This Is Why Islamic Fanatics Kill...
A former fanatic Islamic Jihadist writes about his observations in "The Daily Mail" about how "Big Media" gets it wrong. Below are a few quotes:
When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network - a series of British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology - I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was Western foreign policy.
By blaming the Government for our actions, those who pushed this "Blair's bombs" line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology.
And though many British extremists are angered by the deaths of fellow Muslim across the world, what drove me and many others to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain and abroad was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary worldwide Islamic state that would dispense Islamic justice.
If we were interested in justice, you may ask, how did this continuing violence come to be the means of promoting such a (flawed) Utopian goal?
How do Islamic radicals justify such terror in the name of their religion?
There isn't enough room to outline everything here, but the foundation of extremist reasoning rests upon a model of the world in which you are either a believer or an infidel.
Formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion: they are considered to be one and the same.
Now as to why Islam has gained a foothold in Britain, and such favorable treatment in the press is this:
But the main reason why radicals have managed to increase their following is because most Muslim institutions in Britain just don't want to talk about theology. They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex truth that Islam can be interpreted as condoning violence against the unbeliever - and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace and hope that all of this debate will go away. --Hassan Butt
I don't see how it can be any more plain than this.
posted by Underground Logician @ 12:34 PM
10 comments
10 Comments:
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."-Steven Weinberg
http://tinyurl.com/27jhtg
You mentioned that your blog is a ghost town because of your opinions. could it be the way you present them more than the fact that more people believe what I do? I don't think your opinion is in the minority, especially given conversations with memebers of my own family. i think it has more to do with your loose relationship with the facts rather than the opinion, but the facts don't seem to be adding up well on the anti-islamic pro-war side.
Believe it or not I agree with what you are putting forth here. A religious extremist predetermined to do evil will find all the justification he needs in archaic text left to broad interpretaion by individuals with evil motives.
Eric Robert Rudolph used the bible to justify his evil.
Joanne:
Good people doing evil negates their own goodness, don't you think? Evil that masquerades as light is the very deepest and darkest evil. I'm in agreement with St. John Chrysostom, who said that the floor of hell will be paved with the skulls of bishops. He saw, as we do, that religious people, from the leaders on down, who do evil in the name of Christ are at the very bottom of hell. Lord have mercy on us all!
UWL:
Welcome to my cave!
Well, this is why I will publish comments and invite hard core discussion of the facts and the arguments. If I'm lose on the facts, please help me out. I never resist correction of things I do wrong. As you know, I put up a good fight. But, if I'm off base, show me. I'm willing to learn.
Thanks for visiting; there's less of an echo in here when others are around. You're helping chase away ghosts!
Cranky:
Yes, the actions of good ol' Eric Rudolph ought to be a good lesson for us all. Chesterton, who authored the Father Brown series, illustrates this best. When asked what Fr. Brown's secret was in solving some of the most heinous crimes, he simply states (I paraphrase) "I simply look inside myself and ask myself what I would do to commit such an atrocity, therein usually lies the solution."
Pertaining to the post, we need to face the harsh reality of what we're dealing with in Jihadist terrorists, and look toward heaven for help. We can lament the hopeless flaws of humanity, but we need some hardy solutions that contain humility. Perhaps this ought to be our focus.
I answered somethign similiar to this on my most recent post int he comments section. Why Islamofascist kill is not nearly as important as getting them to stop doing so. If they are educated and their needs are met, they are less likely to want to kill us. We did not cause Islamofascism by any means, but we have done nothing to hurt the spread of it, and many things to help it.
As much as I care for their needs and education, I don't think this will solve it, or even reduce it.
Are you getting the point, though, that this is an ideologically driven view based on their religious convictions? You can hold onto a humanitarian solution, which is good of you, but from what I've seen written by them, I'd say they would laugh at that as a solution. To them, it would totally miss the mark, which they want. It allows them to fly under the radar screen so to speak.
I really don't think we in the West are really aware of what we're facing, even from what we've known in the span of 1300 years. We want to believe something other than what Jihadist Islam is showing us, and this makes me uneasy.
It's called cultures clashing... Can you imagine what the native Americans of the Europeans?
The question is, if jihiadism is such an evil, how is it so widely supported among the Islamic people? Are they all, by the very nature of their religion, evil people? And if so, on a side note, doesn't this prove that religion in general can have very negative and disasterous effects on a populus? Sorry to go off track.
To me, it seems that until the people reject this type of approach to forcing religion it will not stop. Christianity went through a phase much more horrific than what we are seeing from Islam now. Whole societies were eradicated at the point of the sword of the Armies of God. Europe finally rejected it. It's pretty scary when people believe they are doing god's will.
Cranky:
Regarding the hypothetical position that if all of Islam favors the Jihadist position, then that makes them all evil, you state: And if so, on a side note, doesn't this prove that religion in general can have very negative and disasterous effects on a populus?
I say no. It proves that a specific religion or ineffectual leadership or not following prescribed religious teaching can have negative and disasterous effects on a populus. This is what I think riles you, UWL and the like. When you see Christians violate the rules of Charity, or try to force conversations with others who aren't interested in Christ, or act plain weird, what you are witnessing is not Christianity in action. You're seeing humanity in action, trying to live out the tenets of the faith in a flawed or even diabolical manner. Again, this is not Christianity's fault, it's the fault of human frailty. However, when you make an overgeneralization of the credibility of religion from these very real abuses, your logic fails, that's all. I don't deny these exist; we need to see them in context of real Christian teaching. (It is here where I know that if you met a Christian who dealt with you in a manner according to the teachings of Christ, you may still disagree, but you will walk away feeling that you were respected and allowed the freedom to think and feel however you do.)
It really does depend on what the tenets of the religion are, and if the tenets are followed accordingly. If a religion demands the death of infidels, or non-Islamic peoples, that religion would have a disastrous effect on non-Islamic nations, don't you think? You and I would agree there. Even if Islamic teaching condemns the death of infidels, the abuses are still happening and must be dealt with.
You may want to rethink your argument for a couple of reasons. First, I don't think all Islamic people are in favor of Jihadist Islam theology. So you're hypothesis may be irrelevant. On the same token, even if your hypothetical is accurate, there is much in Islamic teaching that condemns what these Jihadists are doing; there isn't anyone rising to the occasion to bring reform.
In addition, even if reform isn't needed, you're making a false comparison with the atrocities you allude to which were committed by the Church. Atrocities occured in the Early and Middle Ages, no doubt. However, it was not due to the tenets of Church teaching, but the abuse of them by leaders of budding states, by powerful princes, or the aristocracies of different city states. Even Church princes violated Church teaching, and the laws of Charity in how they administered the Church. Is this the case of Islam? I don't know. I don't think the comparison flies.
For instance, if you look at Charlemagne conquering the Saxons in the 780's, you'll find forced conversions, forced baptisms, etc. However, this was the act of a temporal power with the rule of Charlemagne, not teaching of Church tradition. The Church princes may not have dealt adequately with this abuse properly, but this is not the essence of Christianity. I those days, if a Pope disagreed with a king or a prince of a city state, that King would sack Rome, find the Pope, either kill him or depose him. It was not safe being a Pope.
There's another thing to consider. Instead of following the pagan manner of conquering, which included wholesale rape, slaughter and slavery, at least Charlemagne was merciful in comparison. This doesn't let him off the hook entirely, but you need to see his actions in the context of the day.
Getting back to the point, what do we do with this type of religious zeal, a threat that is mind boggling to most of us?
Good post, I would go so far as to say your application of "it's not the relgion, it's the person" can be adeqautely applied to Islam as well. The Koran directs Muslims to protect non-muslim under their care. It does not direct them to kill all infidels or force conversion. Much to the contrary they have a special requirement to treat non-muslims well or face the wrath of god. Where corrupt men find the "right" to kill infidels is the notion that it is in defense that they are permitted to kill all enemies of Islam.
So I would refer back to your previous post and say that it is man not islam that is causing this evil just as it was in the past with Christianity. Until the average Muslim stands up and says "NO MORE!" to corrupt and violent leaders, like christians did 500 or so years ago, expect it to continue.
Competition for resources and man's inhumanity toward his fellow man doom us. As a not-so-wise man once said, "Can't we all just get along?"
Well said!
Post a Comment
<< Home