Sharia Law

Writer

To repeat – how does telling all Muslims that they are ALL uncivilized meant to help? Or is it because you comments are not meant to help?

Like Duh -But you haven’t a clue what to do (or rather claim you don’t) so why the fuck are you stating the bloody obvious - is it because you do go on to say below that in your view the line separating moderate and radical Islam is actually extremely tenuous so…basically you are telling people that all Muslims threaten the lives of all beings on the planet.

Fear mongering anyone.

Again Duh – and again but you haven’t a clue what to do (or rather claim you don’t) so why the fuck are you stating the bloody obvious?

But to repeat you’ve already said you think all Muslims are basically uncivilized, even the moderates and then go on to say below that they are not that different from the extremists.

YES I get it – but I ask AGAIN – how does basically portraying all Muslims as extremists help, it just seems like fear and hate mongering.

Oh there are racist, I’ve meet some even on these forums, and there are those that would like to suggest all Muslims are basically uncivilized and extremist, in an attempt to spread fear and hate.

I really don’t get this what has been a Rhodes Scholar or having CIA clearance got to do with it?

I mean you clearly have views – you keep pushing the ‘all Muslims are uncivilized and extremist’ line, so you’ve got that down so why do you seem incapable of saying what you would like done to rectify the problem as you see it?

 

Writer

Not really - if anything it does the opposite, it shows a lack of understanding of what I said misrepresenting it in fact, before trying some half arsed and rather silly psycho-babble analysis, then going on to repeat stuff I’ve already cover before ending with a shrug off about you not having a clue about anything anyway because you don’t have CIA clearance

What you have produced above is a riff on the old ‘I’ve got nothing against them but….’ With everything following the but making a mockery of everything before it.

Here it is – I don’t think we should fear or hate Muslims BUT you should know they are all uncivilised extremists that want to destroy the world and although I’m not suggesting we do anything bad to them BUT to repeat they are all uncivilised extremists that want to destroy the world

 

And that makes it OK that 72% of Kurdish girls are mutilated? Because others do it too? Or excuses the Kurds?

 

Don't let them immigrate into countries that embrace freedom. Know what the problem is, and don't invite the problem into your country. Protect liberal values, protect freedom. Maybe we can't turn their countries into lovers of liberty but we can sure as fuck make sure our countries remain that way.

 

Oxymoron. To restrict freedom because you embrace it.

 

You are not upset for what they do to you but for what you do to them.

 

Yeah and you can't be tolerant unless you tolerate intolerance right?

To ensure freedom, you have to exclude people who reject freedom. How do prisons exist within free societies after all? Because for everyone to be free, to pursue happiness, we can't let murderers and rapists walk around everywhere. We have to exclude murderers, rapists, and fanatics who want to impose Sharia Law on non Muslims. If they get a majority, that is exactly what happens.

 

What exists is that we create temporary conditions for ourselves to the extent we are able. You are simply energetically wrong with the thesis that we have to do anything to live in peace. You are not free if you have to defend yourself and fact is and continues to be that no fortress or prison can keep you safe from the free agency of life. Murderers and rapists do walk around everywhere. It is by no means a matter of we can't let. We can learn to live in peace but you have to be able to distinguish the difference. No where in your rhetoric do you actually embrace peace, you only say to have it we need do this and this. Fact is more peace can be had if you just sit and spin.

It is not energetically congruent to fight for peace or throw up bars to preserve freedom. That is why the situation persists.

 

Unwittingly you've hit on something here.

I think it's also a problem when they want to impose sharia law on other Muslims. Because as long as they do that, there will always be the danger that they'll try to export it. The goal of a global Caliphate will still be there. The principles of sharia law will still be there.
Hence I say that as long as the west continues to suck up to regimes like the Saudis, the politicians are playing a double game. It's ok in their view for the Saudis to behead, flog, amputate and stone, because they are regarded as a legitimate government, and we can make a profit selling them arms. But not IS because they're not legit.

As long as this persists, I don't think any kind of solution will emerge. And it would be relatively easy to put pressure on these regimes to change their act.

 

This is the same retarded hypocrisy I'm talking about. It is an energetic matter not a political one. The idea of national defense is fundamentally different from the idea of world peace, it thrives on different energetic investments. The clarion call we hear of preserving national sovereignty is a claim on property excluding all others. The only sovereign in practice is the powerful elite. They collude to keep us at each others throats.

Reaching out to the neighbor can preempt having to defend against the invader. Freedom is about having an individual choice and it is at that level where practice makes perfect.

 

Sorry dope, but I wouldn't allow people freedom to flog a man for blasphemy, or stone a woman for adultery. Individual choice or not.

In the UK at least, the hand of friendship has already been extended to the Muslims who have come to live here. They should reciprocate by accepting British laws.

 

Blake

[SIZE=11pt][/SIZE]

Oh come on I never said that and you know it

What I’m saying is that you seem to be saying that since FGM takes place amongst Kurds we should not support any Kurds not even those Kurds who are against FGM.

*

It’s like you didn’t even read the article which was by a group trying to stop FGM around the world.

*

 

Nerd

Oh I see in the battle of ideas you think their ideas are so much better than ‘ours’, that we have to ‘make’ them do as we wish rather than persuade them that it’s the better way?

To repeat if ‘we’ are to tackle the rise of religious ideas then ‘we’ need secular ideas and societies that seem like attractive alternatives.

The problem is that the secular neo-liberal/free market ideas that are dominant at the moment in the west and especially in the US seem to many to be corrupt and venal, with liberty and freedom becoming increasing associated with - and linked to - economic values, an unequal equation with only a few gaining the rewards.

 

If you wouldn't allow it, how come it happens? We confuse what should be with what is and what we can do with what we can't.

 

You can keep your peace but you can't make another man abide by it. The only way to export it is to be it.

 

I'm surprised you even bother to frame a question like that.

 

OK let’s work something out -

Is it accepted that fear and hate mongering of all Muslims is not a good idea and very likely counterproductive in tackling Islamic extremism?

And if you disagree can you please present your argument.

 

I think we have to differentiate between hate mongering and legitimate criticism.

Personally, although it is probably a patronizing attitude, I think of Muslims as victims of an obnoxious ideology. I can't see much good in Islam at all. That's not to say I hate those who believe in it. Mostly, they haven't been given a choice.

Rulers of Muslim countries who use Islam as a means to oppress their own people are in a slightly different category. Again hate won't help. Contempt though seems about right.

 

I can't account for your surprise, I mean I have no frame of reference not knowing what "like that" means. I ask the question because it points out essentials. Despite any desire to have things one way or another there is a way things actually transpire. We create temporary conditions for ourselves to the extent we are able. The con/temporary condition you experience is your own state of being. Your own state of being is all you posses in life. If you are in contention you are not at peace and therefor the condition of peace remains elusive.

 

The problem with men coming to agreeable terms with other men is that they find men contemptible.