FRIHOST • FORUMS • SEARCH • FAQ • TOS • BLOGS • DIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

"Radical" Islamic Muslims; Please Read

   Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion
 


Billy Hill
I just want to clear something to you people. Some of you, not to point names, but you know who you are, have been saying that I have been saying Muslims are fine but Islamic Muslims are immoral.

I want you to understand that THAT STATEMENT IS BULLSHIT.

Look, Islam is the name of the religion Muslims follow. Christianity is the religion Christians follow. Judaism is the religion Jews follow. Hinduism is the religion Hindus follow, and so on and so forth.

A Radical Islamic Muslim is someone who follows facist Islam, the religion of Radical Muslims. It's like saying there's a difference between Radical Christians and Radical Christians who follow Christianity. See how it makes no sense? Same idea.

Seriously, not to make fun of Half-Pint Princess, but as I've said many times here (if you'd care to read), the (so-called and self-proclaimed) majority of Islamic Muslims are not Radical. Hence the difference between Muslims/Islamic Muslims/Islamics and RIMs/Radical Islamic Muslims/Islamo-fascists/terrorists. But the similarities, between the RIMs and the so-called moderates in areas like cartoons and naming your teddy bear, are frightening.
Bikerman
Billy Hill wrote:
I just want to clear something to you people. Some of you, not to point names, but you know who you are, have been saying that I have been saying Muslims are fine but Islamic Muslims are immoral.

I want you to understand that THAT STATEMENT IS BULLSHIT.
Really? So the following quotes are obviously taken out of context then? (Aside from the fact that 'Islamic Muslim' is, as has already been pointed out, a tautology - a Muslim is Islamic by definition). These are just some of the quotes I could have used and this list is by no means exhaustive.
BH wrote:
I did it like that because, even though it's OK to generalize about Americans (as in being stupid), it's not ok to generalize about Muslims, so I have to say (radical) Muslims or my posts get deleted locked or otherwise silenced.

ermm..so you distinguish between Muslims and Radical Muslims because your posts might get deleted otherwise? Well, let's see if you stick to that distinction....
BH wrote:
Is it because it's a no win game for Islamic Muslims when looking at barbaric, uncivil, hateful, religious freaks that collectively think it's OK to murder women and children in the name of their God.
BH wrote:
There certainly IS a singularity to Islamic Muslims that is not the belief of any other group of any significant size based on religious or non-religious beliefs.
BH wrote:
Christians don't go about killing the way Muslims do.
BH wrote:
No, I'm telling you that Islamic Muslims are immoral.

Oops....shurely shome mishtake. I'm sure you said above that you did not say that, and that the notion was Bull****.
BH wrote:
The cowards they fight against (angry Islamic Muslims) are hiding in schools, churches and private residences when they attack. They were shown again and again to hide behind women and children. They are cruel cowards.
BH wrote:
Yeah, I'm just as bad as Islamic Muslims who think it's ok to kill someone who refuses to convert to Islam.
BH wrote:
More filthy Muslims hiding behind children?
Or is that from yesterday when those filthy Muslims bombed that prep school?
BH wrote:
Shall I start showing pictures of people getting their heads sawed off by filthy Muslims???
BH wrote:
Filthy Muslims constantly target children, hide behind them, then show pictures of dead children and try to blame it on the filthy Zionists (or filthy Christians or whoever they're fighting this week) when in reality, it was the filthy Muslim's own doing.

Obviously you were not really talking about Muslims, or 'Islamic Muslims' and simple forgot to add the 'Radical' and accidentally added 'filthy'. You can, however, see where the misunderstanding might arise. The words you use define the perceived meaning of your contributions. If your meaning is, as you say, not to impugne all Muslims, then it behoves you to choose your words more carefully. If, on the other hand, you actually mean what you repeatedly say then why deny it?

Last edited by Bikerman on Wed Jan 30, 2008 2:42 am; edited 1 time in total
liljp617
No one cares about your random justifications for prejudice and xenophobia. Preach to people who think like yourself...those with extremely narrow views of reality.
Klaw 2
Billy Hill wrote:


Seriously, not to make fun of Half-Pint Princess, but as I've said many times here (if you'd care to read), the (so-called and self-proclaimed) majority of Islamic Muslims are not Radical. Hence the difference between Muslims/Islamic Muslims/Islamics and RIMs/Radical Islamic Muslims/Islamo-fascists/terrorists. But the similarities, between the RIMs and the so-called moderates in areas like cartoons and naming your teddy bear, are frightening.


Look you don't know the situation there maybe because of fear they do that kinda things. Because of the pressure the state and the population of that country people are forced to turn in people who commit such crimes. As for these laws yeah they are a bit extreme. But I know some muslims myself and they do practice the religion but they are anything but extreme.
HalfBloodPrince
Billy Hill wrote:
No, I'm telling you that Islamic Muslims are immoral.


Is this bullshit? If so, you're the one who said it. "Half-pint Princess"? Have you even hit puberty yet?
Billy Hill
You're right, Chris... all those comments came shortly after people started using the same tone about other groups. I often respond in kind, and I shouldn't. I'm sorry. If you look further back in my posts, you'll clearly find a definition between Islam and Radical Islam. I will make sure I return to the habit of making that clear and obvious distinction. Again, I'm sorry for letting it get out of hand, and thanks for pointing it out.

And HBP, My apologies for calling you names. That was completely uncalled for, even though most times your attitude is condescending and rude.

:edit: and no, none of the mods have talked to me or PM'd me, I'm apologizing because I know the personal attacks were wrong even though they go both ways and I personally won't do it any more unless clearly provoked, and I'll do that with the report button.
Soulfire
I think the word "Islamist" is used to designate the political/religious hybrid of extreme Islam. It's important to clearly define our enemy -- are we attacking Muslims or Islamists? I think our intent is to attack the Islamists (i.e. people who threaten our core values and want to see the world in an Islamic state regardless of consequence), but it is looking like we are attacking a religion. This is simply not the case.
HalfBloodPrince
I beg to differ. Imagine a man robs a store in America. This man is Christian/Hindu/Atheist/whatever. Newspaper headlines: MAN ROBS BANK - STEALS $750,000

Now lets say it was a Muslim man who did this exact same thing. Newspaper headlines: MUSLIM MAN ROBS BANK - Connections with Al Queida unconfirmed

Am I wrong?
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
I beg to differ. Imagine a man robs a store in America. This man is Christian/Hindu/Atheist/whatever. Newspaper headlines: MAN ROBS BANK - STEALS $750,000

Now lets say it was a Muslim man who did this exact same thing. Newspaper headlines: MUSLIM MAN ROBS BANK - Connections with Al Queida unconfirmed

Am I wrong?


Good point HBP, Robbing a bank, no, I dont see that headline... shooting up a school, yes. I could see that headline.
HalfBloodPrince
Billy Hill wrote:
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
I beg to differ. Imagine a man robs a store in America. This man is Christian/Hindu/Atheist/whatever. Newspaper headlines: MAN ROBS BANK - STEALS $750,000

Now lets say it was a Muslim man who did this exact same thing. Newspaper headlines: MUSLIM MAN ROBS BANK - Connections with Al Queida unconfirmed

Am I wrong?


Good point HBP, Robbing a bank, no, I dont see that headline... shooting up a school, yes. I could see that headline.


How?

Bikerman wrote:
Christians tend to use the firearm approach to school attrocities. Here's a list of US school attrocities. I don't know how many of the shooters were Christian but, in the US, it will be a significant number, almost certainly.

University of Texas at Austin massacre Austin, Texas, United States August 1, 1966
Orangeburg Massacre Orangeburg, South Carolina, United States February 8, 1968
Kent State shootings Kent, Ohio, United States May 4, 1970
Jackson State killings Jackson, Mississippi, United States May 14-15, 1970
California State University, Fullerton Library Massacre Fullerton, California, United States July 12, 1976
Cleveland Elementary School shooting San Diego, California, United States January 29, 1979
Parkway South Junior High School shooting Saint Louis, Missouri, United States January 20, 1983
Stockton massacre Stockton, California, United States January 17, 1989
University of Iowa shooting Iowa City, Iowa, United States November 1, 1991
Simon's Rock College of Bard shooting Great Barrington, Massachusetts, United States December 14, 1992
Lindhurst High School shooting Marysville, California, United States May 1, 1992
East Carter High School shooting Grayson, Kentucky, United States January 18, 1993
Richland High School shooting Lynnville, Tennessee, United States November 15, 1995
Frontier Junior High shooting Moses Lake, Washington, United States February 2, 1996
Bethel High School shooting Bethel, Alaska, United States February 19, 1997
Pearl High School shooting Pearl, Mississippi, United States October 1, 1997
Heath High School shooting West Paducah, Kentucky United States December 1, 1997
Jonesboro massacre Jonesboro, Arkansas, United States March 24, 1998
Parker Middle School Shooting Edinboro, Pennsylvania April 24, 1998
Thurston High School shooting Springfield, Oregon, United States May 21, 1998
Columbine High School massacre near Littleton, Colorado, United States April 20, 1999
Heritage High School shooting Conyers, Georgia, United States May 20, 1999
Buell Elementary School shooting Mount Morris Township, Michigan, United States February 29, 2000
Santana High School shooting Santee, California, United States March 5, 2001
Granite Hills High School shooting El Cajon, California March 22, 2001
Appalachian School of Law shooting Grundy, Virginia, United States January 16, 2002
John McDonogh High School Shooting New Orleans, La., United States April 14, 2003
Red Lion Area Junior High School shootings Red Lion, Pennsylvania, United States April 24, 2003
Rocori High School shootings Cold Spring, Minnesota, United States September 24, 2003
Red Lake High School massacre Red Lake, Minnesota, United States March 21, 2005
Campbell County High School shooting Jacksboro, Tennessee November 8, 2005
Pine Middle School shooting Reno, Nevada, United States March 14, 2006
Platte Canyon High School shooting Bailey, Colorado, United States September 27, 2006
Weston High School shooting Cazenovia, Wisconsin September 29, 2006
Amish school shooting Nickel Mines, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, United States October 2, 2006
Virginia Tech massacre Blacksburg, Virginia, United States April 16, 2007
Delaware State University shooting Dover, Delaware, United States September 21, 2007
SuccessTech Academy shooting Cleveland, Ohio, United States October 10, 2007

Source ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#North_America
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:

How?


Robbing a bank isn't terroristic. Shooting up a school full of kids is. Robbing a bank isn't the MO of Radical Islamic Muslims, slamming a plane into said bank is.
HalfBloodPrince
Shooting a school full of children is by far one of the worst things any human can do, but I ask, what does have to do with Islamists? They are in a Muslim country, but what does it have to do with Islamists? What makes it different than two American teenagers walking into their school and shooting people?
Arnie
The difference is when they say they're doing it for Islam and when many Muslims fail to publically, openly condemn it. I've seen that happen, sadly. But saying that all Muslims agree with the terrorists is very wrong and generalising. If you're going to protest against injustice you have to make sure your arguments are correct.

However it's equally wrong to respond to such false claims with a ban of all Islam criticism. I've seen people who scrutinize everything with a harsh scientific view suddenly be soft on Islam because any criticism, valid or invalid, gets attacked. Or because they themselves are led to believe that criticism of Islam is never acceptable.

That's also wrong. But easy to get away with: because there are so many people throwing invalid criticism, you can shove the ones that are right under the same category and make them lose credibility. I bet many even do that unconsciously: after having seen many false arguments, they stop thinking and just see "another Islam basher who can't be right" - let's bash back!

So yeah, it doesn't surprise me that confusion arises as is (supposed to be) the topic of this thread. Note however that I haven't taken any stand for any party here. Just because I don't attack and condemn every Islam criticizer I see, doesn't mean I agree with them. It also doesn't mean I don't.
Billy Hill
Arnie wrote:

However it's equally wrong to respond to such false claims with a ban of all Islam criticism. I've seen people who scrutinize everything with a harsh scientific view suddenly be soft on Islam because any criticism, valid or invalid, gets attacked. Or because they themselves are led to believe that criticism of Islam is never acceptable.


It's not just criticisms, it's humor as well. If a news agency publishes something that jokes or mocks ANYTHING about Muhammad or Islam, i.e. cookies, teddy bears, cartoons, they are instantly hit with threats and/or violence.

Take this for example...



Personally, I LMFAO. Now if that was a picture of Muhammad on that dog's butt, I'm sure all hell would break loose and I'd be told in no uncertain terms that you "don't ****** with Muslims. You just don't" as PMK Bear will tell you.
Arnie
Well FYI, I'm not amused with the picture at all, but don't worry you won't get death threats from me.
HalfBloodPrince
Me neither. Now you say, why aren't we on the streets denouncing it? Well, quite frankly, it isn't really smart. It's dangerous, even stupid.
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
why aren't we on the streets denouncing it? Well, quite frankly, it isn't really smart. It's dangerous, even stupid.


So you'd rather deal with millions and millions of people stereotyping you as a terrorist for being Muslim because you're afraid to tell the terrorists to STFU and leave Islam out of it?

If you're not willing to stand up and make the separation between terrorists and Muslims publicly and loudly then by all means you should not be hostile towards those that refer to you as a terrorist or those that lump you together with that type of person.
HalfBloodPrince
So...because I am an ordinary man who does not wish to get himself involved with mad-men equipped with bombs, guns, tanks, and missiles, I am automatically one of them?
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
So...because I am an ordinary man who does not wish to get himself involved with mad-men equipped with bombs, guns, tanks, and missiles, I am automatically one of them?


Only if you refuse to differentiate yourself from them.
HalfBloodPrince
And that isn't what I've been trying to do for months on this forum?
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
And that isn't what I've been trying to do for months on this forum?


It's not about what you do on this forum

HalfBloodPrince wrote:
why aren't we on the streets denouncing it? Well, quite frankly, it isn't really smart. It's dangerous, even stupid.


YOU are part of WE in this example.
HalfBloodPrince
Billy Hill wrote:
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
And that isn't what I've been trying to do for months on this forum?


It's not about what you do on this forum


Frankly that's the only type of communication I think I can have with you. I don't plan on visiting your front lawn with banners and signs denouncing terrorists. Now quote that line and mock me.
Bryan_Bezzle
Bobby Hill wont you understand YOU are YOU and not any other man. You cannot dictate what other men say feel or do. To sit aside and decry Muslims need to step up is as useless as you sitting in your computer chair telling other people to do what you feel needs to be done. Read that twice for they are the same. Badmouthing a religion on a message board will get your ideals nowhere. If you feel Muslim men and women need to step up and make changes, then you yourself take that step. Otherwise your ramblings are nonsense.
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
Billy Hill wrote:
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
And that isn't what I've been trying to do for months on this forum?


It's not about what you do on this forum


Frankly that's the only type of communication I think I can have with you. I don't plan on visiting your front lawn with banners and signs denouncing terrorists. Now quote that line and mock me.


I'm not mocking you. I'm serious. Your reluctance (refusal?) to denounce terrorists for hiding behind Islam means you will always be seen as an appeaser. Or worse.

Waving banners in my yard won't do anything except get my wife riled up so that she runs out waving her Colt .45 yelling "get away from my child's bedroom window!!" (True story, only it was tweakers parked in front of our house doing drugs, not Muslims waving banners denouncing terrorists. Very Happy )

Meet my wife:



Shocked
HalfBloodPrince
Billy Hill wrote:
Your reluctance (refusal?) to denounce terrorists for hiding behind Islam means you will always be seen as an appeaser.


My refusal? I refuse to denounce terrorists just as much as you love Muslims.
Billy Hill
HalfBloodPrince wrote:
Billy Hill wrote:
Your reluctance (refusal?) to denounce terrorists for hiding behind Islam means you will always be seen as an appeaser.


My refusal? I refuse to denounce terrorists just as much as you love Muslims.


HalfBloodPrince wrote:
why aren't we on the streets denouncing it? Well, quite frankly, it isn't really smart. It's dangerous, even stupid.


So which is it?

You give the impression that you denounce it yet claim it would be dangerous, even stupid... Consistency is key. Wink

FYI, I have Muslim friends. None are as, how shall we say? sensitive ? as the ones I associate with here. Perhaps its because they can tell when I'm talking about radicals and when I'm not (looking someone in the eye conveys that better than emoticons). Or perhaps it's because they live here in the US and are truly free to live their own religious lives and are consistent in their denouncing terrorists.
tidruG
User banned. Topic -closed-. End of story.
Related topics

"Islamic" Muslims...please read
Americans, are you thankful?
terrorism
Breaking news - Amish School Shooting PA
Christian radical says Amish girls deserved to be murdered
Muslim speaks out...
Karma coming full circle...
Can anyone (preferrably a Muslim) 'splane this to me?
The Middle East Conflict
Torture and the US
Nuclear Peace !
Is your country on THIS map?
Iran: very close to the nuclear power!!!
america - when will it stop?
Final Stages? Final Outcome?
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Philosophy and Religion

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.