• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Isis

watson

Banned
Why do right wing people always tend to think one person represents everyone? "media are at fault" like it's one homogeneous glob of journalists working off the same google doc. I mean i know that's how Murdoch's crew works but really...
Depends on what you mean by right-wing? If you mean extreme right-wing then yes.

However, most people aren't extremists, rather Centre-Right at the worst. The fact is, most of the people in this group have already worked out that 'one person represents everyone' is a ridiculous fallacy despite what the Murdoch media says.

In short, the vast majority of people understand that a Muslim and an Islamist think and act differently. I think that is reasonably clear. And you have resorted to unfounded hyperbole in the same way as the Murdoch media.
 
Last edited:

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Depends on what you mean by right-wing? If you mean extreme right-wing then yes.

However, most people aren't extremists, rather Centre-Right at the worst. The fact is, most of the people in this group have already worked out that 'one person represents everyone' is a ridiculous fallacy despite what the Murdoch media says.

In short, the vast majority of people understand that a Muslim and an Islamist think and act differently. I think that is reasonably clear. And you have resorted to unfounded hyperbole in the same way as the Murdoch media.
Yeah, no this is clearly not the case otherwise it wouldn't be an issue ffs.

Perhaps a vast majority of reasonable people, but not a lot of people are reasonable.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Yeah, no this is clearly not the case otherwise it wouldn't be an issue ffs.

Perhaps a vast majority of reasonable people, but not a lot of people are reasonable.
Disagree. Vocal minority skews perceptions for pretty much any view in existence, be it racism, Corbynism or Arsenal fans on twitter
 

watson

Banned
Yeah, no this is clearly not the case otherwise it wouldn't be an issue ffs.

Perhaps a vast majority of reasonable people, but not a lot of people are reasonable.
There is an issue and it's called Islamism. Clearly your average Muslim would not target an 84 year old Priest, but for an Islamist they are an obvious target. This recent sectarian murder comes as no surprise at all.

A priest has been killed in an attack by two armed men at his church in a suburb of Rouen in northern France.

The attackers entered the church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray during Mass, taking the priest, Fr Jacques Hamel, 84, and four other people hostage.

Police later surrounded the church and French TV said shots were fired. Both hostage-takers are now dead.

President Francois Hollande said the men claimed to be from so-called Islamic State (IS).....

France church attack: Priest killed by two 'IS soldiers' - BBC News
 

Nauq

Well-known member
There is an issue and it's called Islamism. Clearly your average Muslim would not target an 84 year old Priest, but for an Islamist they are an obvious target. This recent sectarian murder comes as no surprise at all.
I have a problem with your word Islamism. If these a******* had any islamism in them they would be saving the old priests not killing them.
The problem which no one talks about is that these young muslims in the west have no knowledge of Islam. Their parents moved to West and kids were westernized and had no knowledge of Islam. When they feel bad about themselves (I'm not saying that there is anything wrong in being western) they go online and unfortunately they see ISIS propoganda and pictures of the bombings of the US Army and others and they show the dead bodies of the children and everything.
Please don't think that I'm defending any of this.
You just don't kill anyone, there is no justification in killing.
What I'm curious about is that why not ban all ISIS websites and everything. Who is letting them purchase URL and Web Hosting and everything.

The solution is simple, stop targeting Islam as the problem. You might think It is the problem but the more you say it, the more terrorists you will see. There are 1.5 Billion Muslims in the world. The thing is let muslims scholars take care of it and stop targeting Islam on TV for 2 3 years. When people start to know their own religion, I bet you there will be less violence. And also we need to fix Israel Palestine issue. It has a lot to do with world's trouble.
 
Last edited:

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
I have a problem with your word Islamism. If these a******* had any islamism in them they would be saving the old priests not killing them.
The problem which no one talks about is that these young muslims in the west have no knowledge of Islam. Their parents moved to West and kids were westernized and had no knowledge of Islam. When they feel bad about themselves (I'm not saying that there is anything wrong in being western) they go online and unfortunately they see ISIS propoganda and pictures of the bombings of the US Army and others and they show the dead bodies of the children and everything.
Please don't think that I'm defending any of this.
You just don't kill anyone, there is no justification in killing.
What I'm curious about is that why not ban all ISIS websites and everything. Who is letting them purchase URL and Web Hosting and everything.

The solution is simple, stop targeting Islam as the problem. You might think It is the problem but the more you say it, the more terrorists you will see. There are 1.5 Billion Muslims in the world. The thing is let muslims scholars take care of it and stop targeting Islam on TV for 2 3 years. When people start to know their own religion, I bet you there will be less violence. And also we need to fix Israel Palestine issue. It has a lot to do with world's trouble.
Haha, gee yeah, why didn't anyone else think of that?!
 

Nauq

Well-known member
It is sad to see a terrorist attack everyday now.
I thought Germany was safe but who knows.
I mean If you don't like culture of a country just get your ass out of there but as I said before its complicated.
I wish i could solve the problem and also please do not forget the people who die in the middle east, Africa and other parts of the world as well. Media only shows what happens in the west but If equal coverage is given to all loss of life, I think things will change.
I just don't know what to say, its sad.
 

Nauq

Well-known member
Haha, gee yeah, why didn't anyone else think of that?!
well this is an issue buddy. I personally wouldn't care who take Jerusalem but there are crazy enough people who want the holy places. Someone has to solve the issue, someone has to stand up and solve it.
 

Nauq

Well-known member
Welp, good luck Nauq.
There is no other way. Otherwise it will keep on happening. Some random people kill innocents in the west and there you go you muslim terrorists and Islamists and Islamic Terrorists we are coming for you. Then ISIS is bombed in Iraq or Syria or Afghanistan or wherever then some terrorists die and many kids and women die and they say look at these Western Christians and Jews want to kill us all Muslims and we are coming for you but they can't. So some random muslim with no F****** life feels bad about the way he is living compared to his people and watches ISIS crap and there we go again.
Somebody needs to change, somebody has to say that look we are done. We don't want to fight with you, just go and F*** yourselves. Any side that does that will win this war as well.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
well this is an issue buddy. I personally wouldn't care who take Jerusalem but there are crazy enough people who want the holy places. Someone has to solve the issue, someone has to stand up and solve it.
I don't disagree. But your posts, whether intentionally or otherwise, have rather overlooked the subtle nuance that is the fact that the whole Israel/Palestine issue is probably one of the most intractable problems in the history of mankind.
 

Nauq

Well-known member
I don't disagree. But your posts, whether intentionally or otherwise, have rather overlooked the subtle nuance that is the fact that the whole Israel/Palestine issue is probably one of the most intractable problems in the history of mankind.
But it can be solved. I know it looks hard because one side wants to build a temple or something which they have to in order to fulfill whatever they believe in and the other side doesn't want to let it built because that's what they believe in. How about share half and half. There will always be solutions, we just need leaders who want to find them.
 

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
But it can be solved. I know it looks hard because one side wants to build a temple or something which they have to in order to fulfill whatever they believe in and the other side doesn't want to let it built because that's what they believe in. How about share half and half. There will always be solutions, we just need leaders who want to find them.
Yes, but the devil is in the detail. What might be an acceptable "solution" for one person might not be for another, and this essentially explains why the issue is yet to be "solved".

It's all well and good to talk about solutions in a broad conceptual sense, but in practical terms the acceptability of any form of intervention (whether you can call it a "solution" of not) will be viewed differently from one person to another, as well as being assessed quite differently by supposed experts, lawmakers and politicians etc... Until this issue can be overcome, and I struggle to see how anyone could even begin to approach it, the prospects of success are fairly grim.
 

Nauq

Well-known member
Yes, but the devil is in the detail. What might be an acceptable "solution" for one person might not be for another, and this essentially explains why the issue is yet to be "solved".

It's all well and good to talk about solutions in a broad conceptual sense, but in practical terms the acceptability of any form of intervention (whether you can call it a "solution" of not) will be viewed differently from one person to another, as well as being assessed quite differently by supposed experts, lawmakers and politicians etc... Until this issue can be overcome, and I struggle to see how anyone could even begin to approach it, the prospects of success are fairly grim.
Yeah you're rite but I still hope there will be a solution. I'm a father of two kids. I don't want my kids to be slaughtered like I don't want anybody's kids to suffer any pain. We have had enough pain.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
Disagree. Vocal minority skews perceptions for pretty much any view in existence, be it racism, Corbynism or Arsenal fans on twitter
There's a spectrum. I mean, there's the vocal minority of super racist, obviously extreme people, and then you get towards the more 'reasonable' end where they're not so much vocal but they feel irked by things being Halal certified and any mention of the word Allah where they'd rather not see it.
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
there is an issue and it's called terrorism. Clearly your average muslim would not target an 84 year old priest, but for a terrorist they are an obvious target. This recent murder comes as no surprise at all.
ftfy
 

watson

Banned
There's a spectrum. I mean, there's the vocal minority of super racist, obviously extreme people, and then you get towards the more 'reasonable' end where they're not so much vocal but they feel irked by things being Halal certified and any mention of the word Allah where they'd rather not see it.
If there is such a thing as a 'spectrum' (I like the term) then it also applies to people who identify with Islam.

At the one end of the spectrum we have Sufis who are a-politcal and just want to have a good time, and at the other other end of the spectrum we have ISIS who are political and want to use violence as a political lever.

What you are claiming NZT is that the 'Western' cultural group contains 'extreme people' (eg. Fascists) but the 'Islamic' cultural group does not contain 'extreme people' (eg Islamists). This lack of logic is called an inconsistency.

EDIT: And just to draw the point out a little longer - Fascism is to German people what Islamism is to Muslim people. And so, do we 'target' German people or Muslim people in our ideological battle? Absolutely not. But we should target and oppose Fascist and Islamist ideologies. In fact it's essential that we do.


What is Islamism? A Muslim*Replies

The key difference between Islam and Islamism is that Islam is not, and has never been described as, a political ideology.

Furthermore, one could even argue that there is in fact scriptural justification for the separation of Church and State in Islam, so that there is no real scriptural justification for establishing an Islamic state as Islamists maintain. I refer to the saying of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) “You know your worldly affairs better than I do, and I know your religious matters better than you do” (Muslim ‐ 139‐141). Many have interpreted this to mean that although the Prophet was a religious and political leader, he was not infallible when it came to politics and that Islam makes no prescriptions about the way human beings should organize the political realm while on earth.

It is thus in marked contrast to both the history of Muslim societies and world majority Muslim opinion that even today the Islamists regard Islam axiomatically as a revolutionary political ideology surpassing all other political ideologies, such as Communism and Capitalism, since it is a divine ideology rather than one based on fallible man‐made concepts and ideas. An implication of this is the Islamist assertion that Islam must have provided a detailed and divinely pre‐ordained stance on matters such as political structure or the economy and these can be realized, by definition, only by destroying institutions based on Capitalism and Communism which have no basis in the Qur’an. If these structures and systems are deemed absent, the Islamists will work to bring them about.

https://religion-compass.com/2009/11/19/what-is-islamism/
 
Last edited:

sledger

Spanish_Vicente
If there is such a thing as a 'spectrum' (I like the term) then it also applies to people who identify with Islam.

At the one end of the spectrum we have Sufis who are a-politcal and just want to have a good time, and at the other other end of the spectrum we have ISIS who are political and want to use violence as a political lever.

What you are claiming NZT is that the 'Western' cultural group contains 'extreme people' (eg. Fascists) but the 'Islamic' cultural group does not contain 'extreme people' (eg Islamists) This lack of logic is called an inconsistency.
Yeah, we're all aware you're very well versed in "logic" of this kind.

And anyway, no, he isn't claiming this.
 
Top