Islam – Sunni & Shiite with Free Radicals

With the previous post in place, it just doesn’t cease to amaze me that in the times that we live there are religious fanatics making the most outlandish statements and deadly actions. We have all seen the uproar of various radical elements of Islam over such mundane things as teddy bears and political cartoons. We have seen what we would call barbaric practices over criminal actions (chopping the hand off for theft), and the treatment of women (whipping the victim of a rape). Then there are the horrific attacks upon people not only not of their faith, but of the same religion. In many respects, these actions and reactions are a shadow of our own bloody past.

Punishments just as barbaric by today’s standards can be found in the Old Testament. However, over the years, Western civilization has endeavored to be more compassionate and forgiving, especially since Jesus Christ taught tolerance and forgiveness as being God’s will. But that has not necessarily been the Christian way…

I cannot defend the Christian faith as being pacifistic throughout its history. Many wars have been fought in God’s name and have used God as the justification for battle. If we look in the Old Testament of the Bible, there were wars fought on God’s behalf and direction. Just recently, the violence in Norther Ireland was, in part, due to religious differences between Catholics and Protestants. In light of such a bloody past, is Islam any different?

Perhaps not…

We, as Christians, tolerate other religions, especially in the United States. Our Bill of Rights states that a freedom to worship (or not) is up to the individual, not the government, and no religion or belief is to be held above all others. But that doesn’t mean that we like it, but we typically do not wage war against another faith, at least in these modern times. Tolerance and forgiveness is typically our creed.

Then perhaps I’m ignorant, but isn’t the violence advocated by the Islamic radicals over the acceptance of their religion over all others? If that is the case, then that is why they do not like free societies with their acceptance of multiple religions and beliefs. Indeed, the preferred government they advocate is a theocracy, a religious government.

But even then, what version of their belief would they have as their governing body? Sunni or Shiite? What are the differences between the two? You and I probably wouldn’t understand the differences that these two sects have, but it’s enough for them to war over each other for over 1100 years.

From George Mason University’s History News Network:

The groups first diverged after the Prophet Muhammad died in 632, and his followers could not agree on whether to choose bloodline successors or leaders most likely to follow the tenets of the faith.

The group now known as Sunnis chose Abu Bakr, the prophet’s adviser, to become the first successor, or caliph, to lead the Muslim state. Shiites favored Ali, Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law. Ali and his successors are called imams, who not only lead the Shiites but are considered to be descendants of Muhammad. After the 11th imam died in 874, and his young son was said to have disappeared from the funeral, Shiites in particular came to see the child as a Messiah who had been hidden from the public by God.

The largest sect of Shiites, known as “twelvers,” have been preparing for his return ever since.
How did the violence start?

In 656, Ali’s supporters killed the third caliph. Soon after, the Sunnis killed Ali’s son Husain.
Fighting continued but Sunnis emerged victorious over the Shiites and came to revere the caliphate for its strength and piety.

Shiites focused on developing their religious beliefs, through their imams.

The Sunni branch believes that the first four caliphs–Mohammed’s successors–rightfully took his place as the leaders of Muslims. They recognize the heirs of the four caliphs as legitimate religious leaders. These heirs ruled continuously in the Arab world until the break-up of the Ottoman Empire following the end of the First World War.

Shiites, in contrast, believe that only the heirs of the fourth caliph, Ali, are the legitimate successors of Mohammed.

So now the violence between the sects is over who is the legitimate head of Islam. Sort of reminds you about the early days of the Catholic Church, doesn’t it?

But regardless of who is supposed to be the legitimate head of Islam, this religion must come out of the dark ages and join the modern world. It must realize that preaching hate against non-Muslim countries and people is not the way to convert people to their religion nor to join the world community. But then, this hasn’t been their practice nor their aim. From a prior post:

Islam is a religion of conquest – it was spread by subjugation. The soldiers would ride into a village and wipe out any resistance. Afterward, they would gather up all the villagers, and separated the leaders. The Imam riding with the soldiers would then ask them one by one if they would accept Islam as their religion and Allah as their god. If not, the leader would be forced to kneel, and he was beheaded in front of the assembled villagers. This process usually didn’t last very long as the village saw which way this was going, so they would take vows to accept this new religion. Afterward, they would ride to the next village and repeat the “conversion” of the infidels.

The tribal mentality of the radical Islamists will only turn the world further against the religion as a whole. Many people are looking at Moslems as a whole to be dangerous fanatics even though they do not ascribe to the radical’s agenda.

What is the radical agenda? To subjugate the world under one religion: Islam. And they will do it in any way possible. And therein lies the danger.

This is where the ends justify the means. Bombings (suicide & other), attacks on civilians and soldiers alike, and hate-filled speech all drive this point home although it may be against the ultimate will of Allah. But that does not matter as long as the coming of the Islamic Messiah is hastened. A bloody legacy indeed.

I have posted other essays and opinions on this subject which state what the civilized world should do before the barbarians are at the gate and pounding it down. What say you?

Advertisements

About Tom Roland

EE for 25 Years, Two Patents - now a certified PMP. Married twice, burned once. One son with Asperger's Syndrome. Two cats. Conservative leaning to the Right. NRA Life Member.
This entry was posted in Middle East, Radical Islam, Religion, Terrorism and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Islam – Sunni & Shiite with Free Radicals

  1. Alex Seifert says:

    I agree with you entirely. I think this latest incident with the British teacher in Sudan is just yet another showing of how ridiculous the extremism can be.

  2. Shoprat says:

    One of the things about Christianity is that, in truth, we have no earthly head of all Christians, but we know and recognize each other and generally work together without killing anyone.

    Islam looks like a lamb but speaks like a dragon (Rev 13)

  3. Jim Baxter says:

    Every September, I recall that is more than half a century (62 years) since I landed at Nagasaki with the 2nd Marine Division in the original occupation of Japan following World War II. This time every year, I have watched and listened to the light-hearted “peaceniks” and their light-headed symbolism-without-substance of ringing bells, flying pigeons, floating candles, and sonorous chanting and I recall again that “Peace is not a cause – it is an effect.”

    In July, 1945, my fellow 8th RCT Marines [I was a BARman] and I returned to Saipan following the successful conclusion of the Battle of Okinawa. We were issued new equipment and replacements joined each outfit in preparation for our coming amphibious assault on the home islands of Japan.

    B-29 bombing had leveled the major cities of Japan, including Kobe, Osaka, Nagoya, Yokohama, Yokosuka, and Tokyo.

    We were informed we would land three Marine divisions and six Army divisions, perhaps abreast, with large reserves following us in. It was estimated that it would cost half a million casualties to subdue the Japanese homeland.

    In August, the A-bomb was dropped on Hiroshima but the Japanese government refused to surrender. Three days later a second A-bomb was dropped on the city of Nagasaki. The Imperial Japanese government finally surrendered.

    Following the 1941 sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, a Japanese admiral said, “I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant…” Indeed, they had. Not surprisingly, the atomic bomb was produced by a free people functioning in a free environment. Not surprisingly because the creative process is a natural human choice-making process and inventiveness occurs most readily where choice-making opportunities abound. America!

    Tamper with a giant, indeed! Tyrants, beware: Free men are nature’s pit bulls of Liberty! The Japanese learned the hard way what tyrants of any generation should know: Never start a war with a free people – you never know what they may invent!

    As a newly assigned member of a U.S. Marine intelligence section, I had a unique opportunity to visit many major cities of Japan, including Tokyo and Hiroshima, within weeks of their destruction. For a full year I observed the beaches, weapons, and troops we would have assaulted had the A-bombs not been dropped. Yes, it would have been very destructive for all, but especially for the people of Japan.

    When we landed in Japan, for what came to be the finest and most humane occupation of a defeated enemy in recorded history, it was with great appreciation, thanksgiving, and praise for the atomic bomb team, including the aircrew of the Enola Gay. A half million American homes had been spared the Gold Star flag, including, I’m sure, my own.

    Whenever I hear the apologists expressing guilt and shame for A-bombing and ending the war Japan had started (they ignore the cause-effect relation between Pearl Harbor and Nagasaki), I have noted that neither the effete critics nor the puff-adder politicians are among us in the assault landing-craft or the stinking rice paddies of their suggested alternative, “conventional” warfare. Stammering reluctance is obvious and continuous, but they do love to pontificate about the Rights that others, and the Bomb, have bought and preserved for them.

    The vanities of ignorance and camouflaged cowardice abound as license for the assertion of virtuous “rights” purchased by the blood of others – those others who have borne the burden and physical expense of Rights whining apologists so casually and self-righteously claim.

    At best, these fakers manifest a profound and cryptic ignorance of causal relations, myopic perception, and dull I.Q. At worst, there is a word and description in The Constitution defining those who love the enemy more than they love their own countrymen and their own posterity. Every Yankee Doodle Dandy knows what that word is.

    In 1945, America was the only nation in the world with the Bomb and it behaved responsibly and respectfully. It remained so until two among us betrayed it to the Kremlin. Still, this American weapon system has been the prime deterrent to earth’s latest model world- tyranny: Seventy years of Soviet collectivist definition, coercion, and domination of individual human beings.

    The message is this: Trust Freedom. Remember, tyrants never learn. The restriction of Freedom is the limitation of human choice, and choice is the fulcrum-point of the creative process in human affairs. As earth’s choicemaker, it is our human identity on nature’s beautiful blue planet and the natural premise of man’s free institutions, environments, and respectful relations with one another. Made in the image of our Creator, free men choose, create, and progress – or die.

    Free men should not fear the moon-god-crowd oppressor nor choose any of his ways. Recall with a confident Job and a victorious David, “Know ye not that you are in league with the stones of the field?”

    Semper Fidelis
    Jim Baxter
    Sgt. USMC
    WW II and Korean War

    Job 5:23 Proverbs 3:31 I Samuel 17:40

    http://www.choicemaker.net/

Comments are closed.