It Should Have Been a Defensive Gun Use: Another Bangla Blogger Hacked to Death by Islamists

3:28 Sahih International
Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah , except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination.

Can’t the same can be claimed about devout Christians and scripture? http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=18659 and plenty more turn up via Google.

My former boss did occasionally have a glass of wine at business dinners, but never ate pork. Most of my Buddhist friends (including some monks) eat meat, and have many Jewish friends that don’t follow Orthodox dictates.

Lol. Really GGO, you know as well as I do that the reason Christ came was to create a new covenant with not just the Jews, but all the people of the planet.

Quoting from the Old Testament and saying devout Christians are supposed to follow old testament directives would mean stoning gays would be the norm in Christian countries like they kill gays and adulterers in Saudi Arabia and Iraq today.

Unlike Islam, which pretty much follows old testament commands, Christians respect the old testament, but we don’t follow the commands of the old testament.

Sure, has there been individual lethal attacks by Christians against gay people? Sure. But as individuals, not as government policy. And anyone that does so and calls himself a christian, is in violation of Christ’s commands, unlike Muhammad, which said that practicing Homosexuality is a death sentence, which many muslim countries practice as government policy.

@ThomasR, there are plenty of secular Muslims around, and I have no argument with any of them. There are also religious Muslims like the Sufi, Nizari Ismaili, Druze and other sects who are great people, friendly to us and much despised — and murdered — by the Islamic terrorists that we are fighting.

All Muslims are not terrorists or allies of terrorists. In fact, some are the enemies and targets of terrorists. Likewise, not all terrorists are Muslim.

I agree Ralph. Not all Muslims support violent jihad. There are lax Muslims as there are lax Christians. But there are enough devout Muslims that those that aren’t are really of no consequence.

So I as Christian, if you were to put a Cross of Chrst in a bowl of urine and call it art and go in a,world tour displaying your work of art, I’m certain you would not fear for your life. Make a picture of Muhammad and go on a world tour displaying your work of art?. Would every Muslim kill you on the spot, no, but enough would that it would be certain death.

And that is the point. There are enough devout Muslims, in following the violent and bloody example of Muhammad, that it really doesn’t matter that every Muslim you meet is not intent on converting or killing you, enough are that it is the same as if every one was. Salman Rushdie and his book about Muhammad “Satanic Verses”is still in hiding, what, twenty years later? He still has a Fatwa demanding his death, and there are enough devout Muslims that if he came out of hiding, it would be a death sentence.

You can not say the same about any other religion, Make fun of Buddah? Make fun of Christ? Make fun of the patron saint of Mormons? Of Hindus? Of Daoists? Of any other Icon of any other people? No. Just Islam.

So in the end, when you look at any country , if there is revolution or terror, it is more than likely Muslim or marxist/communist based. Mostly.

>> So I as Christian, if you were to put a Cross of Chrst in a bowl of urine and call it art and go in a,world tour displaying your work of art, I’m certain you would not fear for your life.

It very much depends on the country, actually. In Russia, doing such a thing could easily net you a couple of years in prison for “insulting religious sensibilities”, and if the crowd had their hands on you before the cops do, you may well end up with some broken limbs, too.

You see, there was this guy in 3rd century, went by the name of John Chrysostom, and considered a Church Father and a saint by pretty much all Christian denominations, from Orthodox and Catholic to many Protestants, but especially loved by Orthodox. He had this to say on the subject:

“But since our discourse has now turned to the subject of blasphemy, I desire to ask one favor of you all, in return for this my address, and speaking with you; which is, that you will correct on my behalf the blasphemers of this city. And should you hear any one in the public thoroughfare, or in the midst of the forum, blaspheming God; go up to him and rebuke him; and should it be necessary to inflict blows, spare not to do so. Smite him on the face; strike his mouth; sanctify your hand with the blow, and if any should accuse you, and drag you to the place of justice, follow them thither; and when the judge on the bench calls you to account, say boldly that the man blasphemed the King of angels! For if it be necessary to punish those who blaspheme an earthly king, much more so those who insult God.”

LOL – and educational.
Cautionary note to all on this site: don’t argue with STEM folks and int19 in particular unless extremely well-armed with facts or a fibre connection to Deep Blue. Both are preferred.

STEM types relentlessly pursue arcane and esoteric fact-based counter arguments. If continued, opponents risk becoming uncomfortably familiar with reductio ad absurdum and their heads explode as in Scanners.

Well int19h, you make my point for me. You talk about Russia orthodox christians where you might get some broken limbs for blasheming the christ, but not killed, and you have to go back to the 3rd century for some obscure christian referring to striking a blashemer some blows but not requiring that a blasphemer be killed, unlike Islam, with numerous examples from history up to current times, AkA, Charlie Hebdo et al.

In other words. the killing of blasphemers in Christianity is a rarity, not an accepted norm as it is in Islam.

Just look at the first three hundred years of Christianity before it became a state religion. Christ and all of his disciples were killed, usually in prison for preaching the word, and the persecution of Christians was the norm for most of those 3 centuries. Yet Christians did not respond in kind, they weren’t slaughtering non -Christians in return, or killing or converting people that did not want to be christian.

Unlike Islam. Muhammad was raping, pillaging and plundering, converting, subjugating and killing during his life. Attacking caravans, slaughtering the adult males of a village and taking the woman and children as slaves and concubines. Chopping people’s heads off if they did not convert to Islam.

Old testament stuff. Muhammad’s successors continued this way of spreading Islam for the next 1400 years. ISIS is the present day example of Islam and the way it has been spread for most of it’s history.

If people would simply do a little research,. The power of the Internet at your fingertips, yet it is too much trouble to just read the Koran that you can buy on Kindle for a couple of bucks.

Tominator,
Yup – agree. My former boss met his wife when she was completing an MD program in London and he was completing a PhD at the London School of Economics. Both came from wealthy Pakistani families. Ditto for most of the Indian and Chinese engineers and entrepreneurs I know too.

Not entirely true, unless the “one true culture” is very nonrestrictive itself. Monocultures rarely survive that way for long, as the gains available for those who stray just a little bit beyond cultural confines, increase exponentially as fewer and fewer others cross that line. Imagine a culture proscribing charging interest. The gains available to the one guy who strays, as well as those who deal with him, is so outlandishly huge, that he’ll easily buy sufficient protection to stay in business. Ditto for the one guy with a gun, in a monoculture that proscribes it.

In practice, dealing with emerging Islam is no different than what minorities have had to deal with forever. We just have to offer them enough of what they have a comparative disadvantage at producing, to make those amongst them willing to deal with us obviously better off than those who don’t. IOW, we have to be useful fro something. Which, of course, means we at a minimum have to do something, anything, besides standing around bent over cheering while the Progressives rape us.

Sorry Stuki Moi, I’m not understanding your point.

There is a reason Islam has spread so far and continues to spread today. Islam gives a purpose to a human being and supports the worst aspects of human nature in doing do. Islam specifically says lying, cheating, stealing and mass murder is not only OK, but commands that it is required when dealing with infidels in the spread of Islam.. No action, no horror is disallowed, every thing that is the most evil of human nature is celebrated in the spread of Islam.

So what other belief system can match this license for evil? which can feel really good. What other belief systems can match this license from all forms normal human restraint, and then be promised seventy virgins in the after life as a reward for this violation of all normal human guidelines? The answer is communism, of course, which explains it’s appeal for so many.

Until this aspect of the cult of Islam is accepted in the west, there will be no ability to stop the spread of such a belief system. As is the true nature of communism, and all of it’s spawn.

@ThomasR

Islam has been around forever. Going though periods of violent expansion and peaceful restraint, like any other religion/culture. The Jihadi strain that gets all the coverage today, is pretty darned new. In practice, from the Soviet Campaign in Afghanistan in the 80s. It’s not even “Islam”, at least if you listen to the supposed “Popes” of Islam, the Mullahs and Ayatollahs of traditional Islamic religious centers. Rather, it’s an overlay of Islamic imagery, on top of traditional Afghan/Central Asian warrior cultures/beliefs. Like traditional Viking warrior mythology, just with the names Thor and Odin replaced with Peter and Paul.

And just like the Vikings before them, the Jihadis gain converts because, in their world as of today, their “stuff” plain works. Faced with a “turn the other cheek, seek solace in church and pray” Christianized Europe, all the the Viking Berserkers had to do, was burn down the church, kill everyone in it, and steal whatever valuables were there. And in forcefully disarmed (by kleptocratic governments scared of their own “citizenry” having arms) middle eastern societies, a bunch of fertile, half out of control central Asian warriors have pretty easy pickings as well. Ditto in an equally disarmed Europe. (And America. First South, then working it’s way North.)

But burning down and beheading their own societies are no more traditional Islamic than Judas Chairs and waterboarding is Christian. And as much of a threat as you may think the Jihadis pose to The West, they have certainly proven to be much, much threatening to the Islamic societies of the Middle East. What was relatively stable Islamic societies, have been completely transformed, as in pretty much wiped out, in many instances. By a bunch of marauding berserkers from the mountains. Not dissimilar to how Rome ended.

There will always be “barbarians”, outside any gates. Healthy, fertile, virile, strong crazies, that are perfectly content to live a lifestyle that inevitably lead no further than a violent pile of rubble. And they serve a very useful role, even to those they “threaten.” For without them, there would be no external check on how far into the abyss of self imposed helplessness populations are willing to sink, against the promise of some slick talker that he will “protect them.” And now, the Jihadis are reminding “The West” that we have gone too far. And it is not Them, or Islam,, or The Middle East who are to blame for that. But rather us. Or at least those amongst us who have fallen lock stock and barrel for the empty promise of Progressivism.

Well Stuki Moi, I disagree that Islam is like any other religion like Christianity or Buddhism. If you look at the examples as set by The Christ or Buddha l It was one of teaching peace and harmony without the use of force or threat of death to convert a person to their faith. Christianity was like that for the first three hundred years until it became the Roman state religion; then the popes would use Christianity as a tool of oppression. If a tyrant imposes Christianity by force as the Europeans did during the dark ages, it was clearly against the teachings of christ. But Muhammad established this method as completely commanded by Allah.

In other words, ISIS and their violent methods is the way Muhammad and his successors spread Islam. ISIS is simply following Muhammad’s example.

So Muhammad from his example, imposed Islam at the point of a sword. Any Muslim that converted to another religion or became an athiest would be killed. As it is the case in Saudi Arabia and other muslim countries today. Muhammad raided caravans, took slaves, killed all the adult men of a village and keep the women and children as slaves and concubines. Simply Google the life of Muhammad and you will see. Then look at the spread if Islam into India, Egypt, Asia, Spain and the attempt to spread into western europe. All violent, at the point of a sword.

So look at the example of the Christ or Buddha as how to live a spiritual life, more like the monks and Nuns in a monastery. Muhammad and his example? A blood soaked Viking, a mongol of the Golden Horde, or just Moses and his worst excesses of the old testament.

Sure, once Islam became dominant, there were periods of relative liberal practice of Islam upon those not Muslim, such as a period in India after they had violently conquered the land and established the Mogul muslim empire. During that time they pretty much wiped out Buddhism from India, it’s birth place, by murdering the priests and destroying their temples. They tried the same with Hinduism, but the Hindus were too entrenched and so the Muslims were unsuccessful. So for a time, Islam took a softer stance in India, for a time, until the Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb started a militant expansion of Islam into the surrounding countries around India and started a severe clamp down on Hindus and Christians in India around the 1780’s into the early 1800’s. This led to civil unrest and economic instability. It is in this Chaos which allowed the British East India Trading company to train up their own Sepoy Armed troops that led ultimately to a commercial trading company to take over India.

But in the end Stuki Moi, we might not agree about what was Islam of the past, but we are in agreement about what Islam is in the present. They are the new Barbarians; glorying in blood, conquest, rape, pillage, plunder and slaves. They can only thrive in the decadent, corrupt and nihilistic self-loathing that is the norm for the western “sophisticate.” Otherwise known as the “intellectual Elite” or aka as a liberal/progressive.

Kublia Khan said, as he swept across the Asian continent, conquering all before him, “you would not have me at your gates demanding your surrender if you had not sinned against G-d. I have been sent by G-d as your punishment for your sins”

The current crop of Islamic barbarians could be looked at in the same way for the western world.

Where to start? The Buddha – not Buddha. The Buddha (enlightened one) refers to Siddhartha Gautama, whereas Buddha could mean this guy (Buddha Maitreya the Christ) http://www.buddhamaitreya.org or others using Buddha.

Many dispute that Buddhism is a religion any more than say, AA is. There’s general concurrence it’s a manner of living or a philosophy, but the religious classification is disputed among adherents. It’s often treated as one for tax or zoning purposes as a matter of convenience.

Many consider Buddhists as atheists – due to the absence of a supernatural being or supernatural events in modern interpretations and Buddhist practices. But plenty in ancient texts: demons, mountains of jewels, prophetic white elephants are just some of the exotic items.

Reincarnation is a holdover from Buddhism’s antecedent beliefs just as Christianity includes some from Judaism. A number of contemporary Buddhist scholars and teachers interpret reincarnation as a state of mind rather than a metaphysical transformation upon death.

Buddhist violence? Yup about 1,600 years of it and continuing in Myanmar – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence

Religious Relativism? You got it bad GGO. How can I say it. If we followed the teachings of Buddha or The Christ and their examples as showed by their actions, the world would be a paradise. The examples you spoke of about Buddhists or Christians are peoples not living up to the standards as set by these teachers.

ISIS? They are simply being devout Muslims as the example set by “The Last Prophet of Allah”. Muhammad spread Islam by rape, pillage, plunder, with subjugation or conversion of the infidels at the point of a sword. Any Muslim that is living peacefully and tolerantly with people not Islamic is not being a “Good” Muslim as set by Muhammad, by his own writings in the Koran and more importantly, as set by his example, and the example of his successors.

A devout Muslim cannot live peacefully with the infidel. Which is why most terrorism and civil unrest is Muslim based. The other primary terrorism is marxist/communist based.

There are probably 1000 Chowdhurys for each behead-intending Jihadi in Bangladesh. If all of those, were as well, or better, armed than the Jihadis, and had an unbroken history of standing up for and defending themselves and theirs, there would be so little to gain by joining a Jihadi cult that the attackers would have chosen a different career. Like in the Middle East and Europe, the Jihadists are threatening mainly because those they threaten are a bunch of “voluntarily” disarmed, bound and gagged wimps. Because that’s how their progressive leaders like them.