Radical Islam : What is the fundamental motivation?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Vexen, Jan 8, 2015.

  1. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,275
    Oh? Which parts - explicitly - do you think are wrong? Did I make any factual errors?

    Er... what?

    Where did I sympathise with any psychos?

    Indeed.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,106
    I'll take it all back if we can agree it's all nonsense.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,106
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Photizo Ambassador/Envoy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,519
  8. CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
  9. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    There's nothing nonsensical or outrageous about that. It's all essentially factual: to the opener I add the sense of the moral superiority of Islamic culture, which appears to have always existed anyway. It is for that very sense of cultural chauvinism that non-Muslims in Islamic nations are collectively persecuted and harassed socially and by their own societies and governments.
     
  10. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,106
    The only thing nonsensical is you continuously associating me to Muslims and NOT solely the extremists.
     
  11. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Well the Daily Caller is a bit of a right-wing tab, AFAIK, but I have no doubt at all that such a change occurred. (One could probably find it on Wayback or whatever the hell it is.) Jihadists are about the chauvinism of their culture. There's nothing surprising in the slightest about a jihadist trying to demand that a woman change her religion during a jihad attack. One must consider the relative likelihoods of the situation.

    Edit: "Gaps in women's behaviour"?
     
  12. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    If you have made such a distinction, that is all well. Ensure that such a distinction in your mind is represented in your writing.
     
  13. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,106
    The bottom line is that these extremeists are violent, psychotic and perverted. I can l
    Where did I say anything offensive about a genuine Muslim?
     
  14. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    As I said before: you were painting with too broad a brush, earlier. Precision in writing seems difficult, but is refreshingly easy once you get going with it.

    Edit: That being said - how do you mean "genuine Muslim"?
     
  15. CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
    I'm tired of this. Islam's got nothing to do with what Muslims do on an everyday basis, 'cause Christianity's got nothing to do with what Christians do on an everyday basis. Or any other reassuring fable, for that matter. All religion is is people's bull excuses for doing, what they would've done anyway.

    These two Kouachi boys didn't get laid. That's what it was about. 'Cause that's what it's always about. It's what triggered Anders Breivik, Ted Kaczynski, the Columbine boys, Timothy McVeigh. That they didn't get a leg up in time.

    And here's the horrible thing. This kind of sick sh.., it works with the ladies. How many propositions haven't Dzhokhar Tsarnaev already got from lusty US teenage girls, who can only respond to him having his picture distributed across the world? Didn't Charlie Manson actually just get married in prison, being world famous for the sickest single act in recent memory? 'Cause that's the only criteria female human mating behavior responds to, when the girls are ovulating and subconsciously are looking for the trophy semen: The male has to dominate the other males. This is how girls are right when they are the most fertile. In all fragments of humanity, regardless of race, color, creed. It's not the peacemakers they want to be gestated by, 'cause they're too boooring and don't make the girl's girlfriends green with envy. Instinctively, the boys shooting random people or fly planes into buildings, they know this. In their desperation they know, that as long as they stand out and make the other males nervous by any ... means ... necessary, they do increase their chances of getting the only thing. 'Cause the girls don't see, why they're responsible for how the boys stand out. If those two boys in France survives and lives out their days in a prison, they will get their 72 virgins on Earth. 'Cause that's aparently female human mating behavior, at the age when they're the most fertile. What would that entail about our evolution as a species? Who gets their 50 percent to the future gene pool? Who wins the biological competition? Who do we all descend from?

    That is what all bloodshed and corruption and human mayhem is ultimately always about; the fight for the fertile females. That's what it always boil down to. Because it works butchering the defenseless; then that sick boy with the blood on his hands is the new Alpha. And sex is the only thing males want, from they're fifteen 'till they're dead. The most dangerous creature on this planet is a male Homo sapiens, that doesn't get laid; they will blow up the world to get the girl. What ever excuses people dig up every time doesn't have to make sense. And it's gonna get a lot worse, before it gets better, 'cause there're a lot of boys in this world, the girls don't want semen from for their egg.

    Women are just as big a part of the problem as men. Neither party can destroy the human world on their own, but together between them, human mating behavior is the source of all human entropy. And that's taboo to say, and that's why there'll be no solution. Why we will have world war three. And four. And five. All in the name of procreation in a grossly over populated human world.
     
    davewhite04 likes this.
  16. davewhite04 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,106
    It is easy, yet you fail to point out my errors... then tell me I need a writing class. Go away and continue to piss in wind.
     
  17. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Calm down.
     
  18. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    The result might not be antisocial in societies shaped by those same theocratic inputs, when judged in terms of the values that those inputs represent. It might all be entirely self-justifying. (It wouldn't be a society where I'd want to live, but that's another subject.) What I'm suggesting is that the Islamists might indeed be able to create a society that's good by Islamist lights.

    Where problems arise is when cultures collide, when we try to bring together and harmonize world-views and social visions that are formed around radically different and even contradictory presuppositions.

    By Islamist standards, adherence to a fundamental code of divine law might arguably be a precondition for all other human relationships, the eternally stable rock upon which they must be built. If God's law requires that blasphemers be killed so as to prevent erosion of that foundation, then killing them can only be a good thing.

    Unfortunately, when that Islamist vision immigrates into present day Paris, it crashes into the equally well-entrenched Western ideals of free thought and freedom of expression, and in Paris particularly, the often critical, corrosive and even anarchical connotations of the French concept of 'Liberte'. So violent collisions occur like those we saw at the Charlie Hebdo office.
     
  19. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,197
    Amazing how quickly a normally soft spoken and semi-rational religionist can be provoked simply by pointing out that their particular faith is also capable of radicalization. Instant outrage followed by denial...

    Most of the terrorist activity in the U.S. in recent years has not come from Muslims, but from radical Christianists, white supremacists and far-right militia groups.

    From Fox News to the Weekly Standard, neoconservatives have tried to paint terrorism as a largely or exclusively Islamic phenomenon. Their message of Islamophobia has been repeated many times since the George W. Bush era: Islam is inherently violent, Christianity is inherently peaceful, and there is no such thing as a Christian terrorist or a white male terrorist. But the facts don’t bear that out.
    ...
    1. Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug. 5, 2012. The virulent, neocon-fueled Islamophobia that has plagued post-9/11 America has not only posed a threat to Muslims, it has had deadly consequences for people of other faiths, including Sikhs. Sikhs are not Muslims; the traditional Sikh attire, including their turbans, is different from traditional Sunni, Shiite or Sufi attire. But to a racist, a bearded Sikh looks like a Muslim. Only four days after 9/11, Balbir Singh Sodhi, a Sikh immigrant from India who owned a gas station in Mesa, Arizona, was murdered by Frank Silva Roque, a racist who obviously mistook him for a Muslim.

    But Sodhi’s murder was not the last example of anti-Sikh violence in post-9/11 America. On Aug. 5, 2012, white supremacist Wade Michael Page used a semiautomatic weapon to murder six people during an attack on a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Page’s connection to the white supremacist movement was well-documented: he had been a member of the neo-Nazi rock bands End Empathy and Definite Hate. Attorney General Eric Holder described the attack as “an act of terrorism, an act of hatred.” It was good to see the nation’s top cop acknowledge that terrorist acts can, in fact, involve white males murdering people of color.

    2. The murder of Dr. George Tiller, May 31, 2009. Imagine that a physician had been the victim of an attempted assassination by an Islamic jihadist in 1993, and received numerous death threats from al-Qaeda after that, before being murdered by an al-Qaeda member. Neocons, Fox News and the Christian Right would have had a field day. A physician was the victim of a terrorist killing that day, but neither the terrorist nor the people who inflamed the terrorist were Muslims. Dr. George Tiller, who was shot and killed by anti-abortion terrorist Scott Roeder on May 31, 2009, was a victim of Christian Right terrorism, not al-Qaeda.

    Tiller had a long history of being targeted for violence by Christian Right terrorists. In 1986, his clinic was firebombed. Then, in 1993, Tiller was shot five times by female Christian Right terrorist Shelly Shannon (now serving time in a federal prison) but survived that attack. Given that Tiller had been the victim of an attempted murder and received countless death threats after that, Fox News would have done well to avoid fanning the flames of unrest. Instead, Bill O’Reilly repeatedly referred to him as “Tiller the baby killer." When Roeder murdered Tiller, O’Reilly condemned the attack but did so in a way that was lukewarm at best.

    Keith Olbermann called O’Reilly out and denounced him as a “facilitator for domestic terrorism” and a “blindly irresponsible man.” And Crazy for Godauthor Frank Schaffer, who was formerly a figure on the Christian Right but has since become critical of that movement, asserted that the Christian Right’s extreme anti-abortion rhetoric “helped create the climate that made this murder likely to happen.” Neocon Ann Coulter, meanwhile, viewed Tiller’s murder as a source of comic relief, telling O’Reilly, “I don't really like to think of it as a murder. It was terminating Tiller in the 203rd trimester.” The Republican/neocon double standard when it comes to terrorism is obvious. At Fox News and AM neocon talk radio, Islamic terrorism is a source of nonstop fear-mongering, while Christian Right terrorism gets a pass.

    3. Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 27, 2008. On July 27, 2008, Christian Right sympathizer Jim David Adkisson walked into the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s play and began shooting people at random. Two were killed, while seven others were injured but survived. Adkisson said he was motivated by a hatred of liberals, Democrats and gays, and he considered neocon Bernard Goldberg’s book, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America, his political manifesto. Adkisson (who pleaded guilty to two counts of first-degree murder and is now serving life in prison without parole) was vehemently anti-abortion, but apparently committing an act of terrorism during a children’s play was good ol’ Republican family values. While Adkisson’s act of terrorism was reported on Fox News, it didn't get the round-the-clock coverage an act of Islamic terrorism would have garnered.

    4. The murder of Dr. John Britton, July 29, 1994. To hear the Christian Right tell it, there is no such thing as Christian terrorism. Tell that to the victims of the Army of God, a loose network of radical Christianists with a long history of terrorist attacks on abortion providers. One Christian Right terrorist with ties to the Army of God was Paul Jennings Hill, who was executed by lethal injection on Sept. 3, 2003 for the murders of abortion doctor John Britton and his bodyguard James Barrett. Hill shot both of them in cold blood and expressed no remorse whatsoever; he insisted he was doing’s God’s work and has been exalted as a martyr by the Army of God.

    5. The Centennial Olympic Park bombing, July 27, 1996. Paul Jennings Hill is hardly the only Christian terrorist who has been praised by the Army of God; that organization has also praised Eric Rudolph, who is serving life without parole for a long list of terrorist attacks committed in the name of Christianity. Rudolph is best known for carrying out the Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympics—a blast that killed spectator Alice Hawthorne and wounded 111 others. Hawthorne wasn’t the only person Rudolph murdered: his bombing of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Alabama in 1998 caused the death of Robert Sanderson (a Birmingham police officer and part-time security guard) and caused nurse Emily Lyons to lose an eye.

    Rudolph’s other acts of Christian terrorism include bombing the Otherwise Lounge (a lesbian bar in Atlanta) in 1997 and an abortion clinic in an Atlanta suburb in 1997. Rudolph was no lone wolf: he was part of a terrorist movement that encouraged his violence. And the Army of God continues to exalt Rudolph as a brave Christian who is doing God’s work.
    .
    .
    .

    And so forth and so on. "Nonsense!" the Christians exclaim. "That's entirely different. No sane person could hold Christianity responsible, these people are obviously disturbed nut cases."

    Move along, nothing to see here...
     
  20. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,247
    I need to ask..

    Is there a reason why you are deliberately going all Elliot Rodger?
     
  21. CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
    That I think is unfair. I don't "hate women (no more than I hate men, I'd say), have contempt for racial minorities and interracial couples" (Wiki, had to look him up). At the least hardly deliberate. But I've come to some Dawkinsian conclusions, that currently leaves me with no hope for my own species. France 24 currently confirms it all for me.

    Please tell me, why I'm wrong.
     
  22. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,247
    Your whole 'they wouldn't have done it if only they had had sex' routine.
     
  23. CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
    That's basically my posit. That radical Islam is fueled by the same as radical anything, in the back of the reptilian brain: Sex. A guy like Freud might've agreed.
     

Share This Page