The Prblem with Anti-Islamic Arguments

[micatala]

http://www.twincities.com/newsletter-mo ... ck_check=1

The article includes a short quiz on violent rhetoric, and asks the reader to choose where the rhetoric resides, Bible or Koran.



Questions for debate.

1) Is the author, Leonard Pitts of the Miami Herald, correct? Do Christians, at leat in the U.S., tend to get the benefit of the doubt while Muslims are often condemned in a blanket fashion?


2) Is it fair to Christians who do not understand the context of the Koran to use the Koran to criticize modern Muslim's? Should we discount opinions on the Koran or Islam provided by individuals who show no understanding of Islam?


3) What benefit does the anti-Islamic rhetoric prevalent in today's U.S. society provide to that society? What detriments does it present?


Even if criticism of Islam in general, or particular Muslim or Muslim populations is justified, should we not ask what good or harm this criticism does? Of these three questions, 3 seems to be the most important. It also leads to the follow up.


4) To the extent that their are radical Muslims who practice violence, what is the most constructive way of dealing with those radical views?

[East of Eden]

Another fallacious argument, just because the Lord's Resistance Army & the Iron Guard are Christian terrorist organisations does not mean Christianity itself is violent, it means people are using the religion to commit violence.

And the two groups you mention act as they do despite the word and deed of Jesus, the Jihadists act because of the word and deed of the 'prophet'.

"But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'"
(Luke 19:27)
Oh it's a parable right?

Yes, one that most likely refers to the Last Judgement or the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Tell me what else does "kill" mean?

That's funny coming from you, who ignore the countless Koranic mandates to kill us 'infidels'. The Jihadists get the message.

We know the people who wrote the hadiths, no fallacious argument here.

And we have a pretty good idea who wrote the Gospels.

No "General View" means "Majority of Scholars".

Doubtful, and 'argumentum ad populum'. You don't think there are scholars in the Catholic and Orthodox churches?

Only very few NT scholars debate for the disciple authorship & they are blinded by their theological bias'.

Is it possible for theological liberals to be biased, or does that only apply to those you disagree with?

Obviously, conservatives believe in tradition that the Churches teach them, it's kind of circular if you analyse it properly.

But theological liberals (and Muslims) aren't influenced by their teachers?

The Council of Nicea in 325 decided which Gospels were right & which were wrong, not the Church.

Church councils represent the church, Jesus predicted He would send the Holy Spirit that would lead the apostles into all truth.

There are numerous Gospels that were lost throughout time, that early Church Fathers referred to.

So what? They were not canonical.

Next time i prefer you to give links instead of quoting large slabs of text.

I thought it would make it harder for you to ignore, I was wrong.

Because they witnessed miracles that have been recorded down into authentic narrations with many parallels (no anonymous authors).

Again, just like the Gospels. You still don't see your double standard, but contine to cherry pick the NT by selectively throwing out parts that disagree with the theology the Imans taught you.

No, Aisha herself gave the narrations, its found throughout sahih al-bukhari & sahih muslim. If you have any reason/evidence to believe she was a liar, present your case. Even the Shia sect of Islam who literally hate her for rebelling against Ali, do not doubt her historical recounts.

What does Bart Ehlman think?

Seriously, if there was a pedophile relationship today and the child said she liked it, it would still be a vile crime.

That is illogical, if you sinned against me, lets say you stole my bag, i could forgive you for it, i wouldn't have to kill one of my children to redeem you.

My sin would have ultimately been against God, not you.

And your pre-conceived beliefs that the "Atonement & Blood" compliments the Jewish scripture, it is the absolute contrary, ask any Jew & they will quote you:

Even when I have told the wicked that he will die, but then he repents, and he does justice and righteousness; he returns the collateral when he is supposed to, he repays what he stole, he begins to live by the Laws of Life, and does not do evil, he will live, and he will not die. All the sins that he committed will not be held against him, for he has begun to do judgment and righteousness; he shall surely live.
(Ezekiel 33:14-16)


The creator of the universe, sublime inventor of mathematics, of relativistic space-time, of quarks and quanta, of life itself, Almighty God, who reads our every thought and hears our every prayer, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent God couldn't think of a better way to forgive us than to have himself tortured and executed. For heaven's sake, if he wanted to forgive us, why didn't he just forgive us? Who, after all, needed to be impressed by the blood and the agony? Nobody but himself.
-Richard Dawkins

Once again, a guy from a false religion quoting other false religions and atheists doesn't do much for me.

There is no evidence for the martyrdom of the disciples, its quite humerous how you go back & forth trying to change the subject when you have nothing to say. I've accepted Paul's testimony because he lived during the time of James & he didn't have any theological input, i am clearly not applying double standards, if i was i wouldn't accept Paul's testimony. Do you have ANY evidence or not? Just say Yes or No, im sick of your games.

Once again you contradict yourself, you don't accept Paul's testimony, he wrote of meeting the risen Lord, who you disbelieve in.

Yes they do, its generally accepted by baised liberal Christians that Mark & Quella were copied by Matthew & Luke

Fixed it for you.

The shroud is debated to be fraudulent & even if it was shown to be authentic, it wouldn't conflict with the Sign of Jonah.

While I don't believe the shroud can prove Christianity, I think if the evidence for it were presented to a jury they would vote in it's favor.

So im guessing you admit the whole "Burial Tomb" is restricted to the Bible & is not found on earth?

Uh, no.

Unlike early Christians, Bart Ehrman who has been studying the New Testament for 30+years, he gives reasons & scholarly evidence for his assertions, they are not unsubstantiated claims.

His best award winning books:

I'm sure other biased theological liberal love to give him awards. He doesn't represent anybody. There are many critiques of him, here are a couple:

http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/200 ... -bart.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/03/ ... misqu.html

No i am not, where did i promote "Muslim Tradition", i encourage you to refute any of my claims.

On the contrary you seem to concentrate on quoting what other people believed, regardless of the absence of evidence.

Uh, didn't you just quote a bunch of theolocial liberals and what they believe?

“We may never know what drove these people . . .to hide their own identity and to claim, deceitfully, that they were someone else. Their readers, had they known, would probably have called them liars and condemned what they did. But in their own eyes, their conscience may have been free from blame, and their motives may have been as pure as the driven snow. They had a truth to convey, and they were happy to lie in order to proclaim it.
—from Forged

Completely illogical. That is as crazy as if a biography of Queen Victoria was written 30 years after her death full of false stories. It would be immediately contradicted and would not be accepted and passed on as true.

The disciples gave the world one of the highest ethical teachings ever, and even on the testimony of their enemies lived it out in their lives. It is absurd to picture a little band of defeated cowards huddling in an upper room one day and a few days later transformed into a group that no persecution could silence - and then trying to attribute this change to nothing more convincing than a cheap fabrication they were trying to foist on the world. It makes no sense. People do not knowingly die for a lie.

[East of Eden]

1. Not having read the article I cannot respond directly to the questions. I do find, however, that most people are not educated in Islam well enough to argue specific points about the religion. THIS INCLUDES MUSLIMS. I have read the Qur'an and discovered Muslims misquoting their own book with regard to actual quotations as well as interpretations (such as insisting it's a peaceful religion which it most certainly is not).

I've seen so many Muslims misquoting the Quran it's not even funny.

At all.

Here's a very popular example which seems to fool Muslims and non-Muslims (including non-theists).

A Muslim quotes the following verse:

“If anyone slays a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.�

But here's the entire verse:

"On that account: We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone slew a person - unless it be in retaliation for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew all mankind: and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all humanity."

Anyone with half a brain can see that another meaning emerges entirely.

There are so very many examples of this ignorance and propaganda (on TV and in the newspapers, not to mention from Muslim apologists) that my mind is continuously blown by the fact that non-theists often seem to fly to the rescue of Islam when people say it is violent, rarely bothering to actually mention their concern of the FACTS AT HAND which many of them are unaware of, notably that a MASSIVE percentage of people in MANY Muslim-majority countries support the vilest insanities such as killing people for thought crimes (apostasy) and torturing them to death by pelting them with stones for "sex crimes", and all of this in the name of their religious beliefs which are substantiated by standing mandates in the Sahih Hadith and the Quran.

Why doesn't anyone ask Murad, the self-proclaimed mainstream Muslim, all about it? I'm sure he'll be glad to explain to you why he can't condemn something such as the lethal torture of someone for "adultery", or the savage torture of people who have sex when neither is married.

For example, ANY comment which sheds light upon the prophet Mohammad in a negative fashion MAY result in massive violent demonstrations if not in America then in other countries. It matters not whether that "light" is true or not.

Yes. It's the "kill those who say Islam is violent" syndrome.
The irony would paralyze me from laughter if it wasn't of the LETHAL kind.

This syndrom is amplified by the "anyone who opposes himself to hateful mainstream Islamic theology is a racist or a bigot, or is close-minded or intolerant" disease which seems to permeate large strata of society.

Then there's the extremely dangerous tendency for political correctness at all costs, which leads to such utter stupidities as this one-way condemnation by a U.N. chief envoy to Afghanistan - not one-way towards the vicious and bloodthirsty murderers of innocents, nope, but towards a random idiotic fanatical pastor who burnt a "holy" book he himself owned.

The UN's chief envoy to Afghanistan, Staffan de Mistura, blamed Friday's violence in the northern city of Mazar-e Sharif on the Florida pastor who burnt the Koran on 20 March.

"I don't think we should be blaming any Afghan," Mr de Mistura said. "We should be blaming the person who produced the news - the one who burned the Koran. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from offending culture, religion, traditions."

There are INNUMERABLE such examples of public figures demonstrating their utter stupidity and incompetence, and it seems that this mentality is contagious.

My greatest frustration has been that of endlessly having to deal with non-theists or Christians who are evidently utterly ignorant about Islam, and who constantly attempt to paint me (or any other person who offers legitimate criticism of Islam) in a negative light because they are entirely unaware that mainstream Christianity and Islam simply aren't remotely similar ideologies.

Sometimes I think it's a lost cause. All of this information at their fingertips, and people keep making claims which show that they are utterly uninformed about what they're arguing about with such vehemence. The worst part is that this "Islam is just like Christianity and that's why pointing out the orders for torture and killing people isn't relevant" mentality doesn't usually fade away no matter how many times it is debunked.

-Woland

Another great post on this topic, Woland. I'm done with this thread until Murad is man enough to address your points.

[Choir Loft]

[quote="East of Eden] Muslims are being targeted like communists were in the McCarthy days and Japanese were during WWII. Maybe you don't live near a large Muslim population and do not see it. I happen to (Dearborn, MI being the largest population density of Arabs outside of the middle East) and how many violent acts have occurred in Michigan by Michigan residents who are Muslims? I can think of ZERO. Our larger problems here are the violent Christian militia groups that are out to kill police officers.

You are making false claims without appropriate documentation.

There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that:
[1.] Muslims are being deliberately targeted like communists or Japanese during WWII. (Please provide evidence that Muslims are being rounded up wholesale and forced into guarded camps. per the Japanese in WWII)
Your statement is a lie.
(Please provide evidence that Muslim leaders, entertainers and clerics are being forced into congrssional committee examinations. per the Communists in th 1950's
Please also provide evidence that Muslims are being targeted in the workplace.)
Your statement is a lie.

[2.] You state that there is a conspiracy on the part of Christian militia groups to kill police officers. There is no evidence of that at all. Please provide it if you've got it.
Your statement is a lie.

It is easy to make wild assertions and false claims especially when one is operating in an anonymous media such as this. Anything can be stated with impunity without proof. The fact that no one knows your real name does not justify false claims.

It is a stereotypical tactic of radical Muslims to make illogical and unfounded statements which are derogatory to others, such as Jews and Christians. Their purpose is to create confusion and the false appearance of arguing from the moral high ground - all the while looking for a way to slit the throat of the unwary.

"All Muslims are honest, you just can't trust them."
- an axiom I learned the hard way during a tour of duty in the middle east

[Board]

You are making false claims without appropriate documentation.

I most certainly am not... but I can see where you get that impression if you are not up to speed on the current situation and historical facts.

There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that:
[1.] Muslims are being deliberately targeted like communists or Japanese during WWII. (Please provide evidence that Muslims are being rounded up wholesale and forced into guarded camps. per the Japanese in WWII)
Your statement is a lie.
(Please provide evidence that Muslim leaders, entertainers and clerics are being forced into congrssional committee examinations. per the Communists in th 1950's
Please also provide evidence that Muslims are being targeted in the workplace.)
Your statement is a lie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/0 ... 31939.html

A Minnesota Democrat, congressman Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to the House, says that while it's proper to investigate radicalization, he thinks it is wrong to single out a religious minority.

"I worry about it," he said on the program. "Everybody I talk to worries about it, and we're concerned about the breadth of this."

He added, "It's absolutely the right thing to do for the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee to investigate radicalization, but to say we're going to investigate a religious minority, and a particular one, I think is the wrong course of action to take."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/congress ... d=12867145

Last week, a collection of more than 50 Muslim, Christian and interfaith groups, and human and civil rights organizations wrote a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi condemning the idea of the hearings, which they said are reminiscent of "McCarthyism," and encouraged the committee to embrace an examination of "violence motivated by extremist beliefs, in all its forms, in a full, fair and objective way."

Did we start rounding up communists and Japanese immediately during those times? Of course not... Those events took place after a level of fear was thoroughly spread among the people to allow for such atrocities to take place. The fear is spread by things like these congressional hearings that sway the minds of the less informed in our nation to think that all Muslims are violent. This is not about being politically correct. This is about the citizens of the United States being treated fair and equally.

[2.] You state that there is a conspiracy on the part of Christian militia groups to kill police officers. There is no evidence of that at all. Please provide it if you've got it.
Your statement is a lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutaree

The United States Attorney's Office stated that the Hutaree allegedly planned "to kill an unidentified member of local law enforcement and then attack the law enforcement officers who gather in Michigan for the funeral". [19] [20] The press release further stated that nine had been indicted by a federal grand jury in Detroit on charges of seditious conspiracy, attempted use of weapons of mass destruction, teaching the use of explosive materials, and possessing a firearm during a crime of violence. The indictment said that the Hutaree planned to attack law enforcement vehicles during the funeral procession for the officer(s) they planned to kill, using improvised explosive devices of the Explosively formed penetrator variety, thus constituting the formal, Federal statutory definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. [20]

Their Trial is upcoming in September.

It is easy to make wild assertions and false claims especially when one is operating in an anonymous media such as this. Anything can be stated with impunity without proof. The fact that no one knows your real name does not justify false claims.

Except that the claims are not false...

It is a stereotypical tactic of radical Muslims to make illogical and unfounded statements which are derogatory to others, such as Jews and Christians. Their purpose is to create confusion and the false appearance of arguing from the moral high ground - all the while looking for a way to slit the throat of the unwary.

"All Muslims are honest, you just can't trust them."
- an axiom I learned the hard way during a tour of duty in the middle east

And then you end this post of blatant incivility with this... I can do no more than call it what it is. Prejudiced, bigoted, and ignorant.... every last bit of it.

[Choir Loft]

"All Muslims are honest, you just can't trust them."
- an axiom I learned the hard way during a tour of duty in the middle east

And then you end this post of blatant incivility with this... I can do no more than call it what it is. Prejudiced, bigoted, and ignorant.... every last bit of it.

Not at all.

It's not prejudice, it's EXPERIENCE - THE SCHOOL OF HARD KNOCKS.

I was there, sir. Let me say that unless you have your antenna up ALL THE TIME with those people you are likely to come out of a situation with less than you went in with.....

I was a trifle inaccurate, however.
TWO tours of duty in the middle east. Sorry about that.

To a muslim it's prejudice, to someone else it's a fact of life that one has to deal with and pity the man that forgets it.

[Board]

Not at all.

It's not prejudice, it's EXPERIENCE - THE SCHOOL OF HARD KNOCKS.

I was there, sir. Let me say that unless you have your antenna up ALL THE TIME with those people you are likely to come out of a situation with less than you went in with.....

I was a trifle inaccurate, however.
TWO tours of duty in the middle east. Sorry about that.

To a muslim it's prejudice, to someone else it's a fact of life that one has to deal with and pity the man that forgets it.

Your experiences have brought you to stereotype all Muslims as un-trustworthy? Please, share with us how you have experienced this and show us reason why not one single Muslim should be trusted.

After that maybe you can read the rest of my post and respond to the evidence I presented to your accusation that I lied about the claims.

[Woland]

Muslims are being targeted like communists were in the McCarthy days and Japanese were during WWII.

It's astounding that someone would say something like this, and it's insulting at best to the people who were indeed unfairly targeted in the past.

People are bending over backwards everywhere in the world - including in the U.S. - to not offend Muslims and to make sure that their rights are respected, and then some.

No one can get away with the mildest criticism of violent Islam (not of the sad myth of "tiny minority extreme Islam", but MAINSTREAM Islam, with polls consistently showing 80% support for violent theocratic policies in SEVERAL Muslim-majority countries like Egypt, Pakistan, etc.) anywhere in the West without instantly being branded an "Islamophobe" (an irrelevant and disingenuous expression if I've ever seen one), intolerant (tolerate those who are dangerously intolerant or else) or racist (yes, racist - that's a favorite of people who really know what they're talking about).

When things like this happen regularly around the world (including in Michigan) you just have to accept the reality that your alarmist comparison is more than slightly misplaced.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37621

What else? You have groups like CAIR with prominent members supporting Sharia and extremist groups, you have newspapers that are so afraid for their families that they refuse to print CARTOONS, you have public figures and other groups CONSTANTLY issuing one-way condemnations, you have people - including virtually all the politicians who have ever taken a public stance on this issue - flying to the rescue of "Islam" and IGNORANTLY calling it "a religion of peace and tolerance" in complete disregard for the facts, and you have Muslims everywhere in the world DEMANDING one-way concessions and one-way tolerance, and often getting their wishes.

Give me a break. I could go on for days.

Please inform yourself about the situation at hand before making such patently inadequate comparisons.

The facts remain: there are insidious, violent-theocracy-supporting organizations worldwide mounting a well-organized assault on your freedoms. The organizations I speak of are very skilled at sophistry, lawfare and propaganda.

They are very rarely denounced and exposed, all things considered. If you'd seen even a small part of the hate promoted in the name of Islam all over the world and the disastrous results, you'd NEVER dare utter such a comparison considering the mild and ignorant stance of politicians on the issue. Most people seem to be utterly unaware of what goes on in their own country when it comes to Islam, and with good cause - they're not presented a fraction of the relevant information in the news sources they usually feed from, or they're completely confused with pseudointellectual politically correct doctrines aiming to relativize everything and anything, no matter how vile, when it comes to Islam and the violent actions and oppression perpetrated by Muslims in the name of their religion.

I'm saying all of this knowing full well that the odds of making you see the extent of the irrelevance of your remark would tend to be extremely low if I am to believe my past experiences in such matters.

No, I don't hate Muslims, and yes, I am aware that Muslims in the West tend to be more inclined towards respecting freedoms and human rights than their coreligionists in the Middle East.

It doesn't change a damn thing to the sad reality of the situation.

If anything, the world needs A WHOLE LOT MORE criticism and information about Islam and its dangers SPECIFICALLY, because the massive negligence and disinformation of the intellectually lazy so-called "elite" will kick us in the face sooner than you might wish to believe, and much harder too.

The fear is spread by things like these congressional hearings that sway the minds of the less informed in our nation to think that all Muslims are violent.

I don't expect in a thousand years that these meetings would even partially seem to suggest that "all Muslims are violent" so what are these people complaining about?

Well, something from within. And I've said time and time again, the overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding Americans, but at this stage in our history there's an effort to radicalizate -- to radicalize elements within the Muslim community.

Sure, this guy's out to make people believe that all Muslims are violent.

There simply can't be any valid reason to single out intolerant Islam as a religion/ideology (a religiopolitical ideology) and examine how and why it manipulates young gullible people into becoming fanatical bloodthirsty psychopaths.

-Woland

[micatala]

[quote="East of Eden] Muslims are being targeted like communists were in the McCarthy days and Japanese were during WWII. Maybe you don't live near a large Muslim population and do not see it. I happen to (Dearborn, MI being the largest population density of Arabs outside of the middle East) and how many violent acts have occurred in Michigan by Michigan residents who are Muslims? I can think of ZERO. Our larger problems here are the violent Christian militia groups that are out to kill police officers.

You are making false claims without appropriate documentation.

There is absolutely no proof whatsoever that:
[1.] Muslims are being deliberately targeted like communists or Japanese during WWII. (Please provide evidence that Muslims are being rounded up wholesale and forced into guarded camps. per the Japanese in WWII)
Your statement is a lie.
(Please provide evidence that Muslim leaders, entertainers and clerics are being forced into congrssional committee examinations. per the Communists in th 1950's
Please also provide evidence that Muslims are being targeted in the workplace.)
Your statement is a lie.

[2.] You state that there is a conspiracy on the part of Christian militia groups to kill police officers. There is no evidence of that at all. Please provide it if you've got it.
Your statement is a lie.

It is easy to make wild assertions and false claims especially when one is operating in an anonymous media such as this. Anything can be stated with impunity without proof. The fact that no one knows your real name does not justify false claims.

It is a stereotypical tactic of radical Muslims to make illogical and unfounded statements which are derogatory to others, such as Jews and Christians. Their purpose is to create confusion and the false appearance of arguing from the moral high ground - all the while looking for a way to slit the throat of the unwary.

"All Muslims are honest, you just can't trust them."
- an axiom I learned the hard way during a tour of duty in the middle east

Moderator Comment



I would admonish richardp to avoid incivility.

It is absolutely fine to challenge other posters for evidence of their claims.

However, to ask for evidence and then to label the claim as a lie is unwarranted. It is in fact doing somewhat what you are accusing the poster of doing. A claim for which evidence has not been provided could be labeled unsupported or unsubstantiated. A lie is a deliberate falsehood. A lack of evidence is not proof of falsehood.

Also, your last line is arguably inflammatory.





Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.

[Board]

It's astounding that someone would say something like this, and it's insulting at best to the people who were indeed unfairly targeted in the past.

People are bending over backwards everywhere in the world - including in the U.S. - to not offend Muslims and to make sure that their rights are respected, and then some.

No one can get away with the mildest criticism of violent Islam (not of the sad myth of "tiny minority extreme Islam", but MAINSTREAM Islam, with polls consistently showing 80% support for violent theocratic policies in SEVERAL Muslim-majority countries like Egypt, Pakistan, etc.) anywhere in the West without instantly being branded an "Islamophobe" (an irrelevant and disingenuous expression if I've ever seen one), intolerant (tolerate those who are dangerously intolerant or else) or racist (yes, racist - that's a favorite of people who really know what they're talking about).

When things like this happen regularly around the world (including in Michigan) you just have to accept the reality that your alarmist comparison is more than slightly misplaced.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37621

What else? You have groups like CAIR with prominent members supporting Sharia and extremist groups, you have newspapers that are so afraid for their families that they refuse to print CARTOONS, you have public figures and other groups CONSTANTLY issuing one-way condemnations, you have people - including virtually all the politicians who have ever taken a public stance on this issue - flying to the rescue of "Islam" and IGNORANTLY calling it "a religion of peace and tolerance" in complete disregard for the facts, and you have Muslims everywhere in the world DEMANDING one-way concessions and one-way tolerance, and often getting their wishes.

Give me a break. I could go on for days.

Please inform yourself about the situation at hand before making such patently inadequate comparisons.

Woland, I respect you opinion on a lot of things and I agree whole heartedly that Islam can and does lead to extremism. However, the comparison is not inaccurate and is not insulting to those unfairly targeted in the past. It is unfortunate that in the past we let ourselves get carried away in the frenzy against the minority groups like the communists and Japanese and do terrible things. What lead up to those actions? What created a country wide prejudice that was encouraged? Our government. They need to be held to a higher standard.

I agree that these extreme Islamic groups need to be investigated. I agree that these meetings need to take place. I disagree that these are the only groups that should be singled out. There are extreme Christian groups that need to be investigated. There are extreme *insert belief here* groups that need to be investigated.

By singling out a specific minority group it gives the impression to the more gullible population that their personal prejudice against the minority is justified. We have too many ignorant people in this country who swallow whatever dribble is handed to them from the media and especially the government. The only reason to compare this with McCarthyism is to bring light to the potential and to get people to think before they report their neighbor for terrorism because he is a Muslim.

The facts remain: there are insidious, violent-theocracy-supporting organizations worldwide mounting a well-organized assault on your freedoms. The organizations I speak of are very skilled at sophistry, lawfare and propaganda.

They are very rarely denounced and exposed, all things considered. If you'd seen even a small part of the hate promoted in the name of Islam all over the world and the disastrous results, you'd NEVER dare utter such a comparison considering the mild and ignorant stance of politicians on the issue. Most people seem to be utterly unaware of what goes on in their own country when it comes to Islam, and with good cause - they're not presented a fraction of the relevant information in the news sources they usually feed from, or they're completely confused with pseudointellectual politically correct doctrines aiming to relativize everything and anything, no matter how vile, when it comes to Islam and the violent actions and oppression perpetrated by Muslims in the name of their religion.

I'm saying all of this knowing full well that the odds of making you see the extent of the irrelevance of your remark would tend to be extremely low if I am to believe my past experiences in such matters.

I do see your point and I agree. How do we expressly target these groups without causing the uneasy populace to take up arms against Muslims in their community?

No, I don't hate Muslims, and yes, I am aware that Muslims in the West tend to be more inclined towards respecting freedoms and human rights than their coreligionists in the Middle East.

It doesn't change a damn thing to the sad reality of the situation.

If anything, the world needs A WHOLE LOT MORE criticism and information about Islam and its dangers SPECIFICALLY, because the massive negligence and disinformation of the intellectually lazy so-called "elite" will kick us in the face sooner than you might wish to believe, and much harder too.

Your slippery slope aside I do agree with you. And yes, I realize my comparison of these meetings and McCarthyism is also a slippery slope...

We need the human race to grow up and shrug off the bonds of religion in general. It can all be used equally poorly. The problem is most Islamic nations are 600 years behind the west when it comes to matters of human rights and equality. How do you investigate and act against someone who has ideals still grounded in the dark ages? How do you do this effectively without restricting the rights of those Muslims who have matured in their beliefs and are more moderate?

The fear is spread by things like these congressional hearings that sway the minds of the less informed in our nation to think that all Muslims are violent.

I don't expect in a thousand years that these meetings would even partially seem to suggest that "all Muslims are violent" so what are these people complaining about?

Well, something from within. And I've said time and time again, the overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding Americans, but at this stage in our history there's an effort to radicalizate -- to radicalize elements within the Muslim community.

Sure, this guy's out to make people believe that all Muslims are violent.

There simply can't be any valid reason to single out intolerant Islam as a religion/ideology (a religiopolitical ideology) and examine how and why it manipulates young gullible people into becoming fanatical bloodthirsty psychopaths.

-Woland

It is about the impression this gives to the population. Some things are best kept behind closed doors to not cause panic and violence from the average American citizen. We have enough ignorant people in our country and we do not need to give them reasons why they should turn to violence.

[Woland]

Hello Board,

Though I may not have the time for such an endeavour tonight, I will soon write a proper reply to your post.

In the meantime, please accept my sincere apologies if you found that the "assertive" tone of my previous post was inappropriate, and my thanks (as well as my respect) for not replying with anything inflammatory or dismissive.

If you could only see the countless conversations I've had, read and witnessed (online and elsewhere) about Islam/Muslims, it would help you understand why I'm so easily annoyed when it comes to these topics.

When you have looked at thousands of articles and news reports from around the world about Islam/Muslims (including a simply massive number of diverse opinions from Muslims/politicians/public figures/Christians/non-theists on the issues) for a few years (+theology, scripture and fallacious apologetics), the current global situation seems many levels beyond absurd, and the general unwillingness of people to educate themselves on issues they speak about with absolute conviction - OR, for that matter, to admit that they've been shown that their arguments/views are so very often based on misinformation or fallacies - becomes a sad spectacle at best, and a grim warning of what is to come if ignorance, propaganda and misinformation prevail.

I'm not suggesting that such words apply to your argument as presented and clarified. I agree with you on most points. I'm just sharing my personal conclusions and experiences.

More to come.

-Woland