UN: Civilian deaths in Afghan war hit record high

[Resigned]

Look at the political structure of every now-Western country in the world. Getting good institutions is very difficult. Muslim countries are not unique in this regard. It's really difficult to take power from corrupt and misguided leaders, and when you do, the people that usually take their place are just as corrupt and misguided. It's easy to place blame on the citizens of these countries (not just the Islamic ones), it's a lot more difficult to find solutions.

As far as blame goes, I think it is well suited. By fostering resentment, you are doing your part to make matters worse. You can't possibly think you are doing something productive, can you?

Your comment self-refutes. On the one hand you bemoan the difficulty in taking power from dictators yet you refuse to address that fact of islamist populations voting into power the very “corrupt and misguided leaders” you claim are to be blamed on others.

For an instructive lesson:

There was an interesting article posted at the American Thinker not too long ago which was focused on Yusuf al-Qaradawi, AKA Yusuf “kill the kafir” al-Qaradawi. As you may know, he is considered to be the "spiritual" head of the Brotherhood. He was scheduled to lead a Friday prayer sermon to be held in Tahrir Square, Egypt.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/..._khomeini.html

Qaradawi, though some in the West view him as a moderate, supports the straight Islamist line: anti-American, anti-Western, wipe Israel off the map, foment Jihad, stone homosexuals, in short the works.

One of Qaradawi's initiatives has been urging Muslims to settle in the West, of which he said, "that powerful West, which has come to rule the world, should not be left to the influence of the Jews alone." He contends that the three major threats Muslims face are Zionism, internal integration, and globalization. To survive, he argues, Muslims must fight the Zionists, Crusaders, idolaters, and Communists.

What is his view of both the Mubarak regime and the young, Facebook-flourishing liberals who made the revolution? As he said in 2004: "Some Arab and Muslim secularists are following the U.S. government by advocating the kind of reform that will disarm the nation from the elements of strength that are holding our people together."

Some of the news articles were describing the return of "al" to Egypt as an alarming prelude to the rise of "political Islam". I think that's a misnomer as political islam is not separate from "islam". I think it's just important to understand the mainstream (for islam, that is), views that "al" spews to whomever will listen. And it seems he is finding a willing audience in legions of vacant minded islamautons.


Wholly in keeping with Islamist doctriine, "al" made clear in a 2003 fatwa the status of apostates:

http://www.investigativeproject.org/profile/167

Very much connected to his views on the Caliphate is al-Qaradawi's harsh treatment of those who apostatize from Islam. This "apostate," said al-Qaradawi in a June 2002 fatwa, "is no more than a traitor to his religion and his people and thus deserves killing." [16] While al-Qaradawi does admit that Muslim jurists "differ regarding the punishment [of apostates]," it is readily apparent that he includes himself among "[t]he majority of them [that] go for killing; meaning that an apostate is to be sentenced to death."[17]

And then we have this:

http://www.memri.org/report/en/print1168.htm

Many of Al-Qaradhawi's sermons contain religious supplications directed against the U.K. and the U.S. For example, in a sermon on March 7, 2003 from the Umar Bin-al-Khattab mosque in Doha: "O God, destroy the Zionist, the American, and the British aggressors. O God, shake the ground under them and protect us from them." [5]

The following report details Al-Qaradhawi's teachings on Jihad and martyrdom, September 11 and the war in Afghanistan and Iraq, Judaism and Jews, and wife beating. It also includes Sheikh Al-Qaradhawi's rulings that "Islam will return to Europe as a conqueror." [6]


Al-Qaradhawi's Teachings on Jihad and Martyrdom

Following Al-Qaradhawi's arrival in England on July 7, 2004, BBC2 TV aired an interview in which he said that Islam justifies suicide bombings in Iraq against the U.S. military and in Israel against women and children. [7] In a Friday sermon following the Al-Qa'ida attack in Bali on October 18, 2002, he explained, "Islam does agree to such acts." [8]

So yes, please continue to be the perfect victim of your own hate and ineptitude.

[Polog]

Your comment self-refutes. On the one hand you bemoan the difficulty in taking power from dictators yet you refuse to address that fact of islamist populations voting into power the very “corrupt and misguided leaders” you claim are to be blamed on others.

Ummm... Russia...

[Resigned]

Ummm... Russia...

Ummm.... You need excuses?

[Polog]

No. I'm just saying it is nothing unique to the Muslim world.

When people that are oppressed randomly get the opportunity to vote they usually throw it away.

[alan]

No. I'm just saying it is nothing unique to the Muslim world.

When people that are oppressed randomly get the opportunity to vote they usually throw it away.

I s this a fact?

[Resigned]

No. I'm just saying it is nothing unique to the Muslim world.

When people that are oppressed randomly get the opportunity to vote they usually throw it away.

It's a shame that facts tend to cripple your argiument.

EVERYBODY was a “third world country” just a couple of centuries ago. Why did SOME of the world advance, while much of the REST of the world did not?

Europe struggled through the Dark Ages and its eventual enlightenment, yet they didn’t whine about it and blame muslims for their problems. They took control of their destinies and left the muslim nations to wallow in their self created endowments of self pity and failure.

And what about all the “Eastern” countries that don’t need your feeble excuses? What about South Korea, Japan, Singapore, India… other counties with colonial pasts which have gotten past or largely gotten past their earlier histories and joined the ranks of the developing / developed world? India for example was oppressed by peaceful inner strugglers in it's past but has somehow managed to thrive. Even the parts of Indonesia which have not (yet) been ravaged by the peaceful inner struggle don’t wring their hands in the failure complex like you do.

As long as you refuse to take responsibility for your problems, you will remain the impotent little victim you choose to be.

[alan]

Its just too simplistic to pin it on muslim countries.Iam sure taking into account all the factors,historical,economic etc,a more reasonable rationale for the present situation would be clear.
One example of none muslim strife that jumps out has been in Sri Lanka,before that in yugoslavia Iam sure many more.

[Resigned]

Its just too simplistic to pin it on muslim countries.Iam sure taking into account all the factors,historical,economic etc,a more reasonable rationale for the present situation would be clear.
One example of none muslim strife that jumps out has been in Sri Lanka,before that in yugoslavia Iam sure many more.

It’s not just strife that is at issue, it’s the willingness of muslims to vote in the very oppressors who define totalitarianism. The Muslim Brotherhood has no history of accommodation for the hated kuffar. I think its wishful thinking to suggest that they will be promoting of equal rights, women’s rights or tolerance for competing religions.

As we see throughout the islamist Middle East, revulsion for competing religions is enshrined in their constitutions. I’d like to see the Muslim Brotherhood change these policies but on the contrary, my expectation is that they will only strengthen the willingness of “peaceful muslims” to completely cleanse the Middle East of all competing religions.

http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2006/71420.htm

The constitution provides for freedom of belief and the practice of religious rites, although the Government places restrictions on these rights in practice. Islam is the official state religion and Shari'a (Islamic law) is the primary source of legislation; religious practices that conflict with the Government's interpretation of Shari'a are prohibited.

http://www.persecution.org/2011/01/2...-construction/

"Presently church building in Egypt is still partly governed by the Hamayouni Decree of 1856, and the 1934 el-EzabI Decree that stipulated 10 conditions that must be met prior to issuance of a presidential decree permitting the construction of a church. The conditions include the requirement that the distance between a church and a mosque be not less than 100 meters, the approval of the neighboring Muslim community, the number of Christians in the area and whether or not the proposed church is near the Nile, public utilities or railways. Copts view these regulations as confirmation of their Dhimmi or second-class citizenship status".

[Ron]

Resigned,

EVERYBODY was a “third world country” just a couple of centuries ago. Why did SOME of the world advance, while much of the REST of the world did not?

That's not historically accurate. Different times in different places led to a variety of advancements around the world. If you are gauging it based on present perception then it would render your statement contradictory and moot. Besides, "advancement" is relative as no situation is like the other. Moreover, you make far reaching generalizations and asserting a monolithic nature to people and places that really don't have the uniformity you claim. While I don't deny that Muslims do their part in playing the victim card to some degree, I do not discount history and the facts that lend some of the grievances credence.

[Resigned]

Resigned,

That's not historically accurate. Different times in different places led to a variety of advancements around the world. If you are gauging it based on present perception then it would render your statement contradictory and moot. Besides, "advancement" is relative as no situation is like the other. Moreover, you make far reaching generalizations and asserting a monolithic nature to people and places that really don't have the uniformity you claim. While I don't deny that Muslims do their part in playing the victim card to some degree, I do not discount history and the facts that lend some of the grievances credence.

I can understand your defending an agenda but my comments are with respect to the maintenance of theocratic / dictatorial totalitarianism and the inability to adopt a human-focused worldview absent the above. When people in the KSA, for example, are convicted for the crime of sorcery and beheaded in publc, it’s a statement that some have simply not been able to drag themselves out of their 7th century worlds of fear and superstition.

There is a brightness that is falling across the land called literacy and education and knowledge, and exploration and science, each demonstrable, each progressing the human condition, each giving us hope for a better day tomorrow. The hatreds that muslims espouse for infidels and knowledge, equality and cooperation will always be their worst enemy.

[alan]

I can understand your defending an agenda but my comments are with respect to the maintenance of theocratic / dictatorial totalitarianism and the inability to adopt a human-focused worldview absent the above. When people in the KSA, for example, are convicted for the crime of sorcery and beheaded in publc, it’s a statement that some have simply not been able to drag themselves out of their 7th century worlds of fear and superstition.

There is a brightness that is falling across the land called literacy and education and knowledge, and exploration and science, each demonstrable, each progressing the human condition, each giving us hope for a better day tomorrow. The hatreds that muslims espouse for infidels and knowledge, equality and cooperation will always be their worst enemy.

Honestly,I dont hate infidels,my best friends are infidels,I working science based way and love science I care and co=operate with all my workcolleagues and clients.Please feel free to ignore this if it doesnt fit into your conceptions.

[Ron]

Resigned,

I can understand your defending an agenda but my comments are with respect to the maintenance of theocratic / dictatorial totalitarianism and the inability to adopt a human-focused worldview absent the above. When people in the KSA, for example, are convicted for the crime of sorcery and beheaded in publc, it’s a statement that some have simply not been able to drag themselves out of their 7th century worlds of fear and superstition.

I don't see why you need to be hostile. You stated something I simply said that those were not the facts. There's no agenda. Your example of the KSA has no bearing on the facts.

There is a brightness that is falling across the land called literacy and education and knowledge, and exploration and science, each demonstrable, each progressing the human condition, each giving us hope for a better day tomorrow. The hatreds that muslims espouse for infidels and knowledge, equality and cooperation will always be their worst enemy.

Again, your post is obviously biased...education, knowledge, exploration, and science were the domain of the Muslim world at some point. They lost it and no one would blame you for pointing that out but clearly you harbor prejudice because your posts aren't supported with facts. Are there Muslims as you describe them, sure there are some but there are some of those in every community on earth. You are not bringing to light anything new it just seems you have this passionate hatred that impels your writing.

[Resigned]

Resigned,

I don't see why you need to be hostile. You stated something I simply said that those were not the facts. There's no agenda. Your example of the KSA has no bearing on the facts.

I think you’re reading hostility when there was none. Could it be hyper-sensitivity to criticism of islam?

Again, your post is obviously biased...education, knowledge, exploration, and science were the domain of the Muslim world at some point. They lost it and no one would blame you for pointing that out but clearly you harbor prejudice because your posts aren't supported with facts. Are there Muslims as you describe them, sure there are some but there are some of those in every community on earth. You are not bringing to light anything new it just seems you have this passionate hatred that impels your writing.

Here again, I think the bias on your part. Much of this thread deals with the actions of muslims that confounds their claims to being “oppressed” by external factors. When people elect the very oppressors they eventually claim are oppressing them, one has to wonder about the motives for such behavior.

I’ve offered facts regarding worldviews of some of those who represent the Muslim Brotherhood so your claim itself is factless. To ignore facts is to harbor bias and prejudice. It seems the passionate hatreds are yours as you seek to deride anyone who challenges your opinions and the realities of your politico-religious ideology.

[Ron]

Resigned,

I think you’re reading hostility when there was none. Could it be hyper-sensitivity to criticism of islam?

Read my post, I'm referring to your response to my writing not any criticism of Islam. You said I had an agenda...you words are pretty hostile and this isn't any different.

Here again, I think the bias on your part. Much of this thread deals with the actions of muslims that confounds their claims to being “oppressed” by external factors. When people elect the very oppressors they eventually claim are oppressing them, one has to wonder about the motives for such behavior.

Again, you say "action of Muslims" as if two billion people behave in the same way. Your take on history is far off the mark. Muslims didn't vote or elect their oppressors; first, because where is this monolithic nation? second, because the leaders that took power (that I assume you are referring to) are/were non-religious despots who had the support of many in the international community (if the tyrants hated religion then how is that the "same oppressors?", third, how can assertion be made about events that have not yet happened? As for your wonderment at people's motives, typically it stems from injustice and oppression. They decided they've had enough and want something different. Whether the result is good or bad remains to be seen but clearly your assertions aren't based on historical, political, or religious facts.

I’ve offered facts regarding worldviews of some of those who represent the Muslim Brotherhood so your claim itself is factless. To ignore facts is to harbor bias and prejudice. It seems the passionate hatreds are yours as you seek to deride anyone who challenges your opinions and the realities of your politico-religious ideology.

I don't think "factless" is a word (a little humor)...You really haven't offered any facts; I see you are very opinionated but I don't see any facts. Not knowing the difference between a group like the Muslim Brotherhood the ruling parties - not to mention painting the Muslims all over the world with Egypt's situation - is a clear indication that you are not well versed in Middle East politics or religious studies.

Lastly, I have shown you respect in my posts and you seem to want to make a mirror image of your prejudiced conceptions. If what you say were true it would be plainly seen...the words are right there in black and white. However, if you want to continue your vitriol then I do not wish to have a conversation with a person who seems really mad and armed with misrepresentations of a wide variety of subjects.

[Resigned]

Resigned,

Read my post, I'm referring to your response to my writing not any criticism of Islam. You said I had an agenda...you words are pretty hostile and this isn't any different.

I did read your post. My reaction to your post is that I thought you were pressing an agenda. I don’t believe that is a particularly hostile comment.

Again, you say "action of Muslims" as if two billion people behave in the same way. Your take on history is far off the mark. Muslims didn't vote or elect their oppressors; first, because where is this monolithic nation? second, because the leaders that took power (that I assume you are referring to) are/were non-religious despots who had the support of many in the international community (if the tyrants hated religion then how is that the "same oppressors?", third, how can assertion be made about events that have not yet happened? As for your wonderment at people's motives, typically it stems from injustice and oppression. They decided they've had enough and want something different. Whether the result is good or bad remains to be seen but clearly your assertions aren't based on historical, political, or religious facts.

Read my post. It is the “actions of muslims” which is putting the Muslim Brotherhood into power in Egypt. It is the “actions of Muslims” which brought Hamas into power into Gaza. It is the “actions of muslims” that is bringing islamist groups into power across the islamist Middle East.

I don't think "factless" is a word (a little humor)...You really haven't offered any facts; I see you are very opinionated but I don't see any facts. Not knowing the difference between a group like the Muslim Brotherhood the ruling parties - not to mention painting the Muslims all over the world with Egypt's situation - is a clear indication that you are not well versed in Middle East politics or religious studies.

Lastly, I have shown you respect in my posts and you seem to want to make a mirror image of your prejudiced conceptions. If what you say were true it would be plainly seen...the words are right there in black and white. However, if you want to continue your vitriol then I do not wish to have a conversation with a person who seems really mad and armed with misrepresentations of a wide variety of subjects.

The fact of muslims bringing into power islamist groups coincident with the “Arab Spring” is really not disputed. Not being able to accept responsibility for those actions seems to be something of a pathology in that part part of the world. If the Muslim Brotherhood and other islamist groups have an interest in promoting true democratc values, that should be a simple matter to defend and it should be right there in black and white.

If you choose to hurl insults then I would suggest you not continue to post.