Islamic Terrorism in the West ( Mega thread)

[2 Cdo]

The thing is, is that the West (Europe and the Americas) are asleep.  By the time they wake up it will be too late.  If people want to be in denial, they are only delaying the inevitable.  It is here.  It is now.  We already have a topic on it:  They Walk Among Us.  Many are still in denial.  Those who look at this as being a REAL threat are often called one of many things: Bigots; Paranoid; Racists; Alarmists; and many other less popular or acceptable names.

Very few Muslims are actually free thinkers and open to the freedoms that we in the West enjoy.  A few have raised their voices in concern to what is happening.  One such person has publicly raised his concerns and been ignored by the majority of Muslims in America.  The following documentary is quite an eye opener:  The Third Jihad - Radical Islam's Vision for America

If you visit the website, The Third Jihad, you will see that there are some major concerns about our security being questioned.  In fact, if you take a look at A Second Look at 'The Third Jihad', you will find more insight.

Is it too late for us already?  Are we still asleep to what is unfolding around us?  How many still think that there is no threat to their comfortable way of life? 

I think we are still asleep.  Some of us may never wake up.

I agree 100% George.

 

[Jed]

The thing is, is that the West (Europe and the Americas) are asleep.  By the time they wake up it will be too late.  If people want to be in denial, they are only delaying the inevitable.  It is here.  It is now.  We already have a topic on it:  They Walk Among Us.  Many are still in denial.  Those who look at this as being a REAL threat are often called one of many things: Bigots; Paranoid; Racists; Alarmists; and many other less popular or acceptable names.

Very few Muslims are actually free thinkers and open to the freedoms that we in the West enjoy.  A few have raised their voices in concern to what is happening.  One such person has publicly raised his concerns and been ignored by the majority of Muslims in America.  The following documentary is quite an eye opener:  The Third Jihad - Radical Islam's Vision for America


If you visit the website, The Third Jihad, you will see that there are some major concerns about our security being questioned.  In fact, if you take a look at A Second Look at 'The Third Jihad', you will find more insight.

Is it too late for us already?  Are we still asleep to what is unfolding around us?  How many still think that there is no threat to their comfortable way of life? 

I think we are still asleep.  Some of us may never wake up.

I also agree with this. Let us, very vocally, speak out against the culture of Islamism and not against the religion of Islam.

 

[Jed]

In fact, let us actively oppose with a view to eradicate 'The culture of Islamism' and to leave the religion of 'Islam' to its own devices.

 

[Kirkhill]

To further address the difference between the broad and the narrow:

Christians went through a reformation and came out of the process fairly well.

But

The reformation, I would argue, was spurred in large part, by a small sector of society that felt the Catholics were spending too much time building pleasure domes in Rome and not enough time doing God's Work - Burning Witches.  We spent a hundred years and more in Scotland, doing that very thing, before we gave it up for a bad job and settled down to do God's real Work - selling American tobacco to the French and Indian opium to the Chinese.

 

[George Wallace]

I don't want to talk about Islam.

We are not talking about Islam.  We are talking about Islamists.  Quite a difference.  Islamists are those who want to totally dominate the world with their views of the Quran.  They will seek any means to bring this about, including extreme forms of violence through to the subtle populating of all nations populaces through procreation.  They are the radicals who are not free thinkers, who believe that the word of God was written solely in the Quran and it is "black and white, with no shades of grey" even if there are contradictions in it.  Those contradictions are then overridden in the later chapters which state that forceful use of violence and murder of non-believers (non-Muslim and Muslim alike) are the way to world domination by their form of Islam.

I want humans to exist peacefully with one another.
When a human behaves in contradiction to the greater good of mankind as a race, ie shooting up schools hacking up people in the street planning terror attacks, i want them removed from the public. I don't care why they claim to have done what they have done.

To me the why is inconsequential. I don't want them killing humans to inadvertently give them a platform to get their message out, even post humorously. By telling the murderers story were setting the next killer with a story up to take the stage.

Western society, over the centuries, has evolved to be relatively peaceful and accepting of multiple cultures and religions.  The Islamists, although their religion is a relative latecomer to the religious scene, believe that theirs is the only true religion and the only one that should exist.  They have not evolved into a truly peaceful and accepting society as others have.  Their blind faith in their beliefs have separated them from modern societies, including those in most Muslim states.  They regress, rather than progress.  Violence is their primary choice to bring about their desires to conquer the world. 

It is interesting to watch some of the methods that they use to convert and radicalize new members into their fold.  My Brother The Islamist gives us some insight into how this is happening in Britain.  The Third Jihad (links in above posts), also shows how the prison population in the United States is a ripe recruiting ground for the Islamists. 

Wanting to live in peace comes at a price.  You have made the choice to "Serve" to protect the people of Canada.  You should not close your eyes to possible threats from within, nor hide your head in the sand and hope it will go away.  One of our past Prime Ministers was very adept at ignoring serious issues and hoping that they would just go away.  He never solved the problems, and just let them fester to come back larger and more dangerous in the future.  Let's not follow his example.

 

[Edward Campbell]

To further address the difference between the broad and the narrow:

Christians went through a reformation and came out of the process fairly well.

But

The reformation, I would argue, was spurred in large part, by a small sector of society that felt the Catholics were spending too much time building pleasure domes in Rome and not enough time doing God's Work - Burning Witches.  We spent a hundred years and more in Scotland, doing that very thing, before we gave it up for a bad job and settled down to do God's real Work - selling American tobacco to the French and Indian opium to the Chinese.

The Christians had their reformation about 1,500 years after their religion was established; Islam has been around for about 1,400 years now so it's probably ripe for some of the same.

I have to repeat that I don't know enough about Islam to suggest how a reformation might work but I like to think it might come about in reaction to the Arabization of Islam in Asia. I fantasize that a revolt might be ignited by an Asian scholar, perhaps a woman like one I met in Malaysia about a year ago ...

This woman - who would live in one of the two "Chinese" provinces of predominantly Muslim Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur and Penang) - would speak out, at public meetings, in the newspapers and on TV. "Arabs are barbarians," she would say, "and they have nothing to teach us. The requirements to make our worship of our god more and more Arabic has nothing at all to do with Islam and everything to do with rich Arabs trying to foist their backwards culture on us. We do not not to read the holy Qur'an in Arabic; you and I can understand it just as well in Malay or English or even Chinese. I am an educated woman - better educated than most imans and mullahs, certainly better educated than any who come from Egypt or Saudi Arabia or, god forbid, Pakistan - and I have read the Qur'an and I understand it and I can debate it with any mufti or faqih. We can decide, we Asians, for ourselves how to live together ~ men and women, Malays and Chinese, Muslims and Buddhists ~ in harmony and how to worship our gods, each in our own ways, in peace. The Arabs bring us misery and discord; their rules ~ which are NOT found in the holy Qur'an ~ denigrate our cultural traditions and revile half of us, the women. We are an enlightened, civilized people, the Arabs are not; they are backwards boors and we need them out of our mosques, out of our law courts and universities and out of our political processes."

 

[cupper]

We are not talking about Islam.  We are talking about Islamists.  Quite a difference.  Islamists are those who want to totally dominate the world with their views of the Quran.  They will seek any means to bring this about, including extreme forms of violence through to the subtle populating of all nations populaces through procreation.  They are the radicals who are not free thinkers, who believe that the word of God was written solely in the Quran and it is "black and white, with no shades of grey" even if there are contradictions in it.  Those contradictions are then overridden in the later chapters which state that forceful use of violence and murder of non-believers (non-Muslim and Muslim alike) are the way to world domination by their form of Islam.

Western society, over the centuries, has evolved to be relatively peaceful and accepting of multiple cultures and religions.  The Islamists, although their religion is a relative latecomer to the religious scene, believe that theirs is the only true religion and the only one that should exist.  They have not evolved into a truly peaceful and accepting society as others have.  Their blind faith in their beliefs have separated them from modern societies, including those in most Muslim states.  They regress, rather than progress.  Violence is their primary choice to bring about their desires to conquer the world. 

It is interesting to watch some of the methods that they use to convert and radicalize new members into their fold.  My Brother The Islamist gives us some insight into how this is happening in Britain.  The Third Jihad (links in above posts), also shows how the prison population in the United States is a ripe recruiting ground for the Islamists. 

Wanting to live in peace comes at a price.  You have made the choice to "Serve" to protect the people of Canada.  You should not close your eyes to possible threats from within, nor hide your head in the sand and hope it will go away.  One of our past Prime Ministers was very adept at ignoring serious issues and hoping that they would just go away.  He never solved the problems, and just let them fester to come back larger and more dangerous in the future.  Let's not follow his example.

You are not talking about Islamists. You are talking about Radical Islamic Fundamentalists or Islamic Extremists. A microscopic portion of people who have taken aspects of their own religion and perverted them to justify their own twisted world view. A group that feeds on the ignorant, the vulnerable and the hard-done-by to join their movement to further their cause.

I've worked with several people, both men and women, who are Muslims. Some devout, some secular. They come from various parts of the Muslim world, Asian, African, Middle Eastern. To a person that all held the same view that Islam is a religion of peace and acceptance. Each one  also agreed that the problem is that there needs to be an awakening of it's followers to the reality of today's global culture, and move away from the 12th Century views.

And to say that The West has evolved over the centuries to be relatively peaceful and accepting of other cultures and religions is to be willfully blind at the entire history of the West. From the Crusades, to the First Inquisitions,  the Spanish Conquests, The Second Inquisitions, the Jewish purges, the Slave Trade, The Rise of Nationalism, The Holocaust, Balkan Wars and Ethnic Cleansing, Western Society has shown more than it's fair share of ignorance and intolerance of people who follow a different path in life.

 

[cupper]

And before we further devolve this thread from it's original intent, I would like to suggest that the Mods consider splitting the debate about Islam off into it's own.

 

[George Wallace]

All I can say to you cupper, is you don't know who the Islamists are, and are confusing them with non-violent Muslims.

If you think that you are the only one exposed to Muslims and the only one to have Muslim friends, acquaintances or colleagues; please don't think yourself special.  I am sure the majority of site members have as well.

As for the West's societies having evolved into RELATIVELY peaceful and accepting of other cultures and religions, I tend to think they have, as opposed to your interpretation of history.  Of the many "Brush Wars" that exist today, a vast majority of them have a common factor; radical Islamists.

 

[GnyHwy]

The Christians had their reformation about 1,500 years after their religion was established; Islam has been around for about 1,400 years now so it's probably ripe for some of the same.

Wow, a religious debate.  I can't see this going well.  op:  If anything heats people up more than politics, it's religion.

That's an interesting fact that does make a lot of sense.  The fact we are shoving the "way it should be" down their throat probably isn't helping speed things up. 

I'm guessing it should happen any day now though. 

 

[Jed]

Wow, a religious debate.  I can't see this going well.  op:  If anything heats people up more than politics, it's religion.
That's an interesting fact that does make a lot of sense.  The fact we are shoving the "way it should be" down their throat probably isn't helping speed things up. 

I'm guessing it should happen any day now though. 

No, this is not a religious debate. It is debate about how one identifies and then stamps out barbaric terrorism disguised as religion.

 

[cupper]

No, this is not a religious debate. It is debate about how one identifies and then stamps out barbaric terrorism disguised as religion.

:rofl: :goodpost: :sarcasm:

It's a debate about how some people interpret their own religion, so I think we can accept that this is at its base level a religious debate.

 

[GnyHwy]

No, this is not a religious debate. It is debate about how one identifies and then stamps out barbaric terrorism disguised as religion.

This http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html
is a pretty good paper that speaks to the denial that religion is not involved or our unwillingness to acknowledge it as that.  Regardless of how misinformed, extreme or downright stupid these assholes are, it is the sacred texts that they are "cherry picking" their ideas from.  This is not limited to Islam, and like posted a few above, it wasn't that long ago that Christianity was doing the same; and still may be.

The whole article is a fair bit long and too big to post, but worth a read.  My favourite paragraph is - "This is a key difference for "new atheists." To us, the fight against religious ideology isn't a struggle against human rights but a struggle for them. Human beings have rights and are entitled to respect. Books and beliefs don't and aren't".

Edited to add:  I am not atheist nor theist.  I just like atheist's arguments because they remove the layers of bullshit and are not partial to any religion because of their non beliefs.

 

[cupper]

As for the West's societies having evolved into RELATIVELY peaceful and accepting of other cultures and religions, I tend to think they have, as opposed to your interpretation of history.

How do you explain the rise of nationalistic fervor that runs through out Europe, and has since the Early 90's? Not not just with the vocal right wing parties and followers, but even governments that put forth policies that fan the flames of anti-immigrant sentiment. France pushes its secular agenda and essentially strips all but Christians of the right to openly practice their religion. Germany treats immigrants as third class people. The Conservative Right in the US and its drum beat of anti-immigration policies.

 

[cupper]

Andrew Sullivan makes a few good points in a rebuttal of Glenn Greenwald's attempt to re-frame terrorist acts against the backdrop of what the West has done to the Muslim World.

An Islamist Beheading In Britain, Ctd

http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/05/24/an-islamist-beheading-in-britain-ctd-3/

Greenwald refuses to label the beheading in London “terrorism,” calling it just another attempt to stir paranoia against Muslims:

    [T]he term at this point seems to have no function other than propagandistically and legally legitimizing the violence of western states against Muslims while delegitimizing any and all violence done in return to those states …

I really have to try restrain my anger here. First off, Glenn’s adoption of the view that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan amounted to “continuous violence by western states against Muslim civilians” seems a new step toward the memes of Islamist propaganda. Does Glenn really believe that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, however flawed, were deliberate attempts to kill Muslim civilians, in the way al Qaeda deliberately targets and kills Muslim civilians?

If he does, then I beg to differ. The reason we invaded Afghanistan was not because we decided to launch a war on Islam. It was because wealthy, Islamist, hypocritical bigots launched an unprovoked Jihadist mass murder of Western innocents from a cell based in a country run by a regime that specialized and specializes in the mass murder of other Muslims.

Before 9/11, America had saved Muslims in the Balkans from Christianist fanatics. We helped liberate Muslims in Afghanistan from Soviet oppression. We continue to give vast amounts of money to Muslim countries like Egypt, and, because of our economic development and need for oil made multi-billionaires out of Saudi clerics. And the war against Saddam, though a criminal enterprise and strategic catastrophe, nonetheless removed one of the most vicious mass murderers of Muslims on the planet. And the sectarian murder of Muslims that followed, however the ultimate responsibility for the occupying forces, was not done by Westerners. It was done by Muslims killing Muslims. The West, moreover, is committed to removing its troops from Afghanistan by next year and is fast winding down drone strikes.

How can that legitimize a British citizen’s brutal beheading of a fellow British citizen on the streets of London? If we cannot call a man who does that in the name of God and finishes by warning his fellow citizens “You will never be safe” a terrorist, who would fit that description, apart, of course, in Glenn’s view, Barack Obama?

The barbarian with the machete was not born in a Muslim country or land. He was born in Britain, educated at Marshalls Park school in Romford and Greenwich University.
He does not have a history of concern with foreign policy – or even sensitivity toward the mass murder of Muslims. There is no record of his protest against the mass murders by the Taliban – because those kinds of murders of Muslims he approves of. He is a convert to the Sunni Islamism of Anjem Choudary, whose street thugs were involved in a melee in a London street only last week as they attacked and scuffled with Shi’a Muslims. Choudary’s group wants Sharia law imposed on the UK, a war against Shiites everywhere, the brutal subjugation of women, and suppression of every freedom Glenn cares about. The idea that this foul, religious bigotry – when it provokes its adherents to the kind of barbarism we saw two days ago – is some kind of legitimate protest against a fast-ending war is just perverse.

I want the war in Af-Pak to end. I agree that blowback is a real problem. I was horrified by the Iraq war. I remain appalled by GTMO and the legacy of torture. But I cannot defend any analysis of what happened in London as some kind of legitimate protest against Western foreign policy rather than terrorism in its most animal-like form, created and sustained entirely by religious fanaticism which would find any excuse to murder, destroy and oppress Muslims and non-Muslims in the name of God.

They did this before 9/11 and before our invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. They are doing it now in Syria in the name of the same God. These genocidal theocrats did not need to be spurred by the US and UK’s actions – although they can view those as a further inflammation. They are living out their twisted, foul faith – which requires them not merely to kill, but to hack and mutilate and dismember another human being and celebrate that fact with a glee and a pride that has absolutely nothing to do with foreign policy and everything to do with the evil lurking in the totalitarian’s soul.

I have to say I have always respected the sincerity and clarity of Greenwald’s critique of the war on terror. But his blindness to the savagery at the heart of Salafism is very hard to understand, let alone forgive.

 

[Jed]

:rofl: :goodpost: :sarcasm:

It's a debate about how some people interpret their own religion, so I think we can accept that this is at its base level a religious debate.

Well if you follow this line of reasoning, then every time you say Christian or Spiritual or Higher Power or Nature Lover you are entering the realm of a religious debate.

The preceding posts do a pretty good job of defining the difference between Islamism and the religion of Islam. Choose what ever semantics you want, just because I say western Caucasian extremist white dude doesn't mean I am talking about white supremacists who may or may not have some sort of religious beliefs.

 

[Jed]

This http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/an-atheist-muslims-perspective-on-the-root-causes-of-islamist-jihadism-and-the-politics-of-islamophobia_b_3159286.html
is a pretty good paper that speaks to the denial that religion is not involved or our unwillingness to acknowledge it as that.  Regardless of how misinformed, extreme or downright stupid these assholes are, it is the sacred texts that they are "cherry picking" their ideas from.  This is not limited to Islam, and like posted a few above, it wasn't that long ago that Christianity was doing the same; and still may be.

The whole article is a fair bit long and too big to post, but worth a read.  My favourite paragraph is - "This is a key difference for "new atheists." To us, the fight against religious ideology isn't a struggle against human rights but a struggle for them. Human beings have rights and are entitled to respect. Books and beliefs don't and aren't".

Edited to add:  I am not atheist nor theist.  I just like atheist's arguments because they remove the layers of bullshit and are not partial to any religion because of their non beliefs.

I don't buy that line. Human beings opinions and beliefs are integral to their personality and as such to some degree are entitled to respect. Since we all have to get along together in this world we need to be able accommodate the difference in opinions and personalities. Obviously extreme social violence, ala Islamism, can not be tolerated if we expect to have peace in this world.

For the record, I have my Christian beliefs, but I don't ram them don't anyone's throat and I tolerate the beliefs of the agnostics and atheists of the world. Many who are great human beings at heart and I count as my dearest friends and relatives. I personally do not have the psychological strength to look death in the eye if all that is on the other side is nothingness.

 

[cupper]

just because I say western Caucasian extremist white dude doesn't mean I am talking about white supremacists who may or may not have some sort of religious beliefs.

True, but you are being redundant by calling him Caucasian and white.  ;D

And also true, not all White Supremacists necessarily base their hatred of other races and cultures on their religious beliefs. 

Now had you added Christian Fundamentalist into the mix, we'd have a religious debate.

Anytime you add a modifier specific to a religious context, you are opening the door to discussion of that context.

In this case we are having a discussion related to the ideology of Islamism. Inherent in that ideology is the tenant of spreading Islam and more specifically its political aspects through out the Muslim World (or globally depending on your take). The Arab Spring is an example of the ideology in play.

You can slice it, dice it, ripple cut, Julienne or shoe string it. It still becomes a debate about religious beliefs.

 

[Jed]

You can slice it, dice it, ripple cut, Julienne or shoe string it. It still becomes a debate about religious beliefs.

True, Cupper. If you choose to take it there. And in retrospect the average person would probably do just that. To me, the label Islamist is not the religion Islam similar to the label pedophile wearing a priest's collar is not the same as the Catholic religion.

 

[cupper]

I don't buy that line. Human beings opinions and beliefs are integral to their personality and as such to some degree are entitled to respect. Since we all have to get along together in this world we need to be able accommodate the difference in opinions and personalities. Obviously extreme social violence, ala Islamism, can not be tolerated if we expect to have peace in this world.

For the record, I have my Christian beliefs, but I don't ram them don't anyone's throat and I tolerate the beliefs of the agnostics and atheists of the world. Many who are great human beings at heart and I count as my dearest friends and relatives. I personally do not have the psychological strength to look death in the eye if all that is on the other side is nothingness.

First off, I think you missed the point of quote by the writer in the article. He is saying exactly what you are criticizing him for, that Human Beings have rights and are entitled to respect of their beliefs. However the author steps on his own scrotum by saying "Books and beliefs don't and aren't".

Secondly, don't confuse the corrupted and violent ideology of radical Islamic fundamentalists with Islamism and the tenants of Islam. What the Bin Ladens and Al Alakis and Al Zawahiris of the world espouse and their followers cling to is not compatible with the teachings of Islam. That is what needs to be stamped out. How do you do that? That is the question that should be asked.