Theo van Gogh murdered

[Denur]

This took 20 seconds on google.

.....

Thanks for that, I do appreciate it. I must have known all that at the time and yet have completely forgotten it. Now, why is that? Time for some self-reflection I guess.

 

[Carbonox]

Jihad doesn't necessarily mean blow yourself up, looking up for the translation means "effort for god" so jihadism could be charity or else.
Death treats on the other hand...

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

According to Wikipedia, Jihadism refers to the crazy fundie ideology though. Jihad without the -ism can have a wider variety of meanings.

 

[Flaco13]

Only if you have no idea what Taqyyia actually is, it's history, which Muslim sects allows its use and its limits.

Hint, it's not a blanket lie to the infidels get out of jail free card.

That´s one way to look at it. IMO Taqyyia is alive and kicking just like Curai****e style of peace deals and the many other fundamental exegesis in Islam. And with naive believing in the honesty of people like the ones quoted in your post, it shows how Taqyyia isn´t just a thing of the past, but very succesfull still today.

 

[Scaff]

That´s one way to look at it. IMO Taqyyia is alive and kicking just like Curai****e style of peace deals and the many other fundamental exegesis in Islam. And with naive believing in the honesty of people like the ones quoted in your post, it shows how Taqyyia isn´t just a thing of the past, but very succesfull still today.

You are aware that the sect of Islam that targets the west is Sunni (well actually its a fundamental branch of Sunni) and Sunni's have no concept of taqiyya.

Odd then that a group would take a concept (that only allows one to hide ones religions sect - not to lie at will) from a group that they consider to be as much infidels as they do the west and use it. Doing so being then at total odds with the fundamental views that they hold.

But why let the actual definition get in the way of the one that the far right have given it (to the wrong Islamic sect and by redefining the word).

Do terrorists lie to achieve the aims they want? Of course they do. Does that mean that Wahhabi's are suddenly going to adopt a religious idea from a group they consider worthy of death to the same degree that they view the west? No.


Its nonsense like this that makes matters worse (and bad as those who fail to speak out at all). By demanding that moderates condemn attacks and then when they do then claiming they are just deceiving everyone.

 

[Denur]

@Denur A Canadian soldier was shot and killed in Ottawa last week, and another run down in Quebec in the name of Islam. As you can imagine, there was a significant public response from Canadians who wanted to reaffirm what true Canadian values mean.

Your position is that Islam inherently involves violence and is not a peaceful faith. Perhaps there's something else at play than religion because in my experience the muslims I've met have been plenty peaceful. Perhaps you could reflect on why Muslims in Canada don't feel like victims of society while those in Europe by your own admission apparently do.

Yes, culture plays a role too here. Male youths from Moroccan / Berber assent (in western Europe) have been getting bad press over and over again during the past decade(s). There is a lot of mistrust and fear from "both sides" and because they are mostly Muslims (Theo's killer is from Moroccan descent), the criminal actions that some of them commit are seen by many as done by a Muslim. Which is bollocks, of course. This article gives some good background information: http://islamineurope.blogspot.nl/2009/01/netherlands-awakening-berber-awareness.html

Netherlands: Awakening Berber awareness

"Many Moroccan youth have a feeling of inferiority," says Rachid el Majjaoui (23), a student in The Hague. they're addressed as ****-Moroccan or terrorist, or think they're seen that way. El Majjaoui also suffered from it. On the streets he felt the stares of contempt prick his skin. In Morocco it wasn't much better. There he was a "Dutch dope'" that just like other foreign tourists was cheated considerably in the market.

"I felt nowhere at home," El Majjaoui says, while he works in the Amazigh cultural center Le Papillon in the Hague. The lack of appreciation lay heavily on his heart. He had nothing to be proud of.

That changed three years ago when a friend told him about the history of the Berbers in the North-Moroccan Rif mountain range - of the 335,000 Moroccans in the Netherlands it is estimated that 75% are Berbers, from the Rif. El Majjaoui didn't know about it.

He'd never learned that the Berbers were the first residents of North Africa, before the Arabs had imposed their language, cutulre and religion on them. He didn't know that the Berbers - who call themselves Imazighen, 'free people' - had a high civilization. Nobody told him about Abdelkrim Al-Khattabi, the freedom Fighter from the Rif who in the 1920s fought the Spanish occupier.

El Majjaoui's interest was awakened. He searched on the internet for his roots. The more he learned about his forefathers, the more enthusiastic he became about his origins. "Did you know that Abdelkarim made the cover of the American journal Time in 1925?" he asks. He points to a painting of his hero. It has a central place in Le Papillon, which will open officially at the end of February.

El Majjaoui is an exponent of a budding Berber awareness. More and more Moroccan-Dutch youth wear chains with the Berber symbol, take part in discussion forum on one of the many Dutch Berber sites, discover Berber writing and read old Berber tales and myths. They're beginning to shake off the fear and embarrassment which held the first generation of guest workers in its grip.

The shame is rooted in Morocco, where the regime oppressed the Berbers for decades. Their language and culture were considered backwards (because they are pre-Islamist). All initiatives of Imazighen were roughly suppressed, because they were in conflict with the national Arab ideology of unity. Only those who mastered Arabic could really advance in life.

Under the current regime - King Mohammed VI succeeded his father Hassan II in 1999 - more is possible. Though Arabic is still the official language, the Berber language (Tamazight) can now be thought here and there in schools.

For many years the Moroccan were also thrown in the 'Arabic pile' also by the Dutch government. Immigrant children had a right to education in their own language and culture, but though most Moroccan children speak Berber at home, they got Arabic lessons in school. [ed: this might also be due to requests from the parents, who see Arabic as a 'more useful' language]

That created confusion, says Farid Aouled Lahcen of the association Voice of the Dutch Moroccan Democrats (Stem van Marokkaanse Democraten in Nederland , SMDN). And then they're still between two nations. Both Morocco and the Netherlands demand that show loyalty, but they don't feel accepted in either land. According to him Islamic fundamentalists skillfully play into that situation. They offer searching youth a superior ideology with ready-made identity: 'the pure Muslim'

Aouled Lahcen is convinced that strengthening the Berber identity can be a buffer against radicalization. "On basis of experiences in the history the Berbers known all too well what imposed ideologies can cuase: alienation and confusion,' he says. If the youth know their cultural background, they are more sure of themselves.

Theater maker Chaib Massaoudi (46) also hopes to start the thinking process about Berber identity with his shows. "You should reflect about where you come from. That's your basis. From that you depart and the world lies open." Often Massaoudi adapts old Berber stories about universal themes.

Soon he'll tour through the Netherlands with his theater group Amazigh with the show Tamettut ('woman' in Berbers) about the reforms in the Moroccan family law mudawana. What are the consequences of this new law for Berber women in their daily life? Before that he toured with 'The Magic Ring' - a theater show in which children learn to speak with animals - as the Rif people do - among schools.

These stories should be told down the line, thinks Massaoudi, who came to the Netherlands when he was 18. 'My grandparents and parents had to keep silent about it when I was young. It could cost you your head."

The fear still exists, even in the Netherlands, says Mohammed Aouled Lahcen (29), who like his brother is involved in Le Papillon. The carpenter who worked in the Amazigh center stayed away after he saw the portrait of freedom fighter Abdelkarim. Mohammed Aouled Lahcen: "He was afraid that we're striving for an independent Berber state. He didn't want to be associated with that. But that is not so, we strive for equal rights."

Rachid el Majjaoui wants to inform youth his age through Le Papillon about their background. He notes how positively his friends react when he tell them the Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara traveled to North Africa to get a portrait of himself with Abdelkarim. Such stories touch the 'street rabble' as well as the 'hard-studying youth'.

 

[Flaco13]

You are aware that the sect of Islam that targets the west is Sunni (well actually its a fundamental branch of Sunni) and Sunni's have no concept of taqiyya.

Odd then that a group would take a concept (that only allows one to hide ones religions sect - not to lie at will) from a group that they consider to be as much infidels as they do the west and use it. Doing so being then at total odds with the fundamental views that they hold.

But why let the actual definition get in the way of the one that the far right have given it (to the wrong Islamic sect and by redefining the word).

Do terrorists lie to achieve the aims they want? Of course they do. Does that mean that Wahhabi's are suddenly going to adopt a religious idea from a group they consider worthy of death to the same degree that they view the west? No.


Its nonsense like this that makes matters worse (and bad as those who fail to speak out at all). By demanding that moderates condemn attacks and then when they do then claiming they are just deceiving everyone.

Sunnis do have a concept of the Taqiyya http://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/al-taqiyya-dissimulation-part-1

There´s no need to adopt the idea from the Shi'ias when it is to be taken directly from the Q'ran. The only thing the Sunnis would have to admit is that their views about Taqiyya don´t really differ much from Shi'ias view, but that´s about it. A fundamental exegesis can only be considered fundamental when the foundation is taken as such.

I was just asking you to take the possibillity into consideration, just like I have to ask now, what makes you so sure those leaders are in fact moderates? What if, in reality, they are not? That exactly is Taqiyya!

 

[Scaff]

Sunnis do have a concept of the Taqiyya http://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/al-taqiyya-dissimulation-part-1

There´s no need to adopt the idea from the Shi'ias when it is to be taken directly from the Q'ran. The only thing the Sunnis would have to admit is that their views about Taqiyya don´t really differ much from Shi'ias view, but that´s about it. A fundamental exegesis can only be considered fundamental when the foundation is taken as such.

I was just asking you to take the possibility into consideration, just like I have to ask now, what makes you so sure those leaders are in fact moderates? What if, in reality, they are not? That exactly is Taqiyya!

None of which changes the point that its still not a formal concept in Sunni Islam, nor (and your own source states this) that Wahhabi's utterly reject it.

Take a guess what fundamental Islam is? That's right its Wahhabi, and you now seem to be claiming that all of these Islamic leaders in the west are Shiite and are using taqiyya to lie for people who would want them dead?

However most of all you seem to have utterly failed to understand the background to the piece you have linked to, which is written from a Shiite point of view and attempts to explain why Sunni's should accept taqiyya. Its hardly an un-biased source on Sunni attitudes (let alone Wahhabi's) on the subject.

Tell you what let me have a Wahhabi source stating that they think its fine to fear man more than god and you might have a point, right now you have a concept that you are misusing and attributing to the wrong part of Islam. Which is a little like saying that the Pope is fine with condoms because Protestants can use them without it being considered a sin.

 

[Flaco13]

None of which changes the point that its still not a formal concept in Sunni Islam, nor (and your own source states this) that Wahhabi's utterly reject it.

Again, of course its a concept, its in the Q'ran. They do have an opinion about it, or do you think they simply ignored it through centuries? It is a concept Sunnis got their exegesis about it and they don´t reject the concept of liying in certain situations for their benefit. What they reject is the Shi'ia teaching in general. When Shi'ias say taqiyya is this or that the sunnis and especially wahabis reject it generally even if their views on it are similar.

Take a guess what fundamental Islam is? That's right its Wahhabi, and you now seem to be claiming that all of these Islamic leaders in the west are Shiite and are using taqiyya to lie for people who would want them dead?

No, because see above. I don´t know what sect each of these leaders is because they will both use taqiyya on us westerners or on each other. But it´s not just shi'ias its sunnis aswell thats what im trying to tell you. And if you fail to see this and take their words as truth, its your bad.

However most of all you seem to have utterly failed to understand the background to the piece you have linked to, which is written from a Shiite point of view and attempts to explain why Sunni's should accept taqiyya. Its hardly an un-biased source on Sunni attitudes (let alone Wahhabi's) on the subject.

You probably should read it again then because its you who failed to understand the reason I gave you the link. While it´s true the author is shi'ia, he used sunni books for the explanation to see that sunnis do mainly share the concepts already.

Tell you what let me have a Wahhabi source stating that they think its fine to fear man more than god and you might have a point, right now you have a concept that you are misusing and attributing to the wrong part of Islam. Which is a little like saying that the Pope is fine with condoms because Protestants can use them without it being considered a sin.

No, wrong thinking once again. Its not fine for them to fear man more than their god. Again, the concept of taqiyya is from the Q'ran itself, and therefore 'allah´s word' Don´t think a Whabi or Salafi doesn´t take it seriously.



And you didn´t answer my question yet. What makes you so sure the Muslim leaders who condemned that murder, at least for the public, where moderate?

 

[Scaff]

No, wrong thinking once again. Its not fine for them to fear man more than their god. Again, the concept of taqiyya is from the Q'ran itself, and therefore 'allah´s word' Don´t think a Whabi or Salafi doesn´t take it seriously.

I'm sure you will be able to quote the chapter the word appears in then.

Taqiyya is a concept that some (almost exclusively Shiites) have interpreted out of the the Koran, the word itself doesn't appear. That alone removes it from Wahhadi's.

Wahhadi's do not accept anything but a literal interpretation of the Koran (and should they break that there own version of Islam would make them an unbeliever and subject to death).

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

And you didn´t answer my question yet. What makes you so sure the Muslim leaders who condemned that murder, at least for the public, where moderate?

Your the one making the accusation that they are liars, as such the burden of proof lays with you.

After all you are the one taking the concept that terrorist lie (as I have already said) and are now expanding it to 'don't trust any of them - they could all be lying', requiring you to ascribe a position and practice that doesn't even form a part of the doctrine of 75% of Islam and also misrepresenting the use of the term itself.

That a Shiite cleric argues that it does apply to Sunnis doesn't make it fact, any more than Anglicans arguing that the Bible is actually cool with Condoms makes it a fact for Catholics. It boils down to ecumenical debate, and that doesn't alone change the rules sects follow.

 

[Flaco13]

I'm sure you will be able to quote the chapter the word appears in then.

Taqiyya is a concept that some (almost exclusively Shiites) have interpreted out of the the Koran, the word itself doesn't appear. That alone removes it from Wahhadi's.

Wahhadi's do not accept anything but a literal interpretation of the Koran (and should they break that there own version of Islam would make them an unbeliever and subject to death).

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



Your the one making the accusation that they are liars, as such the burden of proof lays with you.

After all you are the one taking the concept that terrorist lie (as I have already said) and are now expanding it to 'don't trust any of them - they could all be lying', requiring you to ascribe a position and practice that doesn't even form a part of the doctrine of 75% of Islam and also misrepresenting the use of the term itself.

That a Shiite cleric argues that it does apply to Sunnis doesn't make it fact, any more than Anglicans arguing that the Bible is actually cool with Condoms makes it a fact for Catholics. It boils down to ecumenical debate, and that doesn't alone change the rules sects follow.

It´s nonsense, Salafis do teach taqiyya no matter what 'wikipedia' says about it.

Instead of answering or simply telling me you don´t know about the status of the leaders in question, you are trying to twist it around with your 'burden of proof'. Thats, if you didn´t understand me by now, all I did over the past few posts and you refuse to give me a simple answer.

Well, you go on educating yourself about Islam from 'wikipedia' entries mate.


I´ll just leave this here: http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

Thank you for the conversation, have a good Day.

 

[Scaff]

It´s nonsense, Salafis do teach taqiyya no matter what 'wikipedia' says about it.

Instead of answering or simply telling me you don´t know about the status of the leaders in question, you are trying to twist it around with your 'burden of proof'. Thats, if you didn´t understand me by now, all I did over the past few posts and you refuse to give me a simple answer.

Well, you go on educating yourself about Islam from 'wikipedia' entries mate.

No I do it off the back of living, travelling and working in the region for the last thirty years.

And I'm not your 'mate'.

I answered your question repeatedly, that you don't like the answer is not my problem. Those 'permitted' to use it would have no reason to in this case, those who don't use it have no problem expressing there joy at the death of unbelievers (Choudary in the UK is a good example of that).

Please remember that you made the claim and I answered in as above, you then went onto make the claim that its widespread, a claim you made and as such need to back up (that's how the burden of proof works).

I´ll just leave this here: http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

Thank you for the conversation, have a good Day.

So still with the right wing sources. A source that uses as 'proof' that Wahhabi's follow this (along with most Islamic sects) those who have interpreted the Koran after the first three caliphs. Wahhabi's reject all interpretation of the Koran apart from that given by these three or Mo himself.

One Wahhabi source was all I asked for, just one.

 

[V8-Johnboy]

What the hell happened to you Carb

 

[LeMansAid]

Death treats on the other hand...

Ah, death treats..... tasty, but not exactly more-ish.