Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Islam has declared war on America. Muslims worldwide mean to destroy us, conquer us, and terminate our way of life. Our Western liberal philosophy is to be replaced with their Islamic one. All this is to be done in the name of bringing us "civilization" here on earth, and "paradise" in the afterlife.

 

The United States desperately needs to fight and defeat the Muslim nation and Islam. But we're only maybe halfway fighting back against the Muslim people, and perhaps not at all against the ideology of Islam.

 

We're now mostly relying upon the gov't to protect us. And they, in turn, are mostly involved in spying upon Americans. The FBI, CIA, NSA, and several other terrifying "black" organizations we don't even know about yet are very busy violating our right to privacy and brazenly running roughshod over our 4th Amendment protection against "search and seizure."

 

Evidently the federal gov't is monitoring every bank and financial transaction whatsoever, and tapping every phone call, and reading every email. And all without probable cause or judicial warrant.

 

On the one hand, organizations such as Al Qaida, the Taliban, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc. are true enemies of the US. But on the other hand, so too are the freedom-hating, freedom-destroying FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.

 

The difference is the Muslims are very weak; they're a disorganized, temporary threat, mostly from the outside. The federal gov't, however, is immensely strong; they're a well-organized, permanent threat, from deep within.

 

Only one group is a true menace to our liberties, way of life, and happiness. One one group poses an existential threat.   

Edited by Garshasp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Islam has declared war on America.

You lost me here. There is no central authority of Islam. The rest just follows like paranoia that Islam as a religion is inherently worse than every religion there is.

 

Then it goes into paranoia that we now live in "1984". I'd leave this one to Glen Beck.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You lost me here. There is no central authority of Islam. The rest just follows like paranoia that Islam as a religion is inherently worse than every religion there is.

 

Then it goes into paranoia that we now live in "1984". I'd leave this one to Glen Beck.

Do you view Islam as a religion? If so, do you not think it has a more 'severe' form of politics, that for Islam to 'succede' would mean the total destruction of the West?

Edited by tadmjones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Islam needs to be defined here, because the politics of the middle east and Islamic worlds (different things) are a lot more complicated. 

 

I think its true that West Asia and the Islamic world are places filled with people who have very little love or understanding for America and more importantly classical liberal values. A lot of them hate Russia, China, Israel, the EU, and India just as much as the US. Thir part of the world is the one being left behind.  I  can also see the charge that the government has very irresponsible people controlling it. 

 

 However I don't think there is a "Muslim Nation" that agrees on any one thing. There really isn't a single true Caliphate that everyone recognizes anymore.    

The religion is divided, and even then the politics of the Islamic world and West Asia are even more divided. The middle east also has a heavy secularist-nationalist tendency that takes inspiration from Hitler and the like. As an example, Saddam Hussein was secular and his political party was a militant break off from a left-wing nationalist group.  

 

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Caliphate

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ba%27ath_Party

 

Turkish leadership on the other hand wants their nation to be part of the European Union, while I don't really approve of that it shows a friendliness to western ideas in a major Islamic nation. 

 

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union#Timeline

 

Whereas Bin Laden created an organization that fairly small but inspired similar organization throughout the Islamic world to take up arms and fight along side one another. The following link talks about how decentralized Al-Qaeda is and how it isn't really a single organization but more of a strategy that can easily be adopted.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaida#Command_structure

Edited by Hairnet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is the Muslims are very weak; they're a disorganized, temporary threat, mostly from the outside. The federal gov't, however, is immensely strong; they're a well-organized, permanent threat, from deep within.

This is the only point I would disagree with you on; at the end of the day, I'd still prefer the government over a suicide bomber. 

Frankly, I think I stand a good chance of outrunning the beaurocracy.

 

You lost me here. There is no central authority of Islam.

There was no central authority for the looters in AS, either; when people are united by a common philosophy they don't need any chain of command.

 

The rest just follows like paranoia that Islam as a religion is inherently worse than every religion there is.

He never alluded to anything inherent; he made several observations based on the actions of Muslims worldwide.  Would you disagree with any of them?

 

Then it goes into paranoia that we now live in "1984".

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you're wrong.

 

 

Islam needs to be defined here, because the politics of the middle east and Islamic worlds (different things) are a lot more complicated. 

Emphatically so.

Most Muslims are perfectly harmless human beings; I think this probably holds true worldwide, as well. 

 

But would anyone seriously dispute that there's a very clear pattern here?  Not all Muslims are terrorists but 99% of terrorists seem to be Muslim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Muslims are perfectly harmless

 

So just watch out for the 'bad' ones, the harmless ones are actually fighting against the bad ones too? Sure you see it everyday,99% of of the population of Pakistan,Suadi Arabia,Turkey ect are in the streets daily decrying the actions of the 'bad' ones. No" for evil to flourish good men..."kinda thingy, complacent muslims are blameless, really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Muslims are perfectly harmless

 

So just watch out for the 'bad' ones, the harmless ones are actually fighting against the bad ones too? Sure you see it everyday,99% of of the population of Pakistan,Suadi Arabia,Turkey ect are in the streets daily decrying the actions of the 'bad' ones. No" for evil to flourish good men..."kinda thingy, complacent muslims are blameless, really?

'Harmless' yes, 'blameless' no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Muslims are perfectly harmless human beings; I think this probably holds true worldwide, as well. 

 

Almost all Muslims worldwide are monsters. They intellectually, morally, and financially support Islam. This means they help a lot to inflict jihad (war) and sharia (slavery) upon all of us.

 

Now it's true that most Muslims are non-activists and hypocrites. But they're a continuous threat to become active and sincere in their beliefs -- to very violently embrace jihad and sharia. Meanwhile, even if very quiet about it, they intellectually, morally, and financially back these ideals without let-up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now it's true that most Muslims are non-activists and hypocrites. But they're a continuous threat to become active and sincere in their beliefs -- to very violently embrace jihad and sharia.

 Yes.

 

We don't have to worry about MOST of them stabbing us to death in our sleep.  HOWEVER, the premises they hold would lead to that if they were to be consistent; they're not a direct threat to our immediate existence because of their hypocrisy.

Harmless yes, blameless no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost all Muslims worldwide are monsters. They intellectually, morally, and financially support Islam. This means they help a lot to inflict jihad (war) and sharia (slavery) upon all of us.

 

Now it's true that most Muslims are non-activists and hypocrites. But they're a continuous threat to become active and sincere in their beliefs -- to very violently embrace jihad and sharia. Meanwhile, even if very quiet about it, they intellectually, morally, and financially back these ideals without let-up.  

Err okay. It's pretty easy to be racist. It's worse you say financially any Muslim supports violence, but really, I have no idea how you know that. One, in many places, it is illegal to do so, As in financially supporting terrorism is not acceptable and is illegal, unless you're talking about countries like Iran where it is perhaps the status quo. And secondly, you didn't back up what you said, making it as though it's plainly obvious. Again, it's easy to be racist. If you have a point, make it. Racism is no way to back up what you're saying. I don't like many religions, but "almost all" and "monster" indicates you're making a generalization without much basis to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racism is no way to back up what you're saying. I don't like many religions, but "almost all" and "monster" indicates you're making a generalization without much basis to it.

 Muslims can be found in any race. . . Just saying, it isn't racism.

 

The rest is valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost all Muslims worldwide are monsters. They intellectually, morally, and financially support Islam. This means they help a lot to inflict jihad (war) and sharia (slavery) upon all of us.

 

Now it's true that most Muslims are non-activists and hypocrites. But they're a continuous threat to become active and sincere in their beliefs -- to very violently embrace jihad and sharia. Meanwhile, even if very quiet about it, they intellectually, morally, and financially back these ideals without let-up.  

 

Why should moderate muslims have to prove themselves?? You act as though it's THEIR job to fight against terrorist extremists because they are members of the same religion, forgetting that they are just regular joes trying to live their lives in peace. It is NOT their fault that terrorist extremists exist.

 

You'd think the almost constant protesting against terrorism was enough.. but no. You believe they are somehow to blame for all the violence in the world. Grow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Yes.

 

We don't have to worry about MOST of them stabbing us to death in our sleep.  HOWEVER, the premises they hold would lead to that if they were to be consistent; they're not a direct threat to our immediate existence because of their hypocrisy.

 

Harmless yes, blameless no.

 

Harrison -- Are average Muslims really so harmless? Would you feel comfortable living in a community of normal Muslims where it was known that you were a non-Muslim -- what they openly call an "infidel" and "enemy of god"? Would you be safe there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Muslims are perfectly harmless

 

So just watch out for the 'bad' ones, the harmless ones are actually fighting against the bad ones too? Sure you see it everyday,99% of of the population of Pakistan,Suadi Arabia,Turkey ect are in the streets daily decrying the actions of the 'bad' ones. No" for evil to flourish good men..."kinda thingy, complacent muslims are blameless, really?

 

Tadmjones -- Exactly. There's no such thing as an organization called Muslims Against Jihad or Muslims Against Sharia. That would be absurd. Average, normal Muslims LOVE jihad and sharia, and they support it emphatically worldwide. Except for unbelievably tiny and isolated groups -- which regular Muslims hate -- there's no such thing as a movement of Muslims who are ashamed at all the terrorism and enslavement found in Muslim societies, both historically and currently, Whenever the latest Muslim atrocity happens in the West, there's no wringing of hands or public display of shame -- as Christians, Jews, and Mormons would do -- as a result of what their evil philosophy has wrought. As long as innocent Westerners die, Muslims either don't care or they actively support the slaughter. Most Muslims in the world today are NOT good people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err okay. It's pretty easy to be racist. It's worse you say financially any Muslim supports violence, but really, I have no idea how you know that. One, in many places, it is illegal to do so, As in financially supporting terrorism is not acceptable and is illegal, unless you're talking about countries like Iran where it is perhaps the status quo. And secondly, you didn't back up what you said, making it as though it's plainly obvious. Again, it's easy to be racist. If you have a point, make it. Racism is no way to back up what you're saying. I don't like many religions, but "almost all" and "monster" indicates you're making a generalization without much basis to it.

 

Eiuol -- Islam is a religion or, more accurately, a philosophy. It isn't a race. Assuming I'm a bigot against Muslims, shouldn't I be called a "religionist" or "philosophyist"? I find the ideology of Islam, both currently and historically, to be wildly false and evil. I think human freedom, progress, prosperity, and happiness just dies under islam. I'm a proud Islamophobe. All Objectivists should be. 

 

I assume you understand that almost all Muslims worldwide support jihad and sharia, intellectually and morally. But maybe I'm wrong here...?

 

As for financial support, Muslims are obligated to give 1/40th of their income to charity, and most do just that. This almost always means monies to support jihad and sharia. The recent Holy Land Foundation court decision in 2008 proved that. Observe that the Muslims involved were the most civilized Muslims on earth, i.e. Americans, and that their charity group was the most mainstream and popular in the country. And yet a US court of low education and perceptivity -- and of high political correctness and multiculturalism -- nevertheless still found that they were a Hamas-supporting jihadi group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tadmjones -- Exactly. There's no such thing as an organization called Muslims Against Jihad or Muslims Against Sharia. That would be absurd. Average, normal Muslims LOVE jihad and sharia, and they support it emphatically worldwide.

How do you know what a "normal" Muslim is like? Just stop making wild assertions. Fine, racism isn't the right word. It's still bigotry. Mindless bigotry as opposed to rational opposition isn't acceptable. People can't always be equated to bad philosophies.

Edited by Eiuol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should moderate muslims have to prove themselves?? You act as though it's THEIR job to fight against terrorist extremists because they are members of the same religion, forgetting that they are just regular joes trying to live their lives in peace. It is NOT their fault that terrorist extremists exist.

 

You'd think the almost constant protesting against terrorism was enough.. but no. You believe they are somehow to blame for all the violence in the world. Grow up.

 

First off, I think the terms "moderate" and extremist" are mistaken. I think these terms and concepts constitute philosophical surrender to the forces of evil. Better to call the Muslims "activist" and "non-activist", or else "sincere" and "hypocritical".

 

But yes, the Muslims are morally obligated to "prove themselves", just as are Christians and Jews are, whenever atrocities are perpetrated in the name of their obviously false and evil ideologies. Even if they are "regular joes" they're obligated -- by simple human and moral decency -- to publicly reject jihad and sharia. To publicly reject all the jihadi groups worldwide.

 

But they never do. Thus it is largely "their fault that extremists exist." These average, normal Muslims support jihad and sharia (the essence of Islam) intellectually, morally, and financially. To say that they're innocent is like saying that the average, normal Germans of the early 1940s were innocent of what the hideous Nazi philosophy was doing to the world.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly when does one become an extremist? Is it when guiding the aircraft into the building or before? Is it after detonating explosives strapped to your body or before?

Aside from watching someone 'become' an extremist in the act as it were, how could you tell if they were prone to extremism? Wouldn't you look at the things they say they think, those principles and ideals that guide their actions, of course assuming the were being truthful of their motivation.

In what way do the teachings or tenets of 'moderate' muslims differ from those of the 'extremist' kind? Acts of terror are one way to try and bring about the downfall of the West, infiltration by 'moderate' groups such as CAIR are another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I think the terms "moderate" and extremist" are mistaken. I think these terms and concepts constitute philosophical surrender to the forces of evil. Better to call the Muslims "activist" and "non-activist", or else "sincere" and "hypocritical".

 

Do you also believe that the WBC represents all "sincere" Christians, and everyone else is "hypocritical"?

 

But yes, the Muslims are morally obligated to "prove themselves", just as are Christians and Jews are, whenever atrocities are perpetrated in the name of their obviously false and evil ideologies. Even if they are "regular joes" they're obligated -- by simple human and moral decency -- to publicly reject jihad and sharia. To publicly reject all the jihadi groups worldwide.

 

But they never do. Thus it is largely "their fault that extremists exist."

 

That's false- there have been tons of anti-terrorist protests by Muslims all around the world. A quick google search brings up articles about protests in  NY, Libya, UK, Jerusalem, Syria, Detroit, India, etc. Here is yet another source you might want to check out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think its a question of whose more consistent and the so-called "moderates" are just inconsistent about their religion. I don't think they're the tail that wags the dogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alrighty, then.

 

Harrison -- Are average Muslims really so harmless? Would you feel comfortable living in a community of normal Muslims where it was known that you were a non-Muslim -- what they openly call an "infidel" and "enemy of god"? Would you be safe there?

Lots of package-dealing here.  It's understandable; they're the typical concepts one hears thrown around willy-nilly on any given day, but we still need to stop and evaluate them. 

 

Average muslims aren't harmless; let's start there.  I don't care to play numbers games.

If you mean that statistically average and numerically dominant Muslims are out to get me then I won't dispute it.  I do not know such statistics, nor do I care; it's irrelevant to my point.

All I mean is that, if you see someone wearing a burkha in a supermarket, she is not likely to follow you home and slit your throat.  I am referring to regular, American Muslims, of the type one might expect to meet in any American city. . .  Where we do not lynch people in the streets.

 

Next bit.

Logically following from what I mean by 'average' Muslims, yes; I would feel SAFE in such a community.  I would not feel comfortable; frankly, I would probably spend most of my time trying to show them the irrationality of their religion.  It would not work out very well- because I personally have an issue tolerating ideas that I know are blatantly false.

But a Muslim who would refer to me as 'infidel' and 'enemy' is not the sort of Muslim I'm referring to; the community you describe contradicts the people you describe there.

 

 

I assume you understand that almost all Muslims worldwide support jihad and sharia, intellectually and morally. But maybe I'm wrong here...?

 Okay; again you're discussing human beings in terms of statistics which you can assign guilt to.  Check that.

 

IF any Muslim (one, uno, singular) explicitly approves of actual, bloody jihad THEN yes, you're right.  Such a person is dangerous and deserves to be treated accordingly.

 

But check your premises- you are making wild generalizations about human beings with free will.

IF there is ONE Muslim who does not approve of jihad THEN it invalidates the blanket assertions, because that one Muslim cannot be blamed for anything he did not personally do.

Edited by Harrison Danneskjold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, I think the terms "moderate" and extremist" are mistaken. I think these terms and concepts constitute philosophical surrender to the forces of evil. Better to call the Muslims "activist" and "non-activist", or else "sincere" and "hypocritical".

 This is true.  "Moderate" and "extremist" implies that philosophy is some sort of parlor game in which you can stretch the principles like taffy- Enough said.  "Sincere" and "hypocritical" would be much more accurate.

 

 

But yes, the Muslims are morally obligated to "prove themselves", just as are Christians and Jews are, whenever atrocities are perpetrated in the name of their obviously false and evil ideologies. Even if they are "regular joes" they're obligated -- by simple human and moral decency -- to publicly reject jihad and sharia. To publicly reject all the jihadi groups worldwide.

 This has a small kernel of truth in it.

 

Yes, human beings have the moral responsibility (IF they wish to be just) to denounce evil wherever and whenever they see it, and in this respect I agree; the hypocritical Muslim community has been disturbingly silent.

 

But the rest on that issue. . . You should really check your premises.

 

 

Exactly when does one become an extremist?

 When one accepts an idea which necessitates the initiation of force.

 

So IF you find A Muslim who tells you, point-blank, that a worldwide Caliphate would be good, then THAT Muslim is evil and fully deserves to be treated as such.

 

But to assert that ALL Muslims are evil would be as wrong as to assert that ALL Christians oppose [Darwinian evolution, gay marriage, abortion, et cetera] or that ALL Objectivists enjoy Atlas Shrugged (I'm sure some don't).

A human being is not that cut-and-dry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you also believe that the WBC represents all "sincere" Christians, and everyone else is "hypocritical"?

 Yes.

 

But it must be remembered that, in these cases, their hypocrisy is the reason why most Christians and some Muslims are willing to peacefully coexist with us; the hypocrisy consists of mixing GOOD ideas in with the evil.

 

The alternative is that philosophy truly is a parlor game in which any concept may be stretched to fit any meaning you please- in which case there can be no good or evil.

 

Garshasp and Tadmjones:

Remember that NOBODY is interchangeable with anyone else; nobody may be judged for anyone else's ideas, words or actions.  The only person that anyone is morally responsible for is themselves.

Apply that to everything else in your entire argument and I'll have nothing else to dispute.

Edited by Harrison Danneskjold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×