That has got to be the worst possible analogy you could have come up with. Islam is a religion practiced and preached by people with the objective of influencing a person thoughts and actions. This is no different than any other religion. The difference comes when radicals in Islam (or any other religion) preach violence and death to those who are not a member of said religion. Islam seems to have the lead in this area. A gun on the other hand is a tool to be used by a person to carry out actions. A gun does nothing more than allow a person to carry out their ideology and thoughts much the same way a fork allows a person to carry out the action of eating when they are hungry. A gun does not and cannot "brainwash its followers". Religion on the other hand can and throughout history often has. You are absolutely incorrect when you say, "God is not to blame, Islam is not to blame, human beings who preach violence are to blame. Radical Islam and Allah are the reasons human being (Muslims in this case) are preaching violence
You are very confused, and in your blind hatred are not seeing this situation clearly. Islam is being used as a tool by those preaching, to brainwash and incite their followers to violence and hatred. Just like a criminal uses a gun to practice violence. The gun doesn't commit the crime (we don't send guns to jail, and we don't send the Koran to jail...in fact we allow the detainees in Gitmo to read the Koran, one of the truly humane practices there), and in the same way, Islam itself doesn't commit acts of terrorism. No difference really. Certain extremist Mullahs are arming their followers with the weapons of extremist totalitarian thinking. No difference than someone giving guns to kids then inspiring them to use them against authority or a life of crime. All of this happens in mind, not in Islam. All of gun crime happens in the mind first, then is carried out with the use of a gun. It is essentially a political movement that has perverted the true spiritual nature of a religion, and this is nothing new. We have seen it in nearly all religions, when charismatic zealots gain followership, and focus on a demon to destroy in the name of their movement. The enemy is not Islam, or any other religion. The enemy is extremism, totalitarian thinking, violent political movements, etc. In our own country, the Nation of Islam is essentially a peaceful movement, denouncing violence in its members. Therefore, it is not Islam that is the enemy, but rather the nature of totalitarian extremist thinking, in the name of religion, that perverts the mind of those who followers. While you see Islam itself as the problem, you are clearly wrong. As the solution is not the abolishment of any particular religion, including Islam. The solution is for new Muslim spiritual leaders to rise up and show the genuine spiritual value of Islam to the followers of Islam. We have seen reformation in religions before, and we will see it again.
ZZzzz, the clear minded telling everyone who doesn't agree with him that they are confused. Classic ZZzzism... Watching ZZzz throw his tantrums calling everyone who doesn't agree with his world view "confused." Too too too funny....
stu, the adult who got his bottom spanked in another thread, works out his resentments here....an entirely different thread, entirely different topic. Nice job stu! How very, very adult of you. ROTFLMAO...
Sadly there is an element of Islam that you ignore. Spend some time reading the words of the prophet and you will find that he provides the justification of religious violence and advocates it as one of the primary tools for achieving an Islamic world. Terrorism comes out of disputes about land and power over that land (that feel futile to the terrorists, their supporters and their leaders) but Islam provides a fertile garden for that weed to grow. I do agree that the best solution is a reformation but its hard to see how it will come in quasi-medieval societies. The other solutions seem to be keeping a lid on the worst expressions of Islam as being practiced by national security organizations around the world and various forms of wall between difficult muslims and the populations they threaten.
That's the first time I've seen something like that in numbers, and it is quite a shock and very troubling. Keep in mind I mentioned extremists though, implying willingness to strap on a belt and blow up something or take up arms to kill an infidel. That data may (at best) reveal that there is fertile ground for activating terrorists if there is enough of a trigger, or it may mean half the people in these hot countries hate Israel-loving America and are glad to see someone going to bat for them. In either case it's not good of course, but that doesn't mean that half of Saudi Arabia or Morocco is made up of terrorists. I raised the question in the first place to point out that there is a very large divide in Islam, and that people in Morocco follow the same religion as those in Turkey, Kuwait or Australia. The actions of one group end up speaking for the rest in the Western mind. I think Islam is structured to be more absolutist and dogmatic than other religions, that its history has encouraged that culture, and that helps totalitarian powers use the religion to dominate and resist modernization. But the only way it can be softened over time is if it is changed from the inside, by moderates, scholars, academics, artists, businessmen, etc. No interpretation of any religion is ever correct, because no religion is stagnant or monolithic. They all change over time depending on the underlying class and political structure, and historical factors like war and revolution.
I agree entirely. Those who seek to enfuriate the entire Muslim populace by blaming the religion, or those who push for more invasions and bombings in the region, will basically radicalize those who haven't entered the fight. And that is exactly what bin Laden said he was trying to make happen. It's telling that he knew that using the Sean Hannitys of the world would better serve his purpose than building a well-armed military for open combat.
The problem with that approach is that the list of things that infuriate them is apparently endless. If we try to placate them, we end up enganging in self-censorship, which has already happened to a large extent. The mainstream media is very reluctant to publish anything that is even mildly critical of islam. To the extent we fall all over ourselves to grovel for whatever has set them off this week, we only encourage more such responses. We have our principles, they have theirs. We might as well stand up for our principles now, because eventually we will reach the point where we have to. It's just a question of how much we are prepared to surrender.
Tell me that the words you read are in their original language, meaning exactly what the words mean today, and were written down by Mohammed. Every religion, apart from Hinduism which is in original text, Sanskrit, has gone through untold revisions and changes from the prophets who spoke them. Then, to assume the words are meant to be taken literally and fundamentally, not from a spiritual or allegorical foundation.....with no ability to talk to Mohammed to see if that is the right way to read the words for this day and age... See, you are just as much as a fundamentalist when you talk about the words and what they mean to YOU when you read them. I read the same words, and see something entirely different. This is where reform will come in...eventually. It has happened in every other religion, it will happen in Islam, and we should support such reforms. The words themselves provide no justification for violence, only the mind of men who put their own meaning to the words make such rationalizations...
On a related note: One in 10 Muslims 'ignore terror' Press Association Sunday September 24, 2006 3:08 AM Almost one in 10 British Muslims would not inform police if they suspected that someone of the same faith was involved in a terror attack, a poll suggested. The ICM poll for the News of the World found 9% of the 502 questioned would not tell police if they had such suspicions about a fellow Muslim. With a Muslim population aged over 16 in Britain of around one million, that would translate to 90,000 "turning a blind eye", the newspaper said. However, almost nine out of every 10 (86%) would contact police, according to the survey. Among young Muslims, the figures for keeping quiet were higher with 15% of 16 to 24-year-olds saying they would not tell police and 81% saying they would. The poll also found that one in 20 Muslims thought attacks like the July 7 bombings were justified. And more than half (56%) said they did not believe a police warning that there are thousands of extremist British Muslims willing to carry out attacks here. Just over a third (34%) of those questioned believed the warning and 10% said they "did not know". The research also asked Muslims what factors were responsible for continued terror attacks in Britain. Tony Blair, "Islamophobia" and the Islamic community's "failure" to root out extremists were among the favoured reasons. More than eight in 10 (86%) said the Prime Minister should shoulder some of the blame and 72% blamed non-Muslims for racist and "Islamophobic" behaviour. However, two thirds (66%) said the Muslim community's failure to root out extremists was a factor. Meanwhile, 83% accepted that the terrorists themselves were to blame although one in 10 said they were not. ____________________________ Member of the ET Anti-Troll Brigade Iustus ignarus troll