EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
2627

Does Islamic Terrorism really exists?

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
0 points
CrowCrow (PRO)
Ahris generously invited me to do this debate with him.

The resolution is semantical in nature. As the affirmative, I will set my definition of islamic terrorism. It is a modification of the definition of terrorism by Oxford College.

[i]"An act of violence or intimidation used to promote declared muslim values"

There are misconceptions that any Muslim who fights against the system is automatically a terrorist. I consider this presumption to be founded on ignorance. There is a notable sect of Muslims who do engage in acts of violence and intimidation with their religious beliefs being the primary motivator. 

Most of the attacks are cited as being justified by Islamic Terrorists.  They are framed as a reaction to a growing western influence, a rising population of profligates in Muslim lands, and a corruption of traditional Muslim societies from the inside. 

Whether the attacks are justified or not is irrelevant. The question is whether we should recognize that Islamic Terrorism exists, and the moment we do that, is the moment we can begin to have a legitimate conversation on the matter. 

I await the opposition's argument. 

Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-24 13:06:02
| Speak Round
AhrisAhris (CON)
      

        Dear Chair, Judges, pro representatives and all the viewers. Thanks for giving me a chance to express my views on the above topic. I am going to defend the cons side of Existence of Islamic Terrorism.
        
         We are living in the age of Information Technology. It has many advantages and benefits but sorry to say, equal disadvantages are also there. Our belief in media is so firm. We have no instinctive thoughts of our own. Whatever media says we accept it without even using our own conscience. If you have contradiction with my point of media dependency, let me support my point with a calrifying example. Let us suppose that you are a student of XYZ school. If on BBC or some other competitive news channel, it is announced that your school XYZ has been destroyed during a blast and will remain closed for 10 days. I bet you will not wake up for school the next day. What if your school was fine but it was the media who deprived you from education. 
          In the same way, you always hear that some Muslim group has accepted the responsibility of attack, and you believe it for sure, unaware of the fact whether it is true or not because we never see any sort of metallic proof behind it. Media is behind our hatred to the Muslim world. 


            
            We can see many evidences and scientific support on the issue of 9/11 today that it was not destroyed by the plane crashing but bombs were installed in the building. The movement of building while falling down indicates the whole truth from physics point of view.


         Can't you see Syria, Palestine, Iraq, Lebanon and other Muslim countries. Can't you see what USA Govt. is doing to them. They are killing innocent people and destroying the buildings and everything. And when the natives defend the USA attacks, they name them terrorists. I have experienced it very well as I am also from a Muslim country. Here, USA has made many wives lose their loving husbands, many children lose their caring fathers and many parents lose their children (for whom they are ready to sacrifice their own lives) by USA drone attacks and Army involvement. And then they hide the whole thing under the self-creative deceptive banner of so called Peace. 





 




      

        Lets think for sometime how can a Muslim group (ISIS) destroy their own brother Muslim countries? Are they stupid or out of mind? Records show that 80% of attacks were in the countries of Syria, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon; and much less attacks in the west by ISIS and other so-called Islamic Radical Groups (which are fake groups and aren't even considered Muslims by other Muslims). And Yes, I am against them. Eliminate them instead of using their name to destroy the whole Muslim world.

ISIS forgot they are standing in front of USAID tent in the photo-shoot.


How come?


And do you know Osama-bin-Laden was once working for USA and USA used his name to destroy the whole Muslim world. If you ask I can present you with the whole history of Osama bin Laden.


          Well now after destroying Islamic countries in the name of terrorism, Muslims become refugees and when they ask for a place to live, European countries and USA don't let us in. No one is accepting refugees now. Have you forgotten that you destroyed our home where we were living in peace. And then everyone says Muslims are terrorists. 

Have you forgot how today's USA came into existance? Illegal immigrants in the area of Red Indians.


         Now in order to clear the concept of ISIS attacks in USA and other countries and other attacks of 9/11 etc. They do it in order to gain funds from the natives. If you people will not be stopped by the fake ISIS (that CIA has built) now and then, or your people will not die in the blasts, then who will give donations and funds for killing innocent people *labelled as terrorists*? 



         And yes, Illuminati and Rothschild family is behind all this. It is known by much less people but it is truth. They are working on the same purpose of NWO for centuries. They want new world order and one world leader and Muslims are strictly against that. Thatswhy they know that clearing all the Muslims from their way is extremely important and funding from you people is also very important in the whole new world order set-up.




Same Purpose, then be friends!


            In the end, I would like to say that I am not defending those Muslims who commit crimes or muders. Every religion has every sort of people. It is the fault of person, not religion but in west, If John commits crime, It is John's fault and if Abdullah commits crime, it is definitely Islam's fault. I am just fighting against the concept that All Muslims are terrorists and we especially come to USA leaving our own problems, own poverty only to blast. And i am also not defending ISIS as it is not even an Islamic group as mentioned above.
(Note: While mentioning the name of countries in my speech, I am only referring to the Government of that country; not the natives or people living there. So don't take that personal please.)
*All images are taken from an American Facebook Page "Illuminati Exposed Media" so that people may not argue that they are made by Muslims.*

Thanks.

Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-24 18:07:47
| Speak Round
CrowCrow (PRO)
As a Jew, I can personally confirm that my people are working with the illuminati to establish a new world order. Nonetheless, the political motivations of the Jews are irrelevant. 

What matters are the political motivations of Muslims, and what methods Muslim uses to promote perceived Islamic values. The opposition says so himself that groups like ISIS use violence. Statistically, most of that violence is being targeted against civilians. What strategic value do citizens have?

The truth is that killing civilians produces terror and fear, which destabilizes the ruling government. It is usually an act of desperation, but either way, the targeting of civilians is considered an act of terrorism. Unless you have been living under a rock for the last 30 years, it is quite apparent that many Islamists have been targeting civilians with violent attacks.

I am not going to dispute any conspiracies about the United States. Even if the US is organizing groups in the arab world to instill terror [i](which I would not be surprised if they were)[/i] , the key point is that the attacks are still being carried out by Muslims, with the motivation of defending their religious aims. 

The opposition implicitly conceded that there are specific muslim individuals who commit violence in the name of religion. I would never claim all muslims are terrorists, because there would never be a reality in which that was true. What is true, is that islamic terrorism exists, and that is what is being debated under the resolution. 

Mazel tov.


Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-25 02:27:19
| Speak Round
AhrisAhris (CON)
     

         By the last paragraph in my debate, I meant that some individual Muslims may be theives or murderers or commit any other crime as some people of all the religions do. It can't be named as Islamic terrorism for sure. To illustrate this concept, I am quoting my previous example which the pro representative may have missed mistakenly. The example is, If John commits a crime, it is John's fault and if Abdullah or Ali or any other Muslim is found involved in any crime, the whole world comes upto Islam. They say it's Islam's fault instead of pointing that particular person who commited the crime. My competitive in the debate is also using the same method to explain his point of Islamic terrorism existance, which is totally wrong. It is the same as if our pro representative commits a murder and we start saying that it's Judaism fault. Lets attack Israel? Everyone knows that nothing can be more irrelevant than this deduced hypothesis.


        And ISIS's attacks on the innocent people can't be related to Islam from any angle as it is just a deception. Suppose if a person comes to your house and blast it off and before going he says that he is Ahris. So, will you punish me for it? Will you send the police after me? This is called using someone for own benefit and also not getting caught. Similarly when ISIS attacks and then they say they are Muslims, you people instead of realizing that it is a deception as no one ever blows his real cover, start attacking Muslims.





          And if we see USA Government, you can see that they are also killing innocent people in Muslim countries. So why are they exempted from the title of Terrorists? The people they have killed here. You can't even imagine their number. They are 500-600 fold more than people killed in different attacks by so called Muslim terrorists.



            And when you talk about Islamic political interests, please tell me when we were willing to hold the Government of the whole world? We were living peacefully in our respective countries. Then USA invaded Afghanistan and then the whole sequence of invasion in Muslim countries and killing and hatred towards Muslims started. Ignoring the one who is going into other people countries and attacking them (USA), you are talking about our ideas of political interests. USA invaded Afghanistan due to 9/11 attack. But once if we use our mind, we will know that the passports that were found in 9/11 attack were of Saudi Arabian nationals.....then why they attacked Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia? Point to ponder!




            My competitive agrees to the struggle for establishment of NWO and still says Illuminati has no political concerns. Well, have you forgotten that the first rule of NWO is that there will be One World Leader for NWO who will control the whole world and it is only possible if people are not strongly attached towards religions. It is not a new matter. For centuries, people have been working on NWO. First the eliminated the Christians who were stuck to their belief. Now you can see no Christian who is much attached to Christianity and now they are doing the same to Muslims which is the last step to the road towards NWO.

Thanks.

Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-25 07:19:12
| Speak Round
CrowCrow (PRO)
To make it clear, what I am arguing is not that Muslims have interests in controlling the world.
Many Muslims do however have interests in preserving or expanding Islamic values. The act of violence by Muslims to achieve these goals fits the definition of Islamic Terrorism I set out in round one.

It could be argued that Islam is a religion of peace, and therefore no violent action can not truly be considered Islam. How can this be true though, when the Koran declares very specific regulations on when the use of violence is justified? Needless to say, I don't believe it can be true. Islam may be a religion of peace, but that same religion promotes violence as a means of achieving it at times. As much as many moderate Muslims want to expel the violent members of the Islamic religion, they cannot actually do so, and for all intents and purposes, even violent Muslims remain apart of the Islamic religion.

I am not going to make irrelevant disputations on the supposed world conquest being perpetuated by Americans and Jews. It is beside the point. If anything, I have proven Islamic terrorism exists. 

Since I forgot my fair share of irrelevant biased conspiracy info pics, here you go...











Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-26 19:39:43
| Speak Round
AhrisAhris (CON)
         


           Yes. Muslims have interests in preservation of Islam and why shouldn't we? One can preserve his or her belief system. Is it a crime or something? Lets talk about Jews who went in the desert to build Israel just for preserving their religion. This means everyone can preserve their religion and set of beliefs. Are we doing something new?

          When you talk about the use of violence to preserve Islamic beliefs, then I strongly disagree with that point. You can know from history that wherever Muslims got control, they never killed a single person there. You can have the example of "Salahuddin" (Saladin), one of our recent leaders. If you do some research, you will see that he didnt kill a single Christian who wasn't participating in the war against him. Even the Christians couldn't keep this quality hidden in the hollywood movie made on the theme of that time called "The Kingdom Of Heaven".
    
         And what arguments Non-Muslims use to prove Quran as a book of violence are the fragments of sentences there. Better you should read the full paragraph to know what is actually written there. Everyone just picks up "kill the infidels" and start describing Islam as violent religion. If you see that whole paragraph, you will see that those verses were bestowed when the pagans living in Makkah at that time made a peace contract with Muslims but broke it off and started killing Muslims. Then the verses were "If they break their promise once, forgive them. But if they do it again then kill the infidels who fight with you." And in Islam only those ppl are allowed to kill who fight against you in a proper war. If some people even run away after the war is over, you still can't kill them.
As you have came towards Quran. Then i should tell you what's written in Quran...About killing it says:

"The one who kills a single person is the murderer of whole mankind and the one who saves a single person from death has saved the whole mankind."

             And the marrying a small girl was the custom those days. If you do some research you can see that Child brides as young as 8 were common, not exceptions, among the Byzantine emperors and nobility. The minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1895 was 7. Yes, SEVEN. Virgin Mary was as young as 11 when she got pregnant with Jesus Christ, peace be upon both of them.

                All the other points you have described in images are not true. The difference between images i was sharing and the images my opponent is sharing is that I was sharing all the images from an American page built by Christians (no Muslims at all). And you are sharing the images from an anti-Muslims page which are never found in the record. If you can prove that it happened really, i will accept my defeat. And i bet you can't because it's all fake.

              And you think that Islam's God is Satan in real, then how come He told us to believe in Ibrahim, Moses, Jesus and all the Prophets you believe in? How come the rules remained the same only with the addition of a new Prophet. You people are so lucky that we can't make cartoons and bad images of your Prophets as we believe them too and respect them. Its really nasty how you people make adult cartoons of our Prophet, invade in our countries and kill the innocent people and still we don't attack. I don't know how can people judge a religion without reading their book and teachings? Its really weird i would say. It's like an engineer saying to a doctor that No! You're not giving the right medicine. This causes more harm than good. Oh come on please! Wake up. Use some mind. You people don't even know what's going on in your country and what is it doing to other countries. You people give advices on every topic like refugees but don't even know how refugees came into existance. I would request my opponent to see why Jo Cox (A British Parliment Member) was murdered (on June 16,2016) brutally by stabbing her several times? Just because she sided the refugees and requested to let them come in. Even wikipedia says this time that she was murdered due to her strong political views. Isn't this terrorism?
    
               In the end I would like to say that the debate's topic is "Does Islamic Terrorism REALLY exists?" It doesn't say does Islamic terrorism simply exists or not. The whole media is trying to show people that Islamic terrorism exists. You have so many sources to prove that simply. Honestly, if I was the pro representative, i could do it in a single speech. What's the big deal in blinding already 99% blinded people by media against Islam?  The purpose was to go in the depth and see whether it is USA conspiracy behind all these or it was really Muslims who were doing this. If you don't want to talk about conspiracies and just talk about what the media is showing to everyone, then there is no need to debate. You win. I accept my defeat. 

             My purpose is not to win this debate at all. I just want to tell people to research by yourself about what is going on instead of being a memory card in which media is storing what it has to store. And if after research, you develop double hatred towards Muslims, you're most welcome as atleast you used your own mind and conscience to judge the things that are really going on. I would appreciate that. Thatsall i wanted to say.

Thanks.


Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-27 02:09:23
| Speak Round
CrowCrow (PRO)
Hey mate, those pics were supposed to be a joke. Honestly I didn't expect you to get it. 

From my understanding, you are conceding to the debate? I really do not feel the argument moving in a productive direction, so I will leave my arguments as is unless you are not conceding. 


Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-28 23:27:48
| Speak Round
AhrisAhris (CON)
 
             No, actually I wasn't conceding. I too think it's useless as we just keep on talking about the image of Muslims media has built in front of us instead of going somewhere deep. As you don't want to go into American conspiracies and other things, it's just useless. By the way i have a video that may tell you to understand the real conspiracies behind the whole Islamic Terrorism thing which is shown to us.
Here it goes: 




Thanks.

Return To Top | Posted:
2016-06-28 23:58:17
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
AhrisAhris
Lol @Stag i was also confused lol.
Posted 2016-07-01 06:06:03
CrowCrow
There was an auto forfeit? Man, that sucks. I didn't even mean to forfeit.
Posted 2016-07-01 03:34:17
AhrisAhris
@Stag i have no problem with 5 rounds. I can manage that too.
Posted 2016-06-24 22:46:46
AhrisAhris
@admin maybe a noob on the site but not in debating for sure :)
Posted 2016-06-24 22:44:49
AhrisAhris
No its okay. If u want 5 rounds @Stag. I can deal with that too.
Posted 2016-06-24 22:43:36
CrowCrow
@admin

You want to change it to 3 rounds now?

That is fine by me.
Posted 2016-06-24 21:46:04
adminadmin
OK, sorry @Ahris but the rule is both debaters need to agree on any change to the debate settings. I'm very sorry and I appreciate it's difficult as you're new here and stuff.

@Stag - try being nice to noobs sometime.
Posted 2016-06-24 21:09:36
CrowCrow
@admin
Posted 2016-06-24 21:06:54
CrowCrow
It is still 5 rounds.
Posted 2016-06-24 21:06:46
adminadmin
@Stag Ahris asked me to reduce this debate to being only 3 rounds, as he made a mistake due to being new here. Is that ok with you also?
Posted 2016-06-24 19:09:44
AhrisAhris
Extended to 2 days.
Posted 2016-06-24 00:47:43
CrowCrow
One hour is too short amount a time for a non-planned debate.
Posted 2016-06-24 00:32:08
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

There are no judgements yet on this debate.

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 5 rounds
  • No length restrictions
  • No reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Community Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds means forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 2 days
  • Time to vote: 2 weeks
  • Time to prepare: None
No abusive language.
Everyone's point of views will be respected.
Judges are requested to be neutral.
Judges are requested to choose the decision by reading the debate, not merely by reading the title kindly.