What is Islamic Fascism?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Intellectual discussions
Forum Discription: Discuss political and philosophical theories, religious beliefs and other academic subjects
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13947
Printed Date: 04-Jun-2024 at 00:42
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: What is Islamic Fascism?
Posted By: bg_turk
Subject: What is Islamic Fascism?
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 02:58
|
Mr Bush has used the term Islamic fascism on at least two occasion one of which is documented in this CNN report. http://www.cnn.com/video/partners/clickability/index.html?url=/video/politics/2006/08/10/malveaux.bush.terror.politics.cnn - http://www.cnn.com/video What does this term mean and why does Bush feel the need to use it? With FOX constantly ranting about a third "world war", Bush talking about Islamic fascism and crusades in the middle east, I fear that the danger for the clash of civilizations is becoming real. Muslims are becoming increasing stigmatized in Western societies. Recent polls suggest that 2 in 5 Americans have prejudiceses against Muslims. All of this makes me wonder if Muslim people are really safe in the West? Could there be a mass persecution (or God forbid a holocaust) against Muslims in the future? ------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Replies:
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 03:16
|
A holocaust is unlikley as I think it would have happened by now. Aside from politicians public sentiment against Muslims in the US now is probably somewhat less hostile than it was in previous years. 2 in 5 now used to be 3 in 5 I bet.
And no, there is no such thinig as Islamic facism, although I feel that religion and facism share many similarities and seek to brainwash everyone in similar ways, there is nothing technically fascist about Islam or at least not more so than any other religion.
This term is another in a long line of made up words used by the administration and pundits. it seems like the propoganda in 1984, where random nonsensical phrases become political lexicon. ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Komnenos
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 04:42
|
The term "Islamic Fascism" is nonsense, and just another meaningless Bush sound-bite. I suppose it implies that there fascist states whose ideology is supplied by Islam.
Fascism is not an ideology ( in the widest sense of the word) that can carry a religious attribut, to call all the fascist states of Europe in the 30s and 40s "Christian fascism" is equally non-sensical.
Fascism is not motivated by religion, it is nationalist, imperialist, authoritarian, totalitarian, anti-communist, implies an identidy of interests of state and capital, etc., and as such only applicable as an historical term for political phenomena in the first half of European history.
Religions can play an imortant supportive role for fascist states, as they have done for example in the Spanish fascism under Franco.
I presume, Bush referrred to the Iran, as the alleged cradle and stronghold of "Islamic Fascism" , in his latest intellectual master-piece, but neither is the Iran a fascist state, nor is there an Islamis fascist movement on the loose anywhere else.
Attempts to create a totalitarian theocracy, maybe, but fascist it ain't.
Bush's quote is simply propaganda, supplied by some PR men whose copy-writing skills are far greater than their understanding of history and politics.
Not be taken too seriously, and as much verbal diarrhea as any comparisons of Israel with the Nazis.
------------- [IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg"> |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 05:58
|
Bush's use of the term is simply factually wrong.
However, just as you had Christian fascism under Franco in Spain, there's no theoretical reason I can see why you couldn't have Islamic fascism.
The Mubarrak, Assad, Hussein, Musharraf, Ghadaffi regimes are (or were) all similar to European fascist regimes in Muslim countries. I would not object to anyone calling them Islamic fascist countries.
It's worth noting though that they are as likely to be US allies as US enemies. ------------- |
Posted By: Ahmed The Fighter
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 11:29
|
GCLE but all leaders you mentioned them above are not Islamic leaders or have an Islamic charisma. ------------- "May the eyes of cowards never sleep" Khalid Bin Walid 
|
Posted By: Emperor Barbarossa
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 15:20
"Islamic facism" is Middle Eastern facism. The term implies that all countries that are Muslim are fascist. This is not true. I remember some ignorant, misinformed conservative woman on MSNBC ranting about how the Muslims have always hated "us"(Christians, I assume, though I'm not one of "us" and this is a secular country) and that the Crusades were against Muslim agression. What history book was she reading, "Godless: The History of the Righteous Crusades against the Godless Muslims, by Ann Coulter" .------------- 
|
Posted By: Cywr
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 17:05
|
Short answer - an abuse of the word facism for sensationalist purposes. -------------  Arrrgh!!"
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 17:32
| mr bush'S father real fashist. first, bush must account for father.real fashist militarist is father and himself.impolit and immoral man.he must use general terorist word.he use like islam cristian black white words.real raceist himself.everybody see his do toward muslims.terorism's not become race and religion |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 19:29
|
Hum, I do have a big problem, for the first time for years I find myself more on the side of Mr. Bush than on the side of sensible persons of whom I rate highly the opinion. If anybody knows a anti-neo-con vaccin, you have a buyer. Waiting for the miracle that is going to pull me back to the leftwing, I have to make my point. I'm not sure Mr. Bush meant it this way, but Islamic Fascism, though sensationalist do make sense. First, lets tacle down the problem of the use of the word "fascism". If it is to be entended as the strict historic definition Mr. Mussolini and Mr. Hitler gave him, of course it cannot be use for a modern days phenomenon. Yet if it is to be defined as pretty much the same as totalitarism, well it is worth consideration. First remember that Mr. Bush is far from behing the first using this comparaison as plenty of people used to refer to Mr. Khomeny's Iran as a "green totalitarism". Considering Mr. Ben Laden political vision I think the definition Mr. Komnenos' defition of fascism does fit ("nationalist, imperialist, authoritarian, totalitarian, anti-communist"). Of course with the exception of nationalist, yet when you consider his behaviour toward Saudi Arabia you may not be so sure. Finally I'd like to refer once more to the definition a young Italian black shirt gave of fascism (quoted by Mr. Hobsboawn in "the age of extrems") it goes more or less like that "idealists think their regime is worth dying for, on the countrary, fascism wants to be worth killing for". In my opinion this is the best definition of radical islamism. M. ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: çok geç
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 19:33
An Islamist fascist must be similar to a communist capitalist  ------------- D.J. Kaufman Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk. |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 12-Aug-2006 at 22:37
|
nationalist-Imperialist-authoritarian-totalitarian-anti-communist is a descriptive label that describes all world religions perfectly, so Kommenos, I dont get your point even though we agree that there is no such thing as Islamic fascism. ------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Odin
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 00:13
"Fascist" has become the most widely abused word in the English language.  Fascism is Nationalistic Totalitarianism with a Capitalist economy regulated for the benifit of the capitalists that support the government leadership. The Neo-Cons are far closer to being Fascist in practice then Fundimentalist millitants are. Calling Islamic fundies "Fascist" is about the capitalist war profiteers of the Millitary-Industrial Complex preventing rational debate on the causes of Islamic terrorism (namely our knee-jerk supporting of Israel and our support of the Saudi Monarchy).------------- "Of the twenty-two civilizations that have appeared in history, nineteen of them collapsed when they reached the moral state the United States is in now." -Arnold J. Toynbee |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 01:28
What? China?
Islam's not nationalistic. More anti-nationalistic. Islams not Imperialist - although many muslims are. The only authority is God. Most others are ignored, or argued with. Totalitarian only on a divine level, not a mortal one. Anti-Communist - Not really, scratch the communist anti-religious stance and Islams not anti-communist. ------------- |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 02:31
|
Like I said , I dont believe in Islamic fascism, I do think religious people are more prone to being fascist though. Muslims arent usually nationalistic because their states are largely fake Versailles peace tready lines, but very religious Christians are very nationalistic. ALl religions seek to spread and dominate other, thus they are all imperialistic. God is the only authority, the alpha and the omega, like a fascist dictator Totalitiarianism is totalitarianism, if one belives in it divine or no thats where ones sympathies lie. anti-communist: it has to be, communism is a competing religion
------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 03:51
If we ignore the part about communism suppressing religion. (Which does make all religions anti-communist of course). I don't think there is anything un-islamic, or even un-christian about communism ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 06:39
|
I remember back in the 1950's it was pointed out that Jesus's teachings could be termed communist propaganda. This was during the whole McCarthy business.
------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 06:48
The constitutions of Iraq under Hussein and Libya under Ghadaffi both state that the countries are Islamic, and Islam was/is the established religion in both. I'm sure ghadaffi in particular would resent you calling him non-Islamic.
More to the point though, I rather carefully wrote 'Islamic fascist countries' not 'Islamic fascist leaders'.
I would accept that political leaders frequently fail to practise what they preach. ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 06:52
No it doesn't. It implies that a Muslim might also be a fascist: that the two sets of beliefs are not incompatible. As a term, it doesn't even imply that Islamic fascism exists, merely that it might.
Of course as Bush used it he was applying it to the US's opponents in the middle east, and there, as I said, he was simply factually wrong.
[ ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 06:59
I agree with your post on the whole, but if you want to be strictly historical it was Mussolini alone that defined it. His article in the Italian Encyclopedia of 1932 is usually taken as the standard. It's at
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html - http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html ------------- |
Posted By: malizai_
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 07:14
George can be exempt from criticism when you consider that he doesnt think or write out his speeches. As for the neocons speechwriters they are above repproach. So i guess we will just have to put up with it like with everything else.
------------- |
Posted By: çok geç
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 14:15
Ah, right, China contains those contradicting labels
I just mean it is impossible. ------------- D.J. Kaufman Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk. |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 15:35
|
Why is it impossible?
Serious question: I'd like to hear the answer.
(But I do mean using 'fascism' as a serious political term, not just as a term of abuse, though I would broaden it to include at least Franco's regime in Spain. A definition of fascism simply as an Italian political movement would obviously make it inapplicable to Muslim countries.) ------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 16:04
|
As always glce speaks the truth!!! I'd like to add one stuff: the main problem with fascism is maybe less its hate toward some of the components of its population or toward the rest of the world than the fact that it is always aiming at controling every single aspect of the every day life of the citizens. Of course the best way for a state to do that is to become a religion itself. That is what Mr Mussolini did in his time. Now the question is reversed but the problem persists. A religion that tries to become a state to regulate every single aspects of its belivers lives is totalitarian hence by proxy fascist. Eventhough we should beging to considerate radical islamism as the third branch of fascism with bolchevism and fascism. Most of the aspects of the "program" of the radical islamists can be defined as totalitarian. Considering that there are "us" and "them" and that the simple fact of being "them" makes you a perfectly legitimate target is one of the most important. (i. e. Al Qaeda's interpretation of the Dar al Islam and of the Dar al Kafr). The impossibility of contradicting the leader's choices however stupid they are, the abuse of fanatism to serve your cause, the designation of an utopian target as a reachable goal are some other totalitarian aspects of radical islamism. M. ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 16:14
|
to çok ceç: one thing is for sure when it comes to organizations (be it a state, a family, a company, a market) EVERYTHING'S POSSIBLE!!! There are no limit for the human inventivity in this field. To take in consideration the mix between capitalism and communism, well not only it is possible theoretically but it actually took place douzens of times. Consider China, Vietnam or the even weirder case of Cuba (with the army being the first industrial of the country and two currencies in the country one for the tourists and one for the Cubans). USSR itself had the experience of the NEP in the early 20's then in the 80's Gorbatchev's policy was to allow small private entreprises along with major state firms. Not talking about the capitalism of state led by Tito in Yougoslavia... Some capitalist countries even knew or still experiment some communists solutions for their economy: France in the 80's, Argentina nowadays... ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 13-Aug-2006 at 23:46
------------- "the people are nothing but a great beast... I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value." -Alexander Hamilton |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 03:41
I know what you mean. The americans use their founding fathers and symbols such as the liberty bell in pretty much a religious fashion too. (At least Marx did something, the Liberty bell's just a silly bell!) Christianity and Americanism can co-exist, as you surely know. ------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 09:03
|
Guys I can only advise you the works of Emilio Gentile. He is a Italian scholar specialized of fascism but now he has expended his vision of history well beyond these borders. As a matter of facts he last book is titled: "politics as religion". A must read...
------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 10:11
|
Is he related to Giovanni Gentile, who co-wrote with Mussolini the definition of Fascism in the 1932 Italian Encyclopedia? ------------- |
Posted By: John Lenon
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 14:51
I think USA president and his PR people are limited in their knowleges&education and think that other people in the world are the same  Because of that they try to use linquistic assosiations like:
Faschism = Gitler&Halakaust, Communism = Stalin&GULAG, Islam = Women wihout rights&AL-Qaeda ...
 But I hope we all (at least at this forum) understand the main idea and price of all this speeches - Rule & Money  What for definitions:
1. fascismo from fascio — ~ union.filosofic-political doctrine , based on society priority over personality ...
2. Islam - arab. الإسلام, al-Islām - ~ obedience (to The God).
But the problem is that some people who has force&power usually use this definitions in the way sutable for them and lead other people by this way (in the most cases to realize their own interest), not thinking about the main idea of this doctrines (religions).
Conclusions ??? I don'have ...
 |
Posted By: Decebal
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 16:04
|
Well, here's one broad definition of fascism, that could prove a good starting point for our discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion. Let's examine this against the form of militant Islam which forms the ideological basis of Al-Qaeda: Obsessive preoccupation of community decline... check
------------- What is history but a fable agreed upon? Napoleon Bonaparte Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi 
|
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 14-Aug-2006 at 20:40
|
One last thing as a Jew I'm still wondering where I'd have prefered to live: 1) 1933 Berlin or 1942 Warsaw 2) 1946 Cracaw or 1951 Moscow 3) 1998 Kabul or 1979 Teheran Well I'll pick LA 1952 (climax of the Californian antisemistic wave) ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 06:42
Persuasive.
I had however been focussing on the existence or otherwise of Islamic fascist states and whether the US was fighting them. I still think that the closest things to Islamic fascist states I can see include the major US allies in the region. ------------- |
Posted By: docyabut
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 07:51
| I don`t think Bush was wrong in labeling the terrorists as islamic fasism ,its what they are. Omar are`nt there two belief in the koran ? Let the Jews and Chistains live in peace or killed them all? The problem is in what each muslin believes. In my book all religions in the past were consider fascisn. However who want to go back in the past .So we have a problem with Isreal and the Paletinians, it can be worked out with out bringing religion into it. I just think to many young people are brain wash in the old religous ideas of how things should be by islam fanatics and I`m afraid Iran`s Presidents in the biggest one ,you don`t see any other arab countries acting that way.I can only imagine if they get the bomb with that idealogy in the world . |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 08:56
|
Oh! One last thing fascist parties are states within the states that prevent the state apparatus and bureaucracy to wrok properly. It does reminds me of something... Let see... Ah! The Republican party... or Hizbollah. Hum? Both maybe.
------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: John Lenon
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 10:31
Here is the problem - the words ! Terrorists are people who use a terror to get their aim. And there is no sense to listen for what they are fighting, because they use a terror like a tool. And when somebody call them "Islamic", "Liberating" or something like that - he automatically give them a base for next terroristic acts for the name of something ... And Mr.Bush with his PR people are not very clever when using such "unadvatageous" words pair or they are doing it special to "put some oil to a fire".... This is my opinion
 |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 19:31
No. There isn't.
Religion is only on the Israeli side. The palestinian side is simple. Those guys came and stole their land. Explain how thats religious. Hell, even al-Qaedia has secular goals. Religion has nothing to do terrorism. And only when the western leaders realise this are they going to have any chance of solving it
Jews are protected under the Irani constitution. And there are jews living peacefully in Iran. ------------- |
Posted By: bg_turk
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 19:38
And that is probably why every second word the Osama thug uses is "jihad". ------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Posted By: bg_turk
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 19:45
At least 13 Jews have been executed in Iran after the Islamic revolution. ------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 22:41
I'm not sure if your being sarcastic or not. But thats probably true anyway. Overthrow of the Saudi's, US out of ME. Sounds secular to me.
What were they executed for? Iran does use the death penelty alot. How many non-Jews have been executed? Compared to the others on the list, 13 in 27 years? I hope you see that dispite Irans problems, it doesn't deserve to be on that list. ------------- |
Posted By: bg_turk
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 23:06
Sorry for being unclear. I was being sarcasting. I personally am convinced that Al Qaida's ideology is mostly based on religion (or rather the misinterpretation of religion). But of course this does not mean I agree with the term "Islamic Facism". I feel very uncomfortable when you put the two words together. It seems like all muslims are being labelled as fascists.
For being spies and aiding zionism, I think. ------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 23:15
I'm not convinced about anything concerning al-qaedia. Their actions contradict thier stated goals. They don't appear to do anything other than blow things up. No-one really knows what they are. Al-Qaedias real hallmark is an attack that doesn't make any sense at all, perpetrated by people who are unlikely to have done it. ------------- |
Posted By: docyabut
Date Posted: 15-Aug-2006 at 23:26
| Omar, yes both Israel and the Paletinians have rights to the land which can be settled , however al-Qaedia as sunies have secular goals to killed all the sh*tes, so how is that settled? |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 16-Aug-2006 at 03:45
If you provide me with one piece of evidence (and I don't mean hearsay by respected people) or one logical argument about this statement even being remotely true I'll believe you. Al-Qaedia appear to be just a bunch of idiots and thugs that deserve to get the firing squad just as any other mass murderer, but not any more than any other mass murder either. ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 16-Aug-2006 at 06:25
Because stirring up religious feeling is a great way to achieve your secular goals. Including of course satisfying your own ambition.
What Bush et al should be doing is labelling al-Qaeda and terrorists in general as un-Islamic, not Islamic. Apart from being true, it would be better propaganda.
------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 16-Aug-2006 at 21:34
|
Maybe this would help. Today I run through a new concept (i mean new for me but old indeed). While "islam" may be translated in English as "religion", there is another word: "din" (like in SalaDIN). This more broadly means: religious way of life and is closer to "moral" or "ethic" than from religion. For a pious muslim, everything is within this din. Economy and politics are parts of this din and as such the very word secular is senseless as everything is supposed to be ruled by the Qu'ran, the Suna, the Fiq or the more recent fatwas. For once glce I do diseagree with you. I do not think Mr. Bush (or any other western politician for that matter) is qualified to define who and what is islamic and what is not. If anything remember that the church (any church) is separated from the state. One more thing for the records. What is going on in Irak must not mislead you. Al Qaeda is successful and dangerous precisely because they are fighting to unite the muslims be them Sunnis or Shiites. Just consider how easily the supposedly Al Qaeda related kurdish islamic group Ansar al Islam was crusing from the Iraki to the Iranian side of the border. Iran was a safe heaven for the ex talibans in 2003 as well. The specificity of the war in Irak is that for historic and political reasons sunnis terrorists groups such as Zarkawi's started fighting against the shiites. M ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: bg_turk
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 00:27
|
Din is actually the Turkish word for religion.
------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 03:59
Islam literally means entering into peace. I think you mean Eman Maharbbal. (I think, I'm not sure if thats the right Arabic word, but it seems to be how people use it)
I think gcle is 100% right. Bush isn't defining what is Islamic or un-Islamic, the Quran does that. All bush would be doing would be speaking the truth for a change. ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 08:07
I don't think he's qualified to define Islam either. What I pointed out was that if he wants to win Muslims over against al-Qaeda, then it is stupid to call al-Qaeda 'Islamic'. He should call it 'anti-Islamic' and produce whatever evidence he can find or invent to convince Muslims that al-Qaeda is fighting against the interests of Islam.
What's that got to do with al-Qaeda being an Islamic movement or not? It pretends to be one certainly. And it does what it can to get Muslims to support it. But those are tactics not goals.
(Incidentally you seem to have missed the al-Qaeda spokesman recently who, with regard to the Lebanon, said 'we must not forget that Hizbulla is just as much the enemy as Israel and the US.')
------------- |
Posted By: Serge L
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 10:14
|
I don't know if that can be of any help to the present debate, however here in Italy TV news commentators explained the "Islamic Fascism" definition as directed towards Al Qaeda and it's doctrine, in particular its (alleged?) ultimate goal of recreating a califfate.
This califfate should be a non-democratic, anti-libertarian (in the Western sense of liberty, of course) and potentially military aggressive large spanning empire, and these traits are in common with historical fascism. It would have a strong religious (and, in particular, muslim) connotation, hence the adjective Islamic.
Said that, I suppose that was not a correct definition, from a historical-philological-scientific POV, but I have also a gut feeling that is a good way to summarize the idea many common people in AMerica and in the West have of Al Qaeda and other terrorists that attribute their action to a (false, I suppose) idea baout Islam.
|
Posted By: ITAPORA
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 11:16
Brazilians in the Hezbollah: the impressive and appalling vindication of that they die with a smile in the face…
The news article most impressive on the war in the Middle East is in the Leaf of this Saturday. Ibrahim Saleh, 17 years, son of Brazilian mother and Lebanese father, with double nationality, died in the rows of the Hezbollah. A missile reached the car where it was. The family is sad? Not! The mother if confesses happy because she said that the son wanted to die fighting. Zeina Kourani, native of São Paulo of Itapevi, aunt of the youngster, who now lives in the city of Shot, repeat an old myth of the Islamic terrorism: “Say-in that it had a smile in the lips when it was found died” |
Posted By: ITAPORA
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 11:19
| Hezbollah does not only order all the Israelis to airs, to pieces, children or not, because it cannot, because it is not militarily capable. But ambiciona to be it one day. E, therefore, in defense of the children that has and that it will have in the two countries, has of being destroyed |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 11:21
| O Peixe de Babel é comparado muito mais melhor agora à última vez onde você nos visitou. Ao menos agora eu posso compreender a maioria de coisas que você disse. |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 11:27
I see your point and yes it would be a good thing to push Al-Qaeda out of the muslim world. Yet is it even possible? Remember what Mila was saying in another thread about Islam: a Muslim is the one that claims to be one. So I persist in saying Al-Qaeda is a (rogue, violent, fascist whatever) islamic organisation. You could say it is not if Mr. Ben Laden organization was unic, but it is far from being the case.
Indeed I've missed it. Some links maybe? ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 11:29
|
uma vez mas: en ingles se faz favor
------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: ITAPORA
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 12:43
| The federal government acts against the Brazilian citizens how much to the weapons. It is a strategical question already initiated by FHC, that brought for Brazil, artificially, the subject of the civil disarmament, together with the demolition of the Armed Forces and the containment of the Policies. The systematic campaign of surrender to the crime completed the program (it does not react), with the requinte of if explaining the people as better to cooperate with thieves, and to each time bigger leniência stops with the crime and the criminals |
Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 13:13
Great post ITAPORE This topic is now officially thoroughly discussed!
------------- The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 16:28
|
Itapora I didn't understand your last post who is FHC? Your last sentence is a complete mystery. Vulkan have you grasp anything? You remind me of some one... ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 16:48
Also Arabic and Persian - though the words in these languages are conincidentally the same, rather than a loan word from one to the other, because they have different roots. ------------- |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 16:52
It's a given, has been for over a millenium, they state that "there is no honour greater than killing a Shia". ------------- |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 16:58
|
Islamic fascism is akin to Jewish fascism (Zionism) - intolerant and murderous. ------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 18:03
Well maybe they're turning back to their previous love but I do insist: Al-Qaeda for years has done its best to have good relations with the Shiites. Zionism is not a fascism by the way. It has enough defaults of its own to avoid caling it fascist. It is a racist colonial state very keen on militarism and general imperialism with a lot of unassumed deadly paradoxes but it is not fascist. Its democracy prevent it from becoming fascist. ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 17-Aug-2006 at 22:49
|
I think that more than anything, the Bush Admin is using "Fascist" as a keyword to describe a conservative extremist group which opposes basic liberties. The fact that the terrorists to whom he is referring claim to act in the name of Islam is what elicits the prefix Islamic-. I do not think he is generalizing all Muslims as being fascist, nor is he generalizing the religion of Islam as being fascist. Certainly the fact that there is no widespread condemnation
of these terrorists by mainstream Muslims that reaches the broad populations of
|
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 06:06
Bin Ladin's goal is not just to establish a caliphate. It is to become Caliph.
Somewhat different.
I think Bush was just using it as a generalised term of abuse without much idea of what the word means.
Sorry, I've been looking but I can't find it. It was reported in The Times (London) and the IHT a couple of weeks ago. ------------- |
Posted By: Loknar
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 06:30
|
I wondr how many muslims have predjudices against westerners? I frankly dont care about how muslims percieve the west. It isnt my fault that they are educated from birth by radical fundamentalists to hate the west. In the west you dont have schools that have that sort of thing apart of its cirriculm. Of course Im generalizing, but in many places i am not. I honestly do not believe Islam is compatable with western values and wont be for a long time. I think its best we just in large part do not intermingle. Clash of civilizations is all too likely to flare up if you mix these 2 ingredients together. Look at the Danish cartoons, Van Gough ect ect...this proves that Muslims can not integrate them selves into western society. ANd when I hear about terms such as "Eurabia" it REALLY pisses me off. They are useing our love of freedom to build private institutions to educate their young people all over the west in their islamic ways. Am i to believe all these religious schools are prim and proper? Here is a question I ask all: Do you believe that most Muslims, if they had the ability, would take away your freedom of expression or hinder it in some way?
Think aboutt he cartoons...while most were not violent, most did oppose having the ability to publish such cartoons. |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 17:02
|
Islamic Fascism in an invertrate hatred and esposed rhetoric that deals with the destruction of the sovereign state of Israel by terrorist anti-semitic groups and their nation state sponsors. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: Loknar
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 20:16
|
Right...Islamic fundamentalism is all Israel's fault
READ: Madhist Jihad
|
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 20:22
Yes you do.
QED ------------- |
Posted By: docyabut
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 20:29
I notice people post this kind of stuff .What do you make of it?
Iranian cataclysm forecast Aug. 22Topics: http://www.hyscience.com/archives/middle_east_news_and_perspectives/ - Middle East News and PerspectivesIran has promised to respond to a plan for a Western aid package in return for an end to Iran's uranium enrichment program on August 22nd. As noted at http://globalpolitician.com/articledes.asp?ID=2031&cid=11&sid=61 - Global Politician , Ahmadinejad is a significant proponent of symbolism, so why has Ahmadinejad chosen August 22nd? That is the day of Lailat Al-Israa when, the Prophet Mohammed purportedly ascended to heaven from modern-day Jerusalem. One can only imagine what sort of event Ahmadinejad plans to commemorate on that day, and attempt to solidify his image as a holy warrior in the final days. Now a top expert on the Mideast says it is possible Iran could pick Aug. 22, the anniversary of one of Islam's holiest events, http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51445 - for a cataclysm Shiite Muslims believe will forever resolve the battle between "good" and "evil." Princeton's Bernard Lewis has written an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal advising that the rest of the world would be wise to bear in mind that for those who believe the end of the world is imminent and good, there is no deterrent even to nuclear warfare.Read more at http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51445 - WorldNetDaily... I was curious what journalists from the region were saying and came across a Gulf Times piece by Farshid Motahari, who included an ominous quote in his http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=101439&version=1&template_id=46&parent_id=26 - article : ""It is clear that not only the current government, but also the Ahmadinejad opposition, cannot give in to an ultimatum and would eventually prefer a confrontation to losing face and national pride." To Iran, It's about pride, power, and a radical Islamic ideology. For Ahmadinejad and the mullahs, a martyr's heaven - sparked by an Islamic-induced apocalypse, is undoubtedly coming, sooner or later. Whether it happens on August 22 or not, if Iran is allowed to go nuclear, it will be very soon thereafter. In the meantime - count on the present conflict in Lebanon to be just a warmup. |
Posted By: docyabut
Date Posted: 18-Aug-2006 at 20:55
|
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has urged his people to prepare for the coming of an Islamic "messiah.
Does he really believe that he is this messiah ?
|
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 01:25
|
I seriously doubt it. I think the article is complete bollocks. ------------- |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 05:32
|
So do you really think Iran may turn into a big-scale Waco? ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Maharbbal
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 05:44
Well living in the two western countries with the biggest muslim populations I can tell you there are two very different ways of dealing with things. Is Islam compatible with our way of life? No not at all and who ever says the countrary should see what is happening in England NOW. On the countrary, if we stop refering to Islam of the muslim community, and start dealing with muslims as indivuals half the job will be done. Putting all muslims in the same bag braded "islam" is a big mistake as the one leading this pack will be the religious and among them the fanatics. They may very well take advantage of the situation to take the lead of a community created by both the government and the public opinion. Muslims must feel first that they are: young, old, rich, poor, workers, unemplyed, and so on and that before their islamic identity (whatever it means) they have the same problems as young, old, rich, poor, rich non-muslims. This is the best thing to do to avoid the so-called clash of civilization which would be a double mistake because there is not such a thing as "civilizations" and if clash there has to be the West'd better choose some place that is properly threatening it (China for instance). M. ------------- I am a free donkey! |
Posted By: Loknar
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 06:22
|
Of course, Ahmadinejad is such a reasonable guy!
http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=3019&FID=18 - Maharbbal
Ill reply to your post tomorrow.
|
Posted By: Serge L
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 09:15
I guess you are right. However, that does not change the overall sense of my post; on the contrary, that is a reason more to despise Mr. Bin Laden, is it not?
|
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 19-Aug-2006 at 10:32
|
symbolism is always powerful especialy for those living in in the region...doubt the messiah thing is any more revelent then the likely hood of a major terrorist attack in J-town itself...which to me is more probable...especialy on the day in question. ------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 06:12
Yes. In general I meant to indicate I was agreeing with you.
------------- |
Posted By: bg_turk
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 12:21
Arabs cannot be anti-semitic, because by definition they also belong to the semitic group. ------------- http://www.journalof911studies.com - http://www.journalof911studies.com |
Posted By: Centrix Vigilis
Date Posted: 20-Aug-2006 at 14:01
Not at all correct...in fact many countless numbers of 'jews' are not ethnicaly 'semitic' at all.... living currently in Israel....but I discern your point....and normaly i would still disagree because if I were a 'Jordanian arab' for example and of truer 'ethnic semitic' background... i could still espouse a hatered and bigotry for my own ethnicity. ie. be an anti-semitic.
hence you will normaly and generaly always see me reference the term 'anti-semitic' to it's more conventional defintion and Not it's more esoteric...but I do thank you for your feed back and respect your opinion.
later note added: specificaly I believe this to be a radical islamic adaptation of nazism and that rehtoric combined... with the anti-semitism encouraged and abridged by the same... and by Muhammad Al Husseini... past Grand Mufti of Jerusalem..whose close ties and teachings in nazi Germany and as a founding father of the PLO are well known.
best
CV
------------- "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" S. T. Friedman Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true' |