True Islam

enaena
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In Bush's big post-9/11 speech in front of Congress, he said that "the terrorists" had "hijacked" Islam for their own purposes.



Ann Coulter has a piece on her site that is questioning the intentions of that sort of thinking---that it is imperialistic, and used as a tool to direct people where the powers at be want them to go.



Is the "West" trying to put the whammy on the Shia and Wahabi types of Islam? Or are they (the Shia and Wahabi flavors) really hijacking that faith?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    haraldharald Posts: 2,152member
    Uh oh.
  • Reply 2 of 12
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    Hilarious stuff, thanks for posting it.



    Though some colonialists used Christianity as a fig leaf for pillage, they were precisely as Christian as Cuba, China and North Korea are "democratic" today.



    Excuse me, Anne, could this be a double-standard?



    Who the hell is she to tell Mr. Abortion-doctor Sniper that he's not a "true Christian"?



    too easy
  • Reply 3 of 12
    Islam is as varied as Christianity. Instead of Sunni, Wahhabi and Shia, think Catholics, Southern Baptists and Mormons. They all seem to be convinced that they are more right then any other subset of the religion but are still able to co-exist.



    BTW - If you actually want to learn about Islam, might I suggest that you avoid the writings of Ann 'kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity' Coulter?
  • Reply 4 of 12
    haraldharald Posts: 2,152member
    Anne Coulter ranted:



    Quote:

    The only French custom that still survives is the aversion to bathing



  • Reply 5 of 12
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    haha



    It's funny because it's true.



    *pokes France with a stick*
  • Reply 6 of 12
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    haha



    It's funny because it's true.



    *pokes France with a stick*




    Right i prefer showel, i hate to marinate in my own juice



    Concerning the subject of the topic, you are right, who we are to determine who is real islam and who is not. Anyway we can say what is modern (nice) islam. Whannabism is definitively not nice or need a strong evolution.
  • Reply 7 of 12
    enaena Posts: 667member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Powerdoc

    Right i prefer showel, i hate to marinate in my own juice



    Concerning the subject of the topic, you are right, who we are to determine who is real islam and who is not. Anyway we can say what is modern (nice) islam. Whannabism is definitively not nice or need a strong evolution.




    Yes, but here's the clincher:



    Bush (and other western leaders) have basically drawn a line in the sand with what they will and will not accept from "Islam."



    Case in point---they will not tolerate a theocracy in Iraq.
  • Reply 8 of 12
    haraldharald Posts: 2,152member
    EVEN IF THEY ELECT ONE!?
  • Reply 9 of 12
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Hehehehe...

    True Islam is not what the wahabi preach, nor is it contained to the limits which Bush, a sort of apologist, for purposes which we understand well enough.



    It is peace and violence, poetic and brutal, like all religions.
  • Reply 10 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ena

    Yes, but here's the clincher:

    Case in point---they will not tolerate a theocracy in Iraq.




    While I object to theocracy as a form of government (no matter what the religion), who are we to 'tolerate' one in Iraq if that is in fact what the Iraqi people want? And if they really want it, how can it be prevented?
  • Reply 11 of 12
    haraldharald Posts: 2,152member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kneelbeforezod

    While I object to theocracy as a form of government (no matter what the religion), who are we to 'tolerate' one in Iraq if that is in fact what the Iraqi people want? And if they really want it, how can it be prevented?



    I know! We don't invade them and ... uh ... sorry.
  • Reply 12 of 12
    This article does a good job of explaining how the seperation of church and state is an almost entirely alien concept to many Middle Eastern Muslims. It also gives some background on the lengths that Saddam Hussein went to in controlling the Shiites...

    Quote:

    The main Shia mosques and shrines were demolished by Mr. Saddam's Republican Guard in 1991, in the course of suppressing the uprising, then quickly rebuilt after. Unco-operative Shia imams were systematically exterminated.

    ...



    (Saddam) attempted, chiefly by using oil money to co-opt tribal leaders against the traditional Shia leadership in the towns, to control Iraq's Shia Islam from within. He appointed secret police officers as Muslim clerics, filled their retinues with informers, and reached accommodations with all those remaining outside his Ba'athist Party who also wished to remain alive. Outward expressions of traditional Shia faith were ruthlessly suppressed, on a scale beyond even what had been attempted before 1991, and replaced by a superficially Shia-decorated Saddam worship. Thus sincere believers were driven underground.



    Without resorting to the techniques employed by Saddam (or propping up an administration that does so), how is the US going to suppress the desires of the Shia majority?
Sign In or Register to comment.