A thought about dealing with Islamic terrorists


Traveler
 Share

Recommended Posts

Actually you asked why I'd assume he is being facetious. As that is what I said I had assumed.the person who made the claims, even if their other claims are valid and stand up to scrutiny.

Right. But the only way you could assume JojoBag was being facetious is if you assumed that he knew O'bama to be other-than-Muslim and then stating the contrary as fact.

So, you have to assume that O'bama is not Mosilmin, other wise JojoBag could not be facetious.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, in the end, does it matter since his actions advance the Mouselem agenda?

Lehi

The other reason that is matters is for the same reason those teenagers who recieve an email in their inbox, or on Facebook telling them that a virus is going around that will destroy the "zero sector" of their hard drive (this one has been doing the rounds since the 90's). They don't know if its true or not but decide the best course of action is to forward or repost it "just in case", assuming no harm comes from doing so, but in actuality do cause harm by spreading false information all over the Web. Real viruses do exist and are dangerous, but this one doesn't and passing it on just does more harm than good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. But the only way you could assume JojoBag was being facetious is if you assumed that he knew O'bama to be other-than-Muslim and then stating the contrary as fact.

So, you have to assume that O'bama is not Mosilmin, other wise JojoBag could not be facetious.

Lehi

Mostly true, but it still wasn't the question you asked. In fact you just partially answered the question you actually asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, is he officially Moselim? I neither know nor care. It's his actions that interest me, and those acts advance Islam, not USmerican interests.

Lehi

Fair enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Obama supporter. But being a Muslim and acting like a Muslim are not the same thing and I will correct anyone who tries to imply that they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the best men I have ever had the privilege of knowing was (still is) a Muslim from Saudi Arabia. He was a gem of a human being, and took his religion very seriously. Other than a deep distrust of Jews, he had very few overt characteristics that I would consider ungodly. To this day, I am grateful to God for letting me get to know him. To me, he represents what I choose to believe is the true spirit of Islam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the best men I have ever had the privilege of knowing was (still is) a Muslim from Saudi Arabia. He was a gem of a human being, and took his religion very seriously. Other than a deep distrust of Jews, he had very few overt characteristics that I would consider ungodly. To this day, I am grateful to God for letting me get to know him. To me, he represents what I choose to believe is the true spirit of Islam.

 

One of mine is a Sunni from Iran (and all his 4 brothers).  Also a gem of a human being and takes his religion very seriously.  Other than his belief that being mistaken for an Arab is demeaning, he had very few overt characteristics that I would consider ungodly.

 

I also work with another Muslim woman in Florida who wears the hijab.  Amazing woman and many people at my job find ways to get the opportunity to work under her excellent management.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the best men I have ever had the privilege of knowing was (still is) a Muslim from Saudi Arabia. He was a gem of a human being, and took his religion very seriously. Other than a deep distrust of Jews, he had very few overt characteristics that I would consider ungodly. To this day, I am grateful to God for letting me get to know him. To me, he represents what I choose to believe is the true spirit of Islam.

What difference does what you or I believe about "the true spirit of Islam" make? A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, and Islam has brought forth a very large basket of evil fruit. If you are wrong, and the terrorists are right, the fact remains that a very large number (and fraction) of Mouselemins believe it is their duty to kill non-believers, to kill not-aggressive-enough Moselims, to kill those whom they imagine do not follow Islam according to the dictates of their (the terrorists') own consciences.

So, whether you or they are right, there are many people every day dying on the altar of Islam.

A single person, even a large number of "good" Moslims will not change the fact that it is Musloms who are killing people whose religions they don't like.

The real question is, how does one determine whether any particular Muslem follows your interpretation of Islam's "ture spirit" and one who thinks Osama bin Ladin didn't go far enough? If you know, please help me out, because it is not at all clear to me.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teancum took on the role of an assassin.  I have no problem using assassins given the right circumstances and motivations.  But that was not your initial idea.

They really don't like being killed by women either, especially young ones, so maybe our sister missionaries could do 6 month tours as "troubleshooters" too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, and Islam has brought forth a very large basket of evil fruit. 

 

Oh bunkus phooey LeSellers.  I'm not the only one who remembers the Lafferty brothers, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, or Mark Hoffman, right?  I also remember George P. Lee, of the first quorum of the seventy - convicted of molesting a 14 yr old girl.  Or Clayton R. Hildreth, Stake President of Butte, Montana, flying to another state to meet the young girl he had been grooming, only to find out he'd been sending explicit videos of himself to a cybersting unit.  My wife's brother, raised by God-fearing temple-attending disciples of Christ, ended up molesting numerous children and did 5 years.  

 

If you're going to claim those don't count because they're individuals, then let's look at the splinter groups that sprang from the restoration tree.  Warren Jeffs and the FLDS, anyone?

 

The scriptural notion that a good tree can't bring forth evil fruit, obviously does not pertain to people or groups who do evil in the name of religion.  Because if it does, then the restored Gospel is not a good tree.  And if it doesn't, then it's possible Islam is a good tree, in it's way.

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What difference does what you or I believe about "the true spirit of Islam" make? A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, and Islam has brought forth a very large basket of evil fruit.

 

Are you willing to ascribe all evils done in the name of Christianity (or Mormonism, or Liberty) as evidence that those institutions are evil trees?

 

Terrorists are terrorists. Religion is their excuse for evil behavior, not their fundamental reason. It is overly simplistic (and untrue) to say that the terrorists are terrorists because they're Muslim. Or does Sinn Fein prove that Catholics are terrorists?

 

...Mouselemins...Moselims...Moslims...Musloms...Muslem...

 

In general, I avoid commenting on spelling and such, but I would suggest you choose one way to write "Muslim" and stick with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Furthermore, it's good to be reminded of this fun slice of history from the 1979 Ensign, where we all but grant Mohammed the title of prophet and the Koran status as scripture.

 

I have long thought that the editors of the time, in their eagerness to produce an open-armed article, simply did not do enough background research to vet many of the statements in that article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In general, I avoid commenting on spelling and such, but I would suggest you choose one way to write "Muslim" and stick with it.

Then I would be ignoring the knowledgeable counsel of T.E. Lawrence who said (I'm citing from memory) that when some of his readers commented that he had spelled his own name in several different ways, that he wished he had written it in even more, since the Arabs he had lived with for years pronounced it differently, and spelled it differently (in English) almost every time they spoke it.

There are no vowels in Arabic (although there are "points" — not used in normal writing), so "Islam" is the same word, essentially as "Solomon": "peace" because of the consonants SLM. In any case, I prefer a variety in spelling this word (which ought to be obvious, as I do it), and since "spelling" is a convention imposed on us, first by printers and then by schoolmen (like Noah Webster), I'll just follow the further (implied) advice of Samuel Clemens: I don't trust a man who can only spell a word one way.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh bunkus phooey LeSellers.  I'm not the only one who remembers the Lafferty brothers, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, or Mark Hoffman, right?  I also remember George P. Lee, of the first quorum of the seventy - convicted of molesting a 14 yr old girl.  Or Clayton R. Hildreth, Stake President of Butte, Montana, flying to another state to meet the young girl he had been grooming, only to find out he'd been sending explicit videos of himself to a cybersting unit.  My wife's brother, raised by God-fearing temple-attending disciples of Christ, ended up molesting numerous children and did 5 years.

Are you willing to ascribe all evils done in the name of Christianity (or Mormonism, or Liberty) as evidence that those institutions are evil trees?

 

Terrorists are terrorists. Religion is their excuse for evil behavior, not their fundamental reason. It is overly simplistic (and untrue) to say that the terrorists are terrorists because they're Muslim. Or does Sinn Fein prove that Catholics are terrorists?

Well, that's the question, is it not? BTW, Sinn Fein isn't "Catholic", it's a political party with bombs. They just happen to be Catholics who don't like British rule in Ireland.

The history of Islam is rank with atrocities, from the slave trade of the XI~XXI that killed over a hundred million Blacks, and untold numbers of Whites and Asians, including other Mouslems, to the current ISIS ugliness in the Levant, where they are methodically killing Christians, Jews, and other Moselms. If you can do no more than point to a tiny fraction of "Restorationists" as comparable examples of the demons among us, forgive me if I see it as more like a couple of insect-ridden apples on the tree, whereas Islam is a tree with much the fruit moldy and putrid.

While some, perhaps "most", are peaceful, gems of humanity, I raise the earlier question: How does one tell the difference between one of the good guys and one of the bad'uns?

The San Bernadino attack last month shows that it ain't all that easy: in spite of having been "radicalized", and his even posting his intent to kill, in spite of having purchased guns two years ago, in spite of his having gone to Saudi Arabia and bringing back a wife with even more evil intent, the male shooter was not on anyone's radar: he appeared to be a quiet, devout, but "assimilated", Moslim. Turned out, his co-workers were fooled by his façade, and 14 of them are dead.

So, if you can explain the method by which I can assure myself that the guy down the street or the hijabed-woman at the counter in Safeway isn't going to go jihad on my wife and me because she doesn't wear a scarf, I'd really like to know.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is, how does one determine whether any particular Muslem follows your interpretation of Islam's "ture spirit" and one who thinks Osama bin Ladin didn't go far enough? If you know, please help me out, because it is not at all clear to me.

Lehi

That is an easy question to answer.

There are 3 million Muslims in America. You don't hear too many of them beheading people. The very rare ones that do have ties to the Middle East. There are plenty of Muslims in the Philippines - lots of terrorists too... They are all trained, funded, and raised by people with ties to the Middle East. Plenty of Muslims in India - they even hold political positions side by side Christians and Hindu. They get some terrorist activities - all tied to the Middle East. There are plenty of Muslim countries that are peaceful like Malaysia, Bangladesh, Turkey, UAE, Tunisia, Maldives, etc. etc.

What does this tell you? Is the problem with the religion of Islam or is the problem with the leadership in the Middle East?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

BTW, Sinn Fein isn't "Catholic", it's a political party with bombs.

 

Bingo. Just like Sinn Fein. (The only relevance difference being that Sinn Fein does not normally overtly use religion as a justification for their actions.)

 

The history of Islam is rank with atrocities, from the slave trade of the XI~XXI that killed over a hundred million Blacks, and untold numbers of Whites and Asians, including other Mouslems, to the current ISIS ugliness in the Levant, where they are methodically killing Christians, Jews, and other Moselms.

 

Throughout the last fifteen hundred years of European/Near East/North African history. the Muslims have more often than not been the more civilized of the various peoples. Sure, they were expansionist -- like everyone else. If the Muslims looked less than stellar during the so-called Crusades, how did the European Christians look? Much, much worse.

 

I suspect your characterization above is false, and that Islam is no more "rank with atrocities" than Christianity. Today's conflict between Islam and Western democracies has one principle root cause: Oil. Take that away, and the problems vanish (or at least diminish into relative unimportance). In other words, this is not primarily a religious problem.

 

While some, perhaps "most", are peaceful, gems of humanity, I raise the earlier question: How does one tell the difference between one of the good guys and one of the bad'uns?
[...]
So, if you can explain the method by which I can assure myself that the guy down the street or the hijabed-woman at the counter in Safeway isn't going to go jihad on my wife and me because she doesn't wear a scarf, I'd really like to know.

 

Can you do the same for the bare-headed woman in the low-cut dress? How can I know she's not going to kill me? What guarantee can you provide? How about any other human being?

 

I am no fan of government-sponsored and government-encouraged blindness and stupidity (e.g. airport security has to treat the little old lady with a walker as exactly the same threat level as the berobed and bearded man), but nor am I jake with simple-minded bigotry as a solution to a social problem. Remember the Lafferties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bingo. Just like Sinn Fein. (The only relevance difference being that Sinn Fein does not normally overtly use religion as a justification for their actions.)

But ISIS, etc., does. And that's a big difference.

 

Throughout the last fifteen hundred years of European/Near East/North African history. the Muslims have more often than not been the more civilized of the various peoples. Sure, they were expansionist -- like everyone else. If the Muslims looked less than stellar during the so-called Crusades, how did the European Christians look? Much, much worse.

I disagree. Do the words "… to the shores of Tripoli" mean anything to you?

Yes, there were a couple of hundred years of war between Catholics and Protestants (for which I am grateful: it weakened the Catholic Church so USmerica could be a religiously free country), but there were not slaves taken and sold, women were not routinely raped and their children killed on the road to the auction block.

 

I suspect your characterization above is false, and that Islam is no more "rank with atrocities" than Christianity. Today's conflict between Islam and Western democracies has one principle root cause: Oil. Take that away, and the problems vanish (or at least diminish into relative unimportance). In other words, this is not primarily a religious problem.

The Islamic terrorists put it otherwise: to them, it's all religious.

 

Can you do the same for the bare-headed woman in the low-cut dress? How can I know she's not going to kill me? What guarantee can you provide? How about any other human being?

Where would she hide her AK or pipe bomb?

 

I am no fan of government-sponsored and government-encouraged blindness and stupidity (e.g. airport security has to treat the little old lady with a walker as exactly the same threat level as the berobed and bearded man), but nor am I jake with simple-minded bigotry as a solution to a social problem.

Government = problem.

Remember the Lafferties.

Who can forget? But even their adherents rejected the killings, and I can name exactly zero LDSs who supported them.

On the other hand, a huge minority of Mouselemins support discarding the Constitution and replacing it with sharia.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is an easy question to answer.

There are 3 million Muslims in America. You don't hear too many of them beheading people. The very rare ones that do have ties to the Middle East. There are plenty of Muslims in the Philippines - lots of terrorists too... They are all trained, funded, and raised by people with ties to the Middle East. Plenty of Muslims in India - they even hold political positions side by side Christians and Hindu. They get some terrorist activities - all tied to the Middle East. There are plenty of Muslim countries that are peaceful like Malaysia, Bangladesh, Turkey, UAE, Tunisia, Maldives, etc. etc.

What does this tell you? Is the problem with the religion of Islam or is the problem with the leadership in the Middle East?

Not as easy as you portray it.

All Mouslemins are required, by their faith, to go to the Middle East at least once in their lives (unless it's essentially impossible) for the Hajj.

And even among those who are not "radicalized" in Arabia, the internet is a tools of recruitment, and there are many mosques where Friday prayers include imams who encourage jihad against Christian USmerica. It happened here, in Denver two years ago and one of the listeners (and his father, also an attendee), an employee at the airport did something (what, exactly, I do not recall) that made national headlines. No ME connection that I remember.

There was the case of two Muslims in New Jersey who pretended to convert to Christianity and then slit the throats of the man and his family who had been working with them. They had been in the family home many, many times, but, the week before they would have become Christians, the whole façade crumbled, and the blood was everywhere in the home.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, a huge minority of Mouselemins support discarding the Constitution and replacing it with sharia.

Lehi

A huge minority? It can either be huge or a minority.

Do you know that some Catholics want to make Canon Law the law of the land? So you also know that some Jews want to make Halakha the law of the land?

Wanting it and getting it are 2 very different things. The Pope can give a great speech with VP Biden clapping behind him trying to apply tenets of Canon Law to the US Constitution (abolish death penalty of recent note)... It ain't gonna happen until a majority of people decide to amend or get rid of the Constitution.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A huge minority? It can either be huge or a minority.

A huge minority is several million out of 1½billion people. Put 200,000,000 million people in a room, and, minority or not, that's a huge number of people.

Do you know that some Catholics want to make Canon Law the law of the land? So you also know that some Jews want to make Halakha the law of the land?

Are subsets of these groups killing people to enforce their views?

Wanting it and getting it are 2 very different things. The Pope can give a great speech with VP Biden clapping behind him trying to apply tenets of Canon Law to the US Constitution (abolish death penalty of recent note)... It ain't gonna happen until a majority of people decide to amend or get rid of the Constitution.

A papal speech won't get a lot of people,hundreds of thousands, as in the middle east, dead.

Lehi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not as easy as you portray it.

All Mouslemins are required, by their faith, to go to the Middle East at least once in their lives (unless it's essentially impossible) for the Hajj.

And even among those who are not "radicalized" in Arabia, the internet is a tools of recruitment, and there are many mosques where Friday prayers include imams who encourage jihad against Christian USmerica. It happened here, in Denver two years ago and one of the listeners (and his father, also an attendee), an employee at the airport did something (what, exactly, I do not recall) that made national headlines. No ME connection that I remember.

There was the case of two Muslims in New Jersey who pretended to convert to Christianity and then slit the throats of the man and his family who had been working with them. They had been in the family home many, many times, but, the week before they would have become Christians, the whole façade crumbled, and the blood was everywhere in the home.

Lehi

It is very easy. You don't become a terrorist just by going to Mecca. Tons and tons of Muslims go to Mecca. They don't go home and start beheading people.

So this Christian guy bombed an abortion clinic... Did he bomb the clinic because he is Christian or did he bomb the clinic because he's a despicable human being? 2 Muslims slit the throats of his Christian missionaries. Did they slit the throats because they're Muslims or did they slit their throats because they're despicable human beings (or raised by despicable leaders in the Middle East)?

So David Koresh stockpiled illegal weapons, taught and practiced polygamy including under aged children all in the name of Christ. Is the problem because he is Christian? Why not? Jeremiah Wright preached death to America from the pulpit. Is the problem because he's Christian? Why not? Same with that Imam in New Jersey.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't become a terrorist just by going to Mecca. Tons and tons of Muslims go to Mecca. They don't go home and start beheading people.

You said that it was the Middle East that was the common denominator for terrorists. I did not say that all Mouslemins who do Hajj become radicalized, but they do have to go to Arabia. So, once again, how do we distinguish between the good and the bad Moslems?

It is not at all "easy".

We could name thousands of Moslemins who have committed acts of terror in the past two decades. Not all were directly connected to the Middle East, but all were Mouslemins, and all believed they were doing their jihad in the name of their god, and their religion, and their book.

So, what's this easy way?

Oh, and Jeremiah Wright is his own god.

Lehi

Edited by LeSellers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A huge minority is several million out of 1½billion people. Put 200,000,000 million people in a room, and, minority or not, that's a huge number of people.

Are subsets of these groups killing people to enforce their views?

A papal speech won't get a lot of people,hundreds of thousands, as in the middle east, dead.

Lehi

And you're saying that because those people are adherents of al-Sharia that they then want you dead? Do you know what Sharia Law is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share