lkwdblds
Crusader
Re: Some Good Repercussions from the Horrible Terror Killings in France
Very well stated Enthetan! Those who defend Obama tend to state that his security preparation and the size of them might have presented logistic delays in the staging of the march. This type of argument is just nonsense and obscures the true answer which you stated in your post.
Obama does not feel that any of the terrorists are truly Muslims since they are engaging in activities which true Islam does not believe in. He has also said this directly in interviews.
Assuming his view to be legitimate, the question boils down to a relatively simple question as follows: WHAT DOES A GROUP MEMBER DO IF A CULT FORMED INSIDE HIS GROUP THEN CLAIMS TO SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP? The GROUP is the most general case but in the majority of cases, this question applies mostly to a RELIGION or perhaps a POLITICAL PARY.
On occasion, this question comes up every now and then inside of the Christian religion and to a lesser extent in Christianity. In Christianity, the Catholic chruch engaged in the Spanish Inquisition and did exercise a reign of terror against Jews, Muslims and other non Christian peoples. This type of terrorism took place around 500 to 600 years ago. Moving up in time to the 1600's we had the Salem Witch trials where again an organized part of Christianity took part in terror. Moving up later, we have extremist portions of the the Southern Christian Churches carrying out terror against Black people and their supporters in the Southern States of the USA in the Jim Crow era, from about 1865 to 1964.
As for a political party to carry out terror, we need look no farther than to the period of 1933 through 1945 where the German Nazi Party carried out extreme terrorism against the Jewish people as wells as what were termed non Aryan Races such as the Slavic people of Eastern Europe as well as Gypsies. There were also Pogroms against Jews staged on a regular basis throughout Russia when the Tsars were in power. the
In the case of the Christian abuses, Christianity was capable of quite a bit of self correction. Many Christians would denounce the terrorist activities as non Christian and in some cases, correction was either produced inside the Christianity at it's top levels or splinter groups would break away from the main body of the church and would try and reform the main body of the church.
When politics directed state sponsored terrorism as in Nazi Germany and Tsarist Russia, the people of those totalitarian regimes did not have the means to rebel and the terrorist programs of those governments stayed in place into those governments were defeated on the battlefield.
INSIDE ISLAM - So where does this leave Islam? How do peace loving Muslims gain separation from their terrorist wing which is claiming to represent all of the their religion. They have to speak up and assert their independence from the terrorist elements of their religions. One thing for sure is that for a Muslim today to disavow the activities of his terrorist wing, he has to be very brave and must be willing to put his life on the line. Especially if a person is a parent, speaking out against Islamic terrorism has to be looked at very carefully. Certainly, no parent wants to be killed and leave his or her children orphaned.
What President Al-Sisi did last Saturday shows what can be done. Also marching with linked arms along with millions of other people of all backgrounds seems like something which can be done. Some governments can take action as Al-Sisi did in Egypt when he kicked out the Muslin Brotherhood from ruling the country and replaced them with officers of the Egyptian army. WHATEVER OPTIONS THEY HAVE, IT IS UP TO PEACEFUL MUSLIMS TO ASSERT THEMSELVES AND MAKE IT VERY WELL KNOWN THAT THEY DO NOT APPROVE OF TERRORIST ACTS BEING CARRIED OUT IN THEIR NAME BY A SMALL BUT RADICAL GROUP OF Fanatics.
OUTSIDE ISLAM Our primary activity is not to disassociate ourselves from admitting that terrorism exists inside Islam. Burying our heads in the sand in that manner solves nothing for us. We have to be alert to defend ourselves against such terrorism. We have to walk a fine line between being overly aggressive, as the Bush administration appears to have been, but not being naively overly non aggressive as the Obama administration is doing. We need to be firm and resolute in defending free speech and our various other freedoms and our Western way of life.
We should leave it to those inside Islam to reform their own religion so that it will no longer have a violent and extreme terrorist wing. We should aid Muslims when they make moves in this direction as Al-Sisi has done but it up to Islam itself to remove the current terrorist wing from being part of its religion. In summary, our two best actions seem to be to fight terrorism whenever we are attacked by it while at the same time doing everything in our power to head off the attacks and aiding and assisting those Muslims who are making efforts to eliminate Islamic terrorism from their religion.
Lakey
Obviously, he was not interested in standing in solidarity with the people of France against Islamic terror.
Very well stated Enthetan! Those who defend Obama tend to state that his security preparation and the size of them might have presented logistic delays in the staging of the march. This type of argument is just nonsense and obscures the true answer which you stated in your post.
Obama does not feel that any of the terrorists are truly Muslims since they are engaging in activities which true Islam does not believe in. He has also said this directly in interviews.
Assuming his view to be legitimate, the question boils down to a relatively simple question as follows: WHAT DOES A GROUP MEMBER DO IF A CULT FORMED INSIDE HIS GROUP THEN CLAIMS TO SPEAK FOR THE ENTIRE GROUP? The GROUP is the most general case but in the majority of cases, this question applies mostly to a RELIGION or perhaps a POLITICAL PARY.
On occasion, this question comes up every now and then inside of the Christian religion and to a lesser extent in Christianity. In Christianity, the Catholic chruch engaged in the Spanish Inquisition and did exercise a reign of terror against Jews, Muslims and other non Christian peoples. This type of terrorism took place around 500 to 600 years ago. Moving up in time to the 1600's we had the Salem Witch trials where again an organized part of Christianity took part in terror. Moving up later, we have extremist portions of the the Southern Christian Churches carrying out terror against Black people and their supporters in the Southern States of the USA in the Jim Crow era, from about 1865 to 1964.
As for a political party to carry out terror, we need look no farther than to the period of 1933 through 1945 where the German Nazi Party carried out extreme terrorism against the Jewish people as wells as what were termed non Aryan Races such as the Slavic people of Eastern Europe as well as Gypsies. There were also Pogroms against Jews staged on a regular basis throughout Russia when the Tsars were in power. the
In the case of the Christian abuses, Christianity was capable of quite a bit of self correction. Many Christians would denounce the terrorist activities as non Christian and in some cases, correction was either produced inside the Christianity at it's top levels or splinter groups would break away from the main body of the church and would try and reform the main body of the church.
When politics directed state sponsored terrorism as in Nazi Germany and Tsarist Russia, the people of those totalitarian regimes did not have the means to rebel and the terrorist programs of those governments stayed in place into those governments were defeated on the battlefield.
INSIDE ISLAM - So where does this leave Islam? How do peace loving Muslims gain separation from their terrorist wing which is claiming to represent all of the their religion. They have to speak up and assert their independence from the terrorist elements of their religions. One thing for sure is that for a Muslim today to disavow the activities of his terrorist wing, he has to be very brave and must be willing to put his life on the line. Especially if a person is a parent, speaking out against Islamic terrorism has to be looked at very carefully. Certainly, no parent wants to be killed and leave his or her children orphaned.
What President Al-Sisi did last Saturday shows what can be done. Also marching with linked arms along with millions of other people of all backgrounds seems like something which can be done. Some governments can take action as Al-Sisi did in Egypt when he kicked out the Muslin Brotherhood from ruling the country and replaced them with officers of the Egyptian army. WHATEVER OPTIONS THEY HAVE, IT IS UP TO PEACEFUL MUSLIMS TO ASSERT THEMSELVES AND MAKE IT VERY WELL KNOWN THAT THEY DO NOT APPROVE OF TERRORIST ACTS BEING CARRIED OUT IN THEIR NAME BY A SMALL BUT RADICAL GROUP OF Fanatics.
OUTSIDE ISLAM Our primary activity is not to disassociate ourselves from admitting that terrorism exists inside Islam. Burying our heads in the sand in that manner solves nothing for us. We have to be alert to defend ourselves against such terrorism. We have to walk a fine line between being overly aggressive, as the Bush administration appears to have been, but not being naively overly non aggressive as the Obama administration is doing. We need to be firm and resolute in defending free speech and our various other freedoms and our Western way of life.
We should leave it to those inside Islam to reform their own religion so that it will no longer have a violent and extreme terrorist wing. We should aid Muslims when they make moves in this direction as Al-Sisi has done but it up to Islam itself to remove the current terrorist wing from being part of its religion. In summary, our two best actions seem to be to fight terrorism whenever we are attacked by it while at the same time doing everything in our power to head off the attacks and aiding and assisting those Muslims who are making efforts to eliminate Islamic terrorism from their religion.
Lakey
