ISIS Responds to Pope Francis.

[rainbow]

I wonder if we had a mass Nuremberg trial for radical islam how many we'd have to hang? Thousands or millions? Or just some number in between.

Probably less than if there was a trial for those responsible for the invasion of Iraq.
...but then they were motivated by fat defence and oil contracts rather than religion, so I guess that's OK?

[DaveDodo007]

Back to the OP...

Some sections of western media follow a scripted party line about Islamic fundamentalist ideology and the terrorist actions it entails. They insist, above all "this is not about religion"

Well, from the horse's mouth so to speak, they are clearly wrong...

What?

You actually believe that what Isis says is true?

No, I know they believe it, hence the willingness to die for the cause/god.

Funny how the leaders never strap on the vest to set an example.

This never occurred to you?

Some members of religion think they have a higher calling to lead the fight, name me one religion without a hierarchy?

[Sean Hayden]

Additionally, I think the Afghanistan factor was highly significant. In battling the Russians, (with US military assistance), the islamic militants gained enormous confidence that they could successfully face down a major power. The cadre of fighters then spread their skills and confidence far and wide...

They were sold shit, the Russians just didn't go all out. Which is weird given they're evil. Maybe Syria won't go as well...

[rainbow]

Some members of religion think they have a higher calling to lead the fight, name me one religion without a hierarchy?

Islam.
The political movements using Islam do have leadership, but Islam itself has no leader in the way Catholicism has a Pope.

[DaveDodo007]

Some members of religion think they have a higher calling to lead the fight, name me one religion without a hierarchy?

Islam.
The political movements using Islam do have leadership, but Islam itself has no leader in the way Catholicism has a Pope.

They used to have a leader but the Mongols turned up and put him in a sack and let their horses do dressage upon him.

[Svartalf]

There never was a properly religious hierarchy in islam, heck, only the shi'ites have a formal clergy, imams in sunna are self proclaimed and get various degrees of recognition from what teachers they had and the way other imams find their fatwas cogent.

[rainbow]

Some members of religion think they have a higher calling to lead the fight, name me one religion without a hierarchy?

Islam.
The political movements using Islam do have leadership, but Islam itself has no leader in the way Catholicism has a Pope.

They used to have a leader but the Mongols turned up and put him in a sack and let their horses do dressage upon him.

Aren't you getting bored with being proved wrong again and again?

[Forty Two]

I wonder if we had a mass Nuremberg trial for radical islam how many we'd have to hang? Thousands or millions? Or just some number in between.

Probably less than if there was a trial for those responsible for the invasion of Iraq.
...but then they were motivated by fat defence and oil contracts rather than religion, so I guess that's OK?

Is that what motivated the action in Libya, too? Or, the attackers of Libya were not motivated by such things?

[Forty Two]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

There's some truth to Coito's never ending parody of the "progressive stack".

It's not a parody. It's an accurate description of what the progressive stack. It only sounds like a parody because I'm saying it and you know I think it's horseshit. When progressives apply the progressive stack, it sounds all reasonable to them, because they ascribe to identity politics.

I just meant that you go on and on about it. And you do parody it, it unrelated topics.

I'm about to find myself in another fight with some of my lefty mates on facebook. I've been sidestepping around a topic from a mate on the burkini ban. But got a bit sick of all the nonsense this morning and brought up the point that a significant part of the reason why France and others pursue burqa bans is because they view the burqa as a symbol (and indeed a tool) of oppression of women. I'll check back in a while to view all the angst and how women actually love wearing the burka.

It's started..

They defend the burqa in this situation because it's Islam. If it were Christian sects suggesting that women needed to cover up on the beach in a similar fashion, they would not defend the Christian practice (even though it, too, is a religion that people are choosing to follow). I think that much is obvious.

It's like when progressives go on about women not being allowed to be priests and men not being nuns, and nuns wearing "habits" and such.

An interesting issue related to how to dress is the volleyball players at the Rio Olympics. There were many criticisms of how the women volleyball players dressed, as compared to the men. It didn't matter to a lot of progressives that the women athletes chose to dress in the little speedos. They said the men should HAVE TO wear the speedos, too, because the men wear shorts and t-shirts, but the women wear sexier attire....

Switch to the religious aspect, and some of the women athletes were wearing hijabs on the court. http://www.barenakedislam.com/2016/08/0 ... olleyball/ They were playing the women in the speedos. No commentary on how the women could choose what to wear and did not have to dress in speedos (such that the claims of "sexist" volleyball uniforms are, obviously, horseshit). However, there is commentary on the hijab-wearers bringing "oppressive" manners of dress to the Rio Olympics.

In other words, whatever women wear, it's an oppression. The Muslim women are being oppressed for not wearing the speedos, because of their religion. The speedo wearers are being oppressed by western patriarchal culture and the "male gaze" boring into their mostly exposed asses. If someone says "just wear shorts and t-shirts like the men, then" -- then come the screetches of "stop telling women what to wear!!!!"

Meanwhile, women can wear whatever uniforms they want, and generally have MORE options as to what to wear than men, and are criticized less for pushing fashion envelopes than men, but they are "oppressed" no matter what they wear.

[Forty Two]

42 is right here, Ani. And it's not often you are going to hear those words out of my mouth.

You agree with me? Crap. Now I have to go back and check my premises and such. I must have something wrong...

[Animavore]

Oh change the fucking record.

[Forty Two]

Oh change the fucking record.

The young folks out there may not know what that is.

When I was a kid, I waited patiently for about a year before I got something like this for Christmas....



My first record was, I think, this one:

It was that one, or one very similar to it. I didn't discover that the version of "Big Rock Candy Mountain" had been sanitized of any reference to being "buggered sore, like a hobo's whore..."

[Brian Peacock]

...

In other words, whatever women wear, it's an oppression. The Muslim women are being oppressed for not wearing the speedos, because of their religion. The speedo wearers are being oppressed by western patriarchal culture and the "male gaze" boring into their mostly exposed asses. If someone says "just wear shorts and t-shirts like the men, then" -- then come the screetches of "stop telling women what to wear!!!!"

Meanwhile, women can wear whatever uniforms they want, and generally have MORE options as to what to wear than men, and are criticized less for pushing fashion envelopes than men, but they are "oppressed" no matter what they wear.

On the other hand, some of us don't give a fuck what people wear as long as they don't frighten the horses.