View Single Post
      09-18-2006, 04:29 AM   #56
NFS
Major General
NFS's Avatar
United Kingdom
195
Rep
9,218
Posts

Drives: M340i
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pawarrant
Isn't the goal of the Islamic facists to create a Caliphate?
Bit of history for you:

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ISLAM/CALIPH.HTM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate

I am not really sure why you asked the question here ... I am sure that there are many muslims who would like to see a new muslim empire as the dominant world power.

The idea of Islamic Facists is an interesting one. Beyond it's power as a political soundbite do you think it has any real meaning?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamofascism

I find it interesting that this phrase has recently been adopted by Bush. Interesting and smart on his part, because of the way it links the Islamic Extremists to far right organisations - like the Nazi party - despite the fact that the two are quite dissimilar.

In August 2006 in the aftermath of the arrest in Britain of people suspected of plotting to bomb planes travelling to the US, George Bush described the fight against terrorists as a battle against "Islamic fascists... will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom". The Council on American-Islamic Relations wrote to him to complain, saying that the use of the term "feeds the perception that the war on terror is actually a war on Islam".

Does Islamic Facism include Islamic Fundamentalism and in doing so does it have a wider meaning than Islamic Extremists.

Is it possible to be a fundamentalist - but not an extremist? Or did that cease to be legitimate after 911?

I would make the point that I am arguing about language and it's power here. My personal views are that any religious fundamentalism is an extremely bad thing, because it lacks tolerance and it impedes freedom.