I reckon you show signs of radical Islam in your apologetics. You're not cogent or logical, or fair to other religions.
How exactly was this a reasonable response to:
Why do you get to decide what terrorism is? Tell the victims of war crimes and sanctions that what they went through is not terrorism. Because they'd beg to differ.
In other words, being in a suit and a tie & calling yourself president means that you will never be practically/realistically guilty of terrorism even though they otherwise fit the definition of it.
Why is it that only Muslims can play the victim card? How about the people that are victims of Islam? How about the 10s of 1000s of Christians, Hindus and Buddhists that this very day are being driven from their homes by Muslims? Every been to
Voice of the Martyrs ? Click on a Muslim country and tell us all how rosy it is for Christians in those countries.
Tell us how rosy it is for the Muslims in Buddhist Burma (the ethnic minority Muslims are deemed one of the most persecuted minorities in the world by the UN), for the Muslims who were killed by the Hindus in Kashmir & Gujurat, and the Muslims who are persecuted everywhere at the hands of Christians (Serbia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq, etc).
Furthermore, you look quite the hypocrite. I happen to be a minister in a largely Muslim enclave of my city.
May Allaah protect the Muslims from you and all others who try to remove us from God's religion. Ameen.
I know a few Muslims, have baptised a couple too. I know their stories. Unlike you, they aren't belly-aching about how evil the west is. In fact, they left their countries to enjoy the freedom and peace of this little "Christian" country of ours.
Ask them how they feel about the wars in Iraq, the drone strikes in Muslim countries, about America's support of Israel (including through the money that is used for the Israeli military), about Guantanamo Bay, about the Patriot Act, about the NDAA, etc.
I have a feeling they'd tell you how evil those things are. If they don't care about any of these things, well, I wouldn't know what to tell them since the Messenger of God, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), said,
“The similitude of believers in regard to mutual love, affection, fellow-feeling is that of one body; when any limb of it aches, the whole body aches, because of sleeplessness and fever.” [Muslim]
They use all of the Western things in life- cars, computers, software, television, music (not just nafsheed, but music with instruments) They get to vote too.
*nasheed. It's too bad that they listen to musical instruments. Maybe they don't know it's forbidden in Islaam.
As for the rest, you do know that these things exist in other countries, too, right?
Plus, most of them support our participation in the war in Afghanistan, because of lot of them are Afghans who were driven out by Muslim Islamists- the Taliban (who's arguments you propogate on this very forum!) There's also people in my neighbourhood who want our government to be more involved in Syria.
And I have the exact opposite experience with Afghans and the Pathan. Not a single one of them agreed with the war and were actually some of the more outspoken ones regarding it.
I'd guess that those Afghans you speak of were/are supporters of the Northern Alliance and are more nationalist than religious. I'm sure that drug lords were happy with the invasion since opium production has flourished since 2002. Same goes for those who supported & wanted the practice of bacha bazi to continue.
As for Syria, I also know lots of Muslims who want the US to intervene in Syria. I also know lots who don't want the US going in. I understand both of their positions.
I am somewhat 'relieved' that America hasn't helped, though (not that I'm happy that the nations throughout the world, in general, are not doing all that much). It's forcing the Muslims to totally depend on Allaah for victory and help. Not that other oppressed Muslims don't already, but there's something about Syria that just seems special.
As a side note, major props to Sweden. Taking in Syrian refugees was an amazing act on their part. My respect for them has gone up. And IKEA too.
A lot of the Muslims in my area also come from Bosnia. They appreciate the efforts of NATO and the US in particular to come to the "aid of the Muslims against the Christians" during the war with Serbia.
As do I, though I do believe it was too little, too late. Also, a lot of things were questionable, such as imposing an arms embargo so that the Bosnians couldn't defend themselves, the Dutch essentially standing around in an area that was supposed to be under the protection of the UN watching while the Serbs slaughtered the Bosnians, not putting sufficient troops on the ground all the while promising the Bosnians that they are safe (if the Dutch excuse is that there weren't enough people to realistically prevent the slaughter of the Bosnians), not even returning the weapons to the Bosnians in that UN protected area so they could defend themselves, trading Bosnians with the Serbs in return for Dutch hostages (and these Bosnians were later killed), not approving of air strikes until after the massacre (and getting the forms mixed up), etc.
One Iranian we baptized recently gave me a list of good things Christians have done for Muslims and Muslim countries when he first approached us to find out about the Good News of Jesus Christ.
Ok....?
So.....what's your beef? You take sides in politics, engage in hyperbole and exaggerated rhetoric, find inflated and disputed figures and deem them indisputable but only in defense of "Muslims". What's with that? You live a privileged life in a country based on non-Islamic values, and yet you defend people that murder in shopping centres because the West is apparently bad?
1.) My beef is with the claim that Muslims in the West enjoy the same rights & freedoms that our non-Muslim counterparts enjoy. This is absolutely not true.
2.) Don't most people take sides in politics in at least one issue?
3.) Inflated & disputed numbers? You can certainly believe that, but I posted those numbers based on what the UN initially said & what UNICEF reiterated. It speaks volumes that Albright didn't even attempt to deny the figure when confronted with the issue on 60 Minutes. If it was false, wouldn't that be her first line of defense? And it's not like 100,000 infants/toddlers/preschoolers dead due to sanctions is much better.
4.) When have I ever defended murders in shopping centers?
Again, my only two options are not to stay silent & don't criticize or leave.
Not at all. But at least I don't try to empty the word "terrorism" of meaning. I don't have an agenda that requires that. You do.
Then apply it across the board and do not excuse the terror of non-Muslims (including governments). Otherwise it seems that you're the one with the agenda (of trying to pin the term on almost exclusively Muslims).
I want you to stop ignoring the violence done to Muslims BY Muslims as well as the violence done to non-Muslims BY Muslims because of their religion.
I don't.
As one person observed- history has a pattern in Islam. They move in, first they subdue the Jews, then the Christians, and then they turn on each other for not being Muslim enough.
And why should I care about the observations of this person?
You should study Christian theology before you make a dumb statement like that!
Like I said, it doesn't offer practical guidelines. Complete pacifism is not practical.
Hard pressed?
Here.
Here.
Here.
Here.
and...
Here.
Here.
One State Solution: A Historical Perspective
The Status of Non-Muslims In the Islamic State
.
