IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New It's not religion.
If you haven't seen it, read the Spiegel piece about how Daesh came to be.

In 2010, the idea of trying to defeat Iraqi government forces militarily seemed futile. But a powerful underground organization took shape through acts of terror and protection rackets. When the uprising against the dictatorship of the Assad clan erupted in neighboring Syria, the organization's leaders sensed an opportunity. By late 2012, particularly in the north, the formerly omnipotent government forces had largely been defeated and expelled. Instead, there were now hundreds of local councils and rebel brigades, part of an anarchic mix that no one could keep track of. It was a state of vulnerability that the tightly organized group of ex-officers sought to exploit.

Attempts to explain IS and its rapid rise to power vary depending on who is doing the explaining. Terrorism experts view IS as an al-Qaida offshoot and attribute the absence of spectacular attacks to date to what they view as a lack of organizational capacity. Criminologists see IS as a mafia-like holding company out to maximize profit. Scholars in the humanities point to the apocalyptic statements by the IS media department, its glorification of death and the belief that Islamic State is involved in a holy mission.

But apocalyptic visions alone are not enough to capture cities and take over countries. Terrorists don't establish countries. And a criminal cartel is unlikely to generate enthusiasm among supporters around the world, who are willing to give up their lives to travel to the "Caliphate" and potentially their deaths.

IS has little in common with predecessors like al-Qaida aside from its jihadist label. There is essentially nothing religious in its actions, its strategic planning, its unscrupulous changing of alliances and its precisely implemented propaganda narratives. Faith, even in its most extreme form, is just one of many means to an end. Islamic State's only constant maxim is the expansion of power at any price.


It's an important article.

Cheers,
Scott.
New You guys are talking like Daesh . . .
. . is all there is. There are dozens of Islamic terrorist groups slaughtering people around the world - whole towns in Africa. A few have declared allegiance to Islamic State, but that's probably just for show, and in hopes of getting more weapons.

And, if Islamic State is not steeped in religion, why are they destroying antiquities? That is a very Muslim thing - to destroy all evidence from before Mohamed. Well, actually, particularly in North Africa, they're trying to destroy all evidence of more liberal Muslim times as well. Islam wasn't always this radical.

A lot of writers seem to be attempting to separate Islamic State and similar organizations from Islam, basically a whitewash thing. I'm not buying it. The structure of Islam and it's ingrained violence makes it so easy for organizations like Islamic State to attract volunteer fighters, money and weapons - and to justify their actions to the Islamic population at large.

"71 virgins anyone? Just take this package into a crowd and push the button".
New Daesh is in the news.
They're not the only monsters out there, of course.

Boko Haram are monsters - no doubt about it. They killed at least 150, maybe up to 2000, in January.

But so was the Lord's Resistance Army:

In March 2002, the NRA, under the new name of the Uganda People's Defence Force (UPDF), launched a massive military offensive code-named Operation Iron Fist against the LRA bases in southern Sudan, with agreement from the National Islamic Front. In retaliation, the LRA attacked the refugee camps in northern Uganda and the Eastern Equatoria in southern Sudan, brutally killing hundreds of civilians.[21][26][27][28] By 2004, according to the UPDF spokesman Shaban Bantariza, mediation efforts by the Carter Center and the Pope John Paul II had been spurned by Kony.[29] In February 2004, the LRA unit led by Okot Odhiambo attacked Barlonyo IDP camp, killing over 300 people and abducting many others.[21][30] In 2006, UNICEF estimated that the LRA had abducted at least 25,000 children since the conflict began.[31] In January 2006, eight Guatemalan Kaibiles commandos and at least 15 rebels were killed in a botched UN special forces raid targeting the LRA deputy leader Vincent Otti in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[32]

According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the LRA attacks and the government's counter-insurgency measures have resulted in the displacement of nearly 95 percent of the Acholi population in three districts of northern Uganda. By 2006, 1.7 million people lived in more than 200 internally displaced person (IDP) camps in northern Uganda.[31] These camps had some of the highest mortality rates in the world. The Ugandan Ministry of Health and partners estimated that through the first seven months of 2005, about 1,000 people were dying weekly, chiefly from malaria and AIDS. During the same time period of January–July 2005, the LRA abducted 1,286 Ugandans (46.4 percent of whom were children under the age of 15 years), and violence accounted for 9.4 percent of the 28,283 deaths, occurring mostly outside camps.[33]


So was Charles Taylor:

Charles McArthur Ghankay Taylor (born 28 January 1948) is a Liberian politician who was the 22nd President of Liberia, serving from 2 August 1997 until his resignation on 11 August 2003.[5]

Born in Arthington, Montserrado County, Liberia, Taylor earned a degree at Bentley College in the United States before returning to Liberia to work in the government of Samuel Doe. After being removed for embezzlement, he eventually arrived in Libya, where he was trained as a guerilla fighter. He returned to Liberia in 1989 as the head of a Libyan-backed rebel group, the National Patriotic Front of Liberia, to overthrow the Doe regime, initiating the First Liberian Civil War (1989–96). Following Doe's execution, Taylor gained control of a large portion of the country and became one of the most prominent warlords in Africa.[6] Following a peace deal that ended the war, Taylor coerced the population into electing him president in the 1997 general election by threatening to resume the war otherwise.[7]

During his term of office, Taylor was accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity as a result of his involvement in the Sierra Leone Civil War (1991–2002). Domestically, opposition to his regime grew, culminating in the outbreak of the Second Liberian Civil War (1999–2003). By 2003, he had lost control of much of the countryside and was formally indicted by the Special Court for Sierra Leone. That year, he resigned as a result of growing international pressure and went into exile in Nigeria. In 2006, the newly elected President, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, formally requested his extradition, after which he was detained by UN authorities in Sierra Leone and then at the Penitentiary Institution Haaglanden in The Hague, awaiting trial.[8] He was found guilty in April 2012 of all eleven charges levied by the Special Court, including terror, murder and rape.[9] In May of 2012, Taylor was sentenced to 50 years in prison. Reading the sentencing statement, Presiding Judge Richard Lussick said: "The accused has been found responsible for aiding and abetting as well as planning some of the most heinous and brutal crimes recorded in human history."[10]


Boko Haram claims to be Muslim. The LRA claimed to be Christian. Charles Taylor claimed to be a Messianic Jew.

It's not religion that's the issue with these self-identified Islamic terrorists, or the other monsters who are slaughtering innocents. It's lots of other things tied up too often in a bow of religion.

Religion isn't going away. For the vast, vast majority of religious people, it's a comfort and can help them live better lives. Turning these attacks into a battle of modernity against religion is wrong-headed and doomed to failure.

Muslims have and are continuing to speak out against Daesh and similar groups.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/NotInMyName

https://www.facebook.com/Muslims-Against-ISIS-1444672609121662/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/more-than-1000-indian-muslim-clerics-sign-fatwa-against-isis_55f06f6ae4b002d5c0779b9e

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/25/351277631/prominent-muslim-sheikh-issues-fatwa-against-isis-violence

https://m.facebook.com/notes/nanowisdoms-archive-of-imamat-speeches-interviews-and-writings/excerpts-his-highness-the-aga-khan-on-islam-and-terrorism/929799693704882/

It's easy to be furious with the monsters that are destroying our world. Don't lump the innocents in with them.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
New That's whataboutery.
No-one's arguing against the fact of the existence of Christian murderous arseholes.

That the LRA exists and is Christian doesn't make ISIS any the less Islamic.

ISIS are what you get when you take Islam and chuck away any sense of fitting it to the framework of 21st century mores: an eschatological apocalyptic death cult whose leader has a PhD in Islamic Studies.

A neato summary of the differences between Christianity and Islam in the context of ISIS is here. I can't see anything wildly wrong with it.

So, what are the inherent incompatibilities of Islam to the modern world? A short summary:

-The Koran is the direct and undiluted word of God; but actually it is just the rambling memoirs of a bloodthirsty warlord
-The Koran may not be changed, even how idiotic it is and how contradictory it is.
-The only way to read and interpret the Koran is its literal interpretation.
-If there is a contradiction, the principle of abrogation holds, the warmongering phase takes precedence over the peaceful phase
-No separation of powers, Islam is as much a religion as a constitution for political power
-No true free will, but differing degrees of external guidance/steering by god; You cannot sin when executing God’s will


The unpalatable truth for moderate Muslims is that they're going to have to re-define their religion if they want to disassociate themselves from ISIS. Unless and until Islam lets go of the notion that the Koran is the ineffable word of god, ISIS is as Islamic as it gets.

More generally speaking, religion is a boat anchor around the neck of humanity. It turns normal people into judgemental hypocritical shits because it's based, for the most part, on books written by judgemental hypocritical assholes more than a thousand years ago. I notice that most Christians conveniently handwave away the fact that Jebus said "give away all your shit to the poor and do good works because money makes you an asshole" (paraphrasing Matt 19:21 and 6:19).
New Good counterpoint. But...
I don't think that we can tell 1 B+ people that they're doing it wrong when it comes to their faith. There are hundreds of millions of Muslims who have no problem living with us in the modern world. Do we let cancer define biology? Do we condemn every 16-25 year old male because some tiny fraction of them are monsters?

Our brains handle all sorts of contradictions in our heads simultaneously without each of us turning into murderous monsters.

More generally speaking, religion is a boat anchor around the neck of humanity. It turns normal people into judgemental hypocritical shits because it's based, for the most part, on books written by judgemental hypocritical assholes more than a thousand years ago. I notice that most Christians conveniently handwave away the fact that Jebus said "give away all your shit to the poor and do good works because money makes you an asshole" (paraphrasing Matt 19:21 and 6:19).


Agreed. In the greater scheme of things, I believe that is the case. As we know, in far too many cases, religious beliefs of representatives gets in the way of governments (the active body of all the people) helping to make society better. But religion also helps many people as well - far, far more than it turns into murderous monsters.

Now that we agree that religion is too often a problem, what are we going to do about it? Much of anything beyond gentle persuasion of adults seems to me to be highly problematic. There are politicians over here talking about monitoring of mosques, putting visible stickers on people, knee-jerk refusing refugees from war zones, and so forth. It's treating the wrong symptoms (natives of Belgium and France aren't Syrian refugees). We don't want some sort of "thought police" to go along with that. We (as a government) shouldn't be in the business of indoctrinating kids about religion, either, even if it is for the best of intentions. Why? Because you know that someone will decide to take that framework and twist it for their own political advantage. It's been a continuing battle here in the US since at least the early 1960s.

Keeping religious indoctrination (pro or anti) out of schools and government is the best policy.

It's all too tempting to point at an old book and say, "See, it says right there that rape is OK!!1". I've been guilty of picking-and-choosing horrible things like that in the past, myself. I try to stop myself from doing it these days. Context matters, religious tradition matters, and letting cultures have their own interpretation of what their culture means matters. It really doesn't matter what we, as outsiders, think their religious texts say and mean. It's not about us.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
New It is about us . . .
. . when the book says we should all be killed - and a significant number believe that, and act on it to get their 71 virgins.
New EXACTLY
The whole point of ISIS is that Islam doesn't work like other religions when it comes to The Book: i.e. there's no interpretation or context or anything, the Koran is the exact literal holy word of god and it says what it says and that's that. You can go rooting through the hadith if you like, like a pig after truffles, but if the hadith and the Koran differ on a thing - well, the Koran wins every single time.

If you want to live in the UK and associate with women and drink and smoke and do all those things as a Muslim, of course you can, but you'll be a bad Muslim.

There's literally nothing to be gained by talking about the Christian bible as a counterpoint, because all the established churches (large and small) accept that it was written after the fact (in some cases, way after) and whilst it may have been as a result of divine inspiration, these are the words of human beans.
New Re: EXACTLY
The whole point of ISIS is that Islam doesn't work like other religions when it comes to The Book: i.e. there's no interpretation or context or anything, the Koran is the exact literal holy word of god and it says what it says and that's that.


No human language works that way. Every language has shades of meaning and different interpretations. Arabic, the language of the Quran, is no exception.

Reza Aslan:

The Quran itself states that its verses have multiple meanings, some of which are unfathomable to human beings and known only to God.

[...]

The inherent sacredness of the Quran has historically created an unusual problem for many Muslims. Since the end of the seventh century CE, when its verses were collected into a single, authoritative canon, the Quran has remained fixed in Arabic, the language in which it was originally revealed. It was believed that translating the Quran into any other language would violate the divine nature of the text. Translations were done, of course. But to this day, non-Arabic versions of the Quran are considered interpretations of the Quran. Unless the original Arabic verses are embedded on the page, it cannot technically be called a Quran.

The consequences of this belief are obvious. For much of the last 14 centuries, some 90 percent of the world's Muslims for whom Arabic is not a primary language had to depend on Islam's clergy—all of them men, as women are not allowed to enter the clergy—to define the meaning and message of the Quran for them, much as pre-Reformation Christians had to rely on priests to read them the Bible, which at the time was available only in Latin. That is now changing. Over the last century, the Quran has been translated into more languages than in the previous 14 centuries combined. A great many of these translations have been done not by Muslim clergy but by scholars and academics, by Muslim laity and non-Muslims, and, perhaps most significantly, by women. (The first English translation of the Quran by an American woman, Laleh Bakhtiar, was published in 2007.)

Arabic is a language whose words can have multiple, sometimes contradictory, meanings, so how one chooses to render a particular word from Arabic to English has a lot to do with one's biases or prejudice. Take the following example from Sura 4:34, which has long been interpreted as allowing husbands to beat their wives: "As for those women who might rebel against you, admonish them, abandon them in their beds, and strike them (adribuhunna)." The problem, as a number of female Quranic scholars have noted, is that adribuhunna can also mean "turn away from them." It can even mean "have sexual intercourse with them." Obviously, which definition the translator chooses will be colored by whatever his or her preconceived notions are about a husband's authority. The new crop of Quran translators are brushing aside centuries of traditionalist, male-dominated, and often misogynistic clerical interpretations in favor of a more contemporary, more individualized, and often more gender-friendly approach to the Quran. In the process, they are not only reshaping the way Islam's holy book is read; they are reinterpreting the way Islam itself is being understood in the modern world.


Even if a book hasn't changed in hundreds of years, its meaning can and most likely will.

FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
New What are we going to do about it?
Well, the answer is easy:

Educate people, make them prosperous, and give them a nice life.

As people's wealth and education level rises, their propensity for religion falls. It's almost as if people don't need an imaginary friend when their life is good.

(America is behind the curve on this compared to Europe, but it's happening)

Making this happen in the Middle East is an exercise left to the reader.
New Kinda sorta like...
The old saw:

Good / Cheap / Fast - Pick 2.

Yeah, people who are busy and have happy, fulfilling lives don't have the time or inclination to brood about becoming monsters and act upon those impulses. Getting from here to there isn't easy.

Of course, lots of monsters don't need religion to do the monstrous things they do. E.g. Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Seung-Hui Cho, Elliot Rodger, and on and on.

There was an interesting segment on the BBC this morning. The AK-47s that come out in events like these can be traced back to the Balkans wars and the drug trade. I can't find a BBC link, but this al Jazeera link cites the same sources, I believe. The takeaway is that this terrorism stuff is directly tied to organized crime like the drug trade. Changing the laws about drugs to make them less financially rewarding will do a lot to reduce the ability of international terrorists to carry out their plots. And maybe if we don't spend so much on the drug war, maybe we'd be able to get more humane treatment to people who need it so there's less domestic violence as well.

Cheers,
Scott.
New And, one very important point.
Get polygamy banned - everywhere. This is a major cause of the large numbers of dissatisfied young men easy to recruit for terorist activity, because they have no chance whatever of a satisfying family life.

The rich and powerful take so many of the women, there aren't enough left for regular guys. Even if they weren't forced, women have a strong attraction to the rich and powerful, and will often take the oportunity, unless polygamy is forbidden.

In the United States, those polygamous Mormon sects just throw most of the boys out of the community, but the U.S. is big enough to absorb them. This can't happen in Islamic countries.

Of course, it's written right into Islam, so it can't be banned in Islamic countries - that would be heresy against Islam (death penalty applies, as usual).

How can you get those 71 virgins if polygamy is banned.

-----------

Old Arab saying: "You can tell a fool by his two wives".

In Islamic countries, many a man has married a second wife to get the first one under control at home, but instead, they gang up on him - so he gets a third to try again.
New Too many football fans are jerks. Film at 11.
New Hey! I gave up the Battle Flag, they can give up Islam.
New You think wrong.
I don't think that we can tell 1 B+ people that they're doing it wrong when it comes to their faith.
Yes we can (heh...), since they are doing it wrong.

There are hundreds of millions of Muslims who have no problem living with us in the modern world.
But they don't seem to have any problem living with murderous jihadists laying claim to their faith either.

Yes, yes, you may quibble that some imams here and there are issuing statements condemning each new atrocity as it happens.

But if they really want to differentiate themselves from the murderous jihadists then it's on them themselves to get rid of the murderous jihadists. Namby-pamby condemnations are of no use.
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi

(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
New whataboutery, so you believe the earth is only 6 thousand years old?
you can kill people for America at age 18 but need to be 21 to buy a beer
New Eh?
Whataboutery is bringing up other unrelated but similar things in an attempt to say "yes, that's bad, but look at all these other things that are also bad" when I didn't even attempt to discount the presence of other bad things.
New My amateur analysis
Everything I've read about them is consistent with the psychology of LA gangs: protection, sense of belonging, sense of purpose, dehumanization of the "other", recruiting the young and unemployed, etc.

This isn't a perfect parallel, I'm sure. But it seems close enough that maybe we should be looking to what works in fighting gangs.
--

Drew
New That is an opinion I've also stated on this site.
This whole radical Islam thing is more an overgrown street gang than a religion.

However you cut it, loyalty and submission to the authority of your leaders is the same in gangs and radical religion.
     Not a word here on Paris . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (40)
         It's not the religion. - (static) - (31)
             What religion has ever been anything but a political movement? -NT - (mmoffitt)
             Oh no, it's not Islam, not at all! - (Andrew Grygus) - (29)
                 kurds are not followers of islam? News to me -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                     "Compared to the Unbeliever, the Kurd is a Muslim" - (Andrew Grygus)
                 It may not be. - (mmoffitt)
                 It's not religion. - (Another Scott) - (18)
                     You guys are talking like Daesh . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (15)
                         Daesh is in the news. - (Another Scott) - (14)
                             That's whataboutery. - (pwhysall) - (13)
                                 Good counterpoint. But... - (Another Scott) - (10)
                                     It is about us . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                                     EXACTLY - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                         Re: EXACTLY - (Another Scott)
                                     What are we going to do about it? - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                         Kinda sorta like... - (Another Scott)
                                         And, one very important point. - (Andrew Grygus)
                                     The turks don't seem to agree with you - (crazy) - (1)
                                         Too many football fans are jerks. Film at 11. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                     Hey! I gave up the Battle Flag, they can give up Islam. -NT - (mmoffitt)
                                     You think wrong. - (CRConrad)
                                 whataboutery, so you believe the earth is only 6 thousand years old? -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                     Eh? - (pwhysall)
                     My amateur analysis - (drook) - (1)
                         That is an opinion I've also stated on this site. - (Andrew Grygus)
                 the meat of the matter - (rcareaga) - (1)
                     Talk about a broad brush! - (Andrew Grygus)
                 Yes and no. - (static) - (4)
                     Excellent! Thanks very much for the pointer. -NT - (Another Scott)
                     Very good! -NT - (a6l6e6x)
                     Gracias, Wade - (Ashton) - (1)
                         Waleed Aly is a very smart guy. - (static)
         Personally, ... - (Another Scott)
         So, I suppose all those Muslims drowning in the Med trying to get to Europe... - (a6l6e6x) - (4)
             There is actually a significant homegrown component - (scoenye) - (3)
                 Yep, Europeans are clanish and integration of immigrants is a problem. - (a6l6e6x) - (2)
                     Problem is, discrimination is protected - (scoenye) - (1)
                         :-( Thanks for the post. -NT - (Another Scott)
         not really muslims have been bombing paris since 1956 and france used to run syria - (boxley) - (1)
             France and Islam and recent history - (rcareaga)

Yes, m'lord.
146 ms