There is no call for insulting idiots.
Also of how religion functions as a sociocultural phenomenon.
Generally, people shape religious traditions to themselves and not the other way around.
No you did not, nor did my reply in any way suggest that you did. I only indicated that the Tibetans do no have an organization that decided to study and to copy the Tamil tigers. The takfiri salafisism did.
Islamist =/= “jihadi”
Until the modern takfiri salafism invented over the period of the 1980s-1990s, there was been centuries of the consensus of the extreme aversion to the idea of the suicidal actions and attacks.
The invention of the justification of the idea of the suicide attacks / bombing came from the desire to find weapons to overcome the weakness and their desire to use the violence against the " apostate " culture they claimed was all around them. So the Tamil tigers model was then justified by the reinterpretation
No, you only need not to be an ignorant idiot making false statements based on a superifical pseudo-knowledge, not knowing as is clear anything effective about either of these creeds.
Your whole point is a complete failure.
There is no " scripture" support, the concept is a recent invention created in the whole cloth for the immediate goals of the very marginal takfir movement in the salafism
If " scripture " is the driver as you stupidly pretend in ignorance, there would not be the suicide bombers.
But there are after a certain ideological fringe invented a tortured reinterpretation of old concepts and changed meanings.
So it is the organizations and the ideologies that matter, the scripture gave way to their needs.
These recipe threads suck!
There is no way to search for specific dishes. You gotta wade through the sewer to get a good meal planned!
You’re right. Christianity would have been a much better example.
-George W. Bush
Killing civilians under the guise of the state is no different than killing civilians for any other reason.
I’m guessing from your rather idiosyncratic application of the rules of grammar that you’re not a native English speaker. Trust me, you suggested exactly that.
But let’s say they did. How would the Buddhists justify the application of those tactics in religious terms?
So Salafism makes no reference to scripture? None at all? They just went straight from reading ‘Dummies Guide to the Tamil Tigers’ to Al-Qaeda with no intermediary steps? Sounds to me like you’re an absolutist who thinks your interpretation is ipso facto correct.
I know that. Do you deny the existence of Islamists who approve of Jihadi tactics? If not, I don’t see why you’re pointing this out.
And on what do these Salafists base their counterarguments? The Bible? The Bhagavad Gita? Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince? What, specifically, are they using to challenge this longstanding consensus?
Cite, please? Forgive my skepticism, but you really do seem like you’re just making this shit up as you go along.
Whether or not someone is an apostate is an explicitly religious concern. If you take their religious beliefs out of the equation, this desire makes absolutely no sense.
With all due respect (which is to say, no respect whatsoever), I doubt you actually have the foggiest idea what my argument actually is.
Jihadis cite scripture all the time. You can disagree with their interpretation of it, but you can’t deny they’re motivated by their religious beliefs.
Tortured in your opinion. In their opinion, you’re the one who’s got it wrong. Besides, if you grant that Islamists and Jihadis are motivated by a “tortured” interpretation of scripture, you can’t turn around and say in the same fucking breath that there is no scriptural support for what they do!
[QUOTE=Blank Slate]
Killing civilians under the guise of the state is no different than killing civilians for any other reason.
[/QUOTE]
Really? Which, in your opinion, has historically shown itself to be more susceptible to change when confronted with new information, foreign policy, or religious dogma?
Inasmuch as the Catholic Church isn’t sponsoring Crusades anymore while states are still launching wars…
I’m gonna throw this one open to the crowd. First person to spot the fallacy wins five bucks.
My respect for the man being what it isn’t, I’m inclined to buy without inspection. Nonetheless, others have higher standards. I’m willing to pretend that I do too.
Cite?
No I did not, I pointed out the organizational learning and the sourcing of a model from one organization with a motivation to another.
by whatever means a budhdhist terror organization found convenient and effective, just as the takfiri salafistes
So you decide to build the mountainous straw man to try to distract? I stated no such thing at all.
The takfiri of course take old sources and radically reinterpret and change the meaning to sell their ideas
If " scripture " was the source of the action, it would never have been a haram thing. the texts did not change, only a new and a radically different meaning and direction.
It renders the idea " scripture " matters stupid and nonsensical.
It sounds to me you are a bullshitter who is seeking to distract via stawmen and bullshit statements.
This is a stupid and nonsensical question.
the majority of the movements that are called Islamist, as the Muslim Brotherhood reject the takfiri philosophy. They are not close to synonyms, any more than Conservative Republican is synonym to Nazi or to Fascist.
But idiot partisans do like to put them together.
Because stupid person, to put the " jihadi" and the Islamist in the same sentence is to make the implication there are a pair.
I have no further use for this idiot, bigots will believe in ignorance what they want.
The suicide was a deeply forbidden thing for 1400 years of the islamic history, that in the past two decades the tortured assertions of the Takfiri have made it a tractic says nothing about a scripture, it says only something about the organization and the ideological group that promoted the radical revisionism.
Thank goodness, I sneezed twice today!
Could be an allergy, three ice cubes.
BUTTER DROP INS
1/2 c. Butter Flavor Crisco
3/4 c. granulated sugar
1 tbsp. milk
1 egg
1/2 tsp. vanilla
1 1/4 c. all-purpose flour
1/4 tsp. salt
1/4 tsp. baking powder
Heat oven to 375 degrees. Grease baking sheets with Butter Flavor Crisco. Set aside.
Cream 1/2 cup Butter Flavor Crisco, granulated sugar and 1 tablespoon milk in medium bowl at medium speed of electric mixer until well blended. Beat in egg and 1/2 teaspoon vanilla. Combine flour, salt and baking powder. Mix into creamed mixture.
Drop level measuring tablespoons 2 inches apart onto baking sheet. Bake at 375 degrees F. for 7 to 9 minutes. Remove to cooling rack.
(My mom used to make these for me all the time as a kid. She used her own recipe for icing, though)
I have an even easier recipe for grapefruit pie.
Ingredients:
All the grapefruits you have around
One pie shell
Directions:
Gather together all the grapefruits you have around.
Throw them in the garbage. Because grapefruits taste terrible. Why did you have them?
Put something good in the pie shell like blueberries.
Let me put it this way : you’ve got this Jesus guy, right ? And in his fanfic, it says he said “love your neighbour like yourself” and “turn the other cheek”. And for 2000 odd years, his churchmen explain that the first means the Golden Rule and the other means one shouldn’t answer violence with violence, OK ?
But then a new sect pops up whose leader says no no, all the catholics and protestants and Amish and whatnot have it wrong and have had it wrong since the get go and for 2000 years. He says what Jesus meant is that a man called Neighbour is supposed to come along, whom you should fuck a lot ; while the latter refers to the fact that you have to do anal, too. Incidentally, that sect leader’s name is John Neighbour.
Would you similarly shrug your shoulders and say “hey, both say the other is in the wrong, they both have scriptural support for their claim, it’s a wash” ? Because that’s on the level of what you’re doing there.
They’ve already got that recipe, have you seen his rallies? 
Wasn’t Prez Clown Shoes supposed to have a plan for ISIS over 30 days ago?
As I recall it, his plan was “tell the generals to come up with a plan”.
Cite? Like, okay, let’s say that the people in that region were Jains. Do you honestly believe we would be worrying about a spate of violent terrorist attacks put forward by Jainist groups? The abrahamic religions are violent in many significant ways. Islam in particular contains much that advocates for or excuses violence in defense of the faith. And it could be that these Salafists have misinterpreted their religion. Or, it could be that, like the Bible, the Qur’an contains numerous self-contradicting narratives, some of which easily allow for violence and hatred. I mean, can we agree that the Qur’an calls for the death of apostates? It’s not that huge a leap from “kill all apostates” to “kill all non-muslims”.
Hardly. We’re talking about books with numerous self-contradictory messages. People can and do take what they want from that. But if the message for violence isn’t in there, you’re not going to get people being violent as a result. But the Qur’an absolutely does contain messages of violence, division, hatred, and murder.
Just like the bible! A far more reasonable comparison would be a Christian sect that focused less on “love your neighbor” and “turn the other cheek” and more on “I come not to bring peace but to carry a sword” and “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them”, and used that as justification to act violently towards non-believers, apostates, blasphemers, and people who work on the sabbath. It wouldn’t be a mainstream view (at least, not a modern mainstream view), but these books contain multiple contradictory narratives, which allow people so motivated to pick and choose which ones they like. And given that these books were written by bloodthirsy savages in the dark ages… That’s a problem.
Kinda wish someone who wasn’t a bigoted shitty tool would start this thread. Everything Derek posts in is inherently tainted by his presence. It’s like if Stalin started a thread discussing the merits of communism - interesting subject, absolutely the wrong person to lead it.
Well this was worth the price of admission.