Stealing plane is not Islamic, Killing people is not Islamic.. I get it, alright. I don't give a damn, I'm not a Muslim and I'm glad because no one is walking to me and calling me a terrorist. But you are a Muslim, so what are you doing about the people stealing planes on the name of Islam, killing people on the name of Islam, spreading terror on the name of Islam?
I think its mostly because of misuse of Quran in brain washing people. This is what should be read by everyone so that no one lets others bid on him to blow up..
This very morning we have terrorist attacking an embassy. Here are the headline. NONE say the religion of the attacker. Gee, I wonder if they were Jews or Christians or some other group that regularly attacks innocent people at places like UN or Embassies. Hmm, who tends to attack embassies? You have to have your head up your ass to not know already. Frankly, I think the real point you make is that there is no distinction between Muslims and Islamic Terrorists. Sadly, I hope you are wrong. Instead of just denouncing Muslims that do attack embassies, you are busy complaining that when Muslims attack, it makes you look bad. Well, no shit Sherlock. Get off your ass and denouce them and you wont look like a terrorist sympathizer. Instead of seeing these terrorists as disgracing Islam, you defend them. You deserve all the derision and ill will that comes from your support of these terrorists.
I actually edited the post right before you replied to it. What I'm saying is that a terrorist attack should not be called an Islamic attack just because the terrorist had done the attack in the name of Islam. So for example stealing planes can never be "Islamic" as it goes against the teachings of Islam. One thing alot of people don't know is that Bin Laden was not motivated by Islam to carry out 9/11 (if it was him) .. it was America's interference in middle eastern nations and supplying Israel with money and weapons..this is the real motivation that noboody talks about .. similarly all the other terrorists are motivated by some political cause...they are politicians using terror to achieve their political goals.
Two points here: 1) Thank you for acknowledging that these terrorists commit their acts in the name of Islam 2) I've never heard the phrase "Islamic attack". Ever. "Islamist attack", "Islamic Terrorist Attack", yes, but never "Islamic attack". There are many things that go against the teachings of Islam that are practiced on a daily basis by people claiming to be Muslims. It points to large problems within Islamic circles in certain parts of the world. Also, saying "the terrorist just so happened to be a Muslim" is complete baloney, and many western Muslims realize this. It is no one-off chance or coincidence the terrorists claim to be Muslims. Leaders in the Muslim community in some parts of the world are actually encouraging these attacks. These leaders continue to be respected because not enough real Muslims from the rest of the civilized world condemn them for their hate speak, but that is changing.
@israei Webby made a point here.I tell something.I live in one of most corrupted countries.Now, the corrupted people are being sentenced to jail.A recent moment for "Jan Lokpal bill" began by Anna Hazare is a good example that in a democratic country corruption never lasts long.After all its totally internal problem and we can take of it well. But your problem is not internal and your religion is so much offended by many people across the world.What you are doing for this.Why there in no forum when your religion so much offended by many.Tell me any well known committee which deals this. Tell me the steps that are being taken by your leaders.
Islam is not responsible for terrorism .. terrorists are..terrorists are the resultt of bad policing .. ask your Indian government for better policing...better intelligence. I don't have to lift a finger if someone blows himself up on a bus...I'm not responsible for other peoples crimes. You are making it sounds all Muslims are responsible for what another so called Muslim did...which is wrong...learn to make distinctions..learn what or who to blame ...learn how to use correct terminologies.
Was that an acknowledgement of guilt? People like Anwar Al'Alaki are still considered spiritual guides by many and people like you are busily trying to say they don't create terrorists? Not directly, but you are definitely part of the problem.
Nope , you only have to tell him to love the Cornnan , speak poopy and convince people that 9/11 was done by some dark forces so they can attack Dumfreakistan and Mullah and never cease to spread hatred . That's all you have to do and you can do it on the Internet . This is why if we ever meet we won't meet again
This has nothing to do with being "offended" .. you are dreaming if you think I'm offended. I'm pointing out your mistake..which is blaming a religion for what some idiot did. I don't even think you got it. What if I go out an kill in the name of Mahatma Ghandi..is it a Mahamatima Ghandi terrorist attack ? Answer that please.
LoL. We can take the mass number of Mahatma Gandi killers out there and lump them in with those killing in the name of Santa Claus. Maybe we can build a space jail for those killing in the name of Mars!
That is why people do not blame "Muslims" or "Islam" but rather "Islamic Terrorists". The problem comes in because you think the term Islamic Terrorists is describing you. It is only describing you of you share their beliefs that they are doing God's work with their terrorism. If you do, then it does apply to you. If you don't then it doesn't. When I read or hear the term "Islamic Terrorist" I do not think of all Muslims, in fact, I think of the small sub set of Muslims who do believe that their God wants them to attack embassies, or fly planes into buildings, or do anything with a suicide vest. It is posters like you who make me question whether average Muslims really do find the terrorist attacks committed in the name of their religion repugnant. It seems you vacillate between wanting to condemn and wanting to excuse the Muslims who commit these acts. I think you would find a much easier to just pick a side and then join the civilized world in condemning these terrorists without reservation. The fact that they happen to be Muslim should not be an excuse to say nothing, it should motivate you even more to declare that they do not speak for Islam.
You didn't answer the question, I'm gona have to discontinue this conversation now..you can't keep up.
Let's suppose, I'm a Gandhian. Some lunatic starts preaching and spreading hatred on the name of Gandhian ideology, starts killing people. And people start calling it Gandhian Terrorism. Being a Gandhian, what would I do? I'll stand up and tell him that he is a moron, he is a criminal, he is a retard and should be placed in a mental asylum. When enough people like me will be vocal against such crimes and protest against it, people will realize that not all Gandhian are same. They will realize that Gandhian ideology has nothing to do with the crime. But if I say - "ohh well, whatever he is saying and doing is not Gandhian teaching, Gandhi never said that, he is not a Gandhian", and sit on my ass. People will tell me to shut the fuck up. They will expect me to condemn the crime and be vocal against it, protest against it. And if I don't do that, no matter how many times I whine that it is wrong to call it Gandhian terrorism, they won't listen.. And its not their fault.. Because being a Gandhian, burden is on me to protect the ideology..
Nice of you to speak for Bin Laden since a Navy SEAL made him permanently unavailable to do it for himself, but he clearly stated his motivations in a fatwah delivered publicly in 1996. Yes, he and other Islamic jihadists are seeking to achieve political goals, but their point is rather clear that they are doing so as a requirement of their duty to Allah, and they use Islam as their method of motivating people to wage this war. Don't take my word for it, take Bin Laden's, in his doc titled... "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places". SOURCE I'd post the full text, but it's too long for this venue. I encourage you to read the doc in its entirety so you won't think the following excerpts are more rational in context. Bottom line, he hates all "Kuffrs", particularly Americans, and encourages all Muslims to kill them with the promise of rewards from Allah as inducement because the Americans are "enemies of God". Message he sends to Muslims: So like, hey guys... you get double coupons from Allah if you kill Americans instead of just Jews. Neat eh? For those that may not remember, this was written in 1996, the year Bin Laden made the first but less successful attempt to bring down the World Trade Center with a car bomb... a terrorist act for which he was convicted en absentia. The remarks he makes in the text directed to "William" are aimed at William Christopher, Bill Clinton's Secty of Defense. It was issued in the middle of the first Clinton administration and well before GW entered the white house. As a side note... it was Bin Ladens attack on the US that spurred GWs war on terror, not the other way around, just in case anyone wants to suggest Osama targeted the towers in response to George Bush's actions. Bush had been in office only 8 months when the WTC bombing on 9/11 took place, and the pilots were training for the attack before he held office. The War on Terror was in direct response to GW saying enough is enough, we're going after these SOBs. Note that in the fatwah, Osama laughed at the US for the weak responses to previous attacks by Islamic jihadists. Most if not all Christians that carried out the barbaric acts during the long period known as the Inquisition were likely motivated by politics, racism and xenophobia, greed, avarice, or a lust for power instead of any tenet contained in the scriptures they referenced while murdering thousands of people. It doesnt matter that they were twisting the scripture to their own evil purpose, they were in fact for all purposes... Christian Terrorists. In the eyes of the people in their religion in their time, their acts spoke for God, and when people tried to speak out they too fell under the sword of the inquisition. The same is true in current day Islam. Many evil men are considered to be speaking for God when they send people to perform crimes against humanity. Moderate Muslims who rightly speak against this perversion of religion often do so in peril of their lives and that of their family. So in answer to the OPs question, we call those that try to kill us specifically for the glory of Islam and in prospect of recieving rewards from Allah "Islamic Terrorists". That doesn't mean every follower of Islam is a terrorist, it means the terrorists were not just Muslims, but doing terrorist actions BECAUSE they are. So no, if someone that just happens to be Muslim shoots someone he's pissed at, he isn't an Islamic terrorist. BUT if he makes a tape beforehand explaining that he's killing the infidel for the glory of Allah or screams "Allah Akhbar" while blowing away a lot of people he doesnt know, he's correctly called an Islamic terrorist. This is just a recognition of the reality of the circumstances. It is as important to peaceful members of Islam to oppose these guys as it is to us "infidels", cause they're not doing 'em any favors.