ]

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by Ayub_O (U14872501) on Thursday, 23rd June 2011

    India, China, South America, Japan do not react in this way. The West has had World Wars before with some of these cultures and we have not seen this brand of terrorism.


     


    Terrorism isn't just aimed at anybody, it is always aimed at the perceived source of the problem, and so it is not that these countries have no history of terrorists or terrorism, it is just that they haven't been aimed at the west because they are not perceived to be the source of the problem.

    India, for example, is not a puppet state there is no obvious link between any of the repressive actions of that government and other countries, therefore almost all terrorism there is aimed at the state, since they are seen as being the ultimate source of the problem

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    you might like to know that the terrorist activities India are from all sorts of denominations, once again reminding that this is not some muslim issue, it is a human issue of people feeling this is the only way to get their point across.

    China is the same, in that its givernment is not being proped up by anyone, it is very much self made, and so *it* is the foucs of any terrorism or attacks which are a response to its repression.

    As for South America:

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    like I said, terrorist arnt just some "mad men" with no rational for their attacks, they aim their activities at what they view to be the source of the problem . . . look at the terrorist activities carried out in Europe and see what the cited reasons were, Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine etc etc these are all problems in which the foreign involvement is obvious to see.

    Just for good measure, IRA aside, Muslims wern't the first to come to europe to do terrorism to try and resolve problems at home, ask the dutch:

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    and the Jews were at it far earlier, and far longer, than the Muslims in America:

    en.wikipedia.org/wik...

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by NinjaMind (U14830397) on Thursday, 23rd June 2011

    Despite the MYTH some Muslims try to perpetuate that Islam is a religion of peace - it isn't!

    Muhammed showed and led by example - fight! He was never a man of peace. So Muslims can find every justification to fight in the life of Muhammed and the Koran.

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

The BBC Religion and ethics message boards are now closed.

They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available.

Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.

We will be introducing a new blog later in the year. Aaqil Ahmed, Commissioning Editor Religion and Head of Religion & Ethics, has a blog with more details.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

Opening times:
No longer applicable

This messageboard is post-moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.