141 children slaughtered in attack on school. I bet you can guess who did it

[Reub]

Have you noticed how many of these Islamist murderers are being called deranged these days? As if they aren't a part of an international existential movement.

Maybe that's secularism at play and the increasing recognization of how religious mysticism makes human beings deranged.

It seems to me that calling these individuals deranged is a way to minimize the true potential of the threat, which only increases it's potential.

[stone]

The problem with peaceful Muslim clerics speaking out is that they don't want to get their heads chopped off either. I believe that this can only be accomplished through brute government force, the kind that, sadly, leads to brutal dictatorships in some of the countries. People like the Shah of Iran and Egypt's Mubarak, both Western friendly dictators.

That may deter some, but still doesn't explain the universal silence.  There are plenty of examples of Catholic and Protestant clergy and laity speaking out and acting on their beliefs despite great personal risk.

"Deranged" is probably a good way to describe them, although it doesn't say why that might be the case.  Some of the acts by individuals could be attributed to mental illness; hyperreligiousity (and yes that's a medical term) is a prominent symptom of schizophrenia.  There are enough examples of this with just about any religion (like those two Mormon brothers in Utah who murdered a mother & baby and said that God had told them to do it) that you can't make too much of a few cases.

But you can't use that explanation for a group like the Taliban though.  This is where Muslim clerics could do a lot of good by speaking out against them.  They should hire some bodyguards like the Pope does, and get out there and speak up.

WiseOne, this link from the other thread seemed an example of just what you are saying we don't get enough of:-
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... ainst.html

More than 120 Muslim leaders and scholars have co-signed an open letter to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of ISIS, arguing the Islamic State caliphate's establishment and practices are not legitimate in Islam. The letter includes a technical point-by-point criticism of ISIS' actions and ideology based on the Quran and classical religious texts. From Religion News Service:

Even translated into English, the letter will still sound alien to most Americans, said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council of American-Islamic Relations, who released it in Washington with 10 other American Muslim religious and civil rights leaders.
“The letter is written in Arabic. It is using heavy classical religious texts and classical religious scholars that ISIS has used to mobilize young people to join its forces,”? said Awad, using one of the acronyms for the group. “This letter is not meant for a liberal audience.”?
The 18-page letter's thorough catalogue of the transgressions of ISIS "relies completely upon the statements and actions of followers of the ‘Islamic State’ as they themselves have promulgated in social media—or upon Muslim eyewitness accounts—and not upon other media," it says, a move meant to forestall criticism that ISIS has been misrepresented by Westerners. From the English translation of the letter:

The word ‘jihad’ is an Islamic term that cannot be applied to armed conflict against any other Muslim; this much is a firmly established principle...Moreover, there are two kinds of jihad in Islam: the greater jihad, which is the jihad (struggle) against one’s ego; and the lesser jihad, the jihad (struggle) against the enemy. 
In truth, it is clear that you and your fighters are fearless and are ready to sacrifice in your intent for jihad. No truthful person following events—friend or foe—can deny this. However, jihad without legitimate cause, legitimate goals, legitimate purpose, legitimate methodology and legitimate intention is not jihad at all, but rather, warmongering and criminality.
The letter is not the first instance of ISIS being denounced by Islamic scholars. The 21 senior clerics of Saudi Arabia labeled terrorism a "heinous crime" in a recent fatwa, or legal ruling, and the country has been increasingly vocal in its opposition to ISIS. The influential Sheikh Abdullah Bin Bayyah, a native of Mauritania who teaches in Saudi Arabia, issued a fatwa of his own condemning the establishment of a caliphate by force. Bin Bayyah's words—"We must declare war on war so the outcome will be peace upon peace"—were cited by President Obama in his speech on Wednesday to the United Nations General Assembly

[stone]

I believe that this can only be accomplished through brute government force, the kind that, sadly, leads to brutal dictatorships in some of the countries. People like the Shah of Iran and Egypt's Mubarak, both Western friendly dictators.

The goofy part of this logic IMO is that 9/11 was perpetrated by Saudis - an archetypal example of a country with a Western friendly dictator -just as you like.

[Reub]

Or we can just do it your way and just let them know that we mean them no harm.

[stone]

Reub, I'm really not at all sure quite what your view is. I don't want to mischaracterize you. Are you saying that Islam is an intrinsically demonic religion such that it is vital that Muslims do not have access to democracy and are kept oppressed? Is this just Arabs and Persians or does it also apply to Indonesians and Bangladeshis?

This demonization of over a billion people seems insane to me but have I just misunderstood you?

I just can't get my head around it. You generally come across as a level headed well meaning person. I have friends and workmates who are Muslim. I just struggle so much to tally it together.