That is correct, because we're discussing terrorism. Muslims with fundamentalists views are not relevant to this discussion. If we want to discuss religious extremism, and the fact that some political parties in Islamic countries would not be welcomed in this country as mainstream, that's true. That's an entirely separate discussion.You have defended those who support the mission of Islamist terrorists but not their methods,and are unwilling to consider any Muslimas extreme unless they explicitly support a terrorist group.
We're not talking about regular religious extremism. We're talking about Muslims with terrorist sympathies.Were you to use this barometer for other groups,you would find essentially NO extreme Jews,NO extreme Christians,and NO extreme just about anybody else.
There are Muslims with extreme views. This group in question that we're discussing right now (Muslims against a separation of church and state and opposed to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups) are not affiliated with terrorist groups, or even in support of them, so I fail to understand why you are so obsessed with them.Only Muslims receive this special deference of yours where you feel somehow required to engage in these bizarre mental gymnastics where you move the goal posts so as to attempt to remain true to the dictates of your dogma.
They don't get a so called "free pass" from me. I'm going to disagree with an Islamic fundamentalist just as much as any other religious fundamentalist.Most obviously,what you consider "moderate" for a Muslim is not what you consider moderate for anybody else, as even those Muslims who support a viscious, oppressive totalitarian state get a free pass from you.This is just plainly dishonest since the double standards are so patently hypocritical.
So people who don't agree with the values of western civilization, but aren't willing to resort to terrorism to prove their point are terrorist sympathizers?The large number of Muslims who support the mission,if not the precise methods of Islamist terrorists ARE the issue here.
There are two different definitions of moderate being used here. Moderate in regards to terrorism, which I am using, and moderate in regards to fundamentalism, which you are using.When you defend them like you do,you only hurt those Muslims who truly ARE moderate.
As I've said multiple times, the panel in the video was discussing terrorism. This thread is discussing terrorism. I don't agree with Muslim extremism or religious extremism of any kind. That doesn't mean that all religious extremists are linked to terrorism.By calling people with extreme views "moderate" for no other reason than you have been programmed to do so through various insinuations that you are some sort of bigot if you tell the truth,you undermine the ability of the very people who are always the first to suffer under their yoke of oppression. If you were even the tiniest bit progressive in any real sense,you would understand this.
Here is the ideology of the most recent winning party in Pakistan, who you claimed to be run by extremists.
Wow, that was a masterpiece of argument right there. She did not just hit the nail on the head, she manufactured the hammer as well! FATALITY!!!!!
- There was never a good war, or a bad peace.
- Idealistically, everything should work as you planed it to. Realistically, it depends on how idealistic you are as to the measure of success.
- Better to be a pessimist before, and an optimist afterwords.
2. Pakistan is ruled by its security apparatus where it hasn't given up attempting to rule altogether,
3. (and, this is important) They are patrons of the Taliban, whom they intend to support in taking over Afghanistan after we leave, and work with the Haqqani Network, and by extension, Al-Qaeda. So..... maybe depending on them to demonstrate that Islam, by and large, has been through the Enlightenment isn't your best bet.....
Culturally, these people are crazy backwards. Say what you will about Western Civilization, at last we generally gave up pederasty as a "thing" with the Greeks.
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump