Thanks to those of you who decided to spoil the surprise that The Economist did cover the situation in Myanmar
in one sentence.
So, the topic I am covering today is something that a lot of readers have been sending me emails about. I have mentioned it before, but let’s dive right in.
Flip over to the Middle East section and you will find the terms Jihadist and Islamist in abundant use. Microsoft Word, Libre Office and the WordPress editior among many other text editors do not seem to recognize these words. However, a quick search on dictionary.com of the term Islamist leads us to this
a supporter or advocate of Islamic fundamentalism
Alright, well what’s Islamic fundamentalism? Islamic Fundamentalism is used to describe an ideology that promotes an Islamic government.
Now, everyone has different views as to how beneficial that is… I am not trying to cover that. In regards to Islamists, I have just one question… Why is the U.S.so anti-Islam yet it mingles very freely with Dictators in other countries. We have seen how the U.S. imposed the Shah in Iran, we see the strong bond between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a dictatorship, sure the government imposes an extremist Islam on its people, however they follow every whim of the U.S. as I have covered in a previous post. Does everyone remember that video of Bush and King Abdullah drinking beer? However, when it comes to people who want a real Islamic government, the U.S. has a problem.
Furthermore, assuming the definition of Islamist from dictionary.com is right, it seems that Islamist is used in a very different way than what it is supposed to mean. The term Islamist when used in various publications seems to imply a more sinister meaning. The term is used to imply that Islamists are terrorists.
Now I could go on and on, however let’s move onto the term Jihadist. To paraphrase from dictionary.com, a Jihadist is someone who defends Islam. Well, I know that any Muslims reading this will not like this definition, because in Islam Jihad is very different from what the media portrays it to be. But, let’s stick with that definition.
So…. the Muslims have a special name for war. In fact, it is holy war….
Well at least Jihad doesn’t mean “Burn all scientific discoveries that do not agree with the Church”, or “Execute all Scientists who work against the Church”.
Sure, there have been and there are people who claim to be doing “Jihad”. Those people have brutally murdered others. But that is no less than other extremists have done in the name of their respective religions.
At least those people were individuals and were not the actual authority on the Religion….(E.g. The Church)
Is Buddhism the religion of slaughtering people just because their are Buddhists slaughtering innocent people in Myanmar?
Is Christianity the religion of executing people who are not Christians even though that is exactly what they have done in the past?
Just because the leader of a country is from a certain religion does he represent that religion?
I think that the West is really trying to distort the meaning of Islam, and that thus far they have been very successful. I believe that is unjust and I think that I have mentioned and covered this topic in varying detail in previous posts.
So for the next few posts, I am going to cover some different stuff. I have had a few emails asking me to discuss False Flag attacks as well as some basic religious topics. The next few days will be busy, but I’ll try to pump out some posts : )