A Muslim speaks against Islamism

September 17, 2011 | Filed under Islamic Fascism | Posted by

Surprising things being said here by Tarek Fatah… especially at the end of his chat… coming our way via GM’s Place:

« « Comedy Break: Smothered In Chocolate
Obama Scandals Update: You Need A Scorecard » »

Shortlink:

Posted by on September 17, 2011.
Filed under Islamic Fascism.
I blog more regularly at my own place where plain thoughts are delivered roughly. My about page gives you more on who I am.

Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Up to 90% off top rated local fun!

  • Pingback: Brutally Honest

  • Anonymous

    That many Muslims are against Islamism would not surprise anyone who’s been out on a pub crawl in Cairo or Amman, Dubai or Marrakech. 

    This guy goes over the top comparing Islamists (Al Qaeda) to the Wehrmacht in WWII or the Soviets in the Cold War.  Give me a break.  He’s complaining that troops rotate home after their tours in Afghanistan? 

    Other than that, he makes a lot of unsubstantiated charges against companies and people.

    He filled the house, probably got paid well, so I think it’s working out well for him.

    • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

      In any religion there are significant numbers of “members” who prefer not to adhere to the rules because it is too tough, but should the religion itself be judged by the actions of its casual adherents or its dedicated followers?

      • Anonymous

        You tell me how many Catholics use birth control devices and what that means about Catholicism.  Are they, as you say, “members?” Or Jews eating ham sandwiches, does that mean anything?  Mormons drinking coffee?

        Most people in any religion are casual adherents, because many rules don’t make sense to them.  Which is why extremism fails on its own.

        • Anonymous

          First off, Chico, you’d be better off saying “Jews who eat bacon or pepperoni pizza.” Ham sandwiches is a bit too on the nose.

          Next, you’d really impress me with a comparison of how many people have been killed in… say, the last ten years by radicals of each of the three major religions cited in this thread.

          J.

        • Anonymous

          90% of the cause of violence is political and territorial, not religious.  Like blaming Catholicism for IRA violence, it does not go too far.

          Mostly they want Western foreigners out of their countries and to stop stealing their wealth and propping up dictators. 

          But can I count GW Bush as a Christian “radical” for invading Iraq, for the purpose of the count of deaths?

          • Oysteria

            Boy, way to oversimplify, Chico. 

            “90% of the cause of violence is political and territorial, not religious.”  Their religion IS their politics.

            Furthermore, we, meaning the US, are not stealing their wealth.  ”Wealth”, for most of them is oil, and we don’t steal their oil.  We may have propped up dictators, and I don’t agree with that tact, but just what do you think they’ll replace them with?  There’s a large population of Muslims in the Middle East who will wail and gnash teeth over their dictators then stand idly by while the radicals amongst them replace them with new dictators they’re not any happier with.  And don’t try the argument, “At least they get to choose,” because many of them don’t.  Anyone who thinks the new dictators will spread the wealth better, is in for a rude awakening.

            “But can I count GW Bush as a Christian “radical” for invading Iraq, for the purpose of the count of deaths?”
            So you want to compare a duly elected GW Bush and an entire duly elected Congress of many faiths with a number of loosely affilited unelected non-governmental terror groups “for the purpose of the count of deaths”?  You’re being facetious, right? 

          • jim_m

            Chica,

            That demonstrates an astonishing ignorance of islam.  In islam there is no distinction between the religious and the political.  The only way to say that the violence is not of religious basis is if it were conducted by secularists.  Unfortunately, the secular movement in the middle east is all but dead.  Turkey was the last holdout in that regard and Erdogan is taking it into religious based government.

            Mostly middle easterners want a better life.  Their dictators whip them into a fury by telling them that their suffering is not due to the depredations of their corrupt governments but the fault of the Jews and Americans.  Most of the populations would love to have the kinds of goods that expanded trade with America would provide.

            The very idea that we are over their stealing anyone’s wealth is absurd.  We don’t dictate oil prices.  We aren’t over their taking it by force.  If idiot leftists like you really wanted to get the US out of the middle east you would support domestic oil development, but you don’t.  Your agenda is simple anti-Americanism.  Period.

      • Anonymous

        Doesn’t this happen every day with abusive Catholic priests ?

  • Anonymous

    If it makes you happy, can’t be that bad..

  • http://www.locomotivebreath1901.blogspot.com locomotivebreath1901

    What’s most telling about this is the title: “A Muslim speaks against Islamism.”

    “A.” As in single. One.

    And while one person can make a difference, and the longest journey starts with a single step, one Muslim out of a billion Muslims worldwide to denounce Islamism simply is not enough.