Gary82
Called Up to the Major Leagues
what about his followers?
ISIS beheads 21 Coptic Christians in Libya that were Egyptians....
- Thread starter goldfly
- Start date
what about his followers?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
There is no ISIS to ISIL transition. ISIS and ISIL were interchangeable as western attempts to get to the name down. Neither are really correct. The ISIS comes from al-Sham and ISIL from the Levant, Most consider al-Sham and the Levant as interchangable.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Yes, it is. Thanks for posting. I ultimately agree with the author that in the birth of the "Caliphate" were sound the seeds of its distraction.
I have thoughts about my "public" comment that I hope to expand on soon.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
while i agree with ya
i think he is talking about knocking at the gates of Iran
at least that's how i read that but i could be wrong
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
let's not act like the word of Jesus Christ wasn't ever spread by the sword now
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
Whatever Z. The Levant stands for more than Syria. ISIS recognizes no borders and that includes the border between Syria and Lebanon and Israel... The point isn't the letter combinations but the expansion of territory.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
If they kill by the sword to propagate the faith then they deny him and Xnty.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
I may have taken you wrong, but it seemed to be an off-hand denial of their stated goal. Like "yeah it is for public consumption but we are really about something else." If that's not how you meant it, pardon me. I can see that you could have meant that the use of the term Caliphate is a rallying cry for good Muslim to come give allegiance and join. If that's how you meant it then I agree.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
See comment above.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
Well, the Shiites aren't limited to Iran. And ISIS hatred for Shiites knows no border.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
al-Sham is interchangeable with the Levant. That's the point. The second S in ISIS isn't Syria, that's some weird like Fox News over simplification.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
It's your point. Have at it.
The point (my point) isn't the letter combinations but the expansion of territory.
The point (my point) isn't the letter combinations but the expansion of territory.
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
This stuff is among the many reasons why religion and politics DON'T mix. Dems are right about how bad Christianity has behaved in the past, and the Repubs are right about how bad radical Islam has behaved in the past and to an extent still does. Dems (at least those who toe the party line) get their undies in a bunch if anyone criticize Muslims so that it's well known that all Muslims (in fact most of them) aren't radical or violent at all, but just people who worship a religion different than Judaism or Christianity. I agree with this, at least to a point. Repubs (at least those who toe the party line) want it known that those Muslims who do take part in violence should be acknowledged as murderers and that pointing out that all Muslims aren't like this really doesn't help those who are murdered. I agree with this, at least to a point.
So, why is it so hard to just say:
I condemn all violence perpetrated against people in the name of religion in the past 2000 years. We could go back farther but for now let's keep it to just to the time period since the birth of Jesus Christ.
I condemn:
The Romans' destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd temple because of the Hebrews' obstinate clinging to only one God and the political resistance that went with it. At least one million Hebrews were murdered, circa 69/70AD.
The spreading of Islam by the sword and the whole "convert or die" mentality that it was spread in the Circa 600s AD to well, now.
The European crusaders who took Jerusalem in the First Crusade, killing every Muslim and Jewish man, woman, and child inside while singing "Christ We Adore Thee" from the ramparts, circa 1099/1100AD.
The butchering of at least 25,000 Hugenots (French Protestants) by Catholics in France on St. Bartholomew's Day of 1572.
The blowing up of abortion clinics by so called Christians because "they value life so much" in the past, present, and (hopefully not) the future.
The persecution, abuse, and murder by shooting, burning, beheading, other types of "sword related violence" and any other violence by Muslims against Christians or Jews
Any sort of murder against a whole city block of people because one or two (allegedly) bad people happen to be there in that group of people
OK, did I miss anything?
EDIT: For those who want to point out that Group A's murderous behavior really isn't relevant because it happened X years ago, or that Group B's murderous behavior hasn't racked up quite the numbers as Group C's statistics, etc., just stop. You're missing the point.
So, why is it so hard to just say:
I condemn all violence perpetrated against people in the name of religion in the past 2000 years. We could go back farther but for now let's keep it to just to the time period since the birth of Jesus Christ.
I condemn:
The Romans' destruction of Jerusalem and the 2nd temple because of the Hebrews' obstinate clinging to only one God and the political resistance that went with it. At least one million Hebrews were murdered, circa 69/70AD.
The spreading of Islam by the sword and the whole "convert or die" mentality that it was spread in the Circa 600s AD to well, now.
The European crusaders who took Jerusalem in the First Crusade, killing every Muslim and Jewish man, woman, and child inside while singing "Christ We Adore Thee" from the ramparts, circa 1099/1100AD.
The butchering of at least 25,000 Hugenots (French Protestants) by Catholics in France on St. Bartholomew's Day of 1572.
The blowing up of abortion clinics by so called Christians because "they value life so much" in the past, present, and (hopefully not) the future.
The persecution, abuse, and murder by shooting, burning, beheading, other types of "sword related violence" and any other violence by Muslims against Christians or Jews
Any sort of murder against a whole city block of people because one or two (allegedly) bad people happen to be there in that group of people
OK, did I miss anything?
EDIT: For those who want to point out that Group A's murderous behavior really isn't relevant because it happened X years ago, or that Group B's murderous behavior hasn't racked up quite the numbers as Group C's statistics, etc., just stop. You're missing the point.
Metaphysicist
Not Actually Brian Hunter
In Hoc Signo Vinces
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
And your point is?
BedellBrave
It's OVER 5,000!
I'd add "and in the name of irreligion" or whatever the secularists would prefer to use as a monicker. And then you get to add a bunch more atrocities to your well done list.
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
I'm fine with that, but as you probably know I"m one of those aholes who considers atheism a religion (sorry Dalyn). To me anything a that rules a person's mind, thoughts, convinces them of where we came from, why we're here, where we're going, etc., qualifies in my opinion. Plus it pisses most of them off royally when I say that (sorry again Dalyn).
Dalyn
Fredi Gonzalez Supporter
I'm fine with that, but as you probably know I"m one of those aholes who considers atheism a religion (sorry Dalyn). To me anything a that rules a person's mind, thoughts, convinces them of where we came from, why we're here, where we're going, etc., qualifies in my opinion. Plus it pisses most of them off royally when I say that (sorry again Dalyn).
No need to apologize. I will point out that atheism doesn't even qualify under your own rules. Atheism has nothing to say about where we came from, why we're here, where we're going, or anything even close to that. It is simply a lack of belief in the existence of a god or gods. Nothing more. Nothing less.