Islam - What's your view on it?

[Carbonox]

A bit of philosophical wondering:

If Geert Wilders was wrong, would he still be getting all those death threats?

 

[BHRxRacer]

No, go further. I find it quite interesting, because I tend to hear "No, that's not what Islam is about" but not so much of the detail behind that.

On this example though, is the killing justified by misinformation alone or does there have to be killing due to misinformation? Also, who is allowed to be killed, the misinformed killer, the misinformer, or both?

The misinformer, if proven to be spreading misinformation with the intention of killing Muslims (simply because they're Muslims).

If diplomatic ways fail, the misinformed killer can only be killed in self defense.

Any more questions?

I have learned that Sunni Muslims believe in a personal god, and Shia Muslims do not. This is undoubtedly part of their cosmic disagreement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_deity

There is a distinct difference between the two major Islamic sects, Shia and Sunni, regarding belief in a personal god. Most Sunni Muslims believe in a personal god.[2][22]
This belief is strongly rejected by Shia Muslims.[22]



A discussion Christianity with respect to the personal/impersonal god question. If impersonal, as in the energy god of Mose's burning bush, the Christian could be viewed as irreligious, as could the Shiite.
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100825235041AADsBDf

By personal deity you mean there is only one god? No, both Sunnis and Shias believe there is one god. You'll have to specify what kind of Shia you're talking about anyway. Same with Sunnis, but the different branches in Sunnis don't have differences in the fundamental beliefs like the two main branches of Shias do.

The problem between the Majority of Sunnis, and the majority in Shias, is that Sunnis believe god is god and no human can be equated to him or have his power over people. Shias (ones believing in "wilaiat al faqeeh" ولاية الفقيه) believe there an Imam (basically a Jesus) hiding in the world today and that his duties are passed to another human. That other human taking his duties/powers today is Khaminaee(In Iran). He has his guys under him in Lebanon, Iraq and Bahrain. Hence, Bahrain's tension between Shia and Sunna in the past 30 years. The biggest argument Sunnis have in Bahrain against the Shia is that Shia's loyalty, are by religion, to Khaminaee (as with NasrAllah in Lebannon). Given that Iran is an enemy of Bahrain puts their patriotism in question.

You have about 30 mins to ask a question while I post elsewhere before I sleep

 

[Dotini]

By personal deity you mean there is only one god?

No, that's not what I meant. If you had read the link you would see the following:

A personal god is a deity who can be related to as a person[1] instead of as an impersonal force, such as the Absolute, "the All", or the "Ground of Being".

In the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions, God is described as being a personal creator, speaking in the first person and showing emotion such as anger and pride, and sometimes appearing in anthropomorphic shape.[2] In the Pentateuch, for example, God talks with and instructs his prophets and is conceived as possessing volition, emotions (such as anger, grief and happiness), intention, and other attributes characteristic of a human person. Personal relationships with God may be described in the same ways as human relationships, such as a Father, as in Christianity, or a Friend as in Sufism.[3]

A 2008 survey by the Pew Research Center reported that, of U.S. adults, 60% view that "God is a person with whom people can have a relationship," while 25% believe that "God is an impersonal force."[4] A 2008 survey by the National Opinion Research Center reports that 67.5% of U.S. adults believe in a personal god.[5]

 

[BHRxRacer]

No, that's not what I meant. If you had read the link you would see the following:

A personal god is a deity who can be related to as a person[1] instead of as an impersonal force, such as the Absolute, "the All", or the "Ground of Being".

In the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions, God is described as being a personal creator, speaking in the first person and showing emotion such as anger and pride, and sometimes appearing in anthropomorphic shape.[2] In the Pentateuch, for example, God talks with and instructs his prophets and is conceived as possessing volition, emotions (such as anger, grief and happiness), intention, and other attributes characteristic of a human person. Personal relationships with God may be described in the same ways as human relationships, such as a Father, as in Christianity, or a Friend as in Sufism.[3]

A 2008 survey by the Pew Research Center reported that, of U.S. adults, 60% view that "God is a person with whom people can have a relationship," while 25% believe that "God is an impersonal force."[4] A 2008 survey by the National Opinion Research Center reports that 67.5% of U.S. adults believe in a personal god.[5]

............

This is from the wikipedia reference:
Some Sunni scholars hold beliefs which would imply that Allah has body, but not like the bodies that we know, of course. There are quite a number of traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari describing that God has a sign in his leg, and he put his leg over the hell and so on. For instance see Sahih al- Bukhari, Arabic-Englich version, 9.532s in which alleges Allah has a sign in His Shin (leg) and when He uncovers His Shin (leg) people will recognize Him. Or in the same volume see Tradition 9.604 and 9.510 where it is said that Allah has fingers! Please also see the consequetive articles given by Kaamran refrenced to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

I have heard no such thing before. Who wrote that ****? Sunnis don't believe god is a male, female, human, with legs, or eyes or any of that. No physical feature, no physical structure even. I'll check out if Sahih Al-Bukhari said that in any of the Arabic references. I 99.999% doubt I'll find anything of that sort

 

[BobK]

I have learned that Sunni Muslims believe in a personal god, and Shia Muslims do not. This is undoubtedly part of their cosmic disagreement.

Which is, of course, such a supremely important distinction that people need to be killed over it.

Okay, got it.

 

[BHRxRacer]

One of the most interesting and fascinating things I have learned about Islam is acceptance of the existence of a unique non-human being, known variously as the Djinn, Jinn or "Genie" in the west. This being has no equivalent in the Bible.

The Qu'ran describes the Djinn as (1) non-human, (2) possessing an independent will, (3) a shapeshifter made of smokeless flame, (4) comes from caves or caverns to (5) play tricks on humans.

I have taken it upon myself to learn as much about this being as I reasonably can, and have developed alternative synonyms or definitions for its five key characteristics described above.

(1) non-human = alien, extraterrestrial or preferably ultraterrestrial, i.e., originating on Earth long before humans.
(2) independent will = not a servant of God, angel, devil, man or anyone or anything other than it's own kind.
(3) smokeless flame = plasma, operating variably in visible mode (arc or glow) or invisibly (dark mode, e.g. ionized air).
(4) emerges from caves or caverns = comes from the Earth as opposed to the sky. May originate within the crust or even lower, in the mantle.
(5) Plays tricks on humans = "The Trickster", well known to most cultures under various names and guises. Various names include coyote, fox, raven, Loki, Odin, faery, elf, little people, gremlin and clown. Bigfoot, Ufonaut and UFO also work.

I'm respectfully requesting any Muslims, readers of the Qu'ran and other Islamic literature, to reply with comments, plus or minus.

I don't remember the particular verses but there's something I'd like to add. Condition 5 is conditional. The Quran states that such metaphysical creatures cannot play tricks on humans or influence them, if their faith is strong. If your faith is strong enough, they cannot perform that sort of telepathy, if you like. Also states that they inflict bodily harm on you, regardless of your faith.

edit-

I'm sorry I forgot to add "can't". They can't inflict bodily damage.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Allah has a sign in His Shin (leg) and when He uncovers His Shin (leg) people will recognize Him

He is raised!!!!

Only joking of course, that's Monty Python, a British non-prophet organisation.

 

[Furinkazen]

Anyone able to ratify / prove it is 500? In all honesty, would surprise me if that many. Found this as an image online.

Just to throw out to all the clueless people who automatically equate muslim with Jihad... and anyone here who thinks same...

 

[doblocruiser]

When do those 1.6 stand up and act openly against this kind of "extremism"?

oh wait lovely Denmark has to add something as well: http://www.thelocal.dk/20140902/danish-mosque-express-support-for-isis

“An Islamic state will always be what Muslims long for, therefore we cannot help but to support the Islamic State

 

[Spurgy 777]

Anyone able to ratify / prove it is 500? In all honesty, would surprise me if that many. Found this as an image online.

Just to throw out to all the clueless people who automatically equate muslim with Jihad... and anyone here who thinks same...

View attachment 216533

Yep, 500 by the looks of things, have you tried google?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...h-jihadists-of-citizenship-demand-public.html

 

[Spurgy 777]

Oops, quoted instead of edited.

 

[Dotini]

Anyone able to ratify / prove it is 500? In all honesty, would surprise me if that many. Found this as an image online.

Just to throw out to all the clueless people who automatically equate muslim with Jihad... and anyone here who thinks same...

View attachment 216533

Islam in United Kingdom is the second largest religion with results from the United Kingdom Census 2011 giving the UK Muslim population in 2011 as 2,786,635, 4.4% of the total population. The vast majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom live in England: 2,660,116 (5.02% of the population). 76,737 Muslims live in Scotland (1.45%), 45,950 in Wales (1.50%), and 3,832 in Northern Ireland (0.21%).

Estimated by British Muslim leaders are 500 jihadists per year for the last 3 years, i.e., about 1500 going off to jihad. That's twice the number of Muslims in the UK armed forces.

They are unopposed by UK Muslims - and by the UK as a whole - because the UK is cool. Jihadi cool.

 

[doblocruiser]

Lol what is next? When they return we start to offer help with a psychiatrist to try to reintegrate them in society?

It's about time countries start to act against those extreme forms instead of trying to fix everything with silk gloves.

If you choose to fight for an army that is seen as a terrorist group you lose all your rights to have a western citizenship.

What does Islam positively add to our Western society?

 

[Scaff]

Islam in United Kingdom is the second largest religion with results from the United Kingdom Census 2011 giving the UK Muslim population in 2011 as 2,786,635, 4.4% of the total population. The vast majority of Muslims in the United Kingdom live in England: 2,660,116 (5.02% of the population). 76,737 Muslims live in Scotland (1.45%), 45,950 in Wales (1.50%), and 3,832 in Northern Ireland (0.21%).

Estimated by British Muslim leaders are 500 jihadists per year for the last 3 years, i.e., about 1500 going off to jihad. That's twice the number of Muslims in the UK armed forces.

The estimate is 500 in total, not per year, which equates to 0.0179% of the muslim population, even if it were 1,500 it would still be 0.0537% of the muslim population.

Given those percentages your point is?

They are unopposed by UK Muslims - and by the UK as a whole - because the UK is cool. Jihadi cool.

Oh really! Cut the utter bollocks please.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...im-leaders-fatwa-jihadists-islamic-state-isis
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-leaders-condemn-extremist-group-9599273.html
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-08-23/why-dont-muslims-speak-out-against-isis


BTW - The post you made calling for people to kill themselves is gone, do it again and so will you. The AUP is very, very clear on this. You get a warning and as other members will have no doubt already viewed it this gets made public as well. Calls for death, regardless of the motivation of your post have no place here at GT Planet.

Lol what is next? When they return we start to offer help with a psychiatrist to try to reintegrate them in society?

You mean as they have done to great affect in Germany?

Keep in mind that those coming back are not all on the way to kill us all, but mainly because they found out rather quickly that war is utterly horrible and these people may well be one of the keys to fighting radicalism. Locking them up and remove rights will not achieve that, quite the opposite.

It's about time countries start to act against those extreme forms instead of trying to fix everything with silk gloves.

It is, but that's no reason to remove the due process of law or assume guilt, as those approaches have not worked at all well in the past.

If you choose to fight for an army that is seen as a terrorist group you lose all your rights to have a western citizenship.

No you don't. You should face the criminal justice system in the same way as any other person does. The subjective removal of rights without trial has no place outside of a dictatorship and all you do is prove to fundamentalists that they are right.

What does Islam positively add to our Western society?

Well lets see the remaining 99.95% of them in the UK contribute to society without resorting to terrorism, so I would guess they add in the same way anyone else does.

However why pick on one religion, a better question would be what does religion add to our Western Society? That however is a discussion for another thread.

 

[Dotini]

The estimate is 500 in total, not per year, which equates to 0.0179% of the muslim population, even if it were 1,500 it would still be 0.0537% of the muslim population.

http://www.newsweek.com/twice-many-british-muslims-fighting-isis-armed-forces-265865
There are now more than twice as many British Muslims fighting for Islamic State than there are serving in the British armed forces, according to a British Member of Parliament (MP).

Khalid Mahmood, the MP for Perry Barr in Birmingham, estimates that at least 1,500 young British Muslims have been recruited by extremists fighting in Iraq and Syria in the last three years.

Mahmood told Newsweek that this figure had been building since the start of the Syrian conflict: "If you look across the whole of the country, and the various communities involved, 500 going over each year would be a conservative estimate.”

 

[Scaff]

http://www.newsweek.com/twice-many-british-muslims-fighting-isis-armed-forces-265865
There are now more than twice as many British Muslims fighting for Islamic State than there are serving in the British armed forces, according to a British Member of Parliament (MP).

Khalid Mahmood, the MP for Perry Barr in Birmingham, estimates that at least 1,500 young British Muslims have been recruited by extremists fighting in Iraq and Syria in the last three years.

Mahmood told Newsweek that this figure had been building since the start of the Syrian conflict: "If you look across the whole of the country, and the various communities involved, 500 going over each year would be a conservative estimate.”

An anecdotal number that many commentators consider him to have pulled out of the air (as oddly enough he was making a political point) and even if it is correct it still accounts for less than 0.1% of the muslim population of the UK.

I do notice that you've neither addressed the question of 'what exactly is the point of high lighting a tiny minority and of the utterly inaccurate and baseless claims you made in regard to a lack of action against radicalisation from the UK and muslim communities as a whole?

Odd that.

 

[Dotini]

An anecdotal number that many commentators consider him to have pulled out of the air (as oddly enough he was making a political point) and even if it is correct it still accounts for less than 0.1% of the muslim population of the UK.

I do notice that you've neither addressed the question of 'what exactly is the point of high lighting a tiny minority and of the utterly inaccurate and baseless claims you made in regard to a lack of action against radicalisation from the UK and muslim communities as a whole?

Odd that.

More accurate numbers of British jihadis will likely be known in time. Whatever it ultimately is, its nothing to be proud of.

The UK enthusiastically supported regime change in Syria. So did the BBC. I know because I've listen to the BBC every night for many years.

So the government of the UK in a tiny minority, as is the BBC, and so are the multiple hundreds of British jihadis who took up arms in Syria. Judging by the current severe terrorist attack warnings in Britain, panic to find John the beheading Beatle and collect the passports of British jihadis, its clear there was insufficient action against radicals causing severe harm both abroad and at home.

 

[Scaff]

More accurate numbers of British jihadis will likely be known in time. Whatever it ultimately is, its nothing to be proud of.

A comment that could be applied to any country in the world, one could for example remind the US public of the support and funds it supplied to a rather extensive religious terror group for decades (that targeted the UK). That's nothing to be proud of either and I don't see many people being proud of it, but I only live here so what would I know.

Using less than 0.06% of a population group as a representative sample of the whole group is utterly ridiculous and you know it.

I mean its not as if muslims have even resorted to openly mocking IS on the internet or anything is it.....





......oh wait.

http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/...-world-are-making-parody-videos-to-mock-isis/

The UK enthusiastically supported regime change in Syria. So did the BBC. I know because I've listen to the BBC every night for many years.

Ditto a whole host of other countries including your own, however I have to once again say the claim you make doesn't get backed up by evidence on the ground. As for the BBC 'enthusiastically supporting' regime change? All I can say is the version you are listening to much be rather different from the BBC news on Radio 4 or the rather probing questions and debate covered on the subject on such BBC programes as Question Time and Newsnight.

It sounds a lot more like you main source of information is the Daily Mail and Britain First.

So the government of the UK in a tiny minority, as is the BBC, and so are the multiple hundreds of British jihadis who took up arms in Syria. Judging by the current severe terrorist attack warnings in Britain, panic to find John the beheading Beatle and collect the passports of British jihadis, its clear there was insufficient action against radicals causing severe harm both abroad and at home.

What panic!

Once again you are simply posting inflammatory noise that doesn't match the reality of the situation. The UK has lived with terror threats for far longer than the current fundamentalist issue, do you know what effect the raising of the threat level had on the day to day activity of Britons? Not a damn thing, most would not be able to even tell you it had happened.

Now what you have also failed to mention (in your seeming burning desire to paint the UK as full of radicals causing a population to cower in fear) is that both France and Belgium despite smaller muslim populations have higher numbers who have taken up arms in Syria. Nor is the US immune to this, with at least 50 taking the far more difficult route to do the same.

Pleased to note at the very least however that you have at least downgraded your 'bollocks level' from 'unopposed' to 'insufficient'. It still doesn't make it an accurate picture of how communities have acted in reality, but why let that get in the way of some hyperbole.

 

[doblocruiser]

Well Scaff we disagree. You lose all rights within that specific country. Take away identity and give them an oneway ticket back.

The law works if same rules are adapted or mostly adapted. Extremists have no place in society rather than leave.

The ones that go to fight for Islam fight for what it stands for. To go to Syria or Irak to fight I cannot see that work with returning to western civilisation.

 

[Furinkazen]

A comment that could be applied to any country in the world, one could for example remind the US public of the support and funds it supplied to a rather extensive religious terror group for decades (that targeted the UK). That's nothing to be proud of either and I don't see many people being proud of it, but I only live here so what would I know.

^THIS. With muslims they are often given false portrayal because of a few radicals. I do not recall ever reading of christians being portrayed all as butchers because of the actions of the IRA for example?

 

[Scaff]

Well Scaff we disagree. You lose all rights within that specific country. Take away identity and give them an oneway ticket back.

The law works if same rules are adapted or mostly adapted. Extremists have no place in society rather than leave.

The ones that go to fight for Islam fight for what it stands for. To go to Syria or Irak to fight I cannot see that work with returning to western civilisation.

Congratulations on being a part of the problem then.

Sending them back to carry on killing and maiming, that's going to solve the problem perfectly isn't it? Or do you not care because they are killing more of 'them'? Do you care that little about the civilians that they may harm in any society? It would seem so.

Did you miss the part in which I clearly stated that the weight of the law should be brought down upon them?

Extremists don't have a place in society, any society and all you are suggesting is a course of action that would both fuel and perpetuate the situation.

 

[HKS racer]

Congratulations on being a part of the problem then.

Sending them back to carry on killing and maiming, that's going to solve the problem perfectly isn't it? Or do you not care because they are killing more of 'them'? Do you care that little about the civilians that they may harm in any society? It would seem so.

Did you miss the part in which I clearly stated that the weight of the law should be brought down upon them?

Extremists don't have a place in society, any society and all you are suggesting is a course of action that would both fuel and perpetuate the situation.

Jail.
Forever.
And if they stress guards a good old "accidental clash with guards" will solve the problem for ever.
One terrorist less.
Next.

 

[Scaff]

Jail.
Forever.
And if they stress guards a good old "accidental clash with guards" will solve the problem for ever.
One terrorist less.
Next.

Yep - cos Gitmo worked out so well didn't it.

We stick to the rule of law, otherwise we end up no better than they are and history has shown (repeatedly) that all descending to the same level results in is more radicalisation and more terrorists.

It didn't work with in Algeria for the French, the Maze and H Blocks for the British, it didn't work with Abu-Grade and it didn't work with Gitmo, notice a pattern (and I could go on)?

 

[doblocruiser]

There is nothing wrong with sending them back. Justice can be done in the place where they came from. There is no need to let western law be part of judging extremist.

I understand what you say Scaff but I just differ in view. Nobody wants civilian casualties and to say one doesn't care by sending them back is just not the way I see it and I find that a bit easy to say.

 

[Scaff]

There is nothing wrong with sending them back.

International Law may disagree with you on that point if you are on about revoking passports and making them stateless.

Justice can be done in the place where they came from.

That's highly debatable, particularly in the case of Syria. You also seem to be forgetting that 'sending them back' in many cases will allow them to go right back to IS and carry on killing people.

There is no need to let western law be part of judging extremist.

Once again International Law disagrees with you on that point, that however is not the main point. We should address the actions of our citizens via our judicial systems, as in the case of the UK by going overseas to fight in this manner they have committed a criminal act under UK law.

I understand what you say Scaff but I just differ in view. Nobody wants civilian casualties and to say one doesn't care by sending them back is just not the way I see it and I find that a bit easy to say.

Yet you say just send them back, which may allow them to carry on doing just that. The first country that is able to arrest them and subject them to due process should do so, not just ship them back while shrugging and going "not my problem any more".

 

[Dennisch]

@Scaff

Here in the Netherlands the government is looking into the possibility to take away Dutch passports of those who have a dual citizenship.

And last week 2 families were arrested for plans to join the jihad in Syria. All their passports have been taken, and all of them are still in prison

 

[Scaff]

@Scaff

Here in the Netherlands the government is looking into the possibility to take away Dutch passports of those who have a dual citizenship.

Which would not leave them stateless, but is not always a smart move depending on what the 'other' country is.

And last week 2 families were arrested for plans to join the jihad in Syria. All their passports have been taken, and all of them are still in prison

Confiscating passports and detaining someone for suspected terrorism is a sensible move as long as you follow the law.

 

[HKS racer]

Anyone able to ratify / prove it is 500? In all honesty, would surprise me if that many. Found this as an image online.

Just to throw out to all the clueless people who automatically equate muslim with Jihad... and anyone here who thinks same...

View attachment 216533

How you can prove that? "Hey I'm moderate!" self description of this 1.6 million? Hmm very useful stats.

 

[Furinkazen]

How you can prove that? "Hey I'm moderate!" self description of this 1.6 million? Hmm very useful stats.

I think you need to firstly stop with putting across an impression that you think majority muslims are Jihadists.

Also @Spurgy 777 @Dotini @Scaff have also posted links and evidence... right below my post... did you even read them?

 

[Scaff]

How you can prove that? "Hey I'm moderate!" self description of this 1.6 million? Hmm very useful stats.

Hmmm lets see.

None of the ones I work with, shop in and speak to on a daily basis have tried to murder me or my family.
They actively condemn the actions of IS and fundamentalism in general.
1.6 million people can't keep an act of the nature your claiming going for decades.

What you are claiming is as stupid as claiming that because all of the members of the IRA were catholic that means all catholics are terrorists (which means I married a lapsed terrorist). Its the lazy non-argument of the ignorant and scared and has no place in an intelligent debate on the subject (and this is coming from someone who has no time for religion full stop).