Religious Studies 101: Islam

Discussion in 'monkeyCage' started by alterego, Jul 2, 2016.

  1. You're not paying attention.

    Over 1 billion practitioners are living in oppressive regimes under some form of Islamic Law.

    For an ordinary poor citizen living in ISIS conquered territory is no different than living in Saudi Arabia.
    * beyonde obvious war zone issues
    - Both rule by Sharia Law.
    - One sells oil to the West so gets a free pass for atrocities

    That doesn't mean 1 billion people are barbaric terrorists. They are too busy being oppressed and enslaved by Islam. If they want to escape they should be able to. I don't know the logistics of how to screen them. Families trying to leave over single men in prime fighting age is a safe bet. Once they get a chance for a better life and choices, they will be free to choose Islam for the first time ever. People in free society typically cherry pick convenience bits of religion without fear of death.

    You inexplicably continue to defend an oppressive religion ignoring people suffering under it.
  2. Why isn't Islam enslaving and oppressing them when they're in the United States? Or in the UK? Or anywhere else that isn't controlled by wahabbists? Why aren't the millions of Muslims living here waging jihad just like ISIS? Maybe, just maybe, there's a difference between wahhabist extremists and Islam in general. After all, you seem to be able to distinguish between the KKK and Christianity, to the extent that you didn't even want to call them Christian terrorists, but rather just a "hate group" that coincidentally burned crosses and coincidentally oppressed and terrorized people that weren't Protestant Christians.

    Here's an article that I'm sure you won't even read...

  3. What are you talking about? US law trumps Islam. Christianity too. Here Islamic law is about as effective as Old Testament shit WBC follow. People will just leave the group because they have options.

    If you had Biblical law as a form of government impacting 2.4 billion people the net effect would be the same. But we don't. We do have Islamic law keeping the Middle East down. Your article assumes people are willing practitioners. But without any individual freedoms to make your own choices Islam is effectively forced on you in that region via Islamic law.

    *The FBI don't attach religious classification to the KKK. But reading more about it I would agree that it should be a Christian extremist group.
  4. The difference between wahhabists and Islam in general. Saudi Arabia, Brunei, and Indonesia are the only countries where Sharia is applied to non-muslims.
  5. I'm not even getting into the non-Muslims in the ME. I'm talking about the Muslims people not connected to power or enjoying political protections. If you are born into an average Muslim family in that region, you are effectively embracing Islam.

    Theoretically, secular laws would give more freedom and empowerment to the people. Which I think is a step in the right direction to end terrorism. But then bringing freedom to the Iraq people went tits up real quick.
  6. But not wahhabism. Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS...all wahhabists.
  7. So what's a practical solution to wahhabi extremism? Our foreign policy is to do lots of business with the largest exporter of wahhabi Islam. One that is unlikely to change in the next 4-8 years.
  8. Being on better terms with Iran is one of them, as a kind of check-and-balance.

    Overall though, the big problem with extremism is always economic. Lack of financial/job prospects makes it easier to recruit. For example, disbanding the Iraqi army and it's paychecks was one of the big blunders during the occupation of Iraq. That made it a lot easier for Sunni wahhabists to gain influence. But blowing people up with drones is easier than figuring out how to make Middle Eastern economies work better, so that's probably why there's so much focus on military activity instead. It doesn't really work all that well, but it's easier and makes for good press releases every once in a while when they blow up the right person.
  9. Surprised this bill passed... a step in the right direction against a barbaric oppressive regime exporting hate. These scumbags are threatening financial terrorism to avoid this bill passing. That should be reason enough for Obama to sign off on it.

  10. Good. Fuck Saudi Arabia. We should have invaded them instead of Iraq, seeing as how they were the ones who were actually behind 9/11. I hope Trump gets elected and nukes them.
  11. Pretending that the 9/11 report doesn't exist is a step in the right direction? Congress already investigated and concluded that there wasn't a case to be made regarding a state connection. And that was at the height of 9/11 hysteria, when our own government was looking for any excuse possible to blame people.
  12. lol even Alex jones wouldn't expect them to be labeled a state sponsor of terrorism. But as a nation they are the largest financiers of terrorism.

    The threat of massive punitive damages are the only non-violent way to facilitate change in our world. They began to crack down on terror financing this year.
  13. Huh? Those two sentences contradict each other.
  14. No. They don't.
  15. #115 cmdrmonkey, Sep 10, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
    The Saudis, including the Bin Ladens, were Bush's oil buddies. So of course the Bush regime pretended there was no link to terrorism, even though the Saudis were responsible for 9/11.
  16. "State" and "nation"...what exactly is the difference supposed to be?

    The reality: you can say that it's likely there are individuals or groups within Saudi Arabia that finance terrorism, but Congress never found evidence of a national/state sanctioned program. Thus, the sheer stupidity of the House of Representatives bill. I'll grant you that sheer stupidity is the new normal for the House though, so maybe you guys have lost perspective.
  17. The govt has found Saudi Arabia uncooperative with prevention even though they are good about reactionary requests. Why should they not face cases of negligence? Will victims be able to win a judgment? Probably not. But if gets more preemptive actions, it's a win.
  18. And the United States has been good at prevention? We've been at war in the Middle East for 15 years and haven't accomplished much of anything in regards to prevention. Large scale invasions/occupations. Bombing. Shelling. Tactical strikes. Special forces. Drone warfare. Have we killed terrorists? Sure. Is it preventing terrorism? That doesn't look so clear.
  19. I'm still surprised that people actively try defend Islam, that ship has sailed.

    Islam should not be looked upon as a religion but a political ideology designed to dominate the world.

    The left has ruined western Europe by allowing mass immigration from islamic countries. Look at Sweden, once looked upon as a tolerant beacon of humanity but it is that liberal attitude that has all but ruined the country. It has become the rape capital of the west and has produced an unusually large number of jihadi lunatics who have fled to Syria and returned intent on imposing "Allahs law" in Sweden.

    Instead of holding their hands up and admitting to their catastrophic mistake the left have instead created a political climate whereby any criticism of the cultural suicide leaves the critic labelled as ignorant, uneducated and racist. Fortunately the right has emerged and is gaining power back and attempting to lessen the damage caused by the left. Unfortunately the far right has also emerged which could lead more trouble in Europe.

    I am from a northern town in England and I have seen first hand the damage Islamic immigration has done to my home city. I heard rumours 20 years ago at school that muslims were plying vulnerable girls with drugs and alcohol and then raping them in groups. I remember raising the issue over 5 years ago on this very forum and I was shot down and labelled a racist and a bigot. Well it turned out I was correct afterall as Keighley, Rotherham, Oxford and numerous other places terrorised by muslim grooming gangs has proved.

    I just hope people wake up to the truth instead of being stubborn in protecting Islam as it has been drilled into them that it is the right thing to do. We need to stop the spread of the virus that is Islam before it comes to the point that we can only save ourlselves by having another war in Europe. The parallels between National Socialism (Nazism) in the 1930's and Islam now are plain to see but the Nazis weren't protected by the very people they were trying to wipe out the way Islam is protected by left wing liberal idiots who would be slaughtered if Islam ever took Europe.
  20. So on the one hand being tolerant ruined Sweden, but on the other hand Islam is a parallel to the Nazis because of their intolerance. Therefore, Sweden must become intolerant to save itself, but avoid any branding that is similar to Islam or Nazism that might cause confusion in the global intolerance marketplace. Then the rest of Europe can say "we're intolerant like Sweden" and avoid anyone thinking that they want to wear black hijabs or attempt genocidal purification of Europe. It's all so logical.