http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/11/mccain-iraq-comments-brin_n_106468.html
If you watch the short video at the bottom of this page you'll see a perfect example of John McCain's ignorance. He tries to put the US troops in Germany as being in the same position as the ones in Iraq. The only difference being that the ones in Germany are not fighting a greedy and undemocratic war over oil. They are simply lounging around beating themselves (and British soldiers) up, as I happen to know from an inside source.
This man needs to be outed by everybody via the internet or anywhere else possible.
I bet he can't even point out Germany on the World map.
He should be eaten as a chip after being fried in the oil of his greasy lies. McCains be sold deep-frozen in pack of 1.5kg, not as a puppet for the right-wing US government hawks.
Wednesday 11 June 2008
Islamic vs. Islamist
As this is my very first blog it might be a little basic, but here it goes.
As I was reading up on what the Home Office does on their website, I stopped at one of their targest which was to "support local people and organisations who are willing to challenge anti-Islamic activity". I wondered what exactly the term anti-Islamic meant in this context, and discovered on the site called Jihadwatch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/019622.php) that The Right Honorable Jacqui Smith MP (Home Secretary) had coined this phrase to describe events such as the 7/11 bomb attacks on London tubes and a bus in a way that would not offend, or even appeal to moderate Muslims. At this point in the discussion, I do find it very important to stress the difference between the words Islamic and Islamist. By definition, Islamic refers to Islam, and Islamist refers to fundamental forms of it.
Describing these vicious acts of terrorism as anti-Islamic is surely misleading, as the main target of the bombs are the non-believers.
As there are many different interpretations of Islam, varying very widely in terms of fundamentalism, it is more important to put the onus on what these deranged acts of terrorism are and not what they are not. They are islamist, fundamentalist, extremist acts of extreme violence. Performed, not in the name of Islam, but a fundamentalist, misguided interpretation of it.
As I was reading up on what the Home Office does on their website, I stopped at one of their targest which was to "support local people and organisations who are willing to challenge anti-Islamic activity". I wondered what exactly the term anti-Islamic meant in this context, and discovered on the site called Jihadwatch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/019622.php) that The Right Honorable Jacqui Smith MP (Home Secretary) had coined this phrase to describe events such as the 7/11 bomb attacks on London tubes and a bus in a way that would not offend, or even appeal to moderate Muslims. At this point in the discussion, I do find it very important to stress the difference between the words Islamic and Islamist. By definition, Islamic refers to Islam, and Islamist refers to fundamental forms of it.
Describing these vicious acts of terrorism as anti-Islamic is surely misleading, as the main target of the bombs are the non-believers.
As there are many different interpretations of Islam, varying very widely in terms of fundamentalism, it is more important to put the onus on what these deranged acts of terrorism are and not what they are not. They are islamist, fundamentalist, extremist acts of extreme violence. Performed, not in the name of Islam, but a fundamentalist, misguided interpretation of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
