IslamicBoard
Thread: Terrorist - but what is his religion?!?!????
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
S

S1aveofA11ah

Esteemed Member
Messages
183
Reaction score
30
Asalaamualaikum,

Recent news of a racisit who ran a long and well-planned terror campaign of hate mail including a fake bomb was typical of the mass-media of today. Absolutley no mention of his religion in any of the news reports I checked out.

However, if it was ANY Muslim doing anything like this the word ISLAM would be pasted all over the article with oxymoronic wording such as 'Islamic Terrorist' or 'Islamic Fanatic' and not 'Muslim Terrorist/Fanatic' as it should correctly be stated. No wonder the world is upside down.

I heard a statistic saying that something like 85% of all media reporting about Islam is in a negative light even though it is stated by leaders of countries that most Muslims do not follow the path of terrorism and are peaceful folk who contribute good to their various countries be it East or West. No wonder it is one of the most misunderstood religions.

Bad breeding bad and propaganda/brainwashing to the max!.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Fanatic39s-terror-campaign-of-hate.4156705.jp
 
Was his religion at all relevant to his crimes?

To demonstrate bias in the UK media you would need to provide evidence of terrorism cases where the terrorists happened to be muslim, that fact was trumpeted by the media, but it had no relevance whatsoever to their crimes. Can you?
 
Even if a muslim didn't relate religion to their crime.... his deen would still be mentioned
 
S1aveofA11ah said:
Asalaamualaikum,

Recent news of a racisit who ran a long and well-planned terror campaign of hate mail including a fake bomb was typical of the mass-media of today. Absolutley no mention of his religion in any of the news reports I checked out.

However, if it was ANY Muslim doing anything like this the word ISLAM would be pasted all over the article with oxymoronic wording such as 'Islamic Terrorist' or 'Islamic Fanatic' and not 'Muslim Terrorist/Fanatic' as it should correctly be stated. No wonder the world is upside down.

I heard a statistic saying that something like 85% of all media reporting about Islam is in a negative light even though it is stated by leaders of countries that most Muslims do not follow the path of terrorism and are peaceful folk who contribute good to their various countries be it East or West. No wonder it is one of the most misunderstood religions.

Bad breeding bad and propaganda/brainwashing to the max!.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Fanatic39s-terror-campaign-of-hate.4156705.jp
Click to expand...

If the perpetrator justifies his terrorists acts by citing his religion or if he is motivated by his religion then it is religious terrorism. If he does not, it can't be described as religious terrorism IMHO. For example, the PKK aren't Islamic terrorists. The PLO were also never historically described as Islamic terrorists, despite being Muslims.

The religion is only relevant if the perpetrator thinks it is relevant IMHO.
 
Last edited:
Aaron85 said:
You mean that black guy who shoot to people in USA petrol stations few years ago?
Click to expand...
:sl:
Yeah, everybody was speculating about him being some kind of 9/11-style terrorist because he was a Muslim, when he was really more of a black nationalist.

There was also a plane crash of an Egyptian plane. Because the pilots read Islamic prayers before they were killed, everybody was like 'ZOMG terrists!!!111!!!!!111111oneone! OMG ZOMG!!!'.
:w:
 
Fishman said:
:sl:
There was also a plane crash of an Egyptian plane. Because the pilots read Islamic prayers before they were killed, everybody was like 'ZOMG terrists!!!111!!!!!111111oneone! OMG ZOMG!!!'.
:w:
Click to expand...

Argh, I know!! I actually didn't even know about this until a few days ago, when I watched a doc. about it on TV! They were digging up all kinds of stuff about him and just trying to find a way to stick it to his being a muslim, or his crashing the plane on purpose. His daughter was sick, he was going to be fired for harassing women at a hotel, he was depressed, he said "Tawakaltu Ala Allah" (I place my trust in Allah) ELEVEN TIMES (omg 11 no wai! it must be a "special" number or something). People can be such morons sometimes.
 
Fishman said:
:sl:
Yeah, everybody was speculating about him being some kind of 9/11-style terrorist because he was a Muslim, when he was really more of a black nationalist.

There was also a plane crash of an Egyptian plane. Because the pilots read Islamic prayers before they were killed, everybody was like 'ZOMG terrists!!!111!!!!!111111oneone! OMG ZOMG!!!'.
:w:
Click to expand...
Actually most of the people I knew was betting on a white redneck because of the type of weapon they were using. We were shocked to see 2 black people because normally they don't go on planned killing sprees.
 
S1aveofA11ah said:
Asalaamualaikum,

Recent news of a racisit who ran a long and well-planned terror campaign of hate mail including a fake bomb was typical of the mass-media of today. Absolutley no mention of his religion in any of the news reports I checked out.

However, if it was ANY Muslim doing anything like this the word ISLAM would be pasted all over the article with oxymoronic wording such as 'Islamic Terrorist' or 'Islamic Fanatic' and not 'Muslim Terrorist/Fanatic' as it should correctly be stated. No wonder the world is upside down.

I heard a statistic saying that something like 85% of all media reporting about Islam is in a negative light even though it is stated by leaders of countries that most Muslims do not follow the path of terrorism and are peaceful folk who contribute good to their various countries be it East or West. No wonder it is one of the most misunderstood religions.

Bad breeding bad and propaganda/brainwashing to the max!.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/Fanatic39s-terror-campaign-of-hate.4156705.jp
Click to expand...
Actually if you read the independent, the guadrian, the ny times, and so on they never mention the religion of the person. They release the name and nationality that's it.
 
KAding said:
If the perpetrator justifies his terrorists acts on his religion or is motivated by his religion then it is religious terrorism. If he does not, it can't be described as religious terrorism IMHO. For example, the PKK aren't Islamic terrorists. The PLO were also never historically described as Islamic terrorists.

The religion is only relevant if the perpetrator thinks it is relevant IMHO.
Click to expand...

There is no such thing as an Islamic Terrorist. This is an oxymoron and is a known attempt to cause and spread hatred. Maybe you don't know - if not have a read of this for please: http://calltoislam.com/pdf/Nomenclature Of Deception - I'jaz Ibn Iftikhar.pdf.
 
Well usually when a bomber strikes he has a cause. IRA -Ireland. Tamils. -Sri Lanka etc etc

When these people strike they CLAIM it's for Islam. What are they supposed to say in the media? ''Oh he claims he's doing it for Islam, but he's not really'' or 'The Tamils claim they are doing it for Independence, but they're not''
 
AvarAllahNoor said:
You've never been in the ghetto then blud innit!
Click to expand...
I've been to the Ghettos of Detroit and Chicago quite often. When black people go on killing sprees it's out of emotion not calculation. Don't get me wrong you do get calculated hits but it's normally target at getting one person not to cause mass damage or to intimidate a community.
 
A Brazilian going on the rampage on UK streets to try and get foreign nationals out....I doubt he was smart enough to consider the irony in that.

At least the article mentioned he was a far right fanatic.

But I see the point of the original post, if he was a Muslim then his religion would've been mentioned, despite the fact the is not motiviated by religious reasons.

Case in point with Nick Reily, the media continues to hammer "Muslim Convert" in every single article they write about him, despite the fact that police havent even established a motive for his actions yet.
 
Goku said:
A Brazilian going on the rampage on UK streets to try and get foreign nationals out....I doubt he was smart enough to consider the irony in that.

At least the article mentioned he was a far right fanatic.

But I see the point of the original post, if he was a Muslim then his religion would've been mentioned, despite the fact the is not motiviated by religious reasons.

Case in point with Nick Reily, the media continues to hammer "Muslim Convert" in every single article they write about him, despite the fact that police havent even established a motive for his actions yet.
Click to expand...

If we take religion to mean 'a way of life' then everyone has a religion. Even someone who says they denounce all religions could be descrbied as 'religiously unreligious'. However, this man could have been following many ways of life e.g. Atheism. Its just more shame in the face of the blatant media campaign against Islam.
 
AvarAllahNoor said:
Well usually when a bomber strikes he has a cause. IRA -Ireland. Tamils. -Sri Lanka etc etc

When these people strike they CLAIM it's for Islam. What are they supposed to say in the media? ''Oh he claims he's doing it for Islam, but he's not really'' or 'The Tamils claim they are doing it for Independence, but they're not''
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what the media should do otherwise you are blatantly promoting the media to lie. You said yourseld these people CLAIM its for/from Islam and it is not. However the media use forms of wording like "Islamic terrorism" or "Islamic Terrorists" which confuses people easily. Further, like I said its an oxymoron.

They should use phrases like "done falsly in the name of Islam" or "done against the teachings of Islam" etc.