01-27-2008, 10:21 AM
|
 |
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: 
Posts: 16,371
Thanks: 399
Thanked 5,884 Times in 4,091 Posts
|
|
Re: Buddhist Teacher Shot in Thailand
Quote:
Originally Posted by lackluster
I think much of the problem has to do with perception based upon the use of superficial terms like "moderate" as well as people's inability to separate beliefs from the ethnicity of those holding them.
AS to the first, we often call something "moderate" in regards to Islam, but that is only a term relative to Islam as a whole. If you have two number sets, say 1-100 and 41-100, the number representing the mid point of the first is quite towards the end of the spectum of the other. Sure, calculating personal beliefs isn't so linear as that, but the beliefs of Muslims as a whoel and the beliefs of westerners as a whoe are so different that even what we call "moderate" in terms of Islam is really quite arch in western terms. To give an illustration, 78 % of British muslims want to criminalize anything critical of Islam. Much of this totalitarianism is considered "moderate" though, only because not all 78% would actually behead a person who criticizes them.
The second point that prevents people from seeing the truth is the extremety with which they avoid appearing racist. They cannot separate the beliefs from those holding the beliefs. 37 % of British Muslims view Jews as legitimate targets for murder. I will guarantee you that if 37% of white British were to view Muslims as a legitimate target for murder, the same people who act as apologists for Muslims would be all over it. Rather than being anti-racist, people are actually indulging in racism, because they do not hold one group equally accountable as the other.
|
Exactly...
If I may add...
There is also a LARGE contingency in the Muslim population that, although will not go so far as to be violent or believe in hostile takeovers, they DO support Sharia law and native customs being enforced in their host nations...
There are actual terrorists who kill obviously, but the problem is NOT just with them...It is also with those who push their beliefs, not at the tip of the sword, but with propaganda and cries of racism and victimhood... 
Here's just a small example...
Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance
Quote:
It seems only yesterday that Premier Dalton McGuinty declared: "There will be no sharia law in Ontario." Many of us, who witnessed the medieval nature of manmade sharia laws in our countries of birth, heaved a sigh of relief back in September of 2005. We thought this was the end of the attempt by Islamists to sneak sharia into a Western jurisdiction. We were wrong.
The campaign to introduce sharia is back. Last time, the campaign took a populist approach, invoking multiculturalism. This time, the pro-sharia lobby is dangling the carrot of new niche markets and has the backing of Canada's major banks. Such icons of the corporate world as Citibank NA, HSBC Holdings PLC, and Barclays PLC have endorsed sharia banking and have started offering Islamic financing products to a vulnerable Muslim population.
In May, 2007, The Globe reported that "Several Canadian financial institutions are preparing sharia-compliant mortgages, insurance, taxi licensing and investment funds to help serve the country's fastest-growing part of the population." Recently, the Toronto Star's business section reported that an unnamed bank may offer sharia loans as early as this summer; Le Journal de Montreal disclosed that Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation(CMHC) was also getting in on the act. Stephanie Rubec, spokesperson for the CMHC, said the Crown corporation had launched a tender worth $100,000 to study Islamic mortgages for Muslim Canadians. Could she be oblivious to the fact that almost all Muslim Canadians currently have home mortgages through banks and don't feel they are living in sin? In fact, CMHC has gone a step further: It has quietly entered into a partnership with a Saudi company, AaYaan Holdings, to develop sharia-compliant mortgage-lending systems.
The origin of Islamic banking has its roots in the 1920s, but did not start until the late 1970s and owes much of its foundation to the Islamist doctrine of two people — Abul Ala Maudoodi of the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan and Hassan al-Banna of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The theory was put into practice by Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul-Haq who established sharia banking law in Pakistan.
Proponents of sharia banking rest their case on many verses of the Holy Koran that outlaw usury, not interest.
Verses that address the question of loans and debts include:
Al Baqarah (2:275): God hath permitted trade and forbidden usury;
Al Baqarah (2:276): Allah does not bless usury, and He causes charitable deeds to prosper, and Allah does not love any ungrateful sinner.
Every English-language translation of the Koran has translated the Arabic word riba as usury, not interest. Yet, Islamists have deliberately portrayed bank interest as usury and labelled the current banking system as un-Islamic. Instead, these Islamists have created exotic products with names that are foreign to much of the world's Muslim population. This is where they mask interest under the niqab of Mudraba, Musharaka, Murabaha, and Ijara. Two authors, both senior Muslim bankers, have written scathing critiques of sharia banking, one labelling the practice as nothing more than "deception," with the other suggesting the entire exercise was "a convenient pretext for advancing broad Islamic objectives and for lining the pockets of religious officials." Why Canadian banks would contribute to this masquerade is a question for ordinary Canadians to ask.
|
That will be a larger problem than just terrorism itself in the longrun...You have a segment of Islam that does not believe in HOW the terrorists operate in their mission to get rid of infidels and change the world to an Islamic one, but they still believe in the mission itself...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
|
LinkBacks (?)
Linear Mode
