Besides, haven’t you heard? Even though the Koran says, “We shall put terror into the hearts of the non-believers” and “Kill the infidels where you find them”, it also says, “There is no compulsion in religion.” Therefore, Islam does not condone terrorism. Therefore, no Muslim can be possibly be guilty of terrorism. Q.E.D.
But this is obviously nonsense since many Muslims believe that other Muslims are guilty of terrorism.
I think what they do not want to believe is that Muslims are willing to kill fellow Muslims.
The point, which you seem to have missed, is that the victims of the attack are willing to believe it was a Zionist/Crusader plot, and there is no reason to think the non-victims have reached a different conclusion. At least, no reason that I have heard.
The author’s conclusion, which I agree with, is that under these circumstances we cannot expect the “moderate Muslims” to help stop the terrorists.
The argument quoted above is the argument offered by those interviewed in the article.
Shall I start quoting obscure parts of the Bible out of context to tell you what ‘all Christians’ believe?
I have not tried to tell you what all Muslims believe. The article addresses what the “moderates” believe in one case.
It is clear that some Muslims believe Muslims are terrorists – because a significant percentage think terrorism is justified. In a recent Pew survey of six Muslim countries – Indonesia, Morocco, Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia, Lebanon – 16.9% of the respondents said that suicide bomb attacks against innocent civilian targets are either “sometimes justified” or “often justified”.
Only 59.5% were willing to say such mass murders are “never justified.”
At the same time, 51.9% of those respondents said there were “serious threats” to Islam around the world. What do they believe is threatening Islam if not America and Israel?
I think what you have here is a situation in which Muslims cherry-pick their excuses. " Muslims don’t commit terrorism, and if you prove to me that they do, it means it was justified and they had no choice."
On a sidenote, the proper context of the “Kill the infidels where you find them” line has been explained so many times that its incredible people still bring it up.
Indeed, not only are people continuing to “bring it up”, Muslims are continuing to mass-murder “the infidels where they find them”. And the numbers above indicate a good chunk of the Muslim world thinks it’s just fine to do so.
In fact, some Muslim’s allegiance to the Koran’s commandment is so strong they are now mass-murdering fellow Muslims that refuse to assist in the mass-murder of the infidels. They are even mass-murdering Muslims for the crime of merely associating with the infidels (associating with non-believers is another no-no according to the Koran).
It appears that a lot of Muslims didn’t get the memo that “explained” that passage about “kill the infidels”.
Like Christianity, Islam is full of contradictory exhortations. In a faith-based doctrine, with reason out the door, there is no way to determine which of the contradictory claims is “the real meaning". The claim that Islam advocates terrorism is just as valid as the claim that it does not. With faith, anything goes.
But even if we pretend context doesnt exist and treat those statements as being absolute, your argument still doesnt make any sense. How can you interpret “There is no compulsion in religion” to mean “Muslims cant be guilty of terrorism”?
The moment they commit the terror, they cease to be Muslims – or so the argument goes.
Understand that I am not offering that argument. It’s just one more way Muslim apologists try to dissociate Islam from the terrorists it is spawning around the globe.
Hey, if all you watch is jihad-TV what else would you believe?
Do you have any evidence that Al-Jazeera has blamed Israel or America for the attack?
Al-Jazeera does not have to blame America or Israel. All they have to do is run interviews with those who do. I have seen such interviews.
Are we to understand that you consider Al-Jazeera an objective news outlet?
the fact that previous American administrations have discussed staging fake ‘terrorist’ attacks on the nation in order to produce support for unpopular wars, c) the fact that Israel has done similar things in the past, albeit on a far smaller scale (the Lavon affair), and d) the popularity of Pearl Harbour conspiracy theories (which imo seem to have a bit of weight behind them, although I’d hesitate to say I was a believer), I think speculation that the US/Israel allowed 9/11 to happen was not without merit. There’s very little that I would put past the American government, although I dont really believe 9/11 conspiracy theories. I suppose you can call it a ‘boy who cried wolf’ situation.