BKK Airport Apologizes for Searching Muslim Cleric's Turban

[xray]

It is wrong to blame a faith for the actions of extremists...

It is this human capacity for bigotry that we should be concerned about, not any one faith.

Being aware of hatred and bigotry is well and fine; it has existed since the dawn of the human race. What we should be more concerned about at this time is preventing terrorists from murdering us.

There is only one faith current in the world today spawning the type of extremists that target innocent civilians on a worldwide scale, and that faith is Islam. I believe there is an association between the faith and the extremists; as do some leaders in the Islamic world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/egypts-president-calls-for-religious-revolution-in-islam/

“Egypt's president called for a "religious revolution" over the New Year, saying that top Muslim clerics bear responsibility for helping to reign in extremist views.”

[Bluespunk]

It is wrong to blame a faith for the actions of extremists...

It is this human capacity for bigotry that we should be concerned about, not any one faith.

Being aware of hatred and bigotry is well and fine; it has existed since the dawn of the human race. What we should be more concerned about at this time is preventing terrorists from murdering us.

There is only one faith current in the world today spawning the type of extremists that target innocent civilians on a worldwide scale, and that faith is Islam. I believe there is an association between the faith and the extremists; as do some leaders in the Islamic world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/egypts-president-calls-for-religious-revolution-in-islam/

“Egypt's president called for a "religious revolution" over the New Year, saying that top Muslim clerics bear responsibility for helping to reign in extremist views.”

That does not justify the hatred of all Muslims.

That does not justify the lie that all Muslims support terror.

That does not justify islamaphobia.

No one I know is against stopping terrorism, including the man at the centre of this story who said he had no complaints and understood that the security people were doing their job. {Not that I know him}.

So tell me, who is saying we should not be concerned at preventing terrorism?

Edited June 10, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Yunla]

Some of my best friends are Muslim, they have good jobs and lovely families, and their daughters are much loved and enjoy their lives. You will find that the majority of Muslims are normal loving people, with nice families. The Sharia-type abuse of women is certainly a crime against humanity, but you will find that this is actually the minority in the Muslim macro group. Also many people living within extremist cultures such as Sharia, have no choice but to go along with it, that is the essence of violent extremism, many people join it out of fear of reprisals. This is true of many other failed social effects such as football hooligan scenarios, where many young men felt pressured into joining bloody fights just because they lived in a certain neighbourhood and supported that team. So what you are looking at in Sharia is not Muslims or even religion per se, it is a violent and tyrannical social mode, exploited for power and wealth, and clothed in some very pick-and-mix religious elements.

I have been the victim of many violent crimes in my life, every single crime was committed by an atheist. Does that make me think that all atheists are bad people. No.

[xray]

It is wrong to blame a faith for the actions of extremists...

It is this human capacity for bigotry that we should be concerned about, not any one faith.

Being aware of hatred and bigotry is well and fine; it has existed since the dawn of the human race. What we should be more concerned about at this time is preventing terrorists from murdering us.

There is only one faith current in the world today spawning the type of extremists that target innocent civilians on a worldwide scale, and that faith is Islam. I believe there is an association between the faith and the extremists; as do some leaders in the Islamic world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/egypts-president-calls-for-religious-revolution-in-islam/

“Egypt's president called for a "religious revolution" over the New Year, saying that top Muslim clerics bear responsibility for helping to reign in extremist views.”

That does not justify the hatred of all Muslims.

That does not justify the lie that all Muslims support terror.

That does not justify islamaphobia.

No one I know is against stopping terrorism, including the man at the centre of this story who said he had no complaints and understood that the security people were doing their job. {Not that I know him}.

So tell me, who is saying we should not be concerned at preventing terrorism?

Can you see that Islamaphobia has been caused my Islamic terrorism? If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement? Cause and effect. The cause is not "lies" as you claim. The cause is deadly Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again. As long as this continues there will be Islamaphobia. That is why you should be "more concerned" about stopping Islamic terror attacks than preaching about Islamaphobia to the people targeted by terrorists.

[xray]

You will find that the majority of Muslims are normal loving people, with nice families.

I have been the victim of many violent crimes in my life, every single crime was committed by an atheist.

"You will find that the majority of Muslims are normal loving people, with nice families."

That is exactly what I have found in my worldwide travels.

"I have been the victim of many violent crimes in my life, every single crime was committed by an atheist."

It echoes what a Muslim man told me in Tunisia in 2003 - "Most of the problems in the world today are being caused by atheists." Really? Osama bin Laden and George Bush...atheists sure do get around.

Edited June 10, 2015 by petercool
edited as per poster request

[xray]

The Sharia-type abuse of women is certainly a crime against humanity, but you will find that this is actually the minority in the Muslim macro group. Also many people living within extremist cultures such as Sharia, have no choice but to go along with it, that is the essence of violent extremism, many people join it out of fear of reprisals. This is true of many other failed social effects such as football hooligan scenarios, where many young men felt pressured into joining bloody fights just because they lived in a certain neighbourhood and supported that team. So what you are looking at in Sharia is not Muslims or even religion per se, it is a violent and tyrannical social mode, exploited for power and wealth, and clothed in some very pick-and-mix religious elements.

Interesting, thanks for sharing that.

Edited June 10, 2015 by petercool
edited as per poster request

[Bluespunk]

It is wrong to blame a faith for the actions of extremists...

It is this human capacity for bigotry that we should be concerned about, not any one faith.

Being aware of hatred and bigotry is well and fine; it has existed since the dawn of the human race. What we should be more concerned about at this time is preventing terrorists from murdering us.

There is only one faith current in the world today spawning the type of extremists that target innocent civilians on a worldwide scale, and that faith is Islam. I believe there is an association between the faith and the extremists; as do some leaders in the Islamic world.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/egypts-president-calls-for-religious-revolution-in-islam/

“Egypt's president called for a "religious revolution" over the New Year, saying that top Muslim clerics bear responsibility for helping to reign in extremist views.”

That does not justify the hatred of all Muslims.

That does not justify the lie that all Muslims support terror.

That does not justify islamaphobia.

No one I know is against stopping terrorism, including the man at the centre of this story who said he had no complaints and understood that the security people were doing their job. {Not that I know him}.

So tell me, who is saying we should not be concerned at preventing terrorism?

Can you see that Islamaphobia has been caused my Islamic terrorism? If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement? Cause and effect. The cause is not "lies" as you claim. The cause is deadly Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again. As long as this continues there will be Islamaphobia. That is why you should be "more concerned" about stopping Islamic terror attacks than preaching about Islamaphobia to the people targeted by terrorists.

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Plenty of lies contained within it.

Never said I didn't want terrorism stopped, don't know why you keep saying I do.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

[xray]

If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement?

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

"No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith"

Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil. The Nazis of 1930s and 1940s Germany were Christians. You can't disassociate the Islamic terrorists from the faith of Islam any more than you can disassociate Christian terrorists from the faith of Christianity. Islamaphobia will continue as long as Muslims of the Islamic faith carry out terror attacks.

"Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it."

Something we can agree on.

[Bluespunk]

If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement?

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

"No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith"

Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil. The Nazis of 1930s and 1940s Germany were Christians. You can't disassociate the Islamic terrorists from the faith of Islam any more than you can disassociate Christian terrorists from the faith of Christianity. Islamaphobia will continue as long as Muslims of the Islamic faith carry out terror attacks.

"Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it."

Something we can agree on.

I can separate them.

Not all Germans were Nazis or took part in the Holocaust.

Not all Christians are responsible for the relatively recent atrocities carried out in Bosnia or Uganda.

Not all Buddhists are responsible for the bigotry and violence ongoing in Burma and until recently Sri Lanka.

Not all Muslims are responsible or sympathise with the actions of terrorists.

[Jai Dee]

One off-topic post has been removed from this thread.

Can we get back to discussing the original topic instead of religions now?

[i claudius]

I can only add one thing to this debate ,I do not fear attacks by Christians,Bhuddists,Jews,Atheists,or seventh day Adventists the only faith that I fear and therefore do not trust are Muslims this is because daily you see and read about the carnage that they create around the world ,I am sure that there are good Muslims. However I never see them screaming out kill the terrorists,good will prevail etc I only ever see them marching and flying banners against non Muslims,yes a few clerics and ordinary people decry what the bad Muslims do ,like that young girl Malia,look what her own brother Muslims did to her, I was in London only two streets away years ago when they blew up the tube and that bus,sorry but I find that on the whole it is an evil religion that keeps its people in check by fear on the whole,nothing is going to change my mind ,as I fear nothing will change theirs

[i claudius]

ISLAM on the whole seems mired in the middle ages,where Christianity was then ,we have moved on as have most major religions,I am afraid the world cannot wait 500 years for them to catch up ,in fact if anything they are going backwards,believe me the next major war will. Be the modern world against the rising tide of terror,all the signs are there and as for Islamaphobia,that is fast approaching as more and more Muslim immigrants come to the west,

[jacky54]

Some of my best friends are Muslim, they have good jobs and lovely families, and their daughters are much loved and enjoy their lives. You will find that the majority of Muslims are normal loving people, with nice families. The Sharia-type abuse of women is certainly a crime against humanity, but you will find that this is actually the minority in the Muslim macro group. Also many people living within extremist cultures such as Sharia, have no choice but to go along with it, that is the essence of violent extremism, many people join it out of fear of reprisals. This is true of many other failed social effects such as football hooligan scenarios, where many young men felt pressured into joining bloody fights just because they lived in a certain neighbourhood and supported that team. So what you are looking at in Sharia is not Muslims or even religion per se, it is a violent and tyrannical social mode, exploited for power and wealth, and clothed in some very pick-and-mix religious elements.

I have been the victim of many violent crimes in my life, every single crime was committed by an atheist. Does that make me think that all atheists are bad people. No.

This post seems very off topic but is still here. Makes no difference at all how many fluffy nice Muslims there are, we all know some. But just like there were many not so bad Nazis and communists this does not negate what is rotten about Islam and it's terrible influence, and that is the divisive hate filled Koran and the appalling life led by the prophet.

On the topic, the headline was always completely misleading as the cleric did not have his' turban searched' at all but had a wand waved over him. This was photographed by an assistant on the look out for any 'offense' and the storm in the tea cup took off. If the man had any sense of decency he would have insisted on not being banned from further searches, which only became necessary due to Islamic terrorists.

[Scott]

I suggest that members tone down the negative remarks in some of the posts.

[Bluespunk]

Some of my best friends are Muslim, they have good jobs and lovely families, and their daughters are much loved and enjoy their lives. You will find that the majority of Muslims are normal loving people, with nice families. The Sharia-type abuse of women is certainly a crime against humanity, but you will find that this is actually the minority in the Muslim macro group. Also many people living within extremist cultures such as Sharia, have no choice but to go along with it, that is the essence of violent extremism, many people join it out of fear of reprisals. This is true of many other failed social effects such as football hooligan scenarios, where many young men felt pressured into joining bloody fights just because they lived in a certain neighbourhood and supported that team. So what you are looking at in Sharia is not Muslims or even religion per se, it is a violent and tyrannical social mode, exploited for power and wealth, and clothed in some very pick-and-mix religious elements.

I have been the victim of many violent crimes in my life, every single crime was committed by an atheist. Does that make me think that all atheists are bad people. No.

This post seems very off topic but is still here. Makes no difference at all how many fluffy nice Muslims there are, we all know some. But just like there were many not so bad Nazis and communists this does not negate what is rotten about Islam and it's terrible influence, and that is the divisive hate filled Koran and the appalling life led by the prophet.

On the topic, the headline was always completely misleading as the cleric did not have his' turban searched' at all but had a wand waved over him. This was photographed by an assistant on the look out for any 'offense' and the storm in the tea cup took off. If the man had any sense of decency he would have insisted on not being banned from further searches, which only became necessary due to Islamic terrorists.

Read the OP.

No one connected to the man at the centre of this story had anything to do with the BS netizen social media crud.

[xray]

If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement?

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

"No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith"

Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil. The Nazis of 1930s and 1940s Germany were Christians. You can't disassociate the Islamic terrorists from the faith of Islam any more than you can disassociate Christian terrorists from the faith of Christianity. Islamaphobia will continue as long as Muslims of the Islamic faith carry out terror attacks.

"Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it."

Something we can agree on.

I can separate them.

Not all Germans were Nazis or took part in the Holocaust.

Not all Christians are responsible for the relatively recent atrocities carried out in Bosnia or Uganda.

Not all Buddhists are responsible for the bigotry and violence ongoing in Burma and until recently Sri Lanka.

Not all Muslims are responsible or sympathise with the actions of terrorists.

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

[xray]

If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement?

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

"No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith"

Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil. The Nazis of 1930s and 1940s Germany were Christians. You can't disassociate the Islamic terrorists from the faith of Islam any more than you can disassociate Christian terrorists from the faith of Christianity. Islamaphobia will continue as long as Muslims of the Islamic faith carry out terror attacks.

"Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it."

Something we can agree on.

I can separate them.

Not all Germans were Nazis or took part in the Holocaust.

Not all Christians are responsible for the relatively recent atrocities carried out in Bosnia or Uganda.

Not all Buddhists are responsible for the bigotry and violence ongoing in Burma and until recently Sri Lanka.

Not all Muslims are responsible or sympathise with the actions of terrorists.

Well said, reiterating what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil."

Edited June 10, 2015 by xray

[Linky]

If there were not continuing Islamic terrorist attacks, over and over again, we would not have the Islamaphobia. Do you agree with this statement?

No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith.

Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it.

"No islamaphobia is caused by those who will not accept terrorists do not represent a faith"

Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war). Other religions are no different. Christianity has been represented by good and also by evil. The Nazis of 1930s and 1940s Germany were Christians. You can't disassociate the Islamic terrorists from the faith of Islam any more than you can disassociate Christian terrorists from the faith of Christianity. Islamaphobia will continue as long as Muslims of the Islamic faith carry out terror attacks.

"Hate, mistrust, prejudice, bigotry and intolerance {islamaphobia} will not stop it."

Something we can agree on.

I can separate them.

Not all Germans were Nazis or took part in the Holocaust.

Not all Christians are responsible for the relatively recent atrocities carried out in Bosnia or Uganda.

Not all Buddhists are responsible for the bigotry and violence ongoing in Burma and until recently Sri Lanka.

Not all Muslims are responsible or sympathise with the actions of terrorists.

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

No the terrorists do not represent islam. Most muslims and muslim countries condemn them and have publicly stated they dont represent islam.

The terrorists simply state they are doing it in the name of islam, much like hard line christians justify the murder of abortion clinic doctors. Much like scientologists ruining the lives of people that dare leave the faith or speak against them.

None of it is in the name of religion, it is merely the excuse of nutters in an attempt to justfy warped minds.

[xray]

No the terrorists do not represent islam. Most muslims and muslim countries condemn them and have publicly stated they dont represent islam.

The terrorists simply state they are doing it in the name of islam, much like hard line christians justify the murder of abortion clinic doctors. Much like scientologists ruining the lives of people that dare leave the faith or speak against them.

None of it is in the name of religion, it is merely the excuse of nutters in an attempt to justfy warped minds.

They don't represent your idea of what Islam is, or the ideal of Islam held by decent peaceful members of the faith. But, they are Muslims and of the Islamic faith. Their holy book is the Koran and they worship in mosques. If you were to tell them they do not represent Islam, they will say you are mistaken.

Edited June 10, 2015 by xray

[Linky]

No the terrorists do not represent islam. Most muslims and muslim countries condemn them and have publicly stated they dont represent islam.

The terrorists simply state they are doing it in the name of islam, much like hard line christians justify the murder of abortion clinic doctors. Much like scientologists ruining the lives of people that dare leave the faith or speak against them.

None of it is in the name of religion, it is merely the excuse of nutters in an attempt to justfy warped minds.

They don't represent your idea of what Islam is, or the ideal of Islam held by decent peaceful members of the faith. But, they are Muslims and of the Islamic faith. Their holy book is the Koran and they worship in mosques. If you were to tell them they do not represent Islam, they will say you are mistaken.

Of course they would say Im mistaken. But they would be wrong, as the majority of muslims and muslim countries have stated.

The same as a christian killing an abortion doctor in the name of christianity. He believes it is right but we all know he is wrong.

[xray]

No the terrorists do not represent islam. Most muslims and muslim countries condemn them and have publicly stated they dont represent islam.

The terrorists simply state they are doing it in the name of islam, much like hard line christians justify the murder of abortion clinic doctors. Much like scientologists ruining the lives of people that dare leave the faith or speak against them.

None of it is in the name of religion, it is merely the excuse of nutters in an attempt to justfy warped minds.

They don't represent your idea of what Islam is, or the ideal of Islam held by decent peaceful members of the faith. But, they are Muslims and of the Islamic faith. Their holy book is the Koran and they worship in mosques. If you were to tell them they do not represent Islam, they will say you are mistaken.

Of course they would say Im mistaken. But they would be wrong, as the majority of muslims and muslim countries have stated.

The same as a christian killing an abortion doctor in the name of christianity. He believes it is right but we all know he is wrong.

In your example, the Christian who commits murder is still a Christian. There are many Christians in prison for murder. There are also many Muslims in prison for murder. I don't like these people any more than you do, but I still consider them to be Christians and Muslims.

[Bluespunk]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Bluespunk

[Yunla]

This post seems very off topic but is still here. Makes no difference at all how many fluffy nice Muslims there are, we all know some. But just like there were many not so bad Nazis and communists this does not negate what is rotten about Islam and it's terrible influence, and that is the divisive hate filled Koran and the appalling life led by the prophet.

On the topic, the headline was always completely misleading as the cleric did not have his' turban searched' at all but had a wand waved over him. This was photographed by an assistant on the look out for any 'offense' and the storm in the tea cup took off. If the man had any sense of decency he would have insisted on not being banned from further searches, which only became necessary due to Islamic terrorists.

I think it is just about on-topic to discuss the difference between the public prejudice, and sensible Clerics like the gentleman in the OP, who did not object to being screened, and quickly distanced himself from the inevitable follow-up.

The reason he distanced himself from the victim-card people in the OP, is that they are playing a media staring-contest with the Islamophobes. The ammunition that the Islamophobes use is that most Muslims are bad, the Koran is bad. Infact most religious lore including the Bible has violence and punishments. We can not judge an individual believer's love for their God based on random words in an ancient wikipedia where people added to the core storyline with their own wikipinions, century after century. I define religion as a believer's internal faith in a God, the other stuff is sociopolitical manipulation. For example Sharia is a legal and political framework, the actual theological veracity of which is in constant dispute and has no clear consensus among higher Islamic scholars. Tyrants XYZ impose their own pick-and-mix Sharia laws that scholars worldwide disagree on, and use those laws to oppress people. So this is not religion, this is a sociopolitical control mode. People suffering under those systems are not terroristic Muslims, they are oppressed Muslims.

Again, on airport security I think *everyone* should be screened, turbans and all. The more security the better, and I am no more concerned with a religious bomber than I am with any other bomber.

I also don't think an airport should ever apologise for taking the safety of their passengers seriously.

[xray]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

Edited June 11, 2015 by xray

[Bluespunk]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

My points are as they have been from the start and are not repetitions of yours no matter what you claim. There is nothing new in them and I am puzzled as to why you would claim this.

Terrorists and Islamic state are not Islam nor do they represent the majority view of Muslims.

Where did I say they weren't Muslims? They are an intolerant sect based on hatred and intolerance. They do not represent the thinking or beliefs vast majority of their faith.

At best, to claim they represent Islam is just nonsense. Some might see it as deliberate distortion of the truth about most Muslims.

In effect, creating islamaphobia.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Bluespunk

[jacky54]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

My points are as they have been from the start and are not repetitions of yours no matter what you claim. There is nothing new in them and I am puzzled as to why you would claim this.

Terrorists and Islamic state are not Islam nor do they represent the majority view of Muslims.

Where did I say they weren't Muslims? They are an intolerant sect based on hatred and intolerance. They do not represent the thinking or beliefs vast majority of their faith.

At best, to claim they represent Islam is just nonsense. Some might see it as deliberate distortion of the truth about most Muslims.

In effect, creating islamaphobia.

Islam has been responsible for 250 million deaths since it started it's spread 1400 years ago, who was responsible if not Muslims? I think Isis like, Boko harem, the Taliban and all the other true Muslim groups would be most enlightened to learn they do not represent Islam, they do, it's the moderates cowering on the sidelines, but cheering them on that do not.

[Bluespunk]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

My points are as they have been from the start and are not repetitions of yours no matter what you claim. There is nothing new in them and I am puzzled as to why you would claim this.

Terrorists and Islamic state are not Islam nor do they represent the majority view of Muslims.

Where did I say they weren't Muslims? They are an intolerant sect based on hatred and intolerance. They do not represent the thinking or beliefs vast majority of their faith.

At best, to claim they represent Islam is just nonsense. Some might see it as deliberate distortion of the truth about most Muslims.

In effect, creating islamaphobia.

Islam has been responsible for 250 million deaths since it started it's spread 1400 years ago, who was responsible if not Muslims? I think Isis like, Boko harem, the Taliban and all the other true Muslim groups would be most enlightened to learn they do not represent Islam, they do, it's the moderates cowering on the sidelines, but cheering them on that do not.

Nonsense.

As usual.

[xray]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

My points are as they have been from the start and are not repetitions of yours no matter what you claim. There is nothing new in them and I am puzzled as to why you would claim this.

Terrorists and Islamic state are not Islam nor do they represent the majority view of Muslims.

Where did I say they weren't Muslims? They are an intolerant sect based on hatred and intolerance. They do not represent the thinking or beliefs vast majority of their faith.

At best, to claim they represent Islam is just nonsense. Some might see it as deliberate distortion of the truth about most Muslims.

In effect, creating islamaphobia.

It is you, not I that distorts the truth, when you try to deny the fact that Islam is represented by all those who follow the faith, both good and evil. In fact, there are many different and varied groups within the world of Islam, and many of them are violent. I only used one as an example, the Islamic State. You acknowledge that they are Muslims, but you deny they are one of the groups that represent Islam. That is nonsense. They represent their ideal of Islam, just as the Jordanians represent their ideal of Islam, just as all Muslims represent Islam. You try and sell the notion that all the violent, evil, groups within the world of Islam are somehow not Islamic, and only the good peaceful groups belong to the faith. Again, nonsense.

In the face of the thousands of deaths brought about by Islamic terrorism, Islamaphobia is nothing. It is not hate, but only an irrational fear. In regards to the danger posed by Islamic terrorists, most fear is rational, not phobia.

[Bluespunk]

@xray

You said

Here you are just reiterating, using different words, what I have stated in the quoted post:

"Many peoples in many locations around the world represent the Islamic faith. This also includes Islamic terrorists, such as those in the 'Islamic State' (with whom the Muslims of Jordan are currently at war)."

Me

I'm not reiterating anything you said.

I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims.

It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith.

"I'm making clear that terrorists do not represent Islam or mainstream Muslims."

It looked to me like a reiteration of what I had previously posted. You have introduced something different here and are only partly correct. Terrorists do not represent mainstream Muslims, but they certainly are representatives of Islam. Their brand of Islam. There is no way for them not to be, because contrary to previous posts claiming that they are not even Muslims, they are in fact Muslims of Islamic faith. If you do a small amount of research online, you will find this is true. There is no excommunication in Islam like there is in Christianity. If a person claims to be Muslim and follow Islam, then they are and do, regardless of anyone claiming otherwise. The Islamic State is just what it claims to be, Muslims following the Islamic faith. They are representatives of a violent interpretation of Islam.

"It is wrong to hate a person or a community because of their faith."

It depends on what they have done to you. I am sure there are those who would be justified in hating the Islamic State. I would not fault the family of the Jordanian pilot who was burned alive for any hate they might harbor for the Islamic State.

My points are as they have been from the start and are not repetitions of yours no matter what you claim. There is nothing new in them and I am puzzled as to why you would claim this.

Terrorists and Islamic state are not Islam nor do they represent the majority view of Muslims.

Where did I say they weren't Muslims? They are an intolerant sect based on hatred and intolerance. They do not represent the thinking or beliefs vast majority of their faith.

At best, to claim they represent Islam is just nonsense. Some might see it as deliberate distortion of the truth about most Muslims.

In effect, creating islamaphobia.

It is you, not I that distorts the truth, when you try to deny the fact that Islam is represented by all those who follow the faith, both good and evil. In fact, there are many different and varied groups within the world of Islam, and many of them are violent. I only used one as an example, the Islamic State. You acknowledge that they are Muslims, but you deny they are one of the groups that represent Islam. That is nonsense. They represent their ideal of Islam, just as the Jordanians represent their ideal of Islam, just as all Muslims represent Islam. You try and sell the notion that all the violent, evil, groups within the world of Islam are somehow not Islamic, and only the good peaceful groups belong to the faith. Again, nonsense.

In the face of the thousands of deaths brought about by Islamic terrorism, Islamaphobia is nothing. It is not hate, but only an irrational fear. In regards to the danger posed by Islamic terrorists, most fear is rational, not phobia.

It is irrational to condemn, hate and fear all Muslims because of the acts of a few.

It is irrational to blame all Muslims for the actions of a few.

It is wrong and irrational to claim that the terrorism of a few represents all Muslims and Islam.

The actions of isis and other terrorist groups have been condemned by Islamic scholars and leaders. They have also made it clear that they do not represent Islam.

That is the truth.

[jacky54]

The old, you cannot condemn all Muslim for the actions of a few line. The FACT is that security inspections at airports only came into effect after a few Islamic terrorist high jacked planes and murdered 3.000 people with them. The majority are not important it's the minority that is and what motivates them, which is Islam.

Nobody should be exempt from these checks, and I mean nobody, or what's the point of them. What will it be next somebody in a Burka complaining her dignity was offended? and then denying it of course!