The Atlantic’s big Islam lie: What Muslims really believe about ISIS

[el_bryanto]

When you’re fractured and fragmented, it’s hard to root out a movement like ISIS, and even harder to rally together when the people on the other side are just as brutal. If not more so. Syrian President Bashar Assad and his Iranian backers have killed more people than the Islamic State has. It’s not an easy time to be Muslim, that’s for sure.

But for every deluded soul ISIS ensnares, or who seeks them out, countless more condemn them, oppose them, reject them or fight them. It’s beyond a stretch to argue that ISIS represents Islam, is grounded in Islam, or justified by Islam. That’s not to say they don’t claim religious mandates, or exploit religion to enable their savagery.

It’s that no one’s buying it.

Just ask Muslims the world over. Imagine that: actually talking to and hearing out 1.5 billion people who live, identify with and practice this religion. From Sunni to Shi’a, secular to conservative, Islamist to liberal, autocratic to democratic, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and his doppelganger of a Caliphate have united the Muslim world like no one else has – against them.

From an article by Haroon Moghul. Worth reading, in my opinion.

Bryant

[whatthehey]

1. So Muslims are fans of the good old NTS too?

Just like we have people telling us Pat Robertson and Bryan Fischer aren't real Christians despite their consistent advocacy for and support from Christians in huge numbers

[el_bryanto]

3. I'm not sure you read the article. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. I found the Atlantic article interesting and informative but took issue with the generality.

Both the Quran and the Bible have all sorts of bloodthirsty ideals contained in their writings. Do most Christians, Muslims, Jews, adhere to those ideals and are willing to carry them out?

Of course not.

I still believe, in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart. Anne Frank

[closeupready]

4. I knew that article was nonsense.

[CJCRANE]

5. It's an interesting article and more balanced than the Atlantic article

but I'd like to know how many of the Isis grunts are foreign fighters. I'm not convinced that it's an indigenous movement.

[riderinthestorm]

10. Agreed. There's a heavy foreign contingent that this article doesn't mention at all.

And that foreign contingent of ISIS renders many of his points moot unfortunately.

[Warpy]

76. You can bet the foreign fighters are thrown out first

to take the brunt of any counterattack, saving the hard core of old Baathists and religious nuts to do the real fighting.

[snooper2]

6. polls have been done FYI-

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_-_Shariah



Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html



World Public Opinion: 61% of Egyptians approve of attacks on Americans
32% of Indonesians approve of attacks on Americans
41% of Pakistanis approve of attacks on Americans
38% of Moroccans approve of attacks on Americans
83% of Palestinians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (only 14% oppose)
62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose)
42% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (45% oppose)
A minority of Muslims disagreed entirely with terror attacks on Americans:
(Egypt 34%; Indonesia 45%; Pakistan 33%)
About half of those opposed to attacking Americans were sympathetic with al-Qaeda’s attitude toward the U.S.
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

[Rhinodawg]

9. I think that's ..... ISLAMOPHOBIA !!

Gee whiz

[snooper2]

11. I find all religions equally ridiculous

Islam just happens to have a greater foothold in governments around the World-

When you govern based on mythological creatures and thought processes from thousands of years ago your societies are going to fail.

[closeupready]

15. Correct. Which helps explain how the Soviet Union won the Cold War.

[Mariana]

83. Did the Soviet Union's opponents in the Cold War

govern based on mythological creatures and thought processes from thousands of years ago?

[Violet_Crumble]

36. Are you aware that wikislam is run on servers owned by an anti-Muslim hate group?

From the wikislam site: 'WikiIslam was created on October 27, 2005, in collaboration with various individuals from Faith Freedom International who provided the site with server space, technical help and exposure.'

Faith Freedom's listed as a hate site at the Southern Poverty Law Centre, and for good reason.

http://www.splcenter.org/node/3502/activegroups

I won't post the URL of the hate site here, but you should google it and take a look. From Pam Geller to articles like 'Betrayal Papers: Under Obama The US Captured by the Muslim Brotherhood' it stinks of that same sickly smell that other hate sites have.

So I'm not understanding why in response to the OP here that quite rightly pointed out that many, many Muslims are opposed to ISIS by posting unsourced graphs from some wiki set up by anti-Muslim nutters. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt when it comes to knowing its connection to a hate group, but why did you feel the need to go searching for something to dispute the obvious fact that most Muslims are opposed to ISIS?

[m-lekktor]

37. I see a source name for the graphs you say are unsourced.

it says Pew Research Center Q108B-d right under "Views for Harsh Punishment" graph.

[Violet_Crumble]

39. So that's all you took out of what I said in my post?

Ignore the hate site part and just focus on one word? If that's a legit graph, it should be shown in its context and not be linked to at sites that are associated with and hosted by hate groups.

I hope you'd agree with me that sites run by anti-Muslim hate groups shouldn't be welcome at DU?

[muriel_volestrangler]

41. Was all you took out of post #6 the URL on which some of the data was linked to?

Ignore the desires of hundreds of millions to kill apostates and adulterers, as shown by a reputable international polling company, and just focus on one URL? What you said in your post was designed to get people to ignore the graphs. Your false contention that they were 'unsourced' was at the heart of your post.

It is a legit graph. Since the topic is the opinions of Muslims about the incredibly violent ISIS, then violent opinions held by hundreds of Muslims around the world are worth discussing.

[Violet_Crumble]

42. Uh, yeah. And that's because it's a hate site.

What I said in my post was pointing out it's a fucking hate site. And just like any other hate site, it shouldn't be welcome at DU. You disagree, that's yr problem, not mine.

So, would you react the same way if the site was Stormfront and they'd used a jpg taken from a legit survey?

[Fred Sanders]

19. Graphs without meaning. Propaganda. How about the majority of Christians not believing in evolution? Or

talking about being President of the Free World because God, the Christian one I presume, told them so?

The Apocolypse, the End Times, Maria Law, slavery, the KKK...signally out one religion for scorn is.....interesting.

You want some graphs?

[Rhinodawg]

22. Ok...I'll take you up on that offer.

How about Christians who believe in the death penalty for those who leave Christianity ?

Please don't pretend you didn't see this post...you said you would offer some graphs !

[cherokeeprogressive]

23. I. Want. Some. Graphs. You offered, I accept. Show me the graphs. Graphs I say!

[Fred Sanders]

24. Show me yours first. Maybe after you get over your sentence structure problem.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Yeah that's what I thought.

[Fred Sanders]

26. Number 20 on my Full Ignore List. Congrats.

[cherokeeprogressive]

27. If my posts offend you...

They're perfect.

[Adsos Letter]

32. !

[cherokeeprogressive]

34. Truth be known... I'm crushed. No one at DU has ever put me on their ignore list. Ever.

I couldn't tell you how to ignore another DUer... I've never even researched it.

A little part of me died when Fred said I was on his ignore list. The fart I issued while standing on top of a windy mountain died... and I'm crushed.

[Rhinodawg]

29. Still waiting for my graph.

How about Christians who believe in the death penalty for those who leave Christianity ?

[Violet_Crumble]

38. While yr waiting I've got a question for you...

I'm curious to know if you read the article in The Atlantic that this article seems to be disputing parts of?

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

That article was incredibly long, but gave a great insight into what ISIS are and what their end game is. It also discussed the folly of claiming they're not real Muslims because that's exactly the attitude ISIS has towards several billion Muslims around the world who haven't removed themselves from the states they live in and flocked to this caliphate ISIS is trying to create. ISIS thinks they're not real Muslims and we all know that means a death sentence for them at the hands of ISIS.

What made that article so good was that it didn't take the simpleton approach I've seen from some Americans who don't understand ISIS, don't understand the Middle East, and who think sites like religionofpeace.com is the TRUTH!! It explained why ISIS act the way they do and pointed out that neglecting to understand what drives them is a big mistake.

One of the things I took from it, and I know you won't agree on given yr posting history at DU, is that while ISIS are Muslims, trying to connect mainstream Muslims throughout the world with them is an ugly and dishonest thing to do. Especially as the majority of victims of ISIS so far have been Muslims.

So if you haven't read that article, you really should.

[Rhinodawg]

57. I read part of it..and it is long.

will try to read all.

[Violet_Crumble]

104. It's worth reading...

I got a bit fidgety and fatigued just after the halfway point, but I was glad I stuck it out to the end. If yr like me and are a bit time poor bookmark it and just do it in smaller chunks...

[Rhinodawg]

33. Ok...I will give you a out...

Post any graph you want that shows how Christianity leads to innocent death in today's world,

Not some graph from a hundred years ago.

[brush]

52. Not a graph, but how about Bush's invasion of Iraq . . .

and the million Iraqis killed in that war?

Bush, kowtowing to the religious right in his party, talked about his "faith" all the fu_king time and we know his faith is Christianity.

[DanTex]

54. Was gonna post the same thing.

Bush is a born-again Christian. Republicans wouldn't get elected if not for Christian fundamentalists in the US.

And then there's Erik Prince and blackwater:

To that end, Mr. Prince intentionally deployed to Iraq certain men who shared his vision of Christian supremacy, knowing and wanting these men to take every available opportunity to murder Iraqis. Many of these men used call signs based on the Knights of the Templar, the warriors who fought the Crusades.

Mr. Prince operated his companies in a manner that encouraged and rewarded the destruction of Iraqi life. For example, Mr. Prince's executives would openly speak about going over to Iraq to "lay Hajiis out on cardboard." Going to Iraq to shoot and kill Iraqis was viewed as a sport or game. Mr. Prince's employees openly and consistently used racist and derogatory terms for Iraqis and other Arabs, such as "ragheads" or "hajiis."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/08/erik_prince_and_the_last_crusa

[brush]

64. Good stuff in your post. The terms "raghead", "gooks" and others . . .

referring people of color we have attacked certainly come out of our allegedly Christian culture.

[snooper2]

49. are we not getting any graphs?

[Fred Sanders]

50. Since you are now on Ignore, number 22.....no.

[snooper2]

51. so you admit you don't know what you are talking about

sweet!

[Rhinodawg]

56. With all due respect, sir...

Your exact words were "You want some graphs?"

I politely said yes.

I'm politely waiting.

[Rhinodawg]

106. It might be useful just to admit you lied.

What I cant figure out if you hate Christianity or are willing to overlook injustices of women and gays by islamism.

[brush]

53. See post #53. nt

[Donald Ian Rankin]

7. I think the article it purports to rebut is more worth reading.

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

Haroon's article is a fairly boilerplate piece of no-true-Scotsmanism, and I think his narrative of where ISIS comes from is less plausible and insightful than Wood's (although his point about levels of support for ISIS in the Islamic world bears repeating).

[MellowDem]

8. So the author knows what a "true" Muslim is...

Etc. etc. The same logical fallacy used over and over.

All the Altantic article does is point out that Islam is a factor, and that Islam does endorse heinous shit, so ISIS does have legitimacy as one interpretation of Islam. Of course other Muslims may disagree, but that's the breaks of identifying with a belief system with such hateful shit explicitly in its texts.

As for Muslins in general, polling has shows hundreds of millions support violence, misogyny and bigotry, all explicitly in the texts, and even if their view of Islam doesn't match exactly with ISIS, all that terrible shit is still there and should be reckoned with.

All the Abrahamic faiths are explicitly violent, condone slavery, misogyny, homophobia, etc on their texts.

They never had to answer for it because of the power and privilege they hold. People can identify with these bigoted belief systems for culture and tradition while not answering for the shit they identify with. It's intellectually dishonest, and I'm sick of this religious privilege constantly shielding these terrible ideas from the criticism they deserve.

[riderinthestorm]

12. This is "no true Scotsman" applied to ISIS

The article also doesn't even touch on the universal appeal of ISIS' version of Islam evidenced by the flood of foreigners.

The message of apocalyptic end times is remarkably attractive, the punishments as outlined in Sharia Law, the enslavements, etc - I note the author of this rebuttal also dares not address these individual points from the original Atlantic article. Just a blanket "that's not Islam" disclaimer

[CJCRANE]

14. It's not universal appeal if it only appeals to 0.001% of the target population

but taken out of nearly a couple of billion that still amounts to tens of thousands. With social media it makes it much easier to recruit suitable psychopaths and criminals from all over the world.

I heard an interview with an Iraqi girl who said the reason the Sunnis allowed Isis into their cities was because they thought it was a revolution like the Arab Spring. They didn't know that Isis wanted to implement sharia with no smoking, no alcohol etc etc. She said there isn't much they can do it about it now because Isis are so brutal.

[riderinthestorm]

17. Yeah, poor word choice. I guess I was trying to explain its attractiveness

internationally with the large numbers of foreign fighters. The apocalyptic meme transcends many different cultures and versions of Islam.

I was writing during a brief break and didn't do nuance well in my hurry...

[CJCRANE]

18. That's okay. We're all trying to figure this thing out

and bring different pieces to the puzzle.

[Violet_Crumble]

40. Thanks for clarifying. I agree about its appeal to foreign fighters...

Some of the ones from here who've gone over there to join up with ISIS have been recent converts to Islam. I'm wondering if they're like some militant former smokers or over the top zealoted converts to other religions who dial up the crazy meter to 11 on a scale of 10. In the case of the ones being drawn to ISIS, it'd be interesting to know how many are honestly into that end times crap that ISIS believes, and how many think of ISIS as a free ticket to carry out mass murder and other sick things.

[hifiguy]

20. Yep. You hit it squarely on the head.

Brutalizing other human beings has always had a great appeal to the insane, particularly to the religulously insane. Since they're doing the will of their imaginary skydaddy no atrocity or barbarism is beyond the pale.

[salin]

13. both are worth reading

The Atlantic piece offers some philosophical insights. This piece points out some grains of salt to hold onto regarding the first piece.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. This is rebutting a strawman, and throwing in the No True Scotsman argument

The Atlantic article did not claim that ISIS was a typical interpretation of Islam, or the only one. It explicitly denied that. What it tried to do was explain what ISIS believes, and that is basically an attempt to recreate the 7th century as it sees it from the Quran and hadith. That means a fighting, expanding caliphate that is OK with slavery, and expects an apocalyptic battle with the 'Romans', roughly in northern Syria.

He claims ISIS is not grounded in Islam. It is. It just ignores the last 1300 years or so of Islam.

[Fred Sanders]

28. So you could be like the KKK, "grounded" in Christianity yet still able to ignore 14 centuries of Christianity?

So how could they be Christians representing Christian ideals and a murderous vision of society - just by saying so?

ISIS and the KKK are truly grounded in murder, crime and evil, cloaking it all with religion.


Have you listened to anything Obama has said in his two speeches on all this?

[muriel_volestrangler]

30. I think the KKK is only ignoring 150 years of general Christianity

Hatred of blacks was acceptable to several US denominations up until the civil war. But, yes, sects don't have to follow the consensus of a large religion to still be part of that religion. Schism is a long tradition in religion (though probably not honourable).

Since you added some more:

The KKK regard black people as an inferior race. Some (I don't know if the KKK specifically does this) have claimed Biblical justification for this (Mormons had a similar inbuilt racism until fairly recently, though they didn't get violent or put burning crosses everywhere). The KKK isn't murderous to everyone - they like and help white protestants. ISIS kill many, but want to build an Islamic society, with their vision of what Mohammed's example was. He was a war leader, and they've gone with 'war'.

I've seen some excerpts of what Obama has said, and I find him unconvincing on this.

[Fred Sanders]

31. I wish more folks would listen to Obama's two detailed non-sound bite speeches on this. Truly enlightening.

[Fred Sanders]

43. No idea about who Mohammed was, do you?...... No idea. Defending the KKK because they do bake sales?

You find your party's leader and President Obama unconvincing in his two recent speeches.....pray tell, what part? Transcripts are available.

Generalities are what are not convincing.

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. I have plenty of idea about Mohammed

He was a war leader.

Fuck knows where you've pulled "defending the KKK because they do bake sales" from - who the fuck are you talking about? I said they're racist and murderous, so obviously I'm not defending them.

My party's leader? Hard to say what 'my party' is at the moment, but, if anything, it's these guys: http://www.libdems.org.uk/ What are you saying about Nick Clegg?

I have not been convinced by what Obama has said; when he says "we are at war with people who have perverted Islam", I think that's inaccurate; ISIS is a throwback to the earliest stages of Islam, when war was typical for them, expanding rapidly across the Middle East and North Africa, and being OK with slavery. But hundreds of millions of present-day Muslims support death for adulterers and apostates. The undercurrent of religion-based violence remains for a significant number of Muslims around the world. ISIS are the extreme version of it.

[Fred Sanders]

45. Correction. A skewed idea. ISIS are murderers who usurp religion. What more detail do you need?

And if you do know who your party is.....why are you here, because the site mission is fairly clear?

If you do not agree with Obama you are agreeing with Republicans and Fox who want a Holy War.

Although I have to say using vulgarity always helps with the argument - bravo.

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. Are the hundreds of millions wanting the sharia death penalty for adultery 'usurping' too?

You are putting forward a 'No true Scotsman' argument; President Obama edges towards it, but you are grabbing it with enthusiasm.

I am here because I have an interest in American politics, and the "site mission" allows people from outside the USA with similar politics to the Democrats to be members. The Liberal Democrats are indeed quite similar to the US Democratic Party (they were completely against the invasion of Iraq, so they're better in that respect).

"If you do not agree with Obama you are agreeing with Republicans and Fox who want a Holy War. "

Nonsense. Complete rubbish. That's a silly "you're either with us or against us" taunt. What I said is Obama's description of them as 'a perversion of Islam' is unconvincing. I pointed out the violent attitudes of hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, but you haven't even tried to think about that, let alone argue about it - instead you come up with the false "if you don't think like me, you're a Republican" stupidity.

[Fred Sanders]

48. You point out something about yourself for sure and it is not what you think it is. Violent attitudes...sheesh.

Check out the violent attitudes right in America first before going overseas searching for more.

Clear enough, you think President Obama is the one that is wrong, his critics are correct...and we know who they are....

My work here is done.

[CJCRANE]

55. You're using the same "they're coming to get us" argument that the extremists use.

Just look up "Anjem Choudary", he seems to be the guy linked to a lot of convicted terrorists and also a big inspiration for the Isis freaks.

[muriel_volestrangler]

58. No, I have not said anything about people 'comign to get us', or about being a danger

I am arguing about attitudes to killing for actions that aren't crimes in secular societies, like apostasy and adultery, that are held by many Muslims around the world (I didn't say they would do it to us - look at the countries I listed at the link). I am pointing out that ISIS's frequent killing of people for apostasy is one end of a spectrum of Islamic attitudes that is not that distant from a common view among hundreds of millions of Muslims.

Why should I look up Anjem Choudary? When you bring him up, it looks like you are the one falling into the "they're coming to get us" mindset, since he's in the same country as me, and you bring up his links to terrorists.

[CJCRANE]

60. Because he's a particular individual

Who's behind a lot of the indoctrination.

My pointing out an individual is the opposite of broad brush. That would seem obvious.

[muriel_volestrangler]

61. I didn't realise this discussion involved any 'broad brushes'

so I still can't see why you think I need to think or post about Choudary more than I do. Why did you bring him up? Are you saying that he has indoctrinated most of the ISIS supporters in the whole world? Are you saying it's his project?

[CJCRANE]

62. He is one of the main mouthpieces of their philosophy.

He is also connected to many of the recent terror attacks in the west and abroad.

[muriel_volestrangler]

63. But I still can't see why you think I need to read more about him

or why he belongs in this conversation. Can you be clearer?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

35. Are you aware of the fact that Martin Luther King was a Christian preacher?

[Dreamer Tatum]

21. When exactly did "I disagree" get replaced by "You're LYING?"

I am so sick of people howling "LIE" when they really mean "DISAGREE."

[el_bryanto]

46. Well it's the age of the click. The Website and the author both want that article to be read

Calling someone a liar, presumably, is going to drive more clicks than simply saying that they disagree.

Bryant

[LittleBlue]

59. The Atlantic piece is brilliant

It wasn't an attack on Islam. Should be required reading for anyone who really wants to understand Isis.

[el_bryanto]

67. How many muslims do you believe want to set people on fire?

[el_bryanto]

69. OK - seems like you have some issues you need to work out. nt

[WinkyDink]

70. You know, we didn't buy the "good Germans" claim, and we certainly showed no mercy to Japanese

civilians.

[el_bryanto]

71. Well you make a good point - if ISIS becomes the official rulers of a nation

than I think that nation gets what it deserves. But I'm pretty sure that hasn't happened, has it?

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

74. Nods - you really are all over the map.

What nation do they control?

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

77. OK - what are you really upset about

Are you arguing that we should treat all the people in that red area as enemy combatants and bomb the hell out of them? Or are you mad because of a discussion I didn't participate in on Feminism?

[el_bryanto]

79. Nods - well - I don't think you really understand either the article I posted

If you think it's point was that ISIS isn't problem.

If you want to debate about how we are losing certain voters by not kowtowing to them enough than go ahead and start a thread about that.

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

81. It would depend on the context - has anybody suggested we target men for assassination?

In general? Or when you are talking about broad brush smears is it more - women should be careful around men because you can't tell just by looking who might be a rapist?

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

84. Well there you go

Hey you know that Gamergate was total bullshit from beginning to end right? Just an excuse for men to harass women for expressing opinions they don't like?

Anybody who starts talking about journalistic ethics in relation to Gamergate is just full of shit.

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

86. Well as some one desperately concerned at poor benighted men of this world

i just assume you really hated those uppity women who spoke out.

I guess that's not your bag.

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

88. In fairness I"m not really trying; it's clear that you are just going around trying to derail thread

to move them to your preferred subject; we shouldn't suggest that men might be rapists.

Bryant

[el_bryanto]

91. Yes and I'm fine with being outed as generally supporting feminist positions on things. nt

[el_bryanto]

96. The context of the article you pointed out

is different the context of the article I posted

The article is reacting to some apparently confusion at Yale and in the Catholic Church about what constitutes rape; the PSA is reacting to that by providing a simple definition of rape.

The article above is about Islam being tarred with the brush of ISIS. Two different contexts, so two different responses.

I'll also note that I didn't actually participate in that PSA discussion, so I'm not sure why you came after me. I do think that rape is a serious problem, and I do think that there needs to be more, not less, rape awareness in our society. Too often rapists get away with it, and too often, women who report rapes are treated poorly by the system that should be trying to protect them. Again, if you a problem with that, well I'm ok with that.

Bryant

[Violet_Crumble]

103. 'Depends on the context' is a big hint there's double standards about to be displayed...

'Depends on the context' my arse. You hit the nail on the head. If it's not okay to say to be careful round Muslims because you can't tell just by looking at them who might start lopping off people's heads or shoot up shops and synagogues, then it's also not okay to say to be careful around men because you can't tell by looking at them who might be a rapist. I know and you know that it's not okay to say that sort of broadbrush stuff about any group, but I suspect that anyone who argues it's okay to do it to one group but not another is doing a double standard thing...

[Quantess]

89. Religion is just plain stupidity.

No getting around it.

[el_bryanto]

92. So what do you think of religious people? nt

[Quantess]

98. And why not?

If someone actually believes the stupid shit their religion says, no matter what religion it is, then they are kind of dumb.

[Quantess]

95. I think of religious people as stuck to the ways they were taught.

I myself am agnostic, so I differentiate myself as being possibly spiritual without believing in some man-made, invented religion.

[kwassa]

100. This article is a very poor non-rebuttal of the Atlantic piece, which is vastly better.

This author addresses virtually none of the content in the Atlantic piece, or even explain clearly why he thinks the Atlantic article lies. I am at a loss as to why you recommend this. Did you read the complete Atlantic article?

I am not saying I agree with everything in the Atlantic article, but it is a very interesting piece of work, and substantiated point of view, about the source of ISIS ideology.

[onecaliberal]

101. Sadly they overwhelmingly favor sharia law which would also

Favor killing you if you fail to convert.

[Violet_Crumble]

102. So if there's Sharia courts anywhere, people are killed for failing to convert?

Learn something new every day!

[onecaliberal]

108. They don't need a court to decide. Do you not believe your own lying eyes?

Is there something your missing about what they overwhelming believe.

[Violet_Crumble]

110. There's one thing I'm sure not missing

It's that there's a lot of Americans who aren't muslims who appear to promote themselves as some sort of experts on sharia and appoint themselves spokespeople for what the overwhelming majority of muslims believe. Jihadwatch and religionofpeafe.com are go to sites for that sort of thing.

Was it really necessary to quote crappy Eagles song titles in ur post? Now I've got that song running through my head.

[Fred Sanders]

107. The Atlantic has been fooled by ISIS propaganda repeatedly lately....must hurt...so they lash out...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6256465

[Bluenorthwest]

109. Ok, forget about ISIS, are all of the Islamic nations that execute gay people also not representing

Islam, and if so when will the author of this piece point that out to them? This is a 'No True Scotsman' rebuttal of the far more balanced Atlantic piece.