Why I'm not a terrorist

[WinterHold]

A terrorist is a person who uses terrorism as means to reach a goal.
Which is a bad thing because usually people die due to this terrorist act.

In here; I'm not discussing terrorism practiced by parents as a raising tactic; neither am I discussing terrorism practiced by humans to discipline kittens into obedient pets.
I'm discussing fatal type of terrorism, that take place through "armed attacks", with intention to spread fear through murder.

An example for this type of terrorism, is the American nuclear bombing of Japan, also the ancient Jewish "Sicarii" who used to kill Roman citizens,  also the Ottomans who used impaling as an execution method.

Here; I cite why I'm not a terrorist.

I believe in the religion of Islam. In the Quran; the source book of the religion that contains the literal word of God, I'm ordered to be peaceful towards any person peaceful towards me:

Sura 8, The Quran:
( 60 )   And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.
( 61 )   And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.

By the Godly command in verse 61, Sura 8, I must incline to peace with anybody inclining to peace.
It's forbidden on me, to fight that who doesn't fight me.

For example, the normal mainstream citizens of the city of New York. I don't see them fighting me; actually I'm even allowed to pray in their city.

Making terrorism, by verse 61 in Sura 8, a forbidden act. You can ask any terrorist justifying his/her terrorism through Islamic reasons: what is your answer to verse 61, of Sura 8?

The people who died in 9/11 for example. Were they fighters? to my knowledge it's a civilian place that even had Muslims inside it !
But, a Muslim should "PREPARE" whatever he can, to keep attackers and foes away from harming him/her; "PREPARE"; not attack with daggers like the Sicarii. "PREPARE".

That's why I'm not a terrorist.
Islam NEVER calls for terrorism against the innocent.

Sura 8, Verse 61.

[AFTT47]

A terrorist is a person who uses terrorism as means to reach a goal.
Which is a bad thing because usually people die due to this terrorist act.

In here; I'm not discussing terrorism practiced by parents as a raising tactic; neither am I discussing terrorism practiced by humans to discipline kittens into obedient pets.
I'm discussing fatal type of terrorism, that take place through "armed attacks", with intention to spread fear through murder.

An example for this type of terrorism, is the American nuclear bombing of Japan...

You know what Atlas, GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!

Listen, I'll respect your viewpoint as well as anybody else's but you have to make a case for it if you're going to make an inflammatory remark like that.

What would you have had the U.S. government do in WWII? The Japanese attacked US, remember? They had lost the war at the point but they were NOT willing to agree to any terms of surrender at that point without such a dramatic event such as the nuclear attacks. I'll fully admit that those attacks were a human tragedy but the situation had been researched. If we were forced to attack the Japanese homeland in the conventional way in order to bring a close to the war, the body count would have been far worse. Look it up. What were we to do?

I'm not a fan of US (or any other kind of imperialism). Perhaps the US could have avoided the war in the first place with better behavior. History isn't my subject but as far far as I know, the Japanese of that era were evil bastards. I think we all needed to improve and still need to improve. But the Japanese brought their fate down upon themselves. The cost was high but they learned from their mistakes quite well. They rose again and this time became one of the most prominent and respected powers on the planet for peace.

[WinterHold]

A terrorist is a person who uses terrorism as means to reach a goal.
Which is a bad thing because usually people die due to this terrorist act.

In here; I'm not discussing terrorism practiced by parents as a raising tactic; neither am I discussing terrorism practiced by humans to discipline kittens into obedient pets.
I'm discussing fatal type of terrorism, that take place through "armed attacks", with intention to spread fear through murder.

An example for this type of terrorism, is the American nuclear bombing of Japan...

You know what Atlas, GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!

Thank you. But I don't want to touch my prostate gland in the meanwhile. My ass is....full of shit in the meanwhile.
I mentioned 2 other factions that carried on terrorism: the Jewish Sicarii and the Muslim Ottoman Pashas.

Listen, I'll respect your viewpoint as well as anybody else's but you have to make a case for it if you're going to make an inflammatory remark like that.

What would you have had the U.S. government do in WWII? The Japanese attacked US, remember? They had lost the war at the point but they were NOT willing to agree to any terms of surrender at that point without such a dramatic event such as the nuclear attacks. I'll fully admit that those attacks were a human tragedy but the situation had been researched. If we were forced to attack the Japanese homeland in the conventional way in order to bring a close to the war, the body count would have been far worse. Look it up. What were we to do?

I'm not a fan of US (or any other kind of imperialism). Perhaps the US could have avoided the war in the first place with better behavior. History isn't my subject but as far far as I know, the Japanese of that era were evil bastards. I think we all needed to improve and still need to improve. But the Japanese brought their fate down upon themselves. The cost was high but they learned from their mistakes quite well. They rose again and this time became one of the most prominent and respected powers on the planet for peace.

When ISIS blows up a location in the west, they make the same generalization you made in the bold part.
They generalize too; and take every westerner for the sins of the U.S army.

Because the U.S army bombed a neighborhood in Iraq; ISIS beheads a westerner, and accuse ALL WESTERNERS of being the American pilot that carried on the neighborhood bombing.

That is terrorism in a nutshell.

The Japanese army was evil, the Japanese army ALONE needed to be nuked. Not the civilians of Nagazaki and Hiroshima.
What is the sin of Japanese infants? do you claim that every bombed infant made their choice; or were even conscious and mature mentally at the time of bombing?

Your standards for definition are soaked in nationalism with all due respect. You don't take humans for their own personal deeds; you take humans for the deeds of others. That is called "double standards". With all due respect.

[Minimalist]

I'll accept your word that YOU are not a terrorist Atlas.  Your problem, whether or not you wish to face it, is that scumbags like bin Laden follow the same book that you do and reach different conclusions.

Religion is whatever anyone wants it to be and the shit that passes for holy "scripture" is most commonly poorly-written enough to be made to agree with them.

[WinterHold]

I'll accept your word that YOU are not a terrorist Atlas.  Your problem, whether or not you wish to face it, is that scumbags like bin Laden follow the same book that you do and reach different conclusions.

Religion is whatever anyone wants it to be and the shit that passes for holy "scripture" is most commonly poorly-written enough to be made to agree with them.

Justification for actions like terrorism and other brutal crimes (like stoning and killing of gays) is always a syndrome that accompanies the same people that use a certain method to dodge the verses: joining the Hadith books with the Quran. That's how they reach the "other conclusions" you mentioned.

The only way to reach the other conclusion, is to use the Hadith.

Bin Laden is a Sunni : he believes in Hadith.
Khomeini is a Shiite : he believes in Hadith.
The Sauds are Sunnies: they believe in Hadith.
Hezbollah is Shiite: they believe in Hadith.

The list goes on. All terrorists are either Sunni or Shiite.
The Hadith gives you the chance to recite a verse like the above; then say "BUT; the Hadith also said that infedels should be killed; even if peaceful".

With the Quran; it's the blue part only: there is no "BUT".
There is no red part.

[Catholic_Lady]

Well, i am glad you are not a terrorist lol.

[The Grand Nudger]

He's one bad seafood platter away from it, at most.

[WinterHold]

Well, i am glad you are not a terrorist lol.

---

He's one bad seafood platter away from it, at most.

I prefer beef.

[ignoramus]

Nobody play him AC/DC backwards! Or there goes the neighborhood!

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Atlas, you seem to be saying (correct me if I mistook your meaning) that you're not a terrorist because the Quran tells you not to be one. All well and good as far as it goes, but I find your reasoning troubling.  Are we to understand that if you were to lose your faith, you would be a terrorist?  Similarly, suppose that - at some point -you, without losing faith in the Quran as a whole, you were to come to a different interpretation of the verses mentioned. Would you then be opposed to terrorism?  If your faith is the sole reason you reject terrorism, then it is my sincerest wish the you remain steadfast and unchanging in your religious views. 

Personally, I reject terrorism because I been a victim of it and I've seen far too many innocents butchered for political gain. 

Boru