Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

0

Whatsthepoint wrote

OK well first of all thank you for typing up so much about the Wahhabi islamofascist organisation that is Isis.

I will be amazed if anyone here can tell me something about Isis I don't already know.

But I fear the details of Isis, it's funding and support structure, ideological basis, logistics, n number, interactions with the global front for the jihad against the Jew's and crusaders (to give al Qaeda / as nusra it's proper name) and the haqqani network are going a little off topic.

On the topic at hand, you mention

The state force monopoly is there to make people use dialogue.”

this is not true. this monopoly is designed to keep us in line and prevent us from having a way to fight them off. the argument that this is to keep us peaceful and talking rather than barbaric and fighting is propaganda.

Thing is, in order to 'keep us in line and prevent us from having a way to fight them off' a force monopoly is not required. Only a force majore.

A force monopoly, does not even need to be held by the organization that has the greatest force.

Force monopoly means literally that. The state is the only one who can legally sanction the use of force.

If there is not a force monopoly, then it's OK for people, or organisations, to use force as they feel appropriate.

This could lead to some very dangerous situations, socially, practically and politically

1

[deleted] wrote

1

Whatsthepoint wrote

Actually, it is very clear that it is YOU who has a bigoted view of Muslims.

You seek to judge and understand another culture and judge it by your own cultural standards. I believe thats called cultural imperialism.

[ISIS] it's made up of delusional people, [...], who require a state force to tell them what to do

The same could be said about the waffen SS, are you going to tell me that they wern't facists too now?

This whole attempt to remove Islam from ISIS, to say that they are simple mercenaries is the height of ignorance. Yes, the fighters were paid (and recieved their cut of the 'spoils', including women as per the Haddith). But the going rate for a mercenary is $1-3000 per day. ISIS "mercenaries" earned less than that a month.

Yes I too have gay muslim friends (avid Quranists who reject the Haddith in it's entirety), but I also know people who grew up in places like Somalia (that country in Africa that has no government) and other Muslim countries. I know many Muslims, and many of them are my friends.

But for YOU to judge, that the version of Islam that fits in nicely with your western liberal values are the "right" Muslims who are correctly interperting the Quran (literal word of god) and the version of Islam that goes against your western values is the "wrong" kind of islam, followed only by the delusional, is as much ignorant as it is offensive.

I have read the quran (not the Haddith, can't be bothered, too many of em, and what I have read is really cunty), have you?

I have had long conversations, often at times getting metaphysical about Islam, with various Muslims of varying degrees of piety and who have a variety of different views with regards to society and Islam.

From gay quranists to Sharia will create a utopia reverts, and many in between.

The primary funding ISIS relied on was the sale of it's oil on the black market, often through Turkey. Yes of Course Saudi Arabia (home of Wahhabism) had a role to play, it is their belief structure ISIS was promoting, after all... "the only thing worse than a Jew is a shia, but not by much" (direct quote I've heard more than once, said with a smile as a 'joke', often with the other person finishing the sentence)

And I'm sure from your position of knowledge, you know all about the conflicts, history, theological differences and political animosity between the Sunni and Shia muslims right?

But no...Muslims are being 'oppressed' so they must be our allies, and there for their goals, values and ideals must align with ours right?

Islam, is a multi-faceted complex religion, it has it's dark parts and issues, and while there is a desire for reform (to a point) there is also a deep cultural resistance to 'religious innovation', that is unlikely to be overcome within Muslim countries anytime soon.

You can't and shouldn't judge someone based on their religion (Islam or otherwise), but to say that the fighters and leaders of ISIS, along with many of the people who are doing fucked up shit like stoning adulterers are not Muslim, or don't believe they are being 'good' Muslims. Is a bit like saying those abortion clinic or westboro protesters don't believe in Jesus, or aren't christian.

In truth you know very little about what you claim to be in a position to judge.

Feel free to prove me wrong, and answer this simple question (that anyone with a basic understanding of Islam can answer for you)

If it says it's ok to drink and gamble in the quran, and even instructs how much its ok to drink and gamble, why do Muslims consider it haram to drink and gamble?

2

[deleted] wrote

1

Whatsthepoint wrote

You're getting boring, especially as you keep misreading, or are unable to retain what I say when you post.

Firstly:

you quote on these types of forums using the pointy bracket ">"

2: I have not read the hadith, and did not say I read the hadith. I pretty much said the opposite.

  1. Quranists are a thing (they even have a website) and by the sounds of it you are. One.

Worth noting that according to all streams of Islam (except the questions) you are not a Muslim if you do not accept the hadith. If you are already a Muslim, and you reject the hadith, this is even classed by some as apostasy.

I was amazed, surprised and still do not fully understand why the big hate for Quranists, but loads get killed every year because of it, even in the west.

Keep that one to yourself unless amongst friends.

3: I didn't say I know the correct interpretation of the Quran. It is generally one of the central tenants of the Muslim faith that it is the literal word of god.

  1. You clearly have no idea what an islamofascist is. It means literally the opposite of what you think. It is the pushing, promoting, preaching, of the Islamic faith and Sharia law using fascist methodology. Think Hitler with a beard.

  2. There were many answers to my final question actually. Pity you didn't answer.

  3. I fucking dare you to tell a wahabbi he is not Muslim.

2

[deleted] wrote

-1

Whatsthepoint wrote

lol, race card - pathetic

There was me thinking that people on this site would.

a. have a basic understanding of what fascism is

b. Be generally against fascism.

You clearly don't.

I would never dream of calling a zionist a jewish fascist, because zionists are not fascists. They are many many things, but they are not fascists.

You can go to Israel, you can say to whomever you like, that Zionism is the height of bullshit, even that the religion of Judaism is nonsense from a by gone age, and thats fine. Hell as I discovered when I went there, you will probably be suprised how many Israeli's actually agree with you #freepalestine

If you want to talk about christian-fascists, you have to go back to either the crusades, or the inquisition, or the day's of burning heretics. In those days if you went against the teachings of the church, you were punished. These days, even the most extreme, mouthbreathing westboro baptist fuckwits aren't fascists. They won't punish you for not being christian.

There are many places in the world where you cannot be critical in anyway of Islam, or of the interpretation of islam that exists locally. There are many in the middle east and more in the west who are concerned about islamofascism, who are muslims. If you genuinely believe that all doctrines are open to fascism but somehow Islam is special and isn't, then you clearly have your head in the sand.

Be really wonderful to hear your opinion about the people sitting in jail for sending a tweet that was deemed un-islamic in KSA.

Or what you would say to the shopkeeper who got stabbed to death, because his quran only interpretation of islam, went against the official hadith included doctrine