Written by Guest on 02.06.2015 at 21:34

I'm not trying to silence the discussion or say w'ere all the same, fuck you got a lot out of my few sentences, a few sentences that didn't seem to even register with you....carry on your discussion, i'm out of here

I think that's the third time you said "I'm out of here". Would be great to get back to topic. Thanks.

Written by Arian Totalis on 01.06.2015 at 09:34

I could easily refute everything you guys have said with easily verifiable facts, and that comment about there being no such thing as an American Muslim actually pisses me off to no end. I own the Koran, and the bible, and the Bhagavad Gita, and the Tao te Ching and the I Ching and a plethora of other religious texts, and I have read them all. I've spent a good portion of my life dedicated to the study of religion. It's clear to me that you both have a very narrow minded understanding of the subject and just listen to whatever right wing propaganda is thrown at you. The fact is that you're right, we have nothing to discuss, because you're both biggots, and there's no arguing with people like you. You'll both just sit on you little clouds of ignorant hatred your whole lives.

"Darkness can not drive out darkness. Only light can do that. Hatred can not drive out hatred, only love can do that" -Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Go right ahead, I am curious what you have to say and counter argue against anything that Dead One and I have said thus far. Both of us come from the Balkans, both of us are Slavs, both of us were in conflict at the beginning here because of our ethnicity, and yet we are respectful or each other, and we can talk like civilized people that we are, regardless of the bullshit that hit us when we were in Europe. Let's see if you can pull that off with none of the baggage that we entered this forum with.

It is one thing for you do study religion and another to practice it, preach it, teach it and live in it. We have a narrow minded view? How so? You are the one who grew up in the USA, and if you are like most Americans that I know, you have maybe visited 2-3 states and if you were lucky went to Europe for a vacation or two but even that is rare. So how could you possibly have such a "deep" insight on religion that you have not experienced firsthand in the countries that are run by Muslims and where Islam is everything.

There is no such thing as an American Muslim, there is a Muslim who lives in America, because you are a Muslim first and everything else second. It is funny to me for them to swear the allegiance to the flag, when in fact Islamic law overrides any other. It is you my liberal friend who has no touching points with reality. Muslims are "tolerant" in any culture they are a minority, but only to that extent until they reach a critical mass and control a city block, a region or a town, then fun starts to happen.

There is no sense talking about Christianity, because it is compatible with Democracy and it lost its power aside from few countries. Islam is rising, radicalization is increasing, and Muslims are dominating more and more countries, and I for one do not want my country be it presently the USA or Serbia or any other for that matter to be fucked over and returned to stone age. If you think Islam is religion of peace, then please book a vacation to Saudi Arabia, and try to speak your mind, if you survive by some luck, bring us a shirt. Muah, love you honey.

Written by deadone on 04.06.2015 at 08:40

Problem with "mainstream" secularist thinking (which is mainly liberal) is that it has embraced this strange religion of political correctness whereby anything that could be perceived as offensive is immedialtely prohibited and censored.

The other big problem is that racism is seen as some thing only Western white people do when in fact the whole of humanity participates in it on a daily basis and often far worse than merely verbally bagging out religions. (like those Bahá'í people you mention who are victims of even extremer racism/oppression).

Left wing anti-intellectualism has a long history that was usually shared with the romantic right until recent. With the death of Fascism and the replacement of them with a Marxist elite it's hard to see what was in principle wrong with these movements. Marx is widely read, Mussolini and Hitler (even banned) are not.
The cheap relativism, the romanticism (you should read Fascist poetry, it's hilarious), the disdain from consequentialism are all forgotten in the new tribalism. The epistemic lessons are replaced with dogmatic moralism.
The latest wave that continues to this day started in the 60's, the "New Left". Adorno called it "Actionism". Herbert Marcuse rejects his own students when asked about anti-intellectualism by Magee.

Yes, a new metaphysical system where "white" means powerful in virtue of being white. More ethnocentric nonsense. Successful Jews are brushed away as "white (enough)" but Asians leave them without much to say. Eventually Thomas Sowell, Steven Pinker,, probability theory and similar empirical approaches explain human variation quite better than the Neo-Marxist explanations.

I don't think the politically correct are naive, I think it's a well thought of ideology that like any politically correct system aims at social censorship (read "Explaining post-modernism" or Pascal Bruckner for postmodernism and cynicism). The right and far right are gaining significantly more support in Europe (Denmark, France, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands) and I know several people who would not vote for them if the other parties would actually address the issues that arise from mass-immigration.

Written by deadone on 04.06.2015 at 08:40

Therein lies the problem.

Muslims as a whole generally aren't open to discussing their religion even between themselves. Anyone that questions the established Islamic orthodoxy is liable to to get a fatwa issued against them and require police protection for the rest of their lives.

As such secularists avoid discussing Islam in order to not aggravate Muslims who are liable to do something violent in response.

And thus the vicious cycle continues - the conservatives/fundamentalists rant and gain ground and the rest of humanity stays quiet, thus making the convservatives/fundamentalists the only voice.

This is what is happening to Morocco.

Written by Ilham on 04.06.2015 at 16:50

Written by deadone on 04.06.2015 at 08:40

Therein lies the problem.

Muslims as a whole generally aren't open to discussing their religion even between themselves. Anyone that questions the established Islamic orthodoxy is liable to to get a fatwa issued against them and require police protection for the rest of their lives.

As such secularists avoid discussing Islam in order to not aggravate Muslims who are liable to do something violent in response.

And thus the vicious cycle continues - the conservatives/fundamentalists rant and gain ground and the rest of humanity stays quiet, thus making the convservatives/fundamentalists the only voice.

This is what is happening to Morocco.

It pretty much happens anywhere where there is a large concentration of Muslims. For me the biggest worry is how much influence the Imams have over the people. If they flip flop from "moderate" to "extreme" their people will follow.

In Iran for instance, they have "police" checking/arresting women or men who are doing something that the Islam does not agree with, that is the future unfortunately, and Iran was doing well at one point, however, they still for being a heavily control nation and country are more relaxed that some other places I have seen.

Written by Rasputin on 09.06.2015 at 07:38
Uh, Islam, another favorite topic of mine. If you want, we can talk about that in the other topic "Islam" where you will see where I stand on it. While I agree with you that the freedom of religion should be granted, I don't Islam counts, simply because it is a cult of death. If we accept Islam then we have to let Charles Manson and anyone other cultist out there to roam free, because that is what is going on.

The primary reason I disagree with this comes from the fact that it would give the government the power to decide what counts as a cult and what is a religion. I could very easily see this power being abused, with some politician deciding that a legitimate non-threatening religious group is a cult and expelling them. This of course doesn't mean we should allow the more barbaric practices practices by some Muslims like Female Genital Mutilation or violent Jihads. But we should allow them to hold their beliefs and practice prayer.

Written by ixsetf on 09.06.2015 at 21:29

Written by Rasputin on 09.06.2015 at 07:38
Uh, Islam, another favorite topic of mine. If you want, we can talk about that in the other topic "Islam" where you will see where I stand on it. While I agree with you that the freedom of religion should be granted, I don't Islam counts, simply because it is a cult of death. If we accept Islam then we have to let Charles Manson and anyone other cultist out there to roam free, because that is what is going on.

The primary reason I disagree with this comes from the fact that it would give the government the power to decide what counts as a cult and what is a religion. I could very easily see this power being abused, with some politician deciding that a legitimate non-threatening religious group is a cult and expelling them. This of course doesn't mean we should allow the more barbaric practices practices by some Muslims like Female Genital Mutilation or violent Jihads. But we should allow them to hold their beliefs and practice prayer.

While I agree with you that it is problematic to put power like that in someones hands, I still think that something should be done about Islam. You can read the previous posts back and forth and see what we have discussed so far. I think deadone outlined it well, and it was to the effect of:

1. Islam is not a religion of peace, but conquest and submission

2. Islam does not fit with the Western society, because it rejects it's values, principles and morals and instills it's own.

3. Islam will never evolve because it is perceived as perfect by it's adherents. It did not and it will not have a massive upgrade and change like Christianity did.

4. Islam, even the so called "moderate" Islam still endorses pedophilia, death to apostates and infidels, subjugation of non Muslims, death and persecution of Christians and homosexuals and mistreatment of women. Honor killings happen in USA, England, EU and everywhere where there is a large group of Muslims.

5. Islam has only one goal, and that is the subjugation and conversion of the entire planet to Islam, where there is nothing but Islam and it's teachings.

6. Islam is a religion created by a lunatic, on par with Charles Manson and other twisted individuals like that, so to expect anything positive is asinine.

And there are many more to list.

While I would agree with you that they should be allowed to go to prayer and the like, you have to keep in mind that their Imams are the ones who are directing them and instructing them to commit violence and destruction. Basically, under Allah/Muhammad and maybe the religious leaders in Mecca, they are the ones in command, and their rule is almost absolute, which is even more scary. Islam has no moderation, it is all or nothing, so I can see why some of the leaders in the USA and around the world would want to send them back to their countries, and to be honest I would too, because they do not embrace a single culture they move to, they only work to destroy it, since they want assimilation according to their view, not the country that granted them a better life.

I said it once and I will say it again, as a Muslim you are first and foremost a Muslim, everything else is secondary. So I laugh when I hear the expression "American Muslim" or "Australian Muslim" those distinctions do not exist among them, they only exist among the very naive, shelter and blind, who are not able to see the truth for what it is.

Does this mean that every Muslim is evil and wants to kill, no, not at all, but does it have propensity for violence if directed by higher authority, you bet. So we have "radical" or true Muslims, and we have the "moderates" who are on a standby. The only thing they are waiting is for more power and larger numbers, then they can do whatever the fuck they want, and if we are stupid enough to give it to them for the sake of "freedom" and "liberty" we will lose that freedom and liberty.

Written by deadone on 12.06.2015 at 07:10

Oh those funny Australian muslims.

Some Islamic groups are refusing to take part in counter-radicalisation programs or anti-Islamic terrorism conferences because they "don't like some of the language politicians use."

So in essence they're saying it's better to let terrorism and radicalism proliferate than co-operate with authorities to develop solutions merely due to word play. Better let people die than engage in flawed processes to try to fix the problem.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4253490.htm

I wonder if they ever figured out they could change the language used if they engaged with the wider community? But that doesn't fit in with general Islamic practice of "you adopt to our ways, we do not adopt to yours."

Awesome, just awesome. Like I said before, you will be hard pressed to find these "moderate" Muslims as it was hard to find "moderate" Xtians back in the day. But no, just let them pour in. EU is fucked, so are the Balkans, and both USA and Australia will be in deep shit in the next 50 years when these people procreate and spawn more crazy Allah loving, infidel killing children.

In the meantime...
http://www.blic.rs/Vesti/Svet/565238/ISLAMISTI-PRETE-BALKANU-Krenite-u-napad-na-Kosovo-Makedoniju-Albaniju

A conversation between Ali A. Rizvi and Faisal Saeed Al Mutar.

"in academia, unfortunately, they live in an alternate universe...White guilt, and moral and cultural relativism also play a major role in shaping these men's views."

Another peaceful Muslim, a sleeper, like the rest of them.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/us/tennessee-naval-reserve-shooting/

Written by deadone on 23.07.2015 at 01:58

Written by Bad English on 22.07.2015 at 12:49

Rasputin when there was shooting IMO in Tennessee to US army recriting center, you was offline... was it you who organize and done it? how came you're of line when there aqre some major news attacks to US army bases and police? Maybe some americans should inform about you to FBI, and deportation be bad, CIA camp be nice

Geez you say some idiotic crap.

Accusing posters of terrorism even in jest is serious stuff.

And that's not taking into account that all electronic communications on the planet are monitored by the US and co (look up ECHELON).

Some?
Don't even bother with him, he is off his meds. The Russians are invading in his head, and Putin is in his closet so he cannot sleep at night.

Written by Rasputin on 23.07.2015 at 05:53

Written by deadone on 23.07.2015 at 01:58

Written by Bad English on 22.07.2015 at 12:49

Some?
... and Putin is in his closet...

Is that why Putin hates gay people?

Written by Bad English on 23.07.2015 at 16:35

Written by M C Vice on 23.07.2015 at 11:57

Written by Rasputin on 23.07.2015 at 05:53

Written by deadone on 23.07.2015 at 01:58

Written by Bad English on 22.07.2015 at 12:49

Some?
... and Putin is in his closet...

Is that why Putin hates gay people?

Putin hates everyone what comes from west ... an are one big idiot, similar as ... one ms user

You have been drinking your cool aid again I see. Good, keep it up

Written by M C Vice on 23.07.2015 at 11:57

Written by Rasputin on 23.07.2015 at 05:53

Written by deadone on 23.07.2015 at 01:58

Written by Bad English on 22.07.2015 at 12:49

Some?
... and Putin is in his closet...

Is that why Putin hates gay people?

Naa, it's more of a religious thing.

Written by deadone on 24.07.2015 at 05:56

Not a fan of Europeans myself. Everyone knows the only decent people on this planet are us Aussies and the Kiwis cause they're like Aussies.

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie. Oi Oi Oi!

coughweren'tyouonecough

Shh, don't let the Kiwis know we respect them.

The Guardian at its epic nuttiness: 'Extremist is the secular word for heretic'.

No control, no substance, no criticism, no self-criticism. I can find at least perhaps, 1 out of 100 decent articles on it unlike Salon which is so far 100% garbage.

Written by deadone on 27.07.2015 at 08:06

Typical Guardian garbage indeed. Everything about Islamic extremism gets related back to "they're not so bad and it's the west's fault." They present this as a moderate view.

And then they present even moderate conservatives as borderline Nazis, let alone more extreme parties like UKIP (which even at their zenith don't come close to Islamic extremists in terms of ideology and practice of ideology.)

They're losing their mind over Cameron's anti-extremism measures. I would have said this is the lowest in a while, but not a while ago they deliberately mistranslated Persian on their main page (they corrected it after a while!).
The BBC has been mistranslating for close to a decade now, without correction. First time I saw it I was 16 and I was shocked, with age I learned it isn't the journalists, it's the mob who read these newspapers that simply fund the image of reality they want to see.

I'm approaching the end of Michel Houellebecq's "Submission". Thanks to the massive French immigration here it got translated to Hebrew quite fast (Englsih version out in September). The end is extremely depressing and the process he describes that led to it fits the Guardian entirely.

And you are not going to. Colleges are historically the liberal hotbeds, so there is no discussion on what is really going on. Instead, we have the same "not all Muslims are like this" "tolerance" "extremists hijacked Islam" and "that is racist." Colleges have lost the ability to argue facts with facts, and to use logic and reason if it offends someone.

Written by Rasputin on 27.07.2015 at 20:33

And you are not going to. Colleges are historically the liberal hotbeds, so there is no discussion on what is really going on..."not all Muslims are like this" "tolerance" "extremists hijacked Islam" and "that is racist." Colleges have lost the ability to argue facts with facts, and to use logic and reason if it offends someone.

Alan Bloom is an obvious reference to your rant.
Generally, I doubt it, at least as far as 'intellectuals' go.
Reading "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" it's clear fascist intellectuals presented a massive force at the end of the 19th century.

Watching Brian Magee asking Herbert Marcuse why is he trying to couple two on-face contradictory conceptual systems (psychoanalysis and Marxism) to save a 'discredited theory', Marcuse reply is that some of it is indeed true and the missing parts can be filled.
Since then Neo-Marxism has gone through a long (and failed) 'evolution' that is still taking place.

As we all know, the fascist intelligentsia are all but gone and into that void, the above toke its place. Neo-Marxist historiography has destroyed the field of evidence based political history in the humanities, it's "all politics and interests" and "there is no truth out there" so you might as well "represent you own interests and politics best you can". The cynicism is probably the most disturbing, the replacement of the notion of correctness with that of sincereness. That of thoughtful action with actionism encouraged by their own professors.

Written by Candlemass on 28.07.2015 at 02:00

Written by Rasputin on 27.07.2015 at 20:33

And you are not going to. Colleges are historically the liberal hotbeds, so there is no discussion on what is really going on..."not all Muslims are like this" "tolerance" "extremists hijacked Islam" and "that is racist." Colleges have lost the ability to argue facts with facts, and to use logic and reason if it offends someone.

Alan Bloom is an obvious reference to your rant.
Generally, I doubt it, at least as far as 'intellectuals' go.
Reading "The Birth of Fascist Ideology" it's clear fascist intellectuals presented a massive force at the end of the 19th century.

Watching Brian Magee asking Herbert Marcuse why is he trying to couple two on-face contradictory conceptual systems (psychoanalysis and Marxism) to save a 'discredited theory', Marcuse reply is that some of it is indeed true and the missing parts can be filled.
Since then Neo-Marxism has gone through a long (and failed) 'evolution' that is still taking place.

As we all know, the fascist intelligentsia are all but gone and into that void, the above toke its place. Neo-Marxist historiography has destroyed the field of evidence based political history in the humanities, it's "all politics and interests" and "there is no truth out there" so you might as well "represent you own interests and politics best you can". The cynicism is probably the most disturbing, the replacement of the notion of correctness with that of sincereness. That of thoughtful action with actionism encouraged by their own professors.

It is 1984, and the people are the ones who are creating a mental prison and enslaving themselves. The irony of thingsl

Written by Rasputin on 01.08.2015 at 04:34

It is 1984, and the people are the ones who are creating a mental prison and enslaving themselves. The irony of thingsl

However amusing it is to see Europeans (a significant amount at least) essentilizaing themselves negatively ("white guilt") like they did to many others groups of people - it's still bullshit.
So is "white pride" for the same reasons. Just get over the cheap collectivism.

Written by Candlemass on 01.08.2015 at 20:24

Written by Rasputin on 01.08.2015 at 04:34

It is 1984, and the people are the ones who are creating a mental prison and enslaving themselves. The irony of thingsl

However amusing it is to see Europeans (a significant amount at least) essentilizaing themselves negatively ("white guilt") like they did to many others groups of people - it's still bullshit.
So is "white pride" for the same reasons. Just get over the cheap collectivism.

Same thing is occuring in the USA. White Male Privilege and yes, be ashamed of being white. I am laughing at the idiots, however, the idiots are winning because we have so many that are masticating on that liberal ideology.
We will see more stupidity in the future. I am sure of it, and it will progress beyond any logic and reason, if it ever had any.

^ And you'd think Muslim women would be the ones who value women's rights the most...

Written by Karlabos on 02.08.2015 at 16:38

^ And you'd think Muslim women would be the ones who value women's rights the most...

That's not how it works. We're all humans and yet you don't see most of us battling for human rights. If we have to wait for women to stand up for their own rights, we'll still be waiting for a long time.

Any woman who tries to dictate what another woman has to wear, be it more or less clothes, can fuck right off.

Written by deadone on 02.08.2015 at 12:08

A gang of Muslim women beat up a French woman for sunbaking in a bikini.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/29161112/french-women-protest-in-bikinis-after-women-beaten-for-sunbathing-in-park/

I am down to the point where I no longer have any sympathy for Muslims coming to our countries They need to be kicked out. I don't care if they're from wartorn shitholes. They made their own beds and let them sleep in it.

The answer must the the "Patriarchy" and "not all Muslims are like that." We killed this horse time and time again. There is no moderate, there is no logical, there is no reasonable, there is nothing advanced and positive associated with Islam. I'm surprise they did not "honor killed" her, to save her from hell.

Written by Rasputin on 02.08.2015 at 19:18

The answer must the the "Patriarchy" and "not all Muslims are like that." We killed this horse time and time again. There is no moderate, there is no logical, there is no reasonable, there is nothing advanced and positive associated with Islam. I'm surprise they did not "honor killed" her, to save her from hell.

"not all Muslims are like that." is a true statement. Why do I bother.

Written by Candlemass on 03.08.2015 at 21:45

Written by Rasputin on 02.08.2015 at 19:18

The answer must the the "Patriarchy" and "not all Muslims are like that." We killed this horse time and time again. There is no moderate, there is no logical, there is no reasonable, there is nothing advanced and positive associated with Islam. I'm surprise they did not "honor killed" her, to save her from hell.

"not all Muslims are like that." is a true statement. Why do I bother.

You are right, they are not, but their inaction is a form of action. So, by sitting and doing nothing they are accomplices of what ISIS and the rest are doing. You will not hear any criticism in the Middle East about Islam, it;s backward thinking and damage it is causing. And the West is worries about offending Muslims...fucking hell

Written by Rasputin on 04.08.2015 at 01:59

You are right, they are not, but their inaction is a form of action. So, by sitting and doing nothing they are accomplices of what ISIS and the rest are doing. You will not hear any criticism in the Middle East about Islam, it;s backward thinking and damage it is causing. And the West is worries about offending Muslims...fucking hell

Some Muslims fully do (and some make a half-ass condemnation which is an excuse). The fact they are ignored by many, shunned by the left the same left which promotes Islamic extremism and receive death threats from 'extremists' - does not mean they don't exist - many people just don't wished they didn't.

There's Islamic inspired violence and there's anti-Muslim bigotry. There's no contradiction there (many versions of Islam, family resemblance - not essence).
I've heard enough vulgarities about Islam and Muslims from people who can't tell me what's the five pillars of Islam are.

Epistemic modesty is something to aspire to.

Written by deadone on 04.08.2015 at 03:22

Rasputin does make a good point. Inaction is action and often represents tacit approval.

He made a more specific point, a false one.

Written by deadone on 04.08.2015 at 03:22

Konwledge about 5 pilars of Islam or Islamic dogma is irrelevant to the discourse of the practical relationships between Muslims as a whole and the rest of the world.

No, but you could expect someone who claims he knows the 'essence' of the religion to know its basics.

Written by deadone on 04.08.2015 at 03:22

....

It comes down to the fact the Islam as a religion does not offer any state of compromise. It has never gained any flexiility when dealing with other groups. The closest it gets to comp...

Those are not statements I disputed, I would like sources to some of those claims (as expected). I know at least one Muslim reformist which refutes that underlined sentence. There is no one version of Islam and augmenting a sentence to make it more accurate saves us much trouble down the road.

I don't see a problem condemning people who promote religious law over secular law, call it political-Sharia or whatever example you will or as you put it rightly very orthodox/traditional forms of religion, without making inaccurate statements about Islam or its "nature".
Quite the opposite. Supporting reformists means acknowledging people's cognitive ability to change the way they interact with their scripture and interpretational tradition. Maybe empirically, it is harder in widely accepted versions of Islam, but I'm unaware of it.

Who gives a fuck about 5 pillars of Islam? Who is following that sentiment and where? Look at the Middle East, you do not know who is crazier. ISIS executes everyone one in sight pretty much, and decapitates, tortures them and mutilates them, the Iraq/Afghanistan/Libyan/Syrian counter insurgents are doing the same.

I cannot believe that you Candlemass, Mr. scholar and Sophist would still defend these fucks and this idiotic and regressive religion. They have no saving grace. Sunni, Shiite, the Kurds and others are all Muslims, and who the hell is following the tenets, or presumed 5 pillars? Some of them or all of them.

Strangely enough, you had critics within Muslims themselves who somehow managed to speak their minds and do not get their heads chopped off. They saw the bullshit that Islam was and spoke out against it. David fucking Hume commented as well on this death cult "we shall soon find, that [Muhammad] bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers." He saw then that Islam is not compatible with a normal world where ideas and criticisms are a normal part of a discourse.

I ran across Andre Servier, a french historian who stated the same thing that Deadone and I have been pointing out time and time again, but to no avail.
"Islam is a doctrine of death, inasmuch as the spiritual not being separated from the temporal, and every manifestation of activity being subjected to dogmatic law, it formally forbids any change, any evolution, any progress. It condemns all believers to live, to think, and to act as lived, thought and acted the Musulmans of the second century of the Hegira [8th century A.D.], when the law of Islam and its interpretation were definitely fixed...In the history of the nations, Islam, a secretion of the Arab brain, has never been an element of civilization, but on the contrary has acted as an extinguisher upon its flickering light. Individuals under Arab rule have only been able to contribute to the advance of civilization in so far as they did not conform to the Musulman dogma, but they relapsed into Arab barbarism as soon as they were obliged to make a complete submission to these dogmas"

I recommend David Cook and his book "Understanding Jihad" a great book that sheds a lot of light on some things that no one is really talking about.
"In reading Muslim literature ? both contemporary and classical ? one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non- Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible." The West does not have a fucking clue what they are dealing with, and there lies the problem. It is too easy to attack Xtianity because it is a part of the culture while people virtually know nothing of Quran and they have never read it, like most never read the Bible, so for the Western media, Politicans and fucking liberals to spew defense against attacking Islam, is nonsense.

Written by Rasputin on 05.08.2015 at 10:14

...
I cannot believe that you Candlemass, Mr. scholar and Sophist would still defend these fucks and this idiotic and regressive religion. They have no saving grace. Sunni, Shiite, the Kurds and others are all Muslims, and who the hell is following the tenets, or presumed 5 pillars? Some of them or all of them.

I'm not the subject of this thread, this paragraph is written especially for you.
Last week I went hiking, there was a Muslim class, two kids pointed at me "we'll kill you", later on in a stop the teacher shouted "takbir!" and the students replied "alluah akbar!" which followed a cheerful song which included the words "itbah al yahud".
I'm not defending Islamic militarism or extremist ideology or just "Islam" or even Islam not-being an "idiotic and regressive religion". It's an empirical fact that different versions of political Islam, are prima-facie the most violent, wide-spread and repressive ideologies that are currently active (for the Middle-East to Africa around the world).
And yet, the statement "All Muslims are X" when in-fact they are not, is a false statement, even when trying to slide it in by implying "This is the true Islam, if you're a Muslim you believe in Islam hence you ascribe to the former".

Philosophy is a nice place, with high standards of discourse, where I can search for the truth in and of itself while ignoring the crude tribal realities where words are primarily a weapon. The epistemic virtue of accuracy is important to me.

Written by Rasputin on 05.08.2015 at 10:14

... "we shall soon find, that [Muhammad] bestows praise on such instances of treachery, inhumanity, cruelty, revenge, bigotry, as are utterly incompatible with civilized society. No steady rule of right seems there to be attended to; and every action is blamed or praised, so far as it is beneficial or hurtful to the true believers." ...

I could say the same thing about most societies. I could also look only at Islamic scholarship and art and draw a different picture (like many modern day European romantics do). Islam and Muslim history is a complex phenomena.

Written by Rasputin on 05.08.2015 at 10:14

...
I recommend David Cook and his book "Understanding Jihad" a great book that sheds a lot of light on some things that no one is really talking about.
"In reading Muslim literature ? both contemporary and classical ? one can see that the evidence for the primacy of spiritual jihad is negligible. Today it is certain that no Muslim, writing in a non- Western language (such as Arabic, Persian, Urdu), would ever make claims that jihad is primarily nonviolent or has been superseded by the spiritual jihad. Such claims are made solely by Western scholars, primarily those who study Sufism and/or work in interfaith dialogue, and by Muslim apologists who are trying to present Islam in the most innocuous manner possible." ...

I disagree. Many actually do but still endorse it. I had a conversation with a Swedish woman about 'Islamization' and the final response was "so what? it might as well be refreshing". The same attitude is taken by outlets like The Guardian. A part of being 'progressive' today includes to some people the utter cancellation of the self, 'openness' without-end probably in virtue of a bizarre devotion to the most vulgar of anti-realist ideologies.

I'll check it out, I finished Michel Houellebecq's "Submission" recently which is impressed me more than I expected, now in the middle of Paul Thagard's "The Brain and the Meaning of Life" which isn't bad for popular philosophy, next I'll read "Understanding Jihad" .