Would you consider Ilhan Omar as an Islamist?

You repeated several times in the discussions either with me or with Pisa that only an Islamist agenda within the US would be relevant, trying to counter-argument her ties to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which build the foundation of nowadays Islamism. Its the mother of all Islamist organizations, although they are propably no Islamists at all as long as they dont demand specifically the US to implement Sharia Law.

Its clear you wanna neglect the phenomenon as such with such a ridiculous definition.

 

Not sure an Islamist would be part of a party that promotes gay rights.

 

Stop with the childishness, and stop claiming I said something I didn't say. Enough already.

I said islamists want to create their caliphates, and impose sharia law, and if you didn't know that, then why are you even talking about this? Clearly you know nothing about the topic. Omar is a US law-maker and if she was an islamist she'd be pushing for sharia here in US (obviously). If he was in Germany, then she'd be doing it there. No one said anything about it being exclusive / specific to US. However, she actually speaks up against sharia law, so which tells me she is a muslim but not an islamist, but you can all her anything you want. Who could possibly care less.

 

You seem to suffer from the delusion you know anything about this topic whatsoever, you could be in the slightest be qualified to say anything about this not to talk about that you really think you are qualified to lesson me, which is so incredibly far away from reality there are no words to describe that.

You dont even remeber what you wrote, you didnt even mention the word "caliphate" in your "definition", which is becaused you just googled it and confuse it propably with something to eat.

A user here showed connection between the Muslim Brotherhood [the mother of all Islamist organization] to which you had nothing to reply than that the only relevant question is if she wants to implement Sharia law in the US, implying that even membership in the Muslim Brotherhood or any other Islamist organization no matter if MB, Al Quaida, ISIS or Boko Haram doesnt make you an Islamist as long as you dont demand openly to establish Sharia in the US.

So why dont you just read and educate yourself, before you even try to discuss this topic as your infantile and childish trials to establish nonsense definitions and criteria based on your lack of knowledge about that topic.

You have announced it dozens of times, so as you dont have anything to say about the topic, why dont you follow your own announcement and just leave! Yes, I will discuss it with other people as you ordered dozens of time as well. Just follow your own instructions and just leave! There is literally nothing you can bring in into a discussion about that topic.

 

Yea, sure. You too. Have a nice day.

I think pretty much anyone is qualified.

Oh, and learn to read, so others won't have to waste their time explaining everything to you five times over

 

Yes and thats the problem pretty much considerung the results.

Every thread in forums has a clown who announces in every comment how he doesnt care about the thread, that he will leave and leave the discussions alone etc. who will continue this stuff for even years. At least we know who has this role in the thread.

 

Isn't it funny how the clown is always in the mirror when you look?

 

Do you have a quote from Ilhan Omar saying that?
All groups have their radicals, including christians.

 

By this definition you gave of course they're very similar.
Both believe in the torment of hell for non believers of their religion.

According to the bible, no one gets to the Father except through Christ. IE, you don't believe in Christ you can't get to the Father.
RC and many protestant religions believe if one doesn't accept Christ, you spend eternity in hell.

Your definition posted and I reposted above show Islamist and Muslim are interchangeable.

 

No more "Omen" movies for you!

 

Nope.

There have been several different concepts of hell during the times in Christian theology, although - and that difference is crucial - the concept of hell doesnt as such not exist in the Bible. Beside other imaginations of hell e.g. the simple absence of God, the distance from God (afaik thats the Catholic mainstream interpretation) there exist as well hell-imaginations, there are some few Christian theologists who developed a similar understanding as in the Quran, that is however the exception and no one says that dangerous and fanatic Christians do not exist.

There exist e.g. African Christian militias wielding machetes and who are out to kill Muslims, they will never have a comparable back up by Christian mainstream as Islamic militias have from the Muslim world. And they must put the teachings of Jesus upside down to develop a theology that justifies their actions, while Mohammed was a war lord.

No, definitely not. Ilhan Omar e.g. denies the Armenian genocide to whitewash the perpetrators and although its terrifying how widespread this support is, you cannot say that every Muslim does it. Its terrifying how many Muslims agree with infidels being slaughtered, but not every Muslim goes after this hierarchy in the value of human beings. There are a lot of Muslims in Turkey, Egypt, and anywhere from North Africa to Indonesia who dont concur.

 

You can try to project things, in the end you are the one who will repeat again and again that he will ignore me, he wont discuss this anymore and he will leave the thread, emphazize he doesnt care whats written here; instead stick to this thread until its very end with comments like that.

I never announced to withdraw from the thread of course as its absolutely childish, if I wanna log out, I log out, simple as that. If I dont seek attention and make a drama, I will just not post anymore if I at some point decide its boring.

 

Answering Objections and Questions
1. The Bible does not teach “hell”—at least, not as an eternal hell!

The truth is that most of what we know of hell and its eternity comes from the lips of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. And he uses terms that are unequivocal. Pope St. John Paul II, in his book Crossing the Threshold of Hope, says it succinctly:

The words of Christ are unequivocal. In Matthew’s Gospel [Christ] speaks clearly of those who will go to eternal punishment (cf. Matt. 25:46).
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/what-is-hell

 

I had to google the exact statement as everyone else could, "hell" wasnt even mentioned there. There are famous Christian theologists/philosophs like Thomas Aquinas who introduced hell as a concept and there are Christian fundamentalists who believe in the inferiority of infidels, thus justifying killing them, but its completely wrong to summarize it as "Christians".

While its difficult to prove the point when it comes to protestants as many different schools have their own interpretation of the Bible for the Catholics its much easier, there is the Pope and his word is for them to be seen as God's word. It would be easy to prove if the Pope said infidels will go to hell and suffer eternal punishment like hellfire.

 

Of course it teaches hell. Be it under the name of 'eternal separation', 'lake of fire', second death', they all mean the same thing

 

Nothing is easy when it comes to religions.
They are all vague on purpose. Everyone can pick and choose whatever version suits their lifestyle and changes with a person lifestyle changes.
But hell is part of some christian religions. Eternal punishment.

 

In a simpler word - Yes .. but then again .. why not bring up her religion .. given her religion violates the Oath .. of Office.

 

No doubt in my mind she is. The anti-Semitism is enough to get me there.

They should look into what these people think about LGBT types it's a strange bedfellow for leftists to support transitioning kids but also Islam.

But they do view them as people of color even though Islam has nothing to do with color, and I've seen bits of Islam that really admires Muhammad's whiteness.

Rumble so they don't really have any values except for the West is bad Christianity is bad and the traditions therein are bad.

 

because she uses it to justify her antisemitism.

You should ask her about executing gays and if that's a good thing nobody asks because they don't want to hear the answer. And all but the trans crazies will absolutely boycott her.

No and I don't care about the Illuminati or the lizard people are all the imaginary Boogeymen.

 

If you do not embrace people of all race, religion or nationality in need then you are a chrisrian not a Christian.
If you have anger to anyone because of their personal lives such as gays, Muslims and straights then you are a christian not a Christian.
If you claim to be a Christian when in fact you are a christian I wish you would.learn how to be what you claim and stop spreading evil.
I've probably met more Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Atheists and Hindus who were Christians than I've met actual Christians claiming to be such and living the life as taught.

 

Nobody stated Christian fundamentalism doesnt exist. Its however not exactly the same as Islamism and the dimensions are completely different. Nevertheless even when it comes to Islam you cannot state a Muslim is an Islamist as such. As mentioned above there are a lot of Muslims who critizize ISIS not only for secterian reasons (e.g. Shii Islamists for whom they are infidels), but also the concept as such.

While e.g. Ilhan Omar tries to deny the Armenian genocide there are e.g. Turkish muslims who were in solidarity with the writer Hrant Dink and showed this in demonstrations after he was shot. There are Egypt media who strongly condemned e.g. beheadings of Christians or other religous minorities etc.

Ilhan Omar is on the side of Kashmir militants who attack these kind of moderate Muslims. Or in her words "so called militants".

 

The major difference between Christianity and Islam the Western world really is Christianity had a Renaissance. We went from just issuing biblical Justice to the idea maybe some people want to believe a different version of Christianity.

Common suggestion does far greater damage of public health so yeah they're not the same in the beginning they were quite similar.

I would go as far as to say at one point in human history Islam was more advanced than Christianity. But once the Western world reestablished Its trade routes and stepped out of the dark ages western expansion happened and a whole new hemisphere was discovered.

Oh God you can't really give that to Christianity because they were probably people checking and screaming about it the entire time.

It's from Muslims I drew a distinction between people and ideology because there is one the people who suffer the most from Islam are Muslims. When the 12 year old girls forced to marry her rapist that's a Muslim girl that is suffering because of Islam.

As far as your homework I said my piece about her.

 

Some people wouldn't recognize left-wing antisemitism if it bit their softer parts. Many on the left even deny that left-wing antisemitism exists. Sad.

Please explain why should I trust that Bridge thing. At least two of the Bridge members write for Al Jazeera, the well known propaganda rag of the Muslim Brotherhood friendly Qatari government. Of course they'd smear someone like Lorenzo Vidino.

Please point out anti-Muslim bigotry in Vidino's writings, if you can find it.

 

They are similar.
And based on the definition of Islamist you gave me, close enough.

She hardly comes off as some radical, if that is the angle you keep pushing for.

 

What do you mean with "comes off"? You mean she is in your opinion no Islamist bc she has a friendly smile?

I gave you four of her points of view in the OP. You cannot say its normal neither for Christians nor for non-radical Muslims to try to deny genocide, spread anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, try to deny that Islamic militants in Kashmir exist and terrorize civilians there, belittling 9/11 as "some people did something".