SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-34877069
Malian special forces have entered the Radisson Blu Hotel in Mali's capital, Bamako, to end a siege by gunmen who had been holding 170 people hostage. The gunmen stormed the US-owned hotel, which is popular with foreign businesses and airline crews, shooting and shouting "God is great!" in Arabic. Malian state TV is reporting that 80 people have now been freed. At least three people are reported to have been killed in the siege that started around 07:00 GMT. Six staff from Turkish Airlines were at the hotel when it was attacked, and a Chinese guest told China's state news agency Xinhua he was among about seven Chinese tourists trapped there. A French presidential source said French citizens were also at the Radisson Blu Hotel, Reuters news agency reports.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mali
Official languages: French
(Score: 4, Interesting) by SanityCheck on Friday November 20 2015, @02:45PM
The phrase is "Allahu Akbar," Allah is the word for God (according to some sources one of the God who was inside Kaaba), and the conjugated form "Allahu" means "Allah is" AFAIK. "Akbar" is meant to be "the Greatest," or the greatest among Gods, which is not an interpretation any Muslim will admit to.
Indeed he is supposedly the greatest at everything, he is also "the greatest deceiver" according to Quran. So by their own admission he could in fact be Satan, or Santa.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday November 20 2015, @03:23PM
The intended implication of that construction isn't that Allah is greater than all other gods, but rather that he's the greatest possible thing.
Literally the only statement of faith that's mandatory in Islam is stating "There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet." "Allahu Akbar" isn't some back door polytheistic belief, but rather you taking a literal translation of an Arabic statement as if the idea of "greatest" is somehow comparative, even though we use superlatives exactly the same way sometimes.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday November 20 2015, @06:11PM
Yes some people may feel it is not anti polytheistic, but there is evidence to the contrary.
Ask yourself: do Muslims believe there is only one God, or only one true God?
If they believe there is only one God, then surely the Jews and the Christians all worship the same God. In which case wtf, right? Why can't they get along with others who worship their deity.
It is already widely accepted among Muslims that Jesus of Nazareth was a true prophet of God and son in a figurative sense (as God created him), just not his son in a literal sense.
(Remember) when the angels said, “O Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him (God), whose name is the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, revered in this world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (to God). He will speak to the people from his cradle and as a man, and he is of the righteous.” She said, “My Lord, how can I have a child when no mortal has touched me?” He said, “So (it will be). God creates what He wills. If He decrees a thing, He says to it only, ‘Be!’ and it is.” (Quran, 3:45-47)
This would mean they do believe in one God, they just take affront to the people who don't worship their God the same way, or who pretend there are other Gods, but are in fact worshiping Satan (see hatred of Yazidis). But there is evidence that they do believe that Allah is not the only God.
Will ye call upon Baal and forsake the Best of Creators, [Quran: 37:125, Yusuf Ali] (for a "good time" visit here [quran.com])
And of course:
Or is it that thou askest them for some recompense? But the recompense of thy Lord is best: He is the Best of those who give sustenance. [Quran: 23:72, Yusuf Ali]
Of course Quran is a decent sized book, surely you can find parts that contradict others, just like in all religious texts. And I concede your interpretation is in line with a lot of what I have read.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Friday November 20 2015, @06:36PM
Are you going to tell me that you cannot understand why people who ought to get along don't because of stupid trivial differences in their beliefs?
Have you met people?
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Friday November 20 2015, @06:52PM
Yes of course, I was being facetious.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday November 20 2015, @08:41PM
Don't forget the 99 names of Allah, [wikipedia.org] which inspired a short lived comic book! [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 21 2015, @01:18AM
Don't forget the 99 names of Allah, which inspired a short lived comic book!
I always preferred The Nine Billion Names of God [downlode.org] myself.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by BK on Sunday November 22 2015, @06:17PM
Look, I killed Baal! [wikipedia.org] Then, just to be sure, I killed him another 5362 times. And every time he was carrying more shit.
...but you HAVE heard of me.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday November 20 2015, @03:37PM
I wonder if Isaiah 9:6's "He shall be called [...] Mighty God [...]" is (an English rendering, sometimes "Almighty", of) a Hebrew equivalent, as that's an absolute rather than a comparitive like "mightier" or "mightiest".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Troll) by jmorris on Friday November 20 2015, @04:11PM
Let us be judgemental. We are dealing with a religion where lying is considered moral, buggering children is 'part of their culture' and murder and war is a way of life. How obvious does Evil have to be before we in the West can say what is self evidently true and call it out?
There will be no peace between us. Ever. If we, at great expense in blood and treasure, beat them down and force them to submit we will have a short period without violence while they regroup and rearm. We must ban them from our lands, require those already within to assimilate (i.e. convert to a less 'pure' for of Islam that is compatible with civilization) or leave and stop feeding them such that they can afford to breed in such a profligate way so as to keep their numbers under control within their own lands. Yes that means we spend whatever it takes to make the oil under their sand worth roughly the same as the sand atop it.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2015, @06:38PM
Let us be judgemental. We are dealing with a religion where lying is considered moral, buggering children is 'part of their culture' and murder and war is a way of life. How obvious does Evil have to be before we in the West can say what is self evidently true and call it out?
There will be no peace between us. Ever. If we, at great expense in blood and treasure, beat them down and force them to submit we will have a short period without violence while they regroup and rearm. We must ban them from our lands, require those already within to assimilate (i.e. convert to a less 'pure' for of Islam that is compatible with civilization) or leave and stop feeding them such that they can afford to breed in such a profligate way so as to keep their numbers under control within their own lands. Yes that means we spend whatever it takes to make the oil under their sand worth roughly the same as the sand atop it.
Quite right, sir. Nuke 'em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Start with the Middle East, make our way to Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia and anywhere else these scum reside. Once we've glassed over these violent scum, we can turn our attention to the wetbacks. They're really too close for nuking, so we should just shoot or sterilize them all, don't you think?
But why stop there? Let's get all the niggers too. And the Jews. Don't forget those filthy Papists, either.
We sure do have a lot of work to do, don't we jmorris [soylentnews.org]?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday November 20 2015, @07:31PM
Let us be judgemental. We are dealing with a religion where lying is considered moral, buggering children is 'part of their culture'....
Yeah, I think we should ban Catholicism too.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Friday November 20 2015, @08:03PM
When they start murdering and raping and trying to conquer the world under a black flag of hatred, we can discuss it. Not saying Christendom hasn't had it's bloody parts of history, but that it is -history-. Today we have a hundred or more sects of Christians, several flavors of Jews, Buddhists, Hippies, Secularists, Pastafarians, and even a few Witches co-existing mostly peacefully in the Western World. One is most notable for it's inability to coexist.
The only upside is we should probably study Islam since it certainly seems to have solved the Entryism problem, no SJW infestation and corrupting in Islam and hasn't been for over a thousand years. So there is that.
Progressives are the second worst at coexistance but they are mostly harmless if everyone else would simply point at them and laugh instead of taking them seriously; other than a few carefully staged race riots Proggies aren't that violent. (Being pussies by nature makes it hard to have a real revolution.... we do need to watch for the more violent Che/Stalin/Mao/Hitler types and nip those in the bud.)
(Score: 2, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Friday November 20 2015, @09:31PM
There have been more terrorist attacks in the US committed by Christians than by Muslims.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 21 2015, @01:27AM
Same in Europe. By an enormous margin.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by jmorris on Saturday November 21 2015, @02:28AM
If there are so many, perhaps you could be bothered to mention one. No, every drive by shooting where the loser has a crucifix doesn't count anymore than some guy named Mohammad whacking somebody in a bad drug deal or who kills some asshole porking his wife is committing terrorism. You need to point to a hew hundred deaths by Christians who killed in the name of Christ. Post 1900 would probably be best for your argument. Better still would be killings where the victim was killed for not being a Christian or for being the 'wrong' kind. And of course the final qualification of 'terrorism' is the deaths have to be intended to cause political change due to fear/terror.
I can think of an abortion butcher who got whacked that should probably be counted because it ticks all the boxes, a killing based on religious belief with an intention of causing political change by fear. One. There are websites that try and fail to track the deaths by Islam and can't seem to keep up. If we expand it to the Western World we also get the IRA but they don't really count since they were a Communist Front so those deaths should at least be split 50-50 between the Deaths by Communism and Death from Christians entries. So that is what I got, you got anything? I'm waiting. Anyone?
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Tuesday November 24 2015, @10:20PM
Don't be so disingenuous.
It may well be true over all history, simply because in the west there are so many more Christians than Muslims. Start talking proportions, and things suddenly look rather different. And in modern times, Muslims seem to be responsible for most terrorism in the west, despite their small numbers. If we look only at religiously-motivated terrorism (discounting your average school shooter for example), things start looking even 'worse'.
There is no Christian equivalent of the global movement of violent jihadism. The closest you'll get trying to make a comparison would be abortion clinic bombers, but it's off by orders of magnitude.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 20 2015, @10:16PM
We Westerners don't lie, because we know it's wrong.
Have you heard of Catholicism [wikipedia.org]?
Take for example the wars [politifact.com] in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Islamic State, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria.