# ISIS from Islam **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 19, 2015, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069 "2015-02-19T04:55:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/121 "2015-02-23T03:32:07Z")
> [@camille](#): > > Yes, and those are the passages everyone is talking about, right? :dubious: > > Wood interviewed and quoted only radicals and a “secular” authority (Haykel). No mainstream Muslim or widely accepted Islamic scholar was mentioned or offered a chance to give their views. Of course not, the piece wasn’t about them, it was about ISIS and its sympathizers, and what they believe, and why they believe and can make at least a colorable argument that it is soundly grounded in the Koran. But nothing in the piece suggests their movement is anything but marginal in the Islamic world or will ever have wider appeal than it has now (unless it heals its rift with Al-Qaeda – the danger of that is discussed but dismissed as unlikely). There is also an in-depth discussion of “quietist Salafism” as a possible and less troublesome alternative outlet for Muslims of the same potential demographic as ISIS. It is just as extreme and conservative as ISIS’ doctrine, but it focuses on the individual Muslim living his own life uprightly and religiously, and violence and politics have no place in it. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/122 "2015-02-23T04:58:26Z")
> [@Valteron](#): > > If your alleged majority of good and peaceful Muslims is as huge as you maintain, they should have no trouble reforming out the barbaric and backwards atrocities of their religion? They can’t really stop it. If you’re a peaceful Muslim, and there are violent Islamic terrorists who are going around killing people, how are you going to restrain them? Talking won’t work; trying to physically stop them will probably just get you yourself beheaded next. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 7:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/123 "2015-02-23T07:06:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Of course not, the piece wasn’t about them, it was about ISIS and its sympathizers, and what they believe, and why they believe and can make at least a colorable argument that it is soundly grounded in the Koran. But nothing in the piece suggests their movement is anything but marginal in the Islamic world or will ever have wider appeal than it has now (unless it heals its rift with Al-Qaeda – the danger of that is discussed but dismissed as unlikely). There is also an in-depth discussion of “quietist Salafism” as a possible and less troublesome alternative outlet for Muslims of the same potential demographic as ISIS. It is just as extreme and conservative as ISIS’ doctrine, but it focuses on the individual Muslim living his own life uprightly and religiously, and violence and politics have no place in it. The article asserts that mainstream Muslims have a “cotton candy” view of their religion, that they are “embarrassed and politically correct”, and that they "neglect what their religion has historically and legally required.” How is it fair to paint them with these unflattering, uncited characterizations, but then not speak directly to any mainstream Islamic scholars about their actual views of ISIS, Islamic texts, and Islamic history? Wood then says this about his conversations with the extremists he spoke to: > [@](#): > > The Islamic State’s ideology exerts powerful sway over a certain subset of the population. Life’s hypocrisies and inconsistencies vanish in its face. Musa Cerantonio and the Salafis I met in London are unstumpable: no question I posed left them stuttering. They lectured me garrulously and, if one accepts their premises, convincingly. To call them un-Islamic appears, to me, to invite them into an argument that they would win. Is Wood an Islamic scholar? What questions did he ask them that didn’t stump them? How does his discussion with them prove that they would win the larger argument? The interview with the quietist Salafi in Philadelphia is interesting, but also contradicts Wood’s assertion that ISIS is following a legitimate version of Islam that goes back to the time of Mohammed and his companions, by pointing out: > [@](#): > > He cites Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Prophet’s companions, who sat down with dissenters and asked them how they had the gall, as a minority, to tell the majority that it was wrong. Dissent itself, to the point of bloodshed or splitting the umma, was forbidden. Even the manner of the establishment of Baghdadi’s caliphate runs contrary to expectation, he said. “The khilafa is something that Allah is going to establish,” he told me, “and it will involve a consensus of scholars from Mecca and Medina. That is not what happened. ISIS came out of nowhere.” IMO, it’s a glaring omission to not include the opinions of more widely accepted Islamic scholars. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/124 "2015-02-23T14:26:39Z")
> [@rock\_party](#): > > I understand Obama’s strategy to not label ISIS Islamic, to say ISIS has hijacked Islam, to say,“These are evil people using Islam.” I get that it’s not a good idea to paint and entire religion with a broad brush. For peaceful Muslims trying to live a normal life in the modern world, calling their religion inherently wrong or barbaric isn’t helpful, and it’s better to deny ISIS of any Islamic authority. > > But there’s many out there who day different. That not calling ISIS Islamic is wrong, that it’s not only disingenuous, it’s a mistake that can blind us when fighting our enemy.This article, “What ISIS Really Wants” stresses the importance of labeling ISIS Islamic, mostly due to ISIS’s own Islamic rhetoric, but it never tells us WHY it’s been a mistake to deny ISIS Islamic authority. > > [What ISIS Really Wants - The Atlantic](http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/) > > I’ve read several articles and looked at a few debates, and it seems to be a right/left debate, with the right demanding we label ISIS Islamic and Islam is to blame, and the left, no surprise, taking Obama’s strategy of trying to deny ISIS’s claim on Islam. But the right’s argument is loud and keeps pounding the drum. My question then, is there any merit to the right’s insistence that Islam is to blame for ISIS? I’m not finding much argument beyond, “Obama is a Islamic sympathizer.” I think what Obama is doing is the more intelligent strategy , while the leaders of the GOP are doing what they always do and looking for any reason to criticize. Given the importance of having a good long term strategy to fight ISIS and any similar groups I think being willing to smear all Muslims for political strategy is pretty low. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/125 "2015-02-23T14:52:31Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > I think what Obama is doing is the more intelligent strategy , while the leaders of the GOP are doing what they always do and looking for any reason to criticize. Given the importance of having a good long term strategy to fight ISIS and any similar groups I think being willing to smear all Muslims for political strategy is pretty low. This [piece](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-j-parker/obama-is-right-about-isla_b_6716568.html)expands on that argument rather well: > [@](#): > > The reason the Obama administration is consistently driving a wedge with its rhetoric between Islam and terrorism has nothing to do with some unquantifiable rationale on the relationship between Islam and terrorism. It’s not Obama’s job to engage in some dinner table conversation about religion and violence. Rather, his rhetoric is part and parcel of a very deliberate strategy to achieve our political and military aims using the coalition of Islamic states we have built in order to more efficiently kill terrorists. Make no mistake, it is a strategy, one you may not agree with, that has avoided boots on the ground to this point. The article even extends some charity and consideration to people on the **Valteron** side of this issue: > [@](#): > > I am not saying that there are not good reasons to have theological and political discussions on the impact of religion on violence or human rights. I am not saying you are stupid because you think they are a link, or that you have no reason to be frustrated at our foreign policy. > > What I am saying is that they are not measurably beneficial from the standpoint of a Commander-in-Chief to lump Islam and terrorism together. His job is to win a war, and lumping Islam with terrorism doesn’t help him do that. We should be behind him on that. What we want at the end is the maximum damage done to ISIL and al Qaida with the minimal cost to our people. How do we do that? We build an alliance and we kill ISIL without putting boots on the ground. How do we keep that up? We don’t go out and criticize the religion of all our allies without a VERY good reason. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/126 "2015-02-23T14:58:56Z")
To be clear, I’m not saying Obama is incorrect in his diplomatic stance. When I say I’d be more comfortable with his position if he compared ISIS to Westboro, I’m speaking from an intellectual, not a rhetorical, position. Dude knows a bit more about diplomacy than me. ---
**Author:** ![Valteron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f17d59/32.png) [@Valteron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Valteron)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/127 "2015-02-23T17:38:47Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > They can’t really stop it. > > If you’re a peaceful Muslim, and there are violent Islamic terrorists who are going around killing people, how are you going to restrain them? Talking won’t work; trying to physically stop them will probably just get you yourself beheaded next . I did not say it is up to peaceful Muslims to crush ISIS, now did I? What you replied to was a comment by me to the effect that peaceful Muslims, if they are such a huge majority as the posts here allege, should have no trouble reforming out the barbaric and backwards atrocities\*\* of their religion\*\*(emphasis added). This could mean reforming the abuses ANYWHERE, not just in ISIS. It could mean doing something about the Imam in Britain (he was on YouTube) who, acting as a marriage counsellor in one of Britain’s legal Sharia courts, dismissed the wife’s complaint that her husband had hit her on the grounds that it was only once. They could protest against the horrible anti-Semitic cartoons and programs that appear every day in Muslim media. They could put pressure on Saudi Arabia’s sexism that lashes women for daring to drive a vehicle. I have stood in bitter cold in front of the Saudi embassy in Canada for the past several Thursdays to protest against the fact that Raif Badawi is more or less sentenced to be flogged to death for blogging and for being an atheist. Our group is mainly atheists, humanists and Amnesty International protestors, but I can’t recall seeing any Muslims there. They could rely less on Saudi Arabian money to build mosques and reject ultra-conservative, ultra sexist Imams from Saudi preaching in their mosques. They could stop semi-justifying cold-blooded murder in the media with their usual formula of first briefly saying that 9/11 or Charlie Hebdo was terrible, tut, tut, but let’s not forget. . . . . and then attributing guilt for the incidents on everything the west has done from the Crusades to anti-Muslim discrimination in the west. They could get a handle on what freedom of expression means in the west, they could agree that Islamic blasphemy laws do not apply here, and that Muslims have no special right to be offended and to lash out violently when their religion is lampooned or criticized. They could drop all demands for Sharia courts in western countries and admit that there has to be one law for all. They could put pressure on the five Muslim countries who punish homosexuality with death, and on the others that impose flogging, lengthy prison terms, etc. It occurs to me that I could write at least 100 more things the “peaceful” Muslims could do to make their religion less of a primitive atrocity in the world. But they would have to believe that their religion needs that reform. Frankly, I see very little of that feeling. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/128 "2015-02-23T18:53:21Z")
You appear to have made a tactical shift, from claiming that Islam is inherently inhumane and aggressive because of its foundational documents to presenting us with a wall of text comprised of examples. A prospect of rebuttal therefore becomes daunting, because we must address each and every one, allowing you the opportunity to quibble over each and every one and claim victory. But this one seems especially egregious: > [@](#): > > …I have stood in bitter cold in front of the Saudi embassy in Canada for the past several Thursdays to protest against the fact that Raif Badawi is more or less sentenced to be flogged to death for blogging and for being an atheist. Our group is mainly atheists, humanists and Amnesty International protestors, but I can’t recall seeing any Muslims there… You begin reasonably enough by calling attention to your brave solidarity and willingness to brave the horrors of Canadian temperatures. Here in Baja Canada, we face similar circumstances, but with the additional threat of ice spiders. And another, less dangerous. My representative, the Hon. Keith Ellison, is a Muslim. So far as I have noticed, he does not appear to seethe with rage and fury. Rather an ordinary Minnesotan, to all appearance, if slightly more brownish. So, you did not see any Muslims? Did you ask? Did you poll the crowd as to their various religious opinions, or lack thereof? What is the source of your information, here? How many Musllms are there in Canada, how many people in your sample? How many Muslims would you expect to see in attendance at an important Canadian cultural event, like a hockey game? To oversimplify, how do you know there were not Muslims there? Do they give off an easily detectable dark radiance of evilness? The Hon. Mr. Ellison does not, at least not to my eye, and I may not be the best detector. I tend to judge more on expressed opinions and actions. Such as yours. Do you fashion yourself a humanist? But you are not generous nor forgiving, you thunder like an old-style Jeremiah railing at the sinful. Woe unto you, you false believers of Islam, Reason knows you not! Woe, I say, woe unto you! You suffer from an unjustifiable certainty. And in case you have not noticed, certainty is the defining characteristic of the fanatic. But how can you be a fanatic, you are atheist, your are immune to inhumane convictions! Oh? Have you met Mr. Lenin, Mr. Stalin, Mr. Pot? A blessing for you, may the sweet baby Jesus shut your mouth and open your heart. ---
**Author:** ![rock\_party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19b73/32.png) [@rock\_party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rock_party)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/129 "2015-02-23T18:58:03Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally Posted by Velocity View Post > They can’t really stop it. > > If you’re a peaceful Muslim, and there are violent Islamic terrorists who are going around killing people, how are you going to restrain them? Talking won’t work; trying to physically stop them will probably just get you yourself beheaded next . This is such an ongoing problem that there should be major checks and balances in these countries to quell extremists from the beginning. You hear of this country funding this group, and these rich Saudi millionaires funding groups…when the groups get out of hand, it seems the instigators distance themselves, true, but that kind of antagonism needs to stop. And why can’t these countries have militaries that go after this? It’s not like this kind of extremism is coming out of left field. This is ongoing in these countries…uprisings, extremism, slaughtering civilians, and these countries need meticulous intelligence and surveillance and capable military to shield themselves from these uprisings. I don’t understand the lax response we see from the affected countries. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/130 "2015-02-23T20:03:22Z")
Now [here’s](http://www.salon.com/2015/02/20/this_stupidity_needs_to_end_why_the_atlantic_ny_post_are_clueless_about_islam/) a very interesting rebuttal to Wood’s position: > [@](#): > > Islam clearly admits a great diversity in spirituality, jurisprudence and theology. But religious authorities – jurists, theologians, spiritualists – have also traditionally been careful about uniting that pluralism within a harmonious prism. That prism has systems of interpretation — systems that ISIS and its cohorts reject — and therein lies an important part of the puzzle. > > At the root of such systems is the _sanad,_ or the “chain.” Contemporary exemplars of this tradition take great pride in being able to say that any text they teach in the religious sciences is a text that they have read with someone, who read it with someone, who read it with the author of the text, who would have read previous texts with someone who read… and so on and so forth, back to the Prophet himself in the 7th century. That basic ability to show a certain historical pedigree was vital in networks of Muslim religious authority, at least until quite recently. For adherents to those systems, even a degree in a university — let alone self-study — would by itself be insufficient to establish the qualification to interpret even secondary texts, let alone the primary one, the Qur’an. > > These are rather complex systems of establishing religious authority via processes akin to academic peer review. Indeed, parts of these systems of transmission, especially with relation to jurisprudence, have become crystalized in various curricula and schools of law \*(madhahib) \*– even inspiring the modern Western university, according to historians such as George Makdisi. These systems do not simply establish the transmission of texts between successive generations, but also the understanding of those texts, and a methodology — or minhaj — for understanding the primary and secondary texts. > > Modern radical tendencies within the Muslim community do away with such systems. For them, the Muslim community has gone awfully wrong – and they’re going to put it right. In short, they create a do-it-yourself kit of interpretation. > > \ > > When scores of religious authorities in the Sunni and Shi’a Muslim worlds disparage ISIS as being “un-Islamic,” they’re not being facetious. They can see, plainly, that ISIS is citing religious texts – the Qur’an itself, the sayings of the Prophet, and pre-modern religious authorities. These citations, however, don’t establish authenticity. Rather, the ability to interpret the primary texts as the Prophet did, and secondary texts as their authors did, is what establishes authenticity. As far as religious authorities are concerned, such discernment can only come via these systems of training through chains of transmission. After all, there is a vast and massive corpus that has been added upon for more than a millennium. Context thus could be seen as imperative. OMG – these ISIS fellows – they’re Muslim **Lutherans!** ---
**Author:** ![Valteron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f17d59/32.png) [@Valteron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Valteron)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/131 "2015-02-23T20:53:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You appear to have made a tactical shift, from claiming that Islam is inherently inhumane and aggressive because of its foundational documents to presenting us with a wall of text comprised of examples. A prospect of rebuttal therefore becomes daunting, because we must address each and every one, allowing you the opportunity to quibble over each and every one and claim victory. > > But this one seems especially egregious: > You begin reasonably enough by calling attention to your brave solidarity and willingness to brave the horrors of Canadian temperatures. Here in Baja Canada, we face similar circumstances, but with the additional threat of ice spiders. And another, less dangerous. My representative, the Hon. Keith Ellison, is a Muslim. So far as I have noticed, he does not appear to seethe with rage and fury. Rather an ordinary Minnesotan, to all appearance, if slightly more brownish. > > So, you did not see any Muslims? Did you ask? Did you poll the crowd as to their various religious opinions, or lack thereof? What is the source of your information, here? How many Musllms are there in Canada, how many people in your sample? How many Muslims would you expect to see in attendance at an important Canadian cultural event, like a hockey game? > > To oversimplify, how do you know there were not Muslims there? Do they give off an easily detectable dark radiance of evilness? The Hon. Mr. Ellison does not, at least not to my eye, and I may not be the best detector. I tend to judge more on expressed opinions and actions. > > Such as yours. Do you fashion yourself a humanist? But you are not generous nor forgiving, you thunder like an old-style Jeremiah railing at the sinful. Woe unto you, you false believers of Islam, Reason knows you not! Woe, I say, woe unto you! > > You suffer from an unjustifiable certainty. And in case you have not noticed, certainty is the defining characteristic of the fanatic. But how can you be a fanatic, you are atheist, your are immune to inhumane convictions! Oh? Have you met Mr. Lenin, Mr. Stalin, Mr. Pot? > > A blessing for you, may the sweet baby Jesus shut your mouth and open your heart. Moderator, is this person allowed to call me a fanatic? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/132 "2015-02-23T21:01:09Z")
Never Mind…not my wisest post. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/133 "2015-02-23T21:48:40Z")
> [@Valteron](#): > > Moderator, is this person allowed to call me a fanatic? At the top of each post, next to the post number, is the “Report Post” link: a little exclamation mark inside a red triangle. If you feel another poster has violated the rules of the forum, you’re encouraged to click that link. While the mods do their best to read everything, they cannot be everywhere at all times; the “Report Post” button ensures that they will get the message. That said, I don’t see that **elucidator** called you a fanatic. He did suggest it strongly, and truth be told you certainly do come across as one. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/134 "2015-02-23T22:43:46Z")
I issue a warning, this way lies Madness, turn around, turn away. I do not call you a fanatic, I urge you to doubt which is as holy as faith, and far more reliable than certainty. Further, you don’t paint with too broad a brush, but with a fire hose the spews sewage, that slanders millions of innocent people who have done nothing to warrant it. And if that is judged an unacceptable insult, I will stand by it nonetheless. I note that while you await vindication, you do not answer my questions and criticisms. Perhaps if someone else asks? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/135 "2015-02-23T22:51:13Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I issue a warning, this way lies Madness, turn around, turn away. I do not call you a fanatic, I urge you to doubt which is as holy as faith, and far more reliable than certainty. Or, as another wag put it: > [@Aleister Crowley](#): > > Doubt. > > Doubt thyself. > > Doubt even if thou doubtest thyself. > > Doubt all. > > Doubt even if thou doubtest all. > > It seems sometimes as if beneath all conscious doubt there lay some deepest certainty. O kill it! Slay the snake! > > The horn of the Doubt-Goat be exalted! ---
**Author:** ![Valteron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f17d59/32.png) [@Valteron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Valteron)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/136 "2015-02-23T23:20:05Z")
> [@andros](#): > > At the top of each post, next to the post number, is the “Report Post” link: a little exclamation mark inside a red triangle. If you feel another poster has violated the rules of the forum, you’re encouraged to click that link. While the mods do their best to read everything, they cannot be everywhere at all times; the “Report Post” button ensures that they will get the message. > > That said, I don’t see that **elucidator** called you a fanatic. He did suggest it strongly, and truth be told you certainly do come across as one. So if I tell someone he comes across as an asshole, but I do not call him an asshole, that is all right? ---
**Author:** ![Valteron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f17d59/32.png) [@Valteron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Valteron)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/137 "2015-02-23T23:33:04Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I note that while you await vindication, you do not answer my questions and criticisms. Perhaps if someone else asks? I am not sure which of your pointless quibbles rates as “questions and criticisms” in your strange view of reality, but if you are referring to how I knew there were no Muslims demonstrating with me at the Saudi embassy: There are only about 5 or 10 people at each demo willing to brave the unusual (even for Canada) cold we have been having (-20 Celsius one day). I know each of these people, have participated in humanist and atheist discussion groups with them, and I am pretty certain none of them is a Muslim. Your other jab about Stalin and Pol Pot being atheists is stupid beyond belief and does not deserve an answer. You can find that stupid point aptly answered by people much smarter and more eloquent than I, such as Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. If Stalin’s crimes are an indictment of atheism then Hitler’s crimes are an indictment of vegetarianism, and the slave trade is an indictment of Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/138 "2015-02-23T23:46:04Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Now [here’s](http://www.salon.com/2015/02/20/this_stupidity_needs_to_end_why_the_atlantic_ny_post_are_clueless_about_islam/) a very interesting rebuttal to Wood’s position: The problem is that the “chain” of Islam has clearly failed. The areas closest to the birth of the religion, and most of its subsequent dogmatic evolution, are the areas that are taking the strictest, literal interpretations of the religious text. The chain did not seem to moderate nearly as much as, for example, Christian theology did after the ill-fated Crusades and Inquisition. The question is…why? Saying Islam has nothing to do with it is easy, but intellectually unsatisfying. It certainly plays a role. Is it the text itself? Is it the obstinance of the theological authority structure? Is it an inherent principle within the religion’s text and its followers that religion should play a major role in political and cultural life? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/139 "2015-02-23T23:53:49Z")
> [@Valteron](#): > > I am not sure which of your pointless quibbles rates as “questions and criticisms” in your strange view of reality, but if you are referring to how I knew there were no Muslims demonstrating with me at the Saudi embassy: There are only about 5 or 10 people at each demo willing to brave the unusual (even for Canada) cold we have been having (-20 Celsius one day). I know each of these people, have participated in humanist and atheist discussion groups with them, and I am pretty certain none of them is a Muslim. So, with anywhere from 16% to 23% of Canadians holding no belief in a god, your little group can coax 10 fellow nonbelievers to join your demonstration, yet you want to piss and moan that you are not seeing more Muslims, who make up less than 3.5% of the population? Perhaps they are simply smart enough to recognize that such events are feel-good displays for the participants that never have a genuine effect on policy. ---
**Author:** ![Donald\_Rump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Donald\_Rump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donald_Rump)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2015, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069/140 "2015-02-23T23:59:00Z")
**Valteron** , can it be that no Muslims showed up to the protest for the same set of reasons that almost nobody did? Namely, cold, laziness, other affairs to attend to, lack of predilection for such engagement, unawareness of current events? Why do ordinary Muslims carry some superogatory obligation to put their lives on hold every time something horrendous is done in the name of Islam? What makes you think ordinary Canadian Muslims even think the vile kleptocracy terrorizing the Saudi people truly represents Islam at all? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/isis-from-islam/713069.md?page=8)