Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Moderate Muslims

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Moderate Muslims

    I have contended for quite some time there is no such thing as Moderate Islam. All Muslims who actually believe in their "Good Book" at least secretly support this jihad. Here is an informed opinion on the topic:

    A top Shariah lawyers stunning response to the question: Is there such a thing as moderate Islam?
    Who are moderate Muslims in reality according to Akbari?
    Moderate Muslims actually are kind of like CAIR [Council on American-Islamic Relations] people people who are Muslim Brotherhood typesand these people fight for Islam, love it, but they give a peaceful feature, and good-looking [nature] to Islam, todeceive AmericansModerate Muslims, as we might know as Muslim Brotherhood, they are the backbone of jihad.
    http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2015/02...oderate-islam/

  • #2
    Bullshit

    Its propably true that islamistic thoughts were very popular in some parts of the islamic world as some surveys and opinion polls indicate, but its completely false and more a racial slur to assume that every Mulim is a fanatic.
    The european muslims from the Balkans for exmple are very moderat and more or less indistinguishable from other europeans. Most Parts of Turkey belong also to the West and Tunesia is on the brink to become the second funktioning democracy in the Region after Israel. And in the muslimic regions of southeast asia one can make similar observations.

    Its expecially foolish and insulting to the Kurds, who bravely fight in the frontlines against ISIS.

    ?


    • #3
      I'll get to this more later but I would just like to say that the anti-Islamic position is not racist as Islam is not a race. At the most it could be called bigotry.

      ?


      • #4
        Originally posted by Eisbrecher View Post
        Bullshit

        Its propably true that islamistic thoughts were very popular in some parts of the islamic world as some surveys and opinion polls indicate, but its completely false and more a racial slur to assume that every Mulim is a fanatic.
        The european muslims from the Balkans for exmple are very moderat and more or less indistinguishable from other europeans. Most Parts of Turkey belong also to the West and Tunesia is on the brink to become the second funktioning democracy in the Region after Israel. And in the muslimic regions of southeast asia one can make similar observations.

        Its expecially foolish and insulting to the Kurds, who bravely fight in the frontlines against ISIS.
        This will help you in understanding muslims. From a real deal muslim, raised in the middle east who doesn't mind spilling the beans on his kin. I think all liberals should be strapped to a chair, and those clip placed on the eyes to keep them wide open, like in Clockwork Orange, and be forced to listen to the facts from a muslim, who is islamaphobic-phobic, as he likes to say.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-L626DnAuM

        Not that it would totally contradict your beliefs about islam, but it would probably contradict many of them. Like how many of the so called moderates will, in the privacy of their homes, holler out "attaboys" for radical attacks upon infidels and blasphemers of Mohammed.

        What is interesting is that he said the Sunni sect sees the Shia sect as apostates, and you should kill them. And that within each group or sect, there are liberals and conservatives. With the conservatives being the worst of the lot. Those muslims you speak of must be liberals, but a conservative moderate is bad news. So one needs to know whether a moderate muslim is liberal or conservative, for it does indeed make a difference.

        ?


        • #5
          The Atlantic had a great article over the weekend about ISIS that I think provides an important insight into the internal Islamic debate on these matters.

          What ISIS Really Wants

          In short, it provides a thoughtful and much needed rebuttal to the narrative that ISIS is not Islamic. On the contrary, ISIS is extremely Islamic, it is full of Koranic Literalists.

          The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.

          Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, the Prophetic methodology, which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isnt actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it. Well need to get acquainted with the Islamic States intellectual genealogy if we are to react in a way that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its own excessive zeal.
          ....
          Every academic I asked about the Islamic States ideology sent me to Haykel. Of partial Lebanese descent, Haykel grew up in Lebanon and the United States, and when he talks through his Mephistophelian goatee, there is a hint of an unplaceable foreign accent.

          According to Haykel, the ranks of the Islamic State are deeply infused with religious vigor. Koranic quotations are ubiquitous. Even the foot soldiers spout this stuff constantly, Haykel said. They mug for their cameras and repeat their basic doctrines in formulaic fashion, and they do it all the time. He regards the claim that the Islamic State has distorted the texts of Islam as preposterous, sustainable only through willful ignorance. People want to absolve Islam, he said. Its this Islam is a religion of peace mantra. As if there is such a thing as Islam! Its what Muslims do, and how they interpret their texts. Those texts are shared by all Sunni Muslims, not just the Islamic State. And these guys have just as much legitimacy as anyone else.

          All Muslims acknowledge that Muhammads earliest conquests were not tidy affairs, and that the laws of war passed down in the Koran and in the narrations of the Prophets rule were calibrated to fit a turbulent and violent time. In Haykels estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts. Slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings are not something that freakish [jihadists] are cherry-picking from the medieval tradition, Haykel said. Islamic State fighters are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day.

          The Koran specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Korans ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. The Prophet, whom all Muslims consider exemplary, imposed these rules and owned slaves.

          Leaders of the Islamic State have taken emulation of Muhammad as strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for hundreds of years. Whats striking about them is not just the literalism, but also the seriousness with which they read these texts, Haykel said. There is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims dont normally have.
          Fortunately, there is more than one way to look at these things...

          It would be facile, even exculpatory, to call the problem of the Islamic State a problem with Islam. The religion allows many interpretations, and Islamic State supporters are morally on the hook for the one they choose. And yet simply denouncing the Islamic State as un-Islamic can be counterproductive, especially if those who hear the message have read the holy texts and seen the endorsement of many of the caliphates practices written plainly within them.

          Muslims can say that slavery is not legitimate now, and that crucifixion is wrong at this historical juncture. Many say precisely this. But they cannot condemn slavery or crucifixion outright without contradicting the Koran and the example of the Prophet. The only principled ground that the Islamic States opponents could take is to say that certain core texts and traditional teachings of Islam are no longer valid, Bernard Haykel says. That really would be an act of apostasy.
          ...
          Non-muslims cannot tell Muslims how to practice their religion properly. But Muslims have long since begun this debate within their own ranks. You have to have standards, Anjem Choudary told me. Somebody could claim to be a Muslim, but if he believes in homosexuality or drinking alcohol, then he is not a Muslim. There is no such thing as a nonpracticing vegetarian.

          There is, however, another strand of Islam that offers a hard-line alternative to the Islamic Statejust as uncompromising, but with opposite conclusions. This strand has proved appealing to many Muslims cursed or blessed with a psychological longing to see every jot and tittle of the holy texts implemented as they were in the earliest days of Islam. Islamic State supporters know how to react to Muslims who ignore parts of the Koran: with takfir and ridicule. But they also know that some other Muslims read the Koran as assiduously as they do, and pose a real ideological threat.

          Baghdadi is Salafi. The term Salafi has been villainized, in part because authentic villains have ridden into battle waving the Salafi banner. But most Salafis are not jihadists, and most adhere to sects that reject the Islamic State. They are, as Haykel notes, committed to expanding Dar al-Islam, the land of Islam, even, perhaps, with the implementation of monstrous practices such as slavery and amputationbut at some future point. Their first priority is personal purification and religious observance, and they believe anything that thwarts those goalssuch as causing war or unrest that would disrupt lives and prayer and scholarshipis forbidden.
          ...
          Instead, Pociuslike a majority of Salafisbelieves that Muslims should remove themselves from politics. These quietist Salafis, as they are known, agree with the Islamic State that Gods law is the only law, and they eschew practices like voting and the creation of political parties. But they interpret the Korans hatred of discord and chaos as requiring them to fall into line with just about any leader, including some manifestly sinful ones. The Prophet said: as long as the ruler does not enter into clear kufr [disbelief], give him general obedience, Pocius told me, and the classic books of creed all warn against causing social upheaval. Quietist Salafis are strictly forbidden from dividing Muslims from one anotherfor example, by mass excommunication. Living without bayaa, Pocius said, does indeed make one ignorant, or benighted. But bayaa need not mean direct allegiance to a caliph, and certainly not to Abu Bakr al‑Baghdadi. It can mean, more broadly, allegiance to a religious social contract and commitment to a society of Muslims, whether ruled by a caliph or not.

          Quietist Salafis believe that Muslims should direct their energies toward perfecting their personal life, including prayer, ritual, and hygiene. Much in the same way ultra-Orthodox Jews debate whether its kosher to tear off squares of toilet paper on the Sabbath (does that count as rending cloth?), they spend an inordinate amount of time ensuring that their trousers are not too long, that their beards are trimmed in some areas and shaggy in others. Through this fastidious observance, they believe, God will favor them with strength and numbers, and perhaps a caliphate will arise. At that moment, Muslims will take vengeance and, yes, achieve glorious victory at Dabiq. But Pocius cites a slew of modern Salafi theologians who argue that a caliphate cannot come into being in a righteous way except through the unmistakable will of God.

          The Islamic State, of course, would agree, and say that God has anointed Baghdadi. Pociuss retort amounts to a call to humility. He cites Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Prophets companions, who sat down with dissenters and asked them how they had the gall, as a minority, to tell the majority that it was wrong. Dissent itself, to the point of bloodshed or splitting the umma, was forbidden. Even the manner of the establishment of Baghdadis caliphate runs contrary to expectation, he said. The khilafa is something that Allah is going to establish, he told me, and it will involve a consensus of scholars from Mecca and Medina. That is not what happened. ISIS came out of nowhere.

          The Islamic State loathes this talk, and its fanboys tweet derisively about quietist Salafis. They mock them as Salafis of menstruation, for their obscure judgments about when women are and arent clean, and other low-priority aspects of life. What we need now is fatwa about how its haram [forbidden] to ride a bike on Jupiter, one tweeted drily. Thats what scholars should focus on. More pressing than state of Ummah. Anjem Choudary, for his part, says that no sin merits more vigorous opposition than the usurpation of Gods law, and that extremism in defense of monotheism is no vice.

          Pocius doesnt court any kind of official support from the United States, as a counterweight to jihadism. Indeed, official support would tend to discredit him, and in any case he is bitter toward America for treating him, in his words, as less than a citizen. (He alleges that the government paid spies to infiltrate his mosque and harassed his mother at work with questions about his being a potential terrorist.)

          Still, his quietist Salafism offers an Islamic antidote to Baghdadi-style jihadism. The people who arrive at the faith spoiling for a fight cannot all be stopped from jihadism, but those whose main motivation is to find an ultraconservative, uncompromising version of Islam have an alternative here. It is not moderate Islam; most Muslims would consider it extreme. It is, however, a form of Islam that the literal-minded would not instantly find hypocritical, or blasphemously purged of its inconveniences. Hypocrisy is not a sin that ideologically minded young men tolerate well.

          Western officials would probably do best to refrain from weighing in on matters of Islamic theological debate altogether. Barack Obama himself drifted into takfiri waters when he claimed that the Islamic State was not Islamicthe irony being that he, as the non-Muslim son of a Muslim, may himself be classified as an apostate, and yet is now practicing takfir against Muslims. Non-Muslims practicing takfir elicits chuckles from jihadists (Like a pig covered in feces giving hygiene advice to others, one tweeted).
          I would encourage reading it in full, despite these generous excerpts. There is critical common ground here, not just with other faiths, but with pluralistic cultures. All faiths involve some sort of cataclysmic end game in which the faithful achieve a paradisaical state and the non-believers meet an unpleasant demise. But we can coexist when we acknowledge that it is God that is ultimately responsible for bringing it to pass, not man. In the mean time, salvation is a personal matter, and not the business of civil authorities, or even your neighbor. There will always be a battle of ideas, and the best way to encourage people down a religious path is live a fruitful live on that path worth emulating. I for one would welcome the day that a pair of pleasant young men or women knocked on my door to talk about Islam, instead of flying planes into our buildings.

          ?


          • #6
            One of the main problems we have in this debate is the definition of "moderate Muslim". What is considered a moderate Muslim in the context of all Muslims in the world is not anything what we would remotely consider moderate in most Western countries. Most of the Muslims what would fall closer to the realm of what we would consider moderate are those Muslims who moved to Western countries or where born there.

            When you have Muslim countries in the middle east that still do things like sentence people to prison and receive 1,000 lashes for being an internet blogger critical of Islam you're talking about extremism. When you have the death penalty on the books for those who are apostates from Islam you're talking about extremism. These are established governments here, not some small minority of people living in some kind of fringe underground.

            ?


            • #7
              Originally posted by Eisbrecher View Post
              Bullshit

              Its propably true that islamistic thoughts were very popular in some parts of the islamic world as some surveys and opinion polls indicate, but its completely false and more a racial slur to assume that every Mulim is a fanatic.
              The european muslims from the Balkans for exmple are very moderat and more or less indistinguishable from other europeans. Most Parts of Turkey belong also to the West and Tunesia is on the brink to become the second funktioning democracy in the Region after Israel. And in the muslimic regions of southeast asia one can make similar observations.

              Its expecially foolish and insulting to the Kurds, who bravely fight in the frontlines against ISIS.

              As the OP states, there are certain "Muslims" who are just citizens from the MidEast and who are really just atheists or like our Sunday Morning Christians. Those who are true Muslims who actually believe in the Koran, have to be considered violent because Islam is violent.

              ?


              • #8
                Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post


                As the OP states, there are certain "Muslims" who are just citizens from the MidEast and who are really just atheists or like our Sunday Morning Christians. Those who are true Muslims who actually believe in the Koran, have to be considered violent because Islam is violent.
                Interesting theory. I go back and forth about the religion, based on continuous information that I'm hearing, but have come to believe that I myself do not know enough about i,t as I have not been to the middle east and experienced many relationships with Muslims, and for extended periods of time. Nor have I taken the time to actually read the Koran.

                But I will offer, a comment I heard from an Atheist Muslim, on a radio talk show. She said that it is the moderate Muslim that has perverted the religion. And it is the radical Muslims that are the true followers. Just another opinion of a typical person, but a theory of a Muslim that I found interesting.

                ?


                • #9
                  Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post


                  As the OP states, there are certain "Muslims" who are just citizens from the MidEast and who are really just atheists or like our Sunday Morning Christians. Those who are true Muslims who actually believe in the Koran, have to be considered violent because Islam is violent.
                  What about the overwhelming majority of Muslims who live in the US and UK who aren't violent are they somehow now not Muslims?

                  ?


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post

                    What about the overwhelming majority of Muslims who live in the US and UK who aren't violent are they somehow now not Muslims?

                    Obviously, some of them are. Some are not staunch adherents to their faith, some are not really Muslims at all, it's just a social gathering for them. The same is true of Christians and Jews. Some are true adherents to the Bible, and as I said above, some are just members of a social club that they call a church. True Muslims, who adhere to their scriptures, are going to be a threat to society forever.

                    ?


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post


                      Obviously, some of them are. Some are not staunch adherents to their faith, some are not really Muslims at all, it's just a social gathering for them. The same is true of Christians and Jews. Some are true adherents to the Bible, and as I said above, some are just members of a social club that they call a church. True Muslims, who adhere to their scriptures, are going to be a threat to society forever.

                      You're just plain wrong and are slurring millions of Muslims.
                      I'm unsure how such a comment can stand on a political forum from a mod and just let go.

                      I've never said this before but I honestly think you deserve de-moding for the above comment and you can now ban me for this post and most likely delete it.

                      The above comment is disgraceful and uncalled for.

                      ?


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post


                        You're just plain wrong and are slurring millions of Muslims.
                        I'm unsure how such a comment can stand on a political forum from a mod and just let go.

                        I've never said this before but I honestly think you deserve de-moding for the above comment and you can now ban me for this post and most likely delete it.

                        The above comment is disgraceful and uncalled for.

                        I have not been a moderator on this forum for nearly a year.

                        ?


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post


                          You're just plain wrong and are slurring millions of Muslims.
                          I'm unsure how such a comment can stand on a political forum from a mod and just let go.

                          I've never said this before but I honestly think you deserve de-moding for the above comment and you can now ban me for this post and most likely delete it.

                          The above comment is disgraceful and uncalled for.
                          I don't think you understand how the Koran has to be followed, to the T by a conservative muslim. The words of Mohammed are not to be questioned. You need to listen to that video I linked to, to get an understanding of what is the fact in the muslim world, in the middle east. I can understand though why you think as you do, not being of a religion. You don't understand the power of religion, when that religion has a BOOK that has to be followed. The Koran is the backbone of Islam. And the move to interpret it differently is so small, although some muslims are trying to do that. But if you do that in certain parts of the middle east, you are a dead man.

                          Now is it possible for the Koran to be interpreted differently, in order to tame that religion? Sure, but given the current situation in Islam, that will not be any time soon. We may be looking at a hundred years if we are lucky.

                          As the middle eastern born muslim in that video stated, there are liberal muslims, and conservative muslims. The problem are the conservative ones, but even the liberal ones are not like liberal Christian theology. Islam is the world's most dangerous religion these days, for they have a Holy Book that must be followed, in most cases. And that book is very specific on the relationship between infidels and muslims. It is hard for that to be ignored by muslims. How many muslims in the world do not desire sharia? Sharia and secular gov't do not mix, sir. Personally I think you have been sorta brainwashed by the apologists, who don't know what they are talking about at best, or just liars at worse. I am not saying all muslims are fundamentalists, but the number that are is greater than you might want to believe. Hell, look at Saudi Arabia, who lives under Wahabiism, one of the most conservative sects in Sunni Islam. That they hate Iran, is due to Iran being under conservative Shia ideology, or just under Shias. The Wahabis, believe that Shites are apostates for gods sake. And it is their duty to kill these apostates.

                          So, I think you have listened to the apoligists who are keeping you from understanding what is going on. Now, the liberal muslims can fit in with the West, but a conservative? No way man. Yet even the liberals can be recruited by the fundamentalists and its happening as we speak, so even the liberal ones cannot be trusted.

                          ?


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post


                            You're just plain wrong and are slurring millions of Muslims.
                            I'm unsure how such a comment can stand on a political forum from a mod and just let go.

                            I've never said this before but I honestly think you deserve de-moding for the above comment and you can now ban me for this post and most likely delete it.

                            The above comment is disgraceful and uncalled for.
                            So what you're saying is that you can only be a mod on an forum where there is an open exchange of ideas if you are politically correct? Not a surprising view from someone living in a country with restricted speech.

                            ?


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post

                              What about the overwhelming majority of Muslims who live in the US and UK who aren't violent are they somehow now not Muslims?
                              The problem is you're talking about the majority of Muslims in a country where they are the minority and hold no real political power. It's a false comparison. I'm not saying that if they became the majority then things would be different but that's what would have to happen for the comparison to be valid. For a better comparison you would have to see how things are done in countries where there is a Muslim majority. What laws are on the books? What is their record on human rights?

                              ?

                              Working...
                              X