Hillary Muslims 'Have Nothing Whatsoever To Do With Terrorism'

[Atheon]

Again, a failure to distinguish three concepts: Muslims, Islam, and Islamic extremism.

[Mermaid]

There's clearly a problem of islamist terrorism denying that is just stupid and helps no one.

Nobody is denying that. Nobody.
There is clearly a problem with blaming the wrong groups for it.

[SGOS]

There's clearly a problem of islamist terrorism...

Nobody is denying that. Nobody.

Actually, that seems to be exactly what Hillary is denying.  I accept that it's for political reasons, and I can even be sympathetic to her reasons for doing so, but if the thread title is an accurate quote, what she is saying is false.  Of course, she's a skilled politician, and all of her comments, accurate or not, will be explained away later with, "What I meant was...," or "Bla, bla, bla...," but the quote as it stands, taking away any presumed nuance of perception or personal interpretation, is flatly untrue.

This is nothing new in political speech, of course, but the precise clarity of the wording, makes the quote remarkable for a politician, because it creates a perception of undeniable intention on Hillary's part.

[josephpalazzo]

Again, a failure to distinguish three concepts: Muslims, Islam, and Islamic extremism.

True, but the fact is that they are so intimately linked and the lines between each is more or less blurred, that it's difficult to separate each one as if they are completely independent of each other. Take the so-called "moderate" Muslim who doesn't care that certain members of his own faith does violent things in the name of Islam - the so-called "Islamic terrorist".  Through this kind of apathy, or his own claim that his religion was hijacked by someone violent,  is he guilty for not taking any action? or do we absolve him of any responsibility? As an individual, he's not responsible for the action of someone else, but that's a Western concept, of which Islam doesn't want to be part of. Why does the West have to deal with Islamic terrorism, when Islamic states are less inclined to do so, even though many Muslims are themselves victims of this Islamic terrorism? And the religion "Islam" itself has deep problems like no other religion as its founder was not only a religious figure but a warrior who went on a rampage and subjugated the tribes that lived in the ME in his own times. The Quran is a prescription to conquer, and peace only comes about when the world is submitted to the will of Allah. And so this combination of war/peace, defined in that particular way in what is taken to be the final words of God lends itself to all sorts of interpretations. Are we to believe that Islam is a religion of peace?? Regardless of what the so-called "moderate" Muslim thinks, do or not do, the West must be very vigilant towards an enemy that can act like a chameleon.

[Baruch]

If you are an atheist, why don't you hate Christians?  You say you are even handed ... but the biggest spider in Europe isn't ISIS, it is the Vatican.

[SGOS]

If you are an atheist, why don't you hate Christians?  You say you are even handed ... but the biggest spider in Europe isn't ISIS, it is the Vatican.

That's food for thought, but the claim (the biggest spider) is debatable at this point in time.  I dislike ISIS and Islam for many of the same reasons that I dislike Christianity, and furthermore, asking,  "Why don't you hate Christians," is a straw man that requires a false assumption.  And the assumption that atheists must hate Christians, or Muslims for that matter, is irrelevant.  Like 'em or hate 'em isn't the issue here.  It's about the questionable logic of a political claim.

I have never bought into the apologetics for comparing evils of Islam to the evils of Christianity because both are illogical concepts.  You say that Christianity is just as bad as Islam.  OK, but how does that excuse Islam?  It doesn't excuse Islam anymore that pointing at ISIS excuses Christianity.  It isn't relevant.

[mauricio]

Again, a failure to distinguish three concepts: Muslims, Islam, and Islamic extremism.

Muslims are believers in various interpretations of Islam, one of those is jihadism. There's a relation between this elements, so to claim any of this elements  " have nothing whatsoever to do with...'' is very weird at best and disingenuous at worst.

[mauricio]

Nobody is denying that. Nobody.
There is clearly a problem with blaming the wrong groups for it.

mmm hillary said muslims have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism that's plainly false. It is denying the problem of jihadism and islamism within muslim groups.
She could have said the truth instead and talk about how religions have multiple interpretations and how the islamic text can easily be interpreted to justify acts of terror but that this is only a minority whitin the islamic community that we should work together to defuse.

[Baruch]

True, but the fact is that they are so intimately linked and the lines between each is more or less blurred, that it's difficult to separate each one as if they are completely independent of each other. Take the so-called "moderate" Muslim who doesn't care that certain members of his own faith does violent things in the name of Islam - the so-called "Islamic terrorist".  Through this kind of apathy, or his own claim that his religion was hijacked by someone violent,  is he guilty for not taking any action? or do we absolve him of any responsibility? As an individual, he's not responsible for the action of someone else, but that's a Western concept, of which Islam doesn't want to be part of. Why does the West have to deal with Islamic terrorism, when Islamic states are less inclined to do so, even though many Muslims are themselves victims of this Islamic terrorism? And the religion "Islam" itself has deep problems like no other religion as its founder was not only a religious figure but a warrior who went on a rampage and subjugated the tribes that lived in the ME in his own times. The Quran is a prescription to conquer, and peace only comes about when the world is submitted to the will of Allah. And so this combination of war/peace, defined in that particular way in what is taken to be the final words of God lends itself to all sorts of interpretations. Are we to believe that Islam is a religion of peace?? Regardless of what the so-called "moderate" Muslim thinks, do or not do, the West must be very vigilant towards an enemy that can act like a chameleon.

Yes, all you Gentiles look alike and talk alike and hate Jews alike (Sarc)  More inscrutable than Chinese.

[Baruch]

That's food for thought, but the claim (the biggest spider) is debatable at this point in time.  I dislike ISIS and Islam for many of the same reasons that I dislike Christianity, and furthermore, asking,  "Why don't you hate Christians," is a straw man that requires a false assumption.  And the assumption that atheists must hate Christians, or Muslims for that matter, is irrelevant.  Like 'em or hate 'em isn't the issue here.  It's about the questionable logic of a political claim.

I have never bought into the apologetics for comparing evils of Islam to the evils of Christianity because both are illogical concepts.  You say that Christianity is just as bad as Islam.  OK, but how does that excuse Islam?  It doesn't excuse Islam anymore that pointing at ISIS excuses Christianity.  It isn't relevant.

Islamaphobia is a mental condition ... it doesn't equate to atheism.  I have no problem with atheism.

[aitm]

Islamaphobia is a mental condition ..

If Islamaphobia is a mental condition, so is racism, bigotry, vegetarianism and the preference for kosher. It is mere opinion that can be changed with education or a change in ones psychology. Islamaphobia is a mental condition as much as being catholic is.

[Baruch]

If Islamaphobia is a mental condition, so is racism, bigotry, vegetarianism and the preference for kosher. It is mere opinion that can be changed with education or a change in ones psychology. Islamaphobia is a mental condition as much as being catholic is.

A phobia isn't an ideology.  Being kosher (in a modern sense) is simply hygiene.  It is scientific.  Being a racist is an ideology, it isn't a form of insanity either.  A phobia (of any kind) is a medical condition.  Your Newspeak fails.

[Shiranu]

mmm hillary said muslims have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism that's plainly false. It is denying the problem of jihadism and islamism within muslim groups.
She could have said the truth instead and talk about how religions have multiple interpretations and how the islamic text can easily be interpreted to justify acts of terror but that this is only a minority whitin the islamic community that we should work together to defuse.

This. Most of the Muslims I know (all of them?) would have no problem with that and/or have said something similar themselves; infact I would wager most of them would respect her more if she would actually address the issue rather than try to sugar coat it and make it seem like Muslims are some mystical unicorns that poop rainbows and could never put a foot wrong.

But to be fair to her... she is consistently a two-faced politician on basically every topic she has opened her mouth about so nothing new here.

[aitm]

A phobia isn't an ideology.  Being kosher (in a modern sense) is simply hygiene.  It is scientific.  Being a racist is an ideology, it isn't a form of insanity either.  A phobia (of any kind) is a medical condition.  Your Newspeak fails.

Islamaphobia is not a real phobia, you fail. It is a made up word in an effort to convince some ^ that a fear of deranged fanatics is a phobia instead of a precaution. Islamaphobia is as real as judaphobia, or catholophobia, baptistphobia, buddaphobia, or gayphobia. Get real.

[aitm]

  Being kosher (in a modern sense) is simply hygiene.  It is scientific.

LOLOL…..egads….kosher is now hygiene,..lordy, thats rich. Polish the old pole much eh? LOLOL….scientific… yeah….. old goat herders thinking the sky was water and thus gutting an animal is a certain way is scientific…..oy vey.