Islamic State is good.

FRAMEWORK:First and most foremost: this debate is not about the Islamic State when compared with other organizations. Other organizations have done bad and horrible deeds, but this particular debate is not about them; it is about the Islamic State in the perspective of morality, of human rights, and of ethicality. Now, instead of ranting on about this, I shall firstly point out the many fallacies that I have recorded here, and throughout the debate.1. Ignoratio ElenchiMy points about IS actions (golden dinars, on justice, on education, on IS killing as Haram, on Jizyah and Zakat, on IS killing children) have been dismissed or ignored.2. Argument from GeneticsSource analysis by the opposition is an argument from genetics.3. Ad Hominem It must be easy for you typing behind the screen in that comfy chair of yours, cursing and blaming IS, and said they should live by 'modern society' and 'human' rights and the UN. Oh, indeed it is. However, I shall prove the opposition wrong soon.4. Appeal to EmotionsOnce you got your sister raped, parents killed, and you almost died, and there is no more light in the darkness. What are you trying to say here?Objections: I would like to respond to the opposition briefly with my own anecdote. In 2012, I went to an academic compeitition at Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. This was the first time I went to the Middle East, and it was perhaps one of the most fascinating trips I have ever taken. I met an influx of Syrians, and befriended one. She was wearing a veil, and had the Free Syrian Army flag on her bag. At this point, the Syrian Revolution was in it's early stages, but everyone could see the direction it was heading: the Jihadists were taking control. I had a brief conversation with her; she apparently wanted the following to be done. She wanted Assad out of power, and wanted democracy. She wanted freedom, and equality. I got into a brief debate with her about the need to preserve the secular Assadist regime, and then we parted with a little good bye. Two years later, this summer, I met another Syrian who came to Singapore. He was initially studying at a Jordanian international school. I asked him about his thoughts on Syria. His response was iconic:"I was for the revolution when it first started, but now, I am for Bashar. I am a Sunni, but I consider myself Syrian. There are people in Syria that are Syrians, but that consider themselves Sunni. I love Syria, and I want it to be a democracy. I don't want Syria to be another Saudi Arabia. My friends initially supported the revolution too. But now they support Bashar, not because they like him, but they feared his defeat."This was during the Northern Iraq Offensives. News were getting to us too fast. Soon, I saw what my new Syrian friend was talking about. I trusted the news, but the same person also confirmed the reports."I had a family member who lived in Raqqah. After IS took Raqqah, he has seen heads on a pike in the park everyday" CNN reported the same story. Soon after that, the United States launched their sorties against the IS, and soon I became invested in raising awareness for the besieged city of Ayn Al-Arab. I can see no justification for the actions of the Islamic State, and Islam is definitely not one of it. I have proven that Islam calls killing Haram. I have demonstrated that Islam does not provide any justifications for this. Nevertheless, there is one thing that I have not demonstrated yet; that Assad were to stay.Let us say Assad were to fall tomorrow. Let us say the black flag were to fly over the presidential palace in Damascus tomorrow. Let us affirmed that such a case happened. Then all hopes for a new Syria, united, free, and democratic, would have been rushed. We would now see a destroyed Syria, basing itself on an instable economic system and a totalitarian "theocracy" which is highly destructive for the region. Blood will flow; the Alawites, Christians (in Aleppo, in al-Qusayr), Shi'ites, Kurds, and pro-Assadist Sunnis will be killed. The Syrian nation will be become Saudi Arabia. They will be terrorist attacks against the United States, and another war against another M.E. country would have to be launched by the American public. Then let us say that the Islamic State all attacked Deir Ezzor, but was repelled by the forces of the Syrian Arab Army (peace be upon them). Let us say al-Raqqah finally belonged to Syria. Then Bashar Al-Assad would have to be forced to do re-elections, and his legitimacy will be challenged with a scale of much less than before. Assad's Syria will become a Free Syria. Shi'ites and Sunnis, Christians and Kurds, Alawites and Yezidis; all these groups will finally live in harmony, in a free country. And was this not the aim of the ever weakening "Free Syrian Army", whose (unfortunately) Syrian Revolutionary Front has turned Islamist? [3,2]Oh yes, it is easy for me, typing in my comfortable blue chair, taking sources from the internet. Oh yes, it is easy, but I am the future of this world. Do I not have the right to talk about this issue? Do I not have a right to talk about the forces that divided the Arabic world? There was a force, prior to the Islamic State, that almost created a successful state based on the principles of an Arabic Civllization, strong in character. This force was Ba'athism, where religion was to be put aside, where Arabs were to live happily alongside each other. This movement ended as a force when Iraq betrayed Ba'athism and embraced Sunni Islamism.You have a right to do that, because you are cared about (maybe), the UN knows you are there, if you die, someone will care for you.And if you think about it, do you actually think that the citizens of al-Raqqah has the rights to speak out freely like I can? The Islamic State oppresses them. Accordingly: IS has spelled out the terms in which it seeks to frame a global clash of civilisations. At its core is a contest about freedom of speech and belief. By the nature of their work journalists are among those most exposed on the frontline of that struggle...Its “business model” of kidnappings could involve months or years of silence during which the families might receive no information at all. The ordeal might or might not later lead to a ransom demand and negotiations...Islamic State must now be stopped through coherent work by governments and the international media to counter its message of violence and hate. [1]And more injustices were even given. Where are the pictures of the "extremely lucky" few who have been killed by the Islamic State? Heads and bodies separated: is this just? Accordingly: In July, two women were stoned to death by an ISIS-sanctioned mob in different locations in Ar Raqqah governorate...In February, a 15-year-old boy was beheaded, ostensibly for committing rape. Children were present. Several of those interviewed believed that he had been executed for being a member of another armed group...On 29 May, ISIS fighters in Minbij abducted 153 Kurdish schoolboys, aged 13 and 14 years old, as they returned to Ayn al-Arab from Aleppo city, where they had taken their year-end examinations. [2]Now, I see no further justification for this. The parameters of this debate are clear. Either the Islamic State is good, or the Islamic State is bad. Good is defined in R1 as being permissible by various degrees. This the opposition has not proven. There is no background behind his refutations, and his argument is based wholly on a fallacious premise. Because of this, I shall like to provide several voting issues.Voting Issues:The opposition has tried to "move the goalpost" by forcing me to post pictures. Opp. also argues from genetics, and ad hominems me by taking my right to debate this properly away, since I am just "a 14 y-o sitting in a comfortable chair, with an air condition, 2000 miles behind the actual fighting" Opp. ignoratio elenchi's my case, and cherry picks from it. He never really refutes my claims, and just attempts to refute my sources. FINALLY, opp's case was built upon an "on balance" resolution, when clearly, the resolution states that "Islamic State is Good" with "good" having an objective meaning as established in R1. Because of these, I assert the resolution to be negatedDue to exams, this is all I can do. Thanks! CITATIONS:[1] http://www.newstatesman.com...[2] http://fas.org...[3] http://www.ohchr.org...