Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Islamic jihad: the genocide in the Sudan
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 1 of 203 (318198)
06-06-2006 2:47 AM


In the past 23 years alone, 4 million or more Christians and other non-Muslims in the Sudan have been subjected to a campaign of forced Islamicization with the worst atrocities known to man often committed, such as young girls as young as 9 gang-raped after their parents are killed and sold into slavery. Boys sold into slavery or sometimes chained up in a Madrassas forced to memorize the Koran; men literally crucified, villages burned and sprayed with chemical weapons, women gang-raped and murdered, or sometimes a very pregnant or nursing woman has her breasts cut off so if she has the baby, it will die not being able to nurse. Sometimes, her baby will be cut out of her while she is still alive so she can see it die.
The motive in this war is the government's policy of forced Islamicization via genocide and forced conversion.
The NIF regime declared a jihad (holy war) against the religious and ethnic minorities that resist forced Islamization. It is estimated that 2 million people have died in the conflict and five million out of the eight million people that live in the South have been displaced since the fighting began in 1983. The strategy used by the NIF and its accomplices can be considered a scorched earth policy. Areas are sealed off by road and air and government forces move in. Units are often sent into areas and told to "depopulate" the area. Mines are often sown on important roads and paths. All the people and livestock are taken or killed and all structures are destroyed. People are forcibly relocated to "peace camps." In these camps, the young are taken away from their parents and sent to other camps for indoctrination by Islamic fundamentalists. There are numerous reports that the young men taken away are trained as soldiers and sent to fight in the South. These soldiers, along with many northern conscripts, are referred to as suicide soldiers, as their use in battle is less than efficient. They are given a key to wear around their necks and told that it is the key to heaven an that should they die, they will instantly go there. Also in these camps, young women and girls have been forced to do manual labor on farms and are sexually abused by their captors. When food is scarce in the camps, only those who have converted to Islam are given enough to eat.
Page not found | Persecution
CIA Factbook....
Military regimes favoring Islamic-oriented governments have dominated national politics since independence from the UK in 1956. Sudan was embroiled in two prolonged civil wars during most of the remainder of the 20th century. These conflicts were rooted in northern economic, political, and social domination of largely non-Muslim, non-Arab southern Sudanese. The first civil war ended in 1972, but broke out again in 1983. The second war and famine-related effects resulted in more than 4 million people displaced and, according to rebel estimates, more than 2 million deaths over a period of two decades.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/su.html

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 3:33 AM randman has replied
 Message 3 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 10:57 AM randman has replied
 Message 31 by Modulous, posted 06-07-2006 7:40 AM randman has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 100 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 2 of 203 (318200)
06-06-2006 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
06-06-2006 2:47 AM


Absolutely atrocious. I thank my stars that I don't live in a country where force or any kind of coercion is used to impose religious beliefs.
I guess the implication is that Islam is a doctrine that encourages such brutality and forced conversion more than others.
I don't want Islam being singled out as a particularly evil religion because I genuinely don't see it as being much different as the other Abramic faiths. People have killed in the name of many gods, just as they have killed for godless principles. Its the nature of the beast, isn't it?
I'd imagine the native peoples of South America were subjected to similar atrocities, as were the Cathars. You might argue that these things happened a long time ago, and you'd be right, but the sacred texts have remained relatively unchanged during this time, I'd imagine.
Am I being glib? I hope not. Unacceptable oppression can take many forms, and not just horrific violence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 06-06-2006 2:47 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by randman, posted 06-06-2006 11:55 AM Tusko has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 3 of 203 (318274)
06-06-2006 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
06-06-2006 2:47 AM


How very horrible. Looks like those particular adherants of Islam are blinded by their fundamentalism to the point that they would institute their own form of the Inquisition.
Now we don't blame all the people who were not in Spain and who also were practicing Christianity dutifully with the horrors of that terrible incident in history do we?
I can only assume that is why you brought all this up here.
To me all it is just another terrible example of why no fundamentalist dogma should even be allowed to govern the people. It makes me very sad for those suffering under its grip. It makes me even sadder for those would use such attrocities as a method to justify hatred and wash an entire peace loving people in a stigma of evil in the face of total hypocricy.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 06-06-2006 2:47 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by randman, posted 06-07-2006 12:10 AM Jazzns has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 4 of 203 (318297)
06-06-2006 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Tusko
06-06-2006 3:33 AM


the sacred texts
but the sacred texts have remained relatively unchanged during this time, I'd imagine
The difference is the sacred texts of the gospels demand religious liberty whereas the opposite is true for Islam and the Koran (and Sharia). That may make reform of Islam a somewhat daunting task. Mohammed was a conquering general. Jesus eschewed forced conversion and use of physical violence as a means to promote his teachings.
Big difference.
One of the implications may be that in places like the Sudan, Islam or radical Islam may need to be defeated on the field of battle in order to contain the spread of violent forms of Islam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 3:33 AM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 12:45 PM randman has not replied
 Message 16 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 06-06-2006 11:49 PM randman has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 100 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 5 of 203 (318324)
06-06-2006 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
06-06-2006 11:55 AM


Re: the sacred texts
The Koran says...
"And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers" - ( 2.191).
but it also says...
"You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion" - (109.6).
So what do we make of that? I'm not convinced that the Koran is an uncomplicated manifesto for bloody religious uprising. I suspect its as contradictory as many other holy books can appear to those who don't believe in them.
Books that are contradictory but inspire religious devotion can be picked and chosen from - interpreted - and I think that goes some way to explaining the radically different behaviours of the Janjaweed and some of the Muslims I know.
I guess this won't satisfy you - and a mention of the old testament verses that sound a bit queazy - like say Numbers 31:1-54, which seem to indorse massacre and rape on ethnic or religious grounds, won't seem relevant.
The fact of the matter is that I have difficulty trying to differenciate between Christian and Islamic calls to arms like this and would be very interested if you could explain how they differ.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by randman, posted 06-06-2006 11:55 AM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 1:00 PM Tusko has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 6 of 203 (318337)
06-06-2006 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Tusko
06-06-2006 12:45 PM


Re: the sacred texts
The fact of the matter is that I have difficulty trying to differenciate between Christian and Islamic calls to arms like this and would be very interested if you could explain how they differ.
Your never going to get an admission that adherance to old testament philosophy drives beliefs today but that being said, it is equally hard to get certain debaters to recognize that there is difference stemming from the new testament. Failure to recognize this just fuels the fundamentalist fire because it looks like you are equivocating.
Christianity and Islam are different even within themselves. The most barbaric call to arms comes from the old testament. Islam prescribes violence in situations of self-defense. Christianity then switches gears to "turn thy cheek" philosophy in the new testament.
They ARE different and to logically group them only serves to confuse and produce a failure to discuss the real issues. For example, people like randman, Faith, CanadianSteve, and buzzsaw will disagree to the ends of the earth that Islam only prescribes defensive violence. That is what the debate should focus on instead of what has been happening lately which is that people let the discussion move on from that point. What is happening in Sudan is not driven by the Koran. There is nothing in the Koran saying it is okay to rape, mutilate, torture, and murder innocent people. But just because the minority of people doing this happen to claim they are doing so in the name of Islam randman would have you believe that this is proof positive that Islam is the driver of this rather than good old fashioned hate, intollerance, and world politics as usual.
Humanity hasn't changed much overall and the couple of centuries seperating this from the Inquisition does not erase the fact that it was a bastardization of Christianity that caused that too.
Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 12:45 PM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 1:21 PM Jazzns has replied
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 2:08 PM Jazzns has replied
 Message 24 by randman, posted 06-07-2006 12:21 AM Jazzns has replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 100 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 7 of 203 (318346)
06-06-2006 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jazzns
06-06-2006 1:00 PM


Re: the sacred texts
I don't dispute that many Christians chose to distance themselves as best as they possibly can from the more colourful aspects of the Old Testament (although if you are going to make any argument about Jesus fulfilling prophesy from the Old Testament then I'm going to be checking your clothing labels to see that you don't mix your fibres too).
I don't dispute that Islam and Christianity are rather different propositions from each other - and that the grounds on which violence might be justified are probably different.
Am I right in thinking you are concerned that I have conceded that Islam justifies violence on some other ground than self-defence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 1:00 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 1:30 PM Tusko has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 8 of 203 (318348)
06-06-2006 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Tusko
06-06-2006 1:21 PM


Re: the sacred texts
Am I right in thinking you are concerned that I have conceded that Islam justifies violence on some other ground than self-defence?
No, just that you might be whitewashing the real differences. There are REAL differences and the proper rebuttal the randman's taking those differences to the extreme is to stick to what those differences actually are not by making the religions the same.
Randman believes Islam is something that it is most specifically not. He is going in the opposite direction of making it so different that it is unreasonable. I don't know why he does this, presumably to validate his own religion?

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 1:21 PM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Tusko, posted 06-06-2006 1:54 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 100 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 9 of 203 (318356)
06-06-2006 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Jazzns
06-06-2006 1:30 PM


Re: the sacred texts
Fair enough. Seeing as I don't have a working knowledge of Islam, I just want to hear what he has to say, really.
I don't want to be seen to be clumping the Abramic religions together too unthinkingly, but I believe that considering their similarities as well as the differences between them can be helpful. That said, I don't want to develop an inaccurate understanding of Islam.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 1:30 PM Jazzns has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 10 of 203 (318360)
06-06-2006 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Jazzns
06-06-2006 1:00 PM


Re: the sacred texts
For example, people like randman, Faith, CanadianSteve, and buzzsaw will disagree to the ends of the earth that Islam only prescribes defensive violence.
This is false. I don't recall what Randman and Buz have said about this, but I know Canadian Steve has clearly acknowledged that there are two different trends of thought in the Koran, and I have agreed, the live-and-let-live trend and the calls to violent overthrow of all opposition to the claims of Allah, murder of infidels, particularly Jews and Christians and so on. Either side of Islam may be embraced by a particular group or at particular times, but the violent side is always there in black and white to be acted upon whenever it seems expedient.
EDIT: Perhaps I misread you. You were saying that the violent calls in the Koran are all only for defense? That calls for a different answer. They are clearly calls to murder the infidel. Wherever you see a Jew, kill him. That's the sort of thing it says. That's not defensive violence. Nor are the beheadings we've all seen done in the name of Allah. You are whitewashing Islam to claim that all that is not in their holy books. Wahabbism is simply the honest holding to what the texts actually say, refusing to water them down. }}
What is happening in Sudan is not driven by the Koran.
It most certainly is. It is driven by the whole ideology of Islam, which includes Sharia law as well as the Koran.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 1:00 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 2:54 PM Faith has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 11 of 203 (318370)
06-06-2006 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Faith
06-06-2006 2:08 PM


Re: the sacred texts
This is false. I don't recall what Randman and Buz have said about this, but I know Canadian Steve has clearly acknowledged that there are two different trends of thought in the Koran, and I have agreed, the live-and-let-live trend and the calls to violent overthrow of all opposition to the claims of Allah, murder of infidels, particularly Jews and Christians and so on.
Actually what CS believes is that there are two interpretations and that the peaceful interpretation is incorrect and based on a non-literal interpretation of the Koran. You in the past have agreed with this. I personally think that such a position is utterly wrong but as long as we are spelling out positions here I think that is the more accurate one.
You were saying that the violent calls in the Koran are all only for defense? That calls for a different answer. They are clearly calls to murder the infidel.....
Yea and we have hashed through this a million times. I know you are wrong as a matter of fact. If you want to continue to beat your head against a wall thought then be my guest. I won't join you.
You are whitewashing Islam to claim that all that is not in their holy books. Wahabbism is simply the honest holding to what the texts actually say, refusing to water them down.
Wahabbism is generally based on more than just the Koran. What I am talking about are the majority of the followers of Islam who are not Wahabbi, who follow the Koran and treat the Hadith like they should, as commentary.
It most certainly is. It is driven by the whole ideology of Islam,
which includes Sharia law as well as the Koran.
"Most" of Islam does not include Sharia so you are most plain and simply wrong. I also doubt that Sharia prescribes the rape and torture of children. So even if they are claiming Sharia they most certainly are not following it. Unless you can provide a quote from Sharia law that makes it okay to rape 9 year olds and cut out unborn fetuses from pregnant mothers.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 2:08 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 4:15 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 12 of 203 (318385)
06-06-2006 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Jazzns
06-06-2006 2:54 PM


Re: the sacred texts
No I'm not going to say that those acts of barbarity are explicitly prescribed in Sharia law or the Koran, but they represent the spirit of the violent parts of the text, and if beheading infidels is OK by Islam then mistreating infidels in any way isn't going to be frowned upon too severely.
The vast majority of Muslims unfortunately are not the definitive interpreters of the Koran or their laws. As long as a sizeable number of Muslims treat the violent directives as literal and as coming from God it is their views that will dominate.
I don't see the vast majority of peaceful Muslims rising up to stop the violent aggressors either.
You may say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was just a fringe fanatic, but he had a high position and he led a lot of people, and he is not alone, and this is how HE interprets the Koran, critizing those who ignore or reinterpret the War Verses. This speech of his is classic:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Iran/KhomeiniSpeech.htm
Why do you Mullahs only go after the ordinances of prayer and fasting?
Why do you only read the Quranic verses of mercy and do not read the verses of killing?
Quran says; kill, imprison!
Why are you only clinging to the part that talks about mercy?
Mercy is against God.
Mehrab (3) means the place of war, the place of fighting.
Out of the mehrabs, wars should proceed,
Just as all the wars of Islam used to proceeded out of the mehrabs.
The prophet has [had] sword to kill people..
Our [Holy] Imams were quite military men.
All of them were warriors.
They used to wield swords; they used to kill people.
We need a Khalifa who would chop hands, cut throat, stone people
In the same way that the messenger of God used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people.
In the same way that he massacred the Jews of Bani Qurayza (4) because they were a bunch of discontent people.
If the Prophet used to order to burn a house or exterminate a tribe that was justice.

The lives of people must be secured through punishment.
3) Mehraab : Prayer niche of a Mosque, in front of which the Imam stands when leading the congregational prayers. It literally means the place of war, derived from harb (war) *
* Interesting that the point of focus in a mosque is labelled "place of war" whereas Jesus Christ, the point of focus in Christian worship, is a focus of peace, the God who died to secure our peace with God.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : to add footnote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 2:54 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 4:27 PM Faith has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 13 of 203 (318390)
06-06-2006 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Faith
06-06-2006 4:15 PM


Re: the sacred texts
I don't see the vast majority of peaceful Muslims rising up to stop the violent aggressors either.
Nor did the vast majority of Christians rise up to stop the Inquisition.
Nor do Christians currently stand up against what they believe are charlatans of the faith.
Most people are just trying to get by and live their lives. That you would default a lack of action to mean tacit approval just shows where you bias rests. You believe that Islam is a barbaric religiously imperialistic machine and to PREFER to believe that over the much simpler explanations available.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 4:15 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 4:40 PM Jazzns has replied
 Message 23 by randman, posted 06-07-2006 12:13 AM Jazzns has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 14 of 203 (318393)
06-06-2006 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Jazzns
06-06-2006 4:27 PM


Re: the sacred texts
Nor did the vast majority of Christians rise up to stop the Inquisition.
They were too busy being killed by the Inquisition perhaps. The rest of them believed in the Inquisition because they were ignorant of the truths of the Bible, and only knew what the Roman Church fed them. And something similar is no doubt why great numbers of peaceful Muslims don't object to the terrorism -- in their heart of hearts they know it is what the Koran prescribes.
Nor do Christians currently stand up against what they believe are charlatans of the faith.
that might be a good point and perhaps more should be speaking out, but there are plenty of Christians who criticize the charlatans within Christian circles -- and after all who suffers from the charlatans other than Christians anyway? But for the sake of the image of Christianity to the world perhaps more Christians should be condemning the false Christians. Problem is that, as is well known from EvC, every sect is going to be pointing the finger at other sects and calling them false Chrsitians and then everybody will even be more confused. But again, there is no absence of such denuniciations of you look for them at your local Christian bookstore or other Christian places. There are many books out warning against them, and many pastors speak against them from the pulpit.
But the charlatans aren't murdering anyone either, however deplorable their behavior, certainly not attacking unbelievers, and if that were the case you can be sure that there would be plenty of PUBLIC action from Christians against them.
Most people are just trying to get by and live their lives. That you would default a lack of action to mean tacit approval just shows where you bias rests. You believe that Islam is a barbaric religiously imperialistic machine and to PREFER to believe that over the much simpler explanations available.
I had no reason to believe anything about Islam until I understood what it has been doing in the world. Obviously it is you who have some kind of preference to deny the source of terrorism in Islam itself. I find this very odd. You should be one of the ones rising up to denounce it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 4:27 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Jazzns, posted 06-06-2006 11:46 PM Faith has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 15 of 203 (318514)
06-06-2006 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
06-06-2006 4:40 PM


Re: the sacred texts
I had no reason to believe anything about Islam until I understood what it has been doing in the world. Obviously it is you who have some kind of preference to deny the source of terrorism in Islam itself. I find this very odd. You should be one of the ones rising up to denounce it.
I do denounce terrorism. The Moslems in my family do so also. My father was interviewed on the local news condemning the riots over the cartoon fiasco. Local Mosques and other individuals like my father constantly speak out against the violence of terrorists.
I am the one rising up to denounce it. What sort of position do you hold that you would defaultly assume that I just sit back and accept it? What I said was that most people in Islam, especially those in impoverished conditions compared to ours, are spending their energies just trying to get by with the basic necessities of life. People such as the rest of my family that is in the West Bank are in no position to rage against some fundamentalist backwards version of Islam over in Sudan. The Islamic world is huge just like the Christian world. To try to get the Christian world to unite to condemn anything is nearly impossible. Why would you expect Islam to be any different?

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 4:40 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Faith, posted 06-06-2006 11:52 PM Jazzns has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024