Red_Dr_Heinzyaugislam is a fucking disease
Islam has nothing to do with anyone who is part of a terrorist organization. The Islam is just as bad/good as Christianity or any other religion.
It's funny because in the article he says he wants to fight for the laws of allah and he wants to be a martyr for his cause. Yeah nice try dumbass
and it even says the friend of the guy converted to Islam then went on to join ISIS
You guys are retarded if you think Islam has nothing to do with ISIS. You're just blatantly wrong.
From the article " “I’m happy for you and you are always in my prayer. I don’t want you getting in trouble so ima wrap this up real quick. Just a few things! Be careful who you kill, don’t neglect salah, recite qur’an and make tones of dua for guidance. And then trust in Allah. Don’t curse ppl you don’t know stuff about. And just take care, always."
"On August 11, 2014, S.R.G told Khan he was now fighting with ISIS, and Khan told him to make sure they weren’t “doing everything according to Islam …"
If you think Islam has nothing to do with it I'm not sure what does. If it had nothing to do with it then the whole organization would have religions of all kinds.
Here's the issue. All religions' holy books have various passages and interpretations that can be completely at odds with each other. The Quaran has very specific rules about how to "morally" engage in warfare (a precursor to the Geneva Convention), and ISIS quite blatantly violates every single one of those rules. Would that be grounds for saying ISIS is unIslamic? Up until the late 1980s, people were convinced that Catholic nations were authoritarian. It was a convincing argument, like 90% of majority Catholic nations were ruled by dictators and it's pretty easy to find quotes and traditions from Catholicism that would seem to support authoritarian rulers. But now of course we realize that the reason Latin America was undemocratic had very little to do with religion.
Same thing with Protestantism. The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism was a groundbreaking book by Max Weber, possibly the most important work in the history of sociology. Its core theory was that Protestant teachings were uniquely capitalist in a way that no other religion was or could be. It was an airtight argument, bringing in teachings from Luther and Calvin and applying them to the development of capitalism in West Europe, and it worked perfectly. Unfortunately for Weber, the 20th Century largely disproved his theory.
What I'm trying to get at is that saying "Islam made him do it" is a useless statement. Islam encompasses 3/4 of the Earth and something like 10 billion people over the course of 1,300 years. What would be a better idea is taking a look at what ideals, traditions, and teachings he valued within Islam, which ones he ignored, then honestly trying to figure out why some were seen as important and others were left by the wayside. Which schools of thought he adhered to, how they arose, what they were influenced by, what they responded to, and how they developed. You'll get actionable information out of the latter analysis, if you honestly believe "Islam" as a whole is an issue (or any religion as a whole is an issue) then you start to rely on the argument that "the only thing they understand is force." And that hasn't worked out.