And/but/so... Thank you for your courteous reply. I would like to address a few points.
"But your historical highlights are selective. I could pick out similiar astocities, crimes, and bad faith actions by a bunch of groups through the ages, and use them to support a thesis that Christianity is the root of all evil."That would be a tu quoque argument, a logical fallacy.
The point I was making is that Islam's core texts (which contain the expressed will of Allah and the words and deeds of Mohammed) are the source and sustenance of offensive warfare to make the world Islam (Jihad).
To argue that others have done the same (whether or not that is true) does nothing to address my assertion.
I would also note that it is impossible to construct from the words of Christ a theology of offensive warfare, whereas in Islam Jihad is a central doctrine.
"Your quotes are instructive; now how about turning your attention to the Old Testament?"The only Old Testament command for warfare was given to the people of Israel as they entered Canaan. The command was limited to that time, place, and target only, unlike Islam.
Over the course of the Qur'an's revelation, Allah's doctrine on warfare evolved through several stages. Initially, when Mohammed was weak, cooperation with Infidels was urged. As Mohammed grew in power, warring in self-defense was allowed. Later, it was required.
Finally, after Mohammed had realized military, political, and economic success, offensive warfare against all non-Muslims who resist conversion or subjugation was required. Those commands are for all times and places until the hegemony of Allah is established over all mankind.
"My point is a selective reading of any religious tradition allows one to choose what one wants to believe about its followers..."I think I have succinctly dealt with that accusation, but if I have not addressed it to your satisfaction, please point out to me from the Islamic texts where I have misrepresented them.
My point -- the point that so many overlook, deny, or ridicule -- is that, just as the "Islamofascists" themselves confess, jihadists are obeying Allah and their prophet. They are neither perverting, distorting, nor taking out of context their scriptures.
Fourteen hundred years of Islamic theology, law, and history seem to support them.
Again, please read Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira for yourself. Demonstrate where I have misrepresented any of Islam's "sacred" texts.
I would also ask that you show from the Biblical writings where YHWH/Christ make any universal commands for offensive warfare against non-Christians/non-Jews to establish their rule.
"But specious quotes . . . "If that is a reference to my comments (I can't tell), please demonstrate from Islam's texts that they are actually specious.
"I do take exception to the notion that anyone who voted for Hamas supports jihad. Hamas was able to establish itself by providing social supports - schools, medical centers, libraries, etc. - that were lacking in Palestine."Isn't that similar to praising Hitler for his organizational efficiency? Is not Hamas' sworn purpose to destroy Israel?
"I don't blame the Israelis, but the plight of the Palestenian people is a sad one, and they are understandably desperate for a saviour. That doesn't mena all of them are terrorists."I have not argued that they are all terrorists.
How many support terrorism? How many support terrorism against Israel? How many support attacks against the United States? How many would welcome the return of the Caliphate and the global rule of Shari'a?
How many of those who do not are willing -- or able -- to resist their co-religionists who do?
I welcome those who publicly refute and reject forever Jihad and Shari'a, and I fully support those who truly stand for fully equal rights for all non-Muslims and women within Muslim lands.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In arguing against painting with too broad a brush, it should be asked "Who's holding the brush?"
JayHub wrote:
"I would not lump the Palestinians in with Islamic jihadists because they are essentially involved in a civil war with the other occupants of what was British Palestine over how that area is to be governed."You wouldn't lump them, but perhaps these would: Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade; Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP); Hamas; Palestine Islamic Jihad; The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO); Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP); Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC); and Popular Resistance Committees (PRC) are all "Palestinian Islamic jihadists."
And what does Hamas, a group cited above for its charity work (didn't an American politician cite OBL's humanitarianism not long ago?) say about this? Straight from their charter:
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."
"Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims."
"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up."
"There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."
"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."
"Allah is its [Hamas'] goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur’an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief."
Upon its rebirth, Israel's Muslim neighbors sought to wipe it out of existence. The poor "Palestinians" were told to leave for a bit, let the military do its work, and then they'd be able to move back in and take over. Only events did not follow that narrative. Israel successfully defended itself several times against its "Islamic jihadist" neighbors. And which Middle Eastern nations accepted into their lands the displaced "Palestinians"?
"You may not like their tactics, but they fight with the weapons they have . . . To say they attack civilians is true, but the point of war is to break the other side's will to continue and they have few other options. . . . This is why Dresden and Tokyo were fire bombed in WWII and Hiroshima and Nagasaki were nuked."Since Arabs and Muslims are allowed citizenship in Israel, and since so many Infidel states (including Israel) aid the "Palestinians," is not Peaceful Co-existence an option?
Since Israel has bent over backwards to make peace with its neighbors, even to the point of (suicidally) giving up land to its enemies, is there no way that the "Palestinians" can compromise?
If you are here justifying "Palestinian" suicide bombings against Israel, would you also argue that Israel has the right to fire-bomb/nuke "Palestinian" camps?