Moderate Islamists work with Al Qaeda

[Zevico]

So let me get this straight. I post explicit evidence outlining how Islamist groups work with Al Qaeda. You respond that I am somehow calling for genocide. But you can't bring yourself to explicitly state what is by now implicit in your postings: you think all Muslims are Islamists. Hence it does not matter to you if Islamism, as defined, excludes Muslims in theory; in practice you think they all hate us. That can really be the only justification for your complaint. Well, I don't have time to deal with simple minded bigots.

[Aeson]

Those groups subscribe to a specific ideology, Islamism--the idea that their vision of Islam is the answer to every social, political and economic question. Those who subscribe to this view can be quite peaceful. They can peacefully call for blasphemers to be beheaded and violently call for it. But if we oppose beheadings for blasphemy their ideology is still an evil one that deserves to be opposed. To say this is by no means to suggest that every Muslim subscribes to the Islamist ideology. This is not the case, though Islamism is the dominant religious ideology in many Muslim countries. Even when that is the case it is often despised by those Muslims ruled by it. All of which is to say that the label Islamist applies to Islamists, not Muslims per se. Those who equate the two are simply ignorant of history. On the other hand, if you think beheading people for blasphemy is fine as long as you implement it lawfully and peacefully, well, what can I say?

No, it is you who are ignorant of history. Tolerant societies don't just pop into existence, and certainly not under brutal dictators. Islamic democratic movements may not be all we'd hope they would be, but they're a step in the right direction.

If you had been around in 1776 you'd be arguing that the US government should be overthrown and a dictator installed because we had slaves. It took us nearly 200 years to get to the point where the color of a person's skin didn't dictate what type of citizen they were. But we had the opportunity to work out our problems. No foreign power overthrowing our democracy and supporting a dictator.

That's why your world-view is so horribly ****ed up. You want to take away these peoples' chance to do what we did. Even though in many ways they're way ahead of the curve we set, and almost surely wouldn't take as long to reach a relatively tolerant society as we did. Instead you want to pretend that they're all the same, that they're all extremists even when they have obvious differences. You want to support dictators and undermine democratic movements, for fear they might be Islamist movements gaining power.

Absurdly, the very actions you support are the ones that help foster the more extremist movements you fear.

Apart from that, it is nonsense to accuse me of racism. Islamism is not a race but an ideology subscribed to by persons of a vast range of ethnic backgrounds.

You should argue that with people who have accused you of racism here. I haven't in regards to this issue. Again you display the inability to delineate between divergent groups based on very real, very obvious differences. You need to work on that ...

[kentonio]

So let me get this straight. I post explicit evidence outlining how Islamist groups work with Al Qaeda. You respond that I am somehow calling for genocide. But you can't bring yourself to explicitly state what is by now implicit in your postings: you think all Muslims are Islamists. Hence it does not matter to you if Islamism, as defined, excludes Muslims in theory; in practice you think they all hate us. That can really be the only justification for your complaint. Well, I don't have time to deal with simple minded bigots.

That makes absolutely no sense you ****ing moron.

[Asher]

Reg - all Muslims are Arab. Ergo, opposition to Islam = racism.

Oddly enough, opposition to Judaism is not racism.

Opposition to Judaism is certainly a form of racism as well. You may not think so, but that's just you.

[Asher]

Those groups subscribe to a specific ideology, Islamism--the idea that their vision of Islam is the answer to every social, political and economic question. Those who subscribe to this view can be quite peaceful. They can peacefully call for blasphemers to be beheaded and violently call for it. But if we oppose beheadings for blasphemy their ideology is still an evil one that deserves to be opposed. To say this is by no means to suggest that every Muslim subscribes to the Islamist ideology. This is not the case, though Islamism is the dominant religious ideology in many Muslim countries. Even when that is the case it is often despised by those Muslims ruled by it. All of which is to say that the label Islamist applies to Islamists, not Muslims per se. Those who equate the two are simply ignorant of history. On the other hand, if you think beheading people for blasphemy is fine as long as you implement it lawfully and peacefully, well, what can I say?

Apart from that, it is nonsense to accuse me of racism. Islamism is not a race but an ideology subscribed to by persons of a vast range of ethnic backgrounds.

So it's not racism because you believe it's not a race.

What's the term for someone who is biased against an entire race of people because most of them are of one faith?

[regexcellent]

The simple fact is, Zev's preoccupation with Islamists doesn't make him racist against Arabs at all. Islamism is an ideology about theocratic government, not a group of people.

[SlowwHand]

I have a problem with suicide bombers. Is that a race? What if I don't care what race they're a part of, or what country they hail from? Racist? How so?

[regexcellent]

It's especially funny because people like dannubis and Asher are always saying how their knee-jerk anti-Israel views are not anti-semitic.

[Asher]

It's especially funny because people like dannubis and Asher are always saying how their knee-jerk anti-Israel views are not anti-semitic.

There's a difference between criticizing the policies of a specific country and criticizing all people of a faith or belief.

Figure it out or ask for help, but don't keep yourself ignorant.

[regexcellent]

Yes, there is a difference, however what Zevico is doing is criticizing the policies of a specific style of government, if not country, and not criticizing all people of a faith or belief.

[Asher]

The simple fact is, Zev's preoccupation with Islamists doesn't make him racist against Arabs at all. Islamism is an ideology about theocratic government, not a group of people.

The idea of Islamism is no more or less absurd and ridiculous as the idea of America as a Christian Nation.

Right-wingers jerk off over how evil Islamism is while they continually try to enshrine Christianity and its beliefs into the government of Americans.

They're both absurd.

[Asher]

Yes, there is a difference, however what Zevico is doing is criticizing the policies of a specific style of government, if not country, and not criticizing all people of a faith or belief.

You seem to be confused.

A theocracy is a type of government.
Islamism is a set of ideologies.

You are, in fact, criticizing all followers of a set of ideologies.

[regexcellent]

I'm afraid you're mistaken. American conservatives aren't interested in creating a theocracy, even a religious one. Some on the fringe may be but it's not a mainstream view. Moreover, Islamists are not only very common in much of the Arab world, in many countries they represent a plurality or a majority.

[regexcellent]

You seem to be confused.

A theocracy is a type of government.
Islamism is a set of ideologies.

The ideology of Islamism is ISLAMIC GOVERNMENT.

[Asher]

I'm afraid you're mistaken. American conservatives aren't interested in creating a theocracy, even a religious one. Some on the fringe may be but it's not a mainstream view.

Does the GOP not represent the views of American conservative voters?

If not, why are they voting for them?

And don't tell me the GOP is not interested in creating a Christian-dominated government.