Muslim clerics denounce terrorism

[th87]

Which is actually pretty common. Just don't expect to hear anything about it from the MSM:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/11/08/Muslim_clerics_endorse_anti-terror_fatwa/UPI-38241226199440/

[Tarlam!]

Sorry, TH, but Indians are a pretty moderate people. There are enough Muslim clerics running around screaming that the Infidel should be burned.

You've known me since JSO days. You may still remember my best friend - ever! - is a practicing Muslim. I have looked into becoming a Muslim myself. In its pure form, it is, without doubt, the most beautiful religion I have come to investigate.

But unfortunately, it has too many crackpot preachers that would have me go into martyrdom. That, and they want my foreskin and to refrain from eating my bacon.

NOBODY takes away Tarlam!'s bacon!!

[th87]

Sorry, TH, but Indians are a pretty moderate people. There are enough Muslim clerics running around screaming that the Infidel should be burned.

You've known me since JSO days. You may still remember my best friend - ever! - is a practicing Muslim. I have looked into becoming a Muslim myself. In its pure form, it is, without doubt, the most beautiful religion I have come to investigate.

But unfortunately, it has too many crackpot preachers that would have me go into martyrdom. That, and they want my foreskin and to refrain from eating my bacon.

NOBODY takes away Tarlam!'s bacon!!

I agree with you - there are far too many crackpot teachers. But every religion has crackpot teachers.

Hopefully education does away with them over time.

The point of this topic is to show that there are indeed Islamic authorities that denounce terrorism. This is a relatively unknown thing, because the MSM does not illustrate it.

[Tarlam!]

Cool, but what about my bacon?

I believe, as I once posted on JSO many years ago, that the "dark" Muslims are having their period of an Inquisition. If we examine the age of Catholicism and Muslims, then we MUST perceive certain parallels to their respective developments, as world religions.

Christians shouldn't forget the witch hunting that went on when their religion was as old as the Muslim religion is today.

[th87]

Cool, but what about my bacon?

I believe, as I once posted on JSO many years ago, that the "dark" Muslims are having their period of an Inquisition. If we examine the age of Catholicism and Muslims, then we MUST perceive certain parallels to their respective developments, as world religions.

Christians shouldn't forget the witch hunting that went on when their religion was as old as the Muslim religion is today.

I highly doubt God cares what you do with your bacon. I know you're joking, but it's this level of minutiae that I think Muslims need to avoid. Getting caught up in every detail of every allegedly decreed thing (of which I question the sources' accuracy) causes one to miss the forest for the trees.

You're dead on about its parallels to Christianity's dark ages. Those occurred around 1300-1600 years after its founding. How old is Islam? About 1400 years old.

[Tarlam!]

You're dead on about its parallels to Christianity's dark ages. Those occurred around 1300-1600 years after its founding. How old is Islam? About 1400 years old.

Oh, I wish I could take credit for it, but my Muslim best friend pointed it out to me. I just recognised it as the truest thing I ever heard and have been repeating it ever since.

[MJZiggy]

Tarlam, hush about the bacon! If these guys start eating bacon, there will be less bacon for us and then we'd have to settle for bacon bits...

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Deep fried bacon with bourbon maple syrup dipping sauce and a side of grits at Metro Brasserie. The best.

http://www.metrosouthbridge.com/pdf/METRO_Menu_102408.pdf

[mraynrand]

Re: Muslim clerics denounce terrorism

Which is actually pretty common. Just don't expect to hear anything about it from the MSM:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/11/...8241226199440/

I don't think the MSM knows what terrorism is. But they sure are up on 'militants.'


"We have no love for offenders whichever religion they might belong to," he said. "Our concern is that innocents should not be targeted and the career of educated youth not ruined. The government should ensure transparency in investigation."

"Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form. Cooperation should be done for the cause of good but not for committing sin or oppression," the fatwa written at the Darul Uloom Deoband, India's foremost Islamic seminary.
-----------

Do the Muslim clerics in India have the same definition for 'innocents' and 'unjust' as Palestinian Muslim clerics? Hopefully, the fatwa is sincere and there are no more bombings of the 'Peace Train.'

[texaspackerbacker]

I've read--and basically believed--what you've written, TH87, since the JSOnline days about Islam being co-opted and corrupted by the radical clerics. The thing I don't accept, however, is the idea that the "radical clerics" are NOT the solid majority of Muslim clerics.

The sad thing about the substance of this article is that the clerics denouncing terrorism are almost certain to be in turn denounced by the huge majority of Muslim clerics in the middle east, as well, probably as a large share of Muslim clerics in America, Europe, etc.

The fact also is, this courageous 600, if they lived pretty much anywhere in the middle east, would probably literally pay with there lives for what they said.

I'd like to hear whether you agree or disagree with that.

[th87]

Re: Muslim clerics denounce terrorism

Which is actually pretty common. Just don't expect to hear anything about it from the MSM:

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/11/...8241226199440/

I don't think the MSM knows what terrorism is. But they sure are up on 'militants.'


"We have no love for offenders whichever religion they might belong to," he said. "Our concern is that innocents should not be targeted and the career of educated youth not ruined. The government should ensure transparency in investigation."

"Islam rejects all kinds of unjust violence, breach of peace, bloodshed, murder and plunder and does not allow it in any form. Cooperation should be done for the cause of good but not for committing sin or oppression," the fatwa written at the Darul Uloom Deoband, India's foremost Islamic seminary.
-----------

Do the Muslim clerics in India have the same definition for 'innocents' and 'unjust' as Palestinian Muslim clerics? Hopefully, the fatwa is sincere and there are no more bombings of the 'Peace Train.'

You should've bolded "breach of peace", and "not for committing...oppression."

A breach of peace would constitute any act of upsetting peace by any party under any circumstance. Ergo, if there's peace for any reason, it must not be breached for any reason.

Oppression is also universal. Oppression must be avoided by all, again placing value on peace.

[th87]

I've read--and basically believed--what you've written, TH87, since the JSOnline days about Islam being co-opted and corrupted by the radical clerics. The thing I don't accept, however, is the idea that the "radical clerics" are NOT the solid majority of Muslim clerics.

The sad thing about the substance of this article is that the clerics denouncing terrorism are almost certain to be in turn denounced by the huge majority of Muslim clerics in the middle east, as well, probably as a large share of Muslim clerics in America, Europe, etc.

The fact also is, this courageous 600, if they lived pretty much anywhere in the middle east, would probably literally pay with there lives for what they said.

I'd like to hear whether you agree or disagree with that.

I'd highly doubt that radical clerics are the majority. If most of them were radical, and many Muslims follow them, then there would be lots and lots of radical Muslims, right? But that's not the case.

Let's do a thought experiment:

1. Let's assume there are a billion Muslims worldwide.
2. Let's say for the sake of argument even 30% of all Muslims are radical. An absurdly overinflated number.

This leaves us with 300,000,000 radical Muslims.

3. Let's say of these 300M radical Muslims, 10% of them would commit violence.

This leaves 30,000,000 radical Muslims as enemy combatants. Based on world events of the past few years, there is no way there are 30,000,000 enemy combatants. Guantanamo would be filled to the brim, and there would be no semblance of stability in Iraq or Afghanistan (or anywhere else).

The point is, the terrorists represent a staggeringly low percentage of total Muslims worldwide, so if there are many radical clerics, they're not making an impact.

[texaspackerbacker]

First of all, let's NOT assume there are a billion Muslims in the world. The figure most often quoted of 600 million is MORE than enough.

Secondly, even though you are Muslim and in a better position to know, I just do NOT accept your premise that the majority of Muslim clerics are NOT radical--in the sense of advocating or at least excusing terrorism and other violent behavior against non-Muslims. I accept even less the reason you give--the idea that the vast majority of Muslims are NOT radical by the definition I just gave. If that is the case at all in absolute numbers, it could only be true if you include the relatively innocuous Muslims in Indonesia and India--and probably in Bangladesh too--a possible explanation for your rosy picture of the situation. If you take Muslims in north Africa and Asia west of India, though, I would assert that the HUGE majority fit the definition of radical.

[th87]

The clerics in America are generally very moderate. I'm sure there are some extreme ones, but they're the lunatic fringe characters that eventually get arrested anyway.

I think Islam in America is the best representation of it. America has freedom. Muslims here have the ability to learn concepts on their own without peer pressure, coercion, and corrupt teachers. This results in a pure, undistorted learning, leading to the ability to think critically and empathize with people of different cultures and religions as well. This results in a peaceful, relaxed Muslim (which is what Muslims are supposed to be to begin with).

Muslims protest against terrorism all the time. You just never hear about it.

1. Jordanians protest Al Qaeda:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/jordan-continues-to-protest-al-qaida.html

2. More Indian Muslims denounce terrorism:

http://www.anindianmuslim.com/2008/09/muslims-against-terrorism.html

3. A Muslim organization against terrorism:

http://www.freemuslims.org/

4. A Muslim website full of denunciations of terrorism from many sources:

http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

Just like you, Tex, I have an issue with the MSM for not reporting these things ever. I think there's a profit motive involved - bad news is far more lucrative than good news, so you only hear about how bad things are.

[th87]

First of all, let's NOT assume there are a billion Muslims in the world. The figure most often quoted of 600 million is MORE than enough.

Secondly, even though you are Muslim and in a better position to know, I just do NOT accept your premise that the majority of Muslim clerics are NOT radical--in the sense of advocating or at least excusing terrorism and other violent behavior against non-Muslims. I accept even less the reason you give--the idea that the vast majority of Muslims are NOT radical by the definition I just gave. If that is the case at all in absolute numbers, it could only be true if you include the relatively innocuous Muslims in Indonesia and India--and probably in Bangladesh too--a possible explanation for your rosy picture of the situation. If you take Muslims in north Africa and Asia west of India, though, I would assert that the HUGE majority fit the definition of radical.

Even if your premise is true, that would still leave lots of enemy combatants. In the several millions. If that were the case, they'd all be in Iraq, and the Army would be actively fighting all day, as in a "classic" war. Instead, there's a trap set up here, and a terrorist there, and another terrorist hiding out in the city. This seems to imply that the numbers are relatively low - much, much lower than the several millions.