Islam is a Religion of Peace (TM)! [somewhat graphic]

[PainRack]

No, no I mean the muslims around the world don't seem to understand this. They seem to see it as a war against all muslims and the muslim faith.

Simple. Because the Arab community do have a bad deal in international politics, and more importantly, they're as vulnerable to the mass media influence as Americans are.

What? You don't think that just as Fox broadcast shots of Palestinians celebrating 9/11, some Arab stations don't broadcast Jerry Falwell and other crackpots celebrating a war against Islam?

[Spice Runner]

Ok, I retract that statement. I realize I painted a broad stoke over all muslim people. I am sure that many of them would like nothing more than to lead normal lives, around the world and in the ME, but they are given a bad name by a sizeable minority of extremists.

[Coyote]

To compare radical Christian whackjobs with the Islamic fundies is not entirely an apples-to-oranges comparison, but it does come up short in many ways. Take Tim McVeigh and that abortion-docter killer, Eric Rudolph.

Both nutcases, both terrorists using terrorist tactics to forward radical ideology that is basically a mix of theology, politics, and in McVeigh's case, race (I dunno if Rudolph ever linked race to his crimes, but I understand that the slain doctor, Slepian, was Jewish. . . was that a factor?)

But the comparison begins to break down when you look at two things: the scope and the public reaction.

In the Musim world, you have thousands, literally thousands of Timmys and Erics every year. Many of them kill themselves as they perpetrate their crimes. This is a scope unheard of in Western, especially American, society and history. The suicide warrior is rare in our culture, although individual examples stand out-- but that's it, they are unusual, and remembered thusly.

More telling is the public reaction. In the Arab world, there are frequently shrines made to these suicide killers. They are lionized as heroes and the mainstream media and the average cleric-on-the-street tends to praise their names.

True, folks like McVeigh and Rudolph get some positive spin from reactionary groups, but these groups are underground, and like cockroaches, shun the light. In America, these people are found and turned in. Their actions are seen as against the grain of the mainstream society. Their supporters are viewed with suspicion.

The public face of the Arab world views their murderers as heroes to be emulated. They are 'glorious martyrs' that fall in jihad against 'infidels'. They are role models and their actions are publicly supported by their authority figures.

To say that 'America has Tim McVeigh, ergo, we are as evil, vile, corrupt, amoral and murderous as those we claim to fight' is absurd. THe comparison is not there. I, as an American, refuse to be judged by what seems to be our lowest common denominator. I would also not judge all Canadians by the handful of paratroopers that beat Somalis to death, nor would I judge all Frenchmen by the torture teams that visited cruelties upon the Algerians as a matter of government policy for decades.

I have met many, many good Arabs who want peace and stability. Many also appreciate what the Americans have done here in Iraq. But it will not be an easy thing to turn these societies around because they have been told, from the times that their great grandparents were in diapers, all sorts of evil and lies about the West and our intentions. You do not reverse this with the flick of a switch. The fact that sometimes the West has, indeed, acted poorly in these regions does not help.

Turning around the flood of hate will be hard work but it must be done, so that these terrorists become the social aberrations rather than the norms.

Don't make spin for the animals or buy their lies that their murders are justified because of this or that obscure religious reason.

[Joe]

Actually, I'm pretty sure Timothy McVeigh was an agnostic, though he may have had ties with a group called Christian identity.

[PainRack]

In the Musim world, you have thousands, literally thousands of Timmys and Erics every year. Many of them kill themselves as they perpetrate their crimes. This is a scope unheard of in Western, especially American, society and history. The suicide warrior is rare in our culture, although individual examples stand out-- but that's it, they are unusual, and remembered thusly.

1. The highest perpetuators of domestic terrorism in the US, is right wing, conservative Christian militias.

2. The first attempt to acquire bio-chemical weapons for terrorist purposes in the US, was by White Supremacy, interestingly, a group that maintains a bulletin board Timothy Mcveigh posts on.

3. A poll from the streets, extrapolated that the numbers of fundamentalists are hundreds of thousands. intelligence estimates that factoring in fund-raising volunteers, Al Queda and other significant militant Islamic terrorist networks number in the tens of thousands. Compared to the number of muslims, that's statistically insignificant.

More telling is the public reaction. In the Arab world, there are frequently shrines made to these suicide killers. They are lionized as heroes and the mainstream media and the average cleric-on-the-street tends to praise their names.

Mainstream simply isn't as mainstream as you suggest. Again, Arab news TV networks account for at best 20% of the muslim community worldwide.

Its possible to label Arab militancy and the use of Islam to incite hatred. However, suggesting that most muslims support such actions is just ludricious.

The public face of the Arab world views their murderers as heroes to be emulated. They are 'glorious martyrs' that fall in jihad against 'infidels'. They are role models and their actions are publicly supported by their authority figures.

That's just it. What is the public face of the Arab world? Again, militancy sells. News sell. War, violence sells. Not peace. And this isn't a lambast against the US media, the Arab media itself hooks up to this. Not only do they have an agenda, the fact remains that adhering to such an agenda ensures publicitiy, prestige and money.

The difficulty lies in the fact that in America, Timothy and the likes of them do not fulfill the goals of the majority. Their goals are anaethema to many. However, the PR goals of Al Queda aren't.

[Edi]

<snip>

But the comparison begins to break down when you look at two things: the scope and the public reaction.

In the Musim world, you have thousands, literally thousands of Timmys and Erics every year. <snip>

More telling is the public reaction. In the Arab world, there are frequently shrines made to these suicide killers. <snip>

Bolded emphasis mine. The difference between Arab and Muslim world is that the former is a subset of the latter, and based on what one sees in the news, the Arab world seems to contain a statistically much higher concentration of fundamentalist extremists than the Muslim world on average, hence approval of extremists is also higher than on average. It's also the part of the Muslim world that the media most focuses on, which skews perception of all Muslims as extremists in Western eyes.

Other than this nitpick, I agree with what you say.

Edi

[Coyote]

1. The highest perpetuators of domestic terrorism in the US, is right wing, conservative Christian militias.

2. The first attempt to acquire bio-chemical weapons for terrorist purposes in the US, was by White Supremacy, interestingly, a group that maintains a bulletin board Timothy Mcveigh posts on.

I agree with what you're saying and I am not trying to refute it, but I would point out that Timmy McVeigh is dead and not likely to be doing much posting anywhere these days. But yes, US domestic terrorism has been at the hands of right wing whackjobs, although the actions of lefty loonies such as Earth First, Earth Liberation Front, and Animal Liberation Front cannot be ignored-- they mostly do property damage though.

3. A poll from the streets, extrapolated that the numbers of fundamentalists are hundreds of thousands. intelligence estimates that factoring in fund-raising volunteers, Al Queda and other significant militant Islamic terrorist networks number in the tens of thousands. Compared to the number of muslims, that's statistically insignificant.

I am aware of the fact that the majority of Muslims are non-Arabs living in places such as Malaysia and Indonesia, and that except for a few radicals, are pretty much 'normal Joes'.

There are more Muslims than there are Americans, but when we remove the Muslims of Asia (who are not contributing to the problem, exceptions like Abu Sayyaf notwithstanding) and concentrate on the Arab-Muslim population, where a majority of th etroubles are coming from, the ratio would probably change dramatically. I am guesing in this as I have no acces right now to any numbers.

Mainstream simply isn't as mainstream as you suggest. Again, Arab news TV networks account for at best 20% of the muslim community worldwide.

Its possible to label Arab militancy and the use of Islam to incite hatred. However, suggesting that most muslims support such actions is just ludricious.

Here's the tricky part. I mentioned that I have met many Muslims who want to lead normal peaceful lives. This is true-- I do not see Muslims as the problem, as a whole. But even these peaceful, normal-Joe Muslims, whethere they mean to or not, are getting bombarded with messages of hate and distrust from either tyrant leaders or their 'approved' news sources like al-Jazeera.

That's just it. What is the public face of the Arab world? Again, militancy sells. News sell. War, violence sells. Not peace. And this isn't a lambast against the US media, the Arab media itself hooks up to this. Not only do they have an agenda, the fact remains that adhering to such an agenda ensures publicitiy, prestige and money.

The difficulty lies in the fact that in America, Timothy and the likes of them do not fulfill the goals of the majority. Their goals are anaethema to many. However, the PR goals of Al Queda aren't.

The medias of both societies are just in it to make money, yes. But compare the US media reaction to McVeigh and Rudolph to the Arab media reaction to jihadi attacks-- there is a difference in how these people are portrayed...

...but no, I'm not saying "nuke the Muslims". In fact, seeing the curent trend of political discourse in the US, I Have more optimism for the Iraqis these days...

[PainRack]

There are more Muslims than there are Americans, but when we remove the Muslims of Asia (who are not contributing to the problem, exceptions like Abu Sayyaf notwithstanding) and concentrate on the Arab-Muslim population, where a majority of th etroubles are coming from, the ratio would probably change dramatically. I am guesing in this as I have no acces right now to any numbers.

That would suggest that its a result of politics, merging with religion. Not religion solely.

The medias of both societies are just in it to make money, yes. But compare the US media reaction to McVeigh and Rudolph to the Arab media reaction to jihadi attacks-- there is a difference in how these people are portrayed...

The difference, as I said arose in the goals. Timothy McVeigh goals are anaethema to most Americans. However, the publicly stated goals of defending Islam holy sites against trangression, the feelings of being manipulated and inferior to Western society and the need to defend muslims being targeted by Americans, Israelites and etc etc etc is acceptable to many. The only difference lies in that not everybody agree that methods like hostage-taking to preserve the soverignty of Iraq is ethical and justified.

[Sarevok]

This is a very terrible incidents. I am utterly shocked by this mindless act of violence. It would prove very damaging for the Chechens. Their actions which killed hundreds including many children is not helping their cause at all. Instead it would brand them as mass murderers.

Islam is a religon of peace. It is killers like these terrorists who are spreading the opposite notion. It must be kept in mind that a handful of terrorists do not represent over a billion muslims world wide. Most muslim are not like them.

[Durandal]

Islam is a religon of peace. It is killers like these terrorists who are spreading the opposite notion. It must be kept in mind that a handful of terrorists do not represent over a billion muslims world wide. Most muslim are not like them.

Oh, so the Qur'an doesn't promise those who die fighting for Allah eternal rewards in Heaven?

[Master of Ossus]

Islam is a religon of peace. It is killers like these terrorists who are spreading the opposite notion. It must be kept in mind that a handful of terrorists do not represent over a billion muslims world wide. Most muslim are not like them.

Most Muslims don't take the Koran literally, but that doesn't make Islam a religion of peace. Can you envision a group of Buddhist monks storming a school yard? The difference is that Buddhism actually IS a religion of peace. Islam isn't. Observe:

4:56
Those who disbelieve Our revelations, We shall expose them to the Fire. As often as their skins are consumed We shall exchange them for fresh skins that they may taste the torment.

4:168-9
Lo! those who disbelieve and deal wrong, Allah will never forgive them, neither will He guide them unto a road, Except the road of hell, wherein they will abide for ever. And that is ever easy for Allah.

5:33
The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom.

7:50
And the dwellers of the Fire cry out unto the dwellers of the Garden: Pour on us some water or some wherewith Allah hath provided you. They say: Lo! Allah hath forbidden both to disbelievers (in His guidance).

2:191
Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kil them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.

216
War is ordained by Allah, and all Muslims must be willing to fight, whether they like it or not.

Religion of peace, with a god that ordains war and demands that his servants be ready to fight. A religion of peace whose god demands that you "Kill disbelievers wherever you find them." A religion of peace who pontificates at length about how disbelievers are going to hell, and how he's not going to do a thing to help them out.

Great.

[Sarevok]

I stand corrected Ossus.

[Coyote]

Painrack, I am of the oppinion that most of the "religious" conflicts raging in the world today are mostly political in nature that have acquired a blanket of religious fervor to appeal to some sense of social morality-- regardles of whether there is any true 'morality' there or not.

The Israel-Palestine conflict is over land, as is the Kashmir conflict, so is Chechnya, and while religion plays a little bit more of a direct hand in the North Ireland conflict, again it largely started over who was going to rule that area. Darfur is an ethnic clash where the religions come into play because they are handy.

But in all these cases, one group started making it a religious issue and the other group decided to play along. THe various medias add fuel to the fire by exacerbating these points of view for the extremist fringes.

My opinion on the Islam issue is that it seems to me that of the Muslim populations in Arab lands, there is generally more of a willingness to allow ethnic or real estate wars to be hijacked into the realm of religion, and few peopel do anything to stop it. In America, McVEigh's and Rudolph's opinions found no fertile soil in the mainstream US media-- but if a McVeigh or Rudolph were to act this way in an Arab-Muslim land, it would be more socially acceptable to allow this extreme viewpoint to become part of the general dialogue.

And the thing is, very few public figures step up to deny it. Extremism is socially acceptable, and that has got to change.

[CJvR]

Fanatics in the west is measured in parts/million, fanatics in the Arab world is measured in percent. Christian fundamentalists are a nasty boil on the society they exist in, Islamic fundamentalists are smallpox.

Well, the Western civilization has the Muslim world to thank for its existence (although it later came close of destroying it during the 10th century) since it preserved and translated antique Greek documents that surely would've been destroyed during the Middle Ages when the Antique thinking fell out of favor in Europe, but later was reintroduced to Europe through islamic influences in Spain during the 10th to 12th centuries.

Yes, but that could, and probably would, have happened anyway. Without Islam Bysantium would have survived and been much more involved in Europe and while the Arabs might have preserved the knowledge of the ancient Greeks the Bysantines were the ancient Greeks (via Rome).
Without Bysantium we westerners would also stick our asses in the air five times a day...

btw: IIRC it was Islamic forces that finally destroyed the great library in Alexandria with the motivation that if the books didn't support Islam they were blasphemous and if they did support Islam they weren't needed.

[StarshipTitanic]

btw: IIRC it was Islamic forces that finally destroyed the great library in Alexandria with the motivation that if the books didn't support Islam they were blasphemous and if they did support Islam they weren't needed.

Likely a fabrication by medieval Christians. The most damage was probably done by the destruction of pagan temples (The Library was dedicated to Serapis, a Greco-Egyptian god) done by Emperor Theodosius. The Arabs did far more help to ancient knowledge by translating and distributing the information.

[PainRack]

And the thing is, very few public figures step up to deny it. Extremism is socially acceptable, and that has got to change.

The problem lies in the issues and resolution. To put it simply, Bush has so skewered the PR image of America that even in regions not affected by Arabian culture, the swinging of opinion against America has blossomed. Whereas in the past, it was possible to support the goals but oppose the methods in non Arabic regions, "You are either with us or against us" has successfully denied this option to many.

Fanatics in the west is measured in parts/million, fanatics in the Arab world is measured in percent. Christian fundamentalists are a nasty boil on the society they exist in, Islamic fundamentalists are smallpox.

I'm sorry, but tens of thousand of Al Queda and other militant supporters compare favourably with the thousands of right-wing, christian influenced militias in the US. Not to mention, several hundred thousand fundamentalist muslims do not make a significant part of 1 billion worshippers.

[Master of Ossus]

And the thing is, very few public figures step up to deny it. Extremism is socially acceptable, and that has got to change.

The problem lies in the issues and resolution. To put it simply, Bush has so skewered the PR image of America that even in regions not affected by Arabian culture, the swinging of opinion against America has blossomed. Whereas in the past, it was possible to support the goals but oppose the methods in non Arabic regions, "You are either with us or against us" has successfully denied this option to many.

I somehow find this mantra less objectionable after the whole massive Chechen terrorism campaign happened. I used to feel sorry for the Chechen separatists. Sorry. If I see the Chechen separatist then I'm going to make him spend the seven cents to shoot me, even if that's all I can do to hurt their cause. If anyone supports a Chechen separatist, from now on I consider them to be a terrorist. I'm willing to end relationships with my closest friends over this, if any of my friends feel sympathy for them. I no longer make a distinction between their cause and their methods, for their cause is only destruction. Fuck them all.

I'm sorry, but tens of thousand of Al Queda and other militant supporters compare favourably with the thousands of right-wing, christian influenced militias in the US. Not to mention, several hundred thousand fundamentalist muslims do not make a significant part of 1 billion worshippers.

Did you see crowds of American right-wingers celebrating and shooting guns off in the streets when Oklahoma City went off? Did you see people celebrating when the Twin Towers fell? Neither did I. While the right-wing probably plays a similar role in our society as Al Qaeda et. al do in theirs, the right wing has nowhere NEAR the influence and enjoys virtually no support among the popular press. That, in and of itself, represents a tremendous difference in the two societies.