Are all terrorists really Muslims?By Aakar Patel

[Joe Shearer]

Absolutely.

I can only comment on the problems plaguing the world I live in.

History is for Professors.

Hah! Try telling your re-tread friends that.

 

[doppelganger]

Hah! Try telling your re-tread friends that.

Sir, I apologise. Being glib was a liberty I afforded myself.

Is Christianity spotless. Of course not.

Are their excesses a thing of the past? Of course not. They have been at it longer than the Muslims, and hence are a lot better at it. Which includes camoflaging it very smoothly. At writing history as the victors. At being on the side of the righteous, and convincing the world of the same. By force when necessary.

Something the Muslims are pretty pathetic novices at.

But does Christian terrorism affect me? No it does not.

Does Muslim terrorism affect me? Yes it does.

You will appreciate that I find it difficult to be academically detached on this one.

 

[Tshering22]

But does Christian terrorism affect me? No it does not.

Oh yes it does affect us.

It affects us big time in a major major part of India which many mainstream media channels won't show.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Sir, I apologise. Being glib was a liberty I afforded myself.

Is Christianity spotless. Of course not.

Are their excesses a thing of the past? Of course not. They have been at it longer than the Muslims, and hence are a lot better at it. Which includes camoflaging it very smoothly. At writing history as the victors. At being on the side of the righteous, and convincing the world of the same. By force when necessary.

Something the Muslims are pretty pathetic novices at.

But does Christian terrorism affect me? No it does not.

Does Muslim terrorism affect me? Yes it does.

You will appreciate that I find it difficult to be academically detached on this one.

It affects all of us. So do we lose our balance and lash out? Then what's the difference?

 

[doppelganger]

It affects all of us. So do we lose our balance and lash out? Then what's the difference?

I am not for lashing out willy nilly.

Only for controlling a rebalancing.

And I am not in this to be different. Only to do what I think needs done.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I am not for lashing out willy nilly.

Only for controlling a rebalancing.

And I am not in this to be different. Only to do what I think needs done.

Could I point out that you are in strange company? That you are with people who apparently wish to lash out willy nilly? If you are in this to do what you think needs to be done, presumably you dress in khaki every morning, all over, that is, or go to the secretariat, or run your district with a rod of iron?

PS: Or maybe you are in the city of Calcutta, in which case, and in no other case, you must be dressed all in white? ROTFL.

 

[doppelganger]

Could I point out that you are in strange company? That you are with people who apparently wish to lash out willy nilly? If you are in this to do what you think needs to be done, presumably you dress in khaki every morning, all over, that is, or go to the secretariat, or run your district with a rod of iron?

No, no. I am a callow young man who does not amount to much. Yet.

I see some of the willy nilly lashing out more as a catharsis of an element of our society that has been left on the fringe for too long. With good or bad reason is not for me to decide. But were I to be part of that fringe, I'd definitely feel a bit of giggly gloating coming on. Alow myself to run my mouth off and say a lot of the things I could not in the still very recent past. Rub some faces in it while I can.

All good fun.

Does it do close to as much damage as what we just exited from, or any worse? Not by a long shot.

Sir Hinduism is a very different beast. You may have left the flock some time ago, but your soul and DNA remains Hindu. As does that of most of us.

Have faith.

What comes from alien lands and alien genes will remain alien to our land. Including the aftermath of its unfettered growth and expression.

 

[Joe Shearer]

No, no. I am a callow young man who does not amount to much. Yet.

I see some of the willy nilly lashing out more as a catharsis of an element of our society that has been left on the fringe for too long. With good or bad reason is not for me to decide. But were I to be part of that fringe, I'd definitely feel a bit of giggly gloating coming on. Alow myself to run my mouth off and say a lot of the things I could not in the still very recent past. Rub some faces in it while I can.

All good fun.

Does it do close to as much damage as what we just exited from, or any worse? Not by a long shot.

Sir Hinduism is a very different beast. You may have left the flock some time ago, but your soul and DNA remains Hindu. As does that of most of us.

Have faith.

What comes from alien lands and alien genes will remain alien to our land. Including the aftermath of its unfettered growth and expression.

Hmmm. Can't parse that very well. Maybe I'll sing along with Dylan,"Ah, but I was much older then. I'm much younger than that now."

 

[illusion8]

@indianBong @Abhijeet Sarkar

It is very clear now.

When a Hindu is a Maoist, he is no longer a Hindu; his acts of terrorism are Maoist acts of terrorism.

When a Muslim is an Al Qaeda supporter, or ISIS, or SIMI, he remains a Muslim; his acts of terrorism are Muslim acts of terrorism.

Very clear.

A maoist can be a hindu, muslim, christian, sikh, buddhist, atheist...whatever.
An LTTE cadre could have been a hindu, christian, muslim etc...whatever.

An AQ, LET, ISIS, SIMI, boko, al shabaab etc etc has to be a sunni muslim or has to get a conversion...they usually intend to kill the rest.

Islamic Jihad is a global movement with a global network of supporters, financiers who for all counts happen to be muslim.

 

[doppelganger]

Hmmm. Can't parse that very well. Maybe I'll sing along with Dylan,"Ah, but I was much older then. I'm much younger than that now."

Sir that's deep.

I'm more like into Snoop Dogg myself.

 

[SQ8]

So, when I defame Islam, this doesnt hurt you? And I know it hurt you so much even more than me or anyother else for hurting so called "bharat mata". Isnt religion another form of nationalism?

Have you ever think about it? If nationalism is meaningless, then why? Nothing in this world happened because of nonsense. Why nationalism? Why religion?

Ok, have you ever played Age of Mythology or Rise on Nation, how nation develops, how religion develops, and yes you cant skip these, because these are fundamental parameters for development. For development, you need a point of reference. India never tried to be a superpower, if USA or China never exist. Pakistan never try to catch, if India never exist.

The only possibility when human become united is when aliens invade us, and thats reality.

Ok, leave all that, play Rise of Nation of multiplayer (in diplomacy mode), your action depicts the true nature ( and yes you cant skip those), and that applied to whole world also.

To tell you the truth, it doesn't anymore. Your defamation has little impact on what my views on the religion are, and so I am rather content with it. Your bigotry against my religion translating into oppression however is something that hurts me. The same way, if a Muslim uses Islam to opress a people .. it would hurt me.

There are various means of unity which includes religion and nationalism. But both of these have demonstrated a repeated potential to lead to a "nationwide" murderous spree and almost barbarian ideals. Each of these have their use and their motivational capacities that need to be tempered and used with caution; not end up driving oppressive ideals and mindsets.

 

[kaku1]

To tell you the truth, it doesn't anymore. Your defamation has little impact on what my views on the religion are, and so I am rather content with it. Your bigotry against my religion translating into oppression however is something that hurts me. The same way, if a Muslim uses Islam to opress a people .. it would hurt me.

There are various means of unity which includes religion and nationalism. But both of these have demonstrated a repeated potential to lead to a "nationwide" murderous spree and almost barbarian ideals. Each of these have their use and their motivational capacities that need to be tempered and used with caution; not end up driving oppressive ideals and mindsets.

In one instance you calling it bigotry and in one instance you accepting my whole argument. I like your ego.

Ok, leave it. You still didnt answer my question. Many things hurt me too in this world, but I didnt do like this. Why religion? Why nationalism? Why humans need it?

I believe in more practicality rather then in big talks and morality.

 

[SQ8]

Islamism.

I believe. Or rather, I hope.

Islam was already spread out in various sects long before, a read into
Kitab Al-Milal Wa 'L-Nihal (Book of Sects and Creeds) by Tāj al-Dīn Abū al-Fath Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Karīm ash-Shahrastānī (1086–1153 CE) @Joe Shearer recommended for you in case you have interest in the subject and free time.

So clearly the "islam" in Islam has not been a uniform equation for quite some time.

However, the rather fluid concepts of "Jihad"(notwithstanding the subjective nature of the Arabic language much like Sanskrit) and the rewards associated with it in scripture leaves a powerful motivational tool for those who have blind following(rather than the required blind faith).

So your hope is misplaced political correctness. Islamism is a rather stupid term in my view; I am someone who endeavours to offer all his prayers, studies the Quran and Hadiath, reads early Islamic history and has certain views on topics like the Shia and Qadiyani sect that would irk the liberals in society, just as I hold views against the Wahabbis and other schools of thought that would irk conservatives.. I consider myself an Islamist.

Islam,Islamism are not separate entities..
What is being dealt with today also happened a 1000 years ago if we actually bother to study history.. and is not just confined to Islam. Just because BBC is able to get you coverage today does not mean similar events in history did not occur.. what took people and word of mouth which would then be put in by scribes over a period of years takes minutes today.. that is the only difference.

The reality today is that there is a religion with a large and powerful following, which has a significant majority that now feels that it is being hunted, due to an even more significant minority that is has taken up arms for various reasons that to their leaders may have various political motives, the primary motivations for many remain the same; Fighting in the way of god, to receive the rewards for it. That , without any iota of a doubt and regardless of apologists remains an integral part of Islamic belief and hence.. Islamism.
The difference herein lies in how one looks at those integral parts, and that depends upon the level of education and exposure of the person.

I am writing an article on the mentality of the "Hindu"(dweller of the land) based on Al-Bairunis writings on the subject and will focus on the growing extremism Hindu majority in India and why it should not surprise people; and hopefully it will serve as an example that history and characteristics sometimes never change.

In one instance you calling it bigotry and in one instance you accepting my whole argument. I like your ego.

Ok, leave it. You still didnt answer my question. Many things hurt me too in this world, but I didnt do like this. Why religion? Why nationalism? Why humans need it?

I believe in more practicality rather then in big talks and morality.

Read my post above to understand the concept. You mistake venues for human connection as justification for bigotry and genocide..my ego has little to do with your own depth of understanding.

 

[kaku1]

I

Read my post above to understand the concept. You mistake venues for human connection as justification for bigotry and genocide..

Hold on, hold on. Where I justified the genocide?

my ego has little to do with your own depth of understanding.

Thats a personal remark. Your or mine has nothing to do with whole human development or with human history, mine or yours thinking/egos are invaluable in this instance.

 

[SQ8]

Hold on, hold on. Where I justified the genocide?



Thats a personal remark. Your or mine has nothing to do with whole human development or with human history, mine or yours thinking/egos are invaluable in this instance.

And yours was not? and what a complete oxymoron is that statement.

And have you not been paying attention to the subject that you ignored the entire reference to extremes in nationalism?
Why do you think the philosophers of old were weary of it? because it inevitably has the potential to turn from a benign love for one's land into a violent xenophobia or worse.