Of Course, "the Great Majority of Muslims are Peaceful" blah blah [Archive]

abu afak

11-12-2002, 05:53 PM

Of Course, the Great Majority of Muslims are Peaceful – So What?
By Dennis Prager - November 5, 2002

Whenever the question of Islam and violence – specifically terror – is raised, we are repeatedly told that "the vast majority of Muslims in the world are peaceful people" who never engage in terror. This is entirely accurate.

And entirely irrelevant.

The vast majority of Germans living in the Nazi era were also peaceful – very few ever so much as laid a hand on a Jew. So, too, the vast majority of Russians never killed anyone while 20 to 40 million of their fellow citizens were murdered by the communist regime under Stalin.

The point here is that the threat to civilization emanating from within Islam is no more obviated by the fact that the great majority of Muslims are not violent than the threat that emanated from Nazism was obviated by the peaceful behavior of the great majority of Germans, or the threat from Soviet Communism was nullified by the nonviolence among the great majority of Russians.

Germany was a threat to civilization because Nazis and their ideology took over German society while the majority of Germans (the "good Germans") either supported Nazi ideals or did nothing. Russia was a threat to civilization because communists took over the country, and the great majority of Russians either supported Papa Stalin or did nothing. Some Islamic societies are today becoming a threat to civilization because Islamic totalitarians and terrorists are taking over those societies while a majority of Muslims either support their ideals or do nothing.

That is why it is meaningless at best, and dishonest at worst, to deny the threat to civilization coming from various Muslim countries by noting that most Muslims are not violent. Only a handful of Saudis terrorized America on 9-11-01, but a large majority of Saudis support Osama bin Laden. Few Palestinians strap bombs onto their children's bodies, but the majority of them support such evil and none of the others publicly morally condemn it.

At this moment, the dominant strain of Islamic thought is totalitarian, meaning that wherever possible, a government should be Islamic and govern according to a strict interpretation of the Sharia (Muslim religious law). Furthermore, when necessary and when possible, the Islamists believe these religious laws should be imposed violently – as in Sudan, Nigeria, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

In addition, the dominant ideological trend in much of Islamic society is hate-filled. What is said daily about Jews in Middle Eastern mosques rivals what the Nazis said about Jews. And not only in mosques. During Ramadan, Egyptian television is running a 41-part series based on the anti-Semitic forgery "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

For all these reasons, one's moral assessment of what is taking place in the Muslim world must be made independent of the fact that the great majority of Muslims are peaceful people. Their peaceful lifestyle is not influencing the bellicose trends in their religion.

Thus, what is most frightening is not that there are Muslim terrorists, but by how little criticism of Islamic terror emanates from normative Islamic groups. While some Muslim groups have condemned individual acts of Islamic terror such as 9-11, not one significant Muslim group in the world, including here in free America, has condemned Islamic terror generally. And the leaders of Al-Azhar University, the most prestigious institution of Islamic learning, have actually morally and religiously come out in support of Islamic suicide terror against Israelis.

So the fact that the majority of those living in the Islamic countries are good people is of no consequence. Unless they do something to condemn and to isolate the Muslim totalitarians and terrorists in their midst, history will judge them as it has all the good Germans during the Holocaust.

Dennis Prager, one of America's most respected and popular nationally syndicated radio talk-show hosts, is the author of several books and a frequent guest on television shows such as Larry King Live, Politically Incorrect, The Late Late Show on CBS, Rivera Live, The Early Show on CBS, Fox Family Network, The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes.
©2002 - Creators Syndicate, Inc. - WorldNetDaily.com

reason

11-13-2002, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by abu afak
Of Course, the Great Majority of Muslims are Peaceful – So What?
By Dennis Prager - November 5, 2002

Whenever the question of Islam and violence – specifically terror – is raised, we are repeatedly told that "the vast majority of Muslims in the world are peaceful people" who never engage in terror. This is entirely accurate.

And entirely irrelevant.

The vast majority of Germans living in the Nazi era were also peaceful – very few ever so much as laid a hand on a Jew. So, too, the vast majority of Russians never killed anyone while 20 to 40 million of their fellow citizens were murdered by the communist regime under Stalin.

The point here is that the threat to civilization emanating from within Islam is no more obviated by the fact that the great majority of Muslims are not violent than the threat that emanated from Nazism was obviated by the peaceful behavior of the great majority of Germans, or the threat from Soviet Communism was nullified by the nonviolence among the great majority of Russians.

Germany was a threat to civilization because Nazis and their ideology took over German society while the majority of Germans (the "good Germans") either supported Nazi ideals or did nothing. Russia was a threat to civilization because communists took over the country, and the great majority of Russians either supported Papa Stalin or did nothing. Some Islamic societies are today becoming a threat to civilization because Islamic totalitarians and terrorists are taking over those societies while a majority of Muslims either support their ideals or do nothing.

That is why it is meaningless at best, and dishonest at worst, to deny the threat to civilization coming from various Muslim countries by noting that most Muslims are not violent. Only a handful of Saudis terrorized America on 9-11-01, but a large majority of Saudis support Osama bin Laden. Few Palestinians strap bombs onto their children's bodies, but the majority of them support such evil and none of the others publicly morally condemn it.

At this moment, the dominant strain of Islamic thought is totalitarian, meaning that wherever possible, a government should be Islamic and govern according to a strict interpretation of the Sharia (Muslim religious law). Furthermore, when necessary and when possible, the Islamists believe these religious laws should be imposed violently – as in Sudan, Nigeria, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

In addition, the dominant ideological trend in much of Islamic society is hate-filled. What is said daily about Jews in Middle Eastern mosques rivals what the Nazis said about Jews. And not only in mosques. During Ramadan, Egyptian television is running a 41-part series based on the anti-Semitic forgery "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

For all these reasons, one's moral assessment of what is taking place in the Muslim world must be made independent of the fact that the great majority of Muslims are peaceful people. Their peaceful lifestyle is not influencing the bellicose trends in their religion.

Thus, what is most frightening is not that there are Muslim terrorists, but by how little criticism of Islamic terror emanates from normative Islamic groups. While some Muslim groups have condemned individual acts of Islamic terror such as 9-11, not one significant Muslim group in the world, including here in free America, has condemned Islamic terror generally. And the leaders of Al-Azhar University, the most prestigious institution of Islamic learning, have actually morally and religiously come out in support of Islamic suicide terror against Israelis.

So the fact that the majority of those living in the Islamic countries are good people is of no consequence. Unless they do something to condemn and to isolate the Muslim totalitarians and terrorists in their midst, history will judge them as it has all the good Germans during the Holocaust.

Dennis Prager, one of America's most respected and popular nationally syndicated radio talk-show hosts, is the author of several books and a frequent guest on television shows such as Larry King Live, Politically Incorrect, The Late Late Show on CBS, Rivera Live, The Early Show on CBS, Fox Family Network, The O'Reilly Factor and Hannity & Colmes.
©2002 - Creators Syndicate, Inc. - WorldNetDaily.com

Aren't most Germans Christians? So you might as well say that Christianity is to blame. Islam is not a nationality, its a religion not a goverment. If you will blame people in Morroco for things Taliban did in Afghanistan, you have to blame Peru for the Holocaust. And why didnt Peru condemn the Holocaust?History will judge them as it has all the good germans.I dont see any Logic in this.

ibrodsky

11-13-2002, 07:38 AM

Mediocrates

11-13-2002, 07:45 AM

Perhaps the point of the peace is to state that claiming "we are really peaceful" is an inadequate response to the problems at hand. In most civilized societies the common response to something which is antisocial is to exclude it, condemn it. So for example most Americans don't respond to the Klan or the Turner Diaries with a simple "Well - people is entitled to they own opinions, ya know?"

In a similar vein I posted an art. in Resources about the al Hayat firing of a liberal journalist. The common message is quite clear. At best the mainstream Arab press will ignore the worst abuses of their own societies. But more frequently the official party line is quite extreme, racist, inflammatory and in severe denial.

abu afak

11-13-2002, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by reason
Aren't most Germans Christians? So you might as well say that Christianity is to blame. Islam is not a nationality, its a religion not a goverment. If you will blame people in Morroco for things Taliban did in Afghanistan, you have to blame Peru for the Holocaust. And why didnt Peru condemn the Holocaust?History will judge them as it has all the good germans.I dont see any Logic in this.

Killing Christians
By Amitai Etzioni - November 12, 2002
On October 17, bombs killed 6 people and wounded 143 in Zamboanga, the Philippines. While press accounts mentioned in passing that the victims were Christians, few conveyed to the reader that these were people assaulted by Muslim extremists because of their religion. On September 25, militant Muslims shot dead 7 Christian Pakistanis execution style in Karachi. Most of the media failed to report this at all, though it was at least the fifth bloody attack on Christians in Pakistan in the last twelve months.

And the media almost never point out that Christians are being killed, often at places of worship, in several countries with Islamic majorities or governments, not because they are Westerners or Americans (many are neither) but because they are Christians. Nor is the White House or Congress nearly as attentive--to put it mildly--to this pattern of killing as it is to any injury on either side of the conflict in Israel.

People who follow international news are aware that a civil war raged in Ethiopia for more than 30 years. But few realize that it was a religious war--between Muslim Eritrea and Christian Ethiopia--in which tens of thousands perished. Many know that the people of East Timor were savaged, but it is rarely mentioned that most East Timorese are Christian, while the Indonesian militants who killed many of them and brutalized the refugees in West Timor are Muslim. Indeed, Christians in other parts of Indonesia have hardly fared better; for instance, thousands died during riots in the Moluccan Islands in 2000.

The bloody war in the Sudan, similarly, pits the Muslim government in the North against the Christian and animist South. And in Nigeria, as Muslims try to impose a strict version of the legal code called sharia in several provinces, armed conflicts between Muslims and Christians have erupted and thousands have died. Just lately, in the Ivory Coast, Muslims in the North have been attacking Christians in the South. On a smaller scale but very much along the same lines, scores of Coptic Christians were killed in Egypt in January 2000; several churches were burned in Kenya the following year.

It seems somehow inflammatory to point to the religious element of these and many other conflicts. Nearly every day, meanwhile, some scholar assures us that Islam is a peaceable and loving religion. What is going on here? >From the beginning, Islam drew a distinction between Christians and Jews and other non-Muslims. The former were "people of the book." They had to pay special taxes and wear identifying clothing, yet their status reflected a certain respect for what Muslims saw as the earlier but incomplete and corrupted revelation recorded in the Bible. In the modern period, Christians and Jews are typically called Kuffr, or infidels. In countries under strict sharia, apostasy is a capital crime, and in the minds of extremists like Osama bin Laden, infidels too deserve death. While Muslim societies differ widely in their levels of tolerance, pluralism, and religious freedom, full respect for Christianity is virtually absent.

This matter came up last spring at a conference held by Iranian reformers in Isfahan. The gathering brought together a number of Islamic and Western intellectuals in opposition to the thesis advanced by Samuel Huntington of Harvard University that Western and Islamic civilizations are bound to clash. During his presentation, Ebrahim Moosa, an imam from South Africa now teaching at Duke University, urged that Islam be recast so as to accommodate liberal attitudes. He stressed the need for three changes: recognition of women's equality with men; toleration of capitalism; and recognition of the full dignity and humanity of nonbelievers. But we are still waiting to hear from many other Muslim leaders as to whether they wish to move Islam in this direction.

The White House has solid tactical reasons for stating and restating that our fight is only with terrorists, not Muslims. We must face the fact, however, that while the prophet has many moderate followers, the terrorists command great sympathy in the Islamic world not only because Islamic populations are anti-American or anti-Western, but also because the terrorists are attacking infidels. An elderly Afghan freed from detention at Guantanamo last week made a telling statement to a Washington Post reporter: "The Americans treated me well, but they were not Muslims, so I didn't like them."

It is true that other religions have passed through violent and intolerant phases. And it is possible that moderate interpretations of Islam may again come to predominate. But we shall be unable to recognize and foster that development if we refuse to acknowledge that the violence currently erupting in many parts of the Islamic world is aimed not simply at the political and economic leadership of the West but also at its Judeo-Christian tradition. When Christians and Jews are no longer characterized as Kuffr, we shall know we have turned a corner.

©2002 - The Weekly Standard

reason

11-13-2002, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
No, you are ignoring the point.

Terrorist groups are conducting mass murder attacks all over the world. There is no way to know if the next attack will be in Africa, Europe, Asia, or the Americas. The perpetrators claim to be Muslims and say their religion obligates them to mount brutal attacks against unarmed civilians.

As I indicated in another thread, the Muslim world's response has been "We have nothing to do with these attacks and of course they are wrong. But you have to understand the root cause."

Translation: "Don't blame us -- blame yourselves. The terrorists have just grievances. We can't condone their methods, because that would get us into trouble, but we sympathize with their cause."

Though western media and governments are extremely careful not to blame Islam, one cannot help but notice that ordinary citizens increasingly see terrorism as a facet of Islam.

This situation can be reversed, but only Muslims can do it and they don't have forever. Two things I believe good Muslims must do:

1. Speak out loudly and frequently against terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah, and Islamic Jihad. Make it clear that there are no excuses for killing unarmed civilians, and that committing such crimes can only cast doubt about the injustices they claim to redress.

2. Join the war against terrorism. Provide information about terrorist groups and people expressing sympathies with terrorists. Encourage Muslim countries and governments to form special militia to hunt down and capture or kill terrorists. Support US and Israel in fighting these groups, and do everything possible to convince good Muslims that Islamist terrorists are destroying Islam's reputation and endangering Muslim communities by associating their crimes with Islam.

"Terrorist groups are conducting mass murder attacks all over the world."
Germany and its allies during WWII where killing people all over the world.It dosnt change the fact that you cant point fingers at people in Morocco for what is happening in Afghanistan.I could understand the need for people in Morocco to speak out against these acts (since its being done in the name of Islam), but they are not guilty as those people who didnt condemn the Holocaust in Peru.

"As I indicated in another thread, the Muslim world's response has been "We have nothing to do with these attacks and of course they are wrong. But you have to understand the root cause."
There is no justifiable reason ever to kill innocent women and children, but there is a root problem for why its happening.There is a difference. Its like trying to understand the mind of a serial killer (the root) so there is a way to save lives later.There is no excuse ,reason or sympathy for the killer, but understanding his mind is crucial.Now in the example of Isreal, there is no justifiable reason for the suicide bombings, but there is a root problem mainly poverty and lack of education.Get rid of these and you rid the world of terrorisim.

"Translation: "Don't blame us -- blame yourselves. The terrorists have just grievances. We can't condone their methods, because that would get us into trouble, but we sympathize with their cause."

Yes the terrorists have their grievances(poverty,etc...) but they are not justification for killing innocent civilians.I agree with the rest we must condone their methods even if it causes trouble and we shouldnt sympathize with murderers , but we should understand where they are comming from (the root).

Otherwise I agree with your post.

abu afak

11-13-2002, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by reason
"Terrorist groups are conducting mass murder attacks all over the world."
Germany and its allies during WWII where killing people all over the world.It dosnt change the fact that you cant point fingers at people in Morocco for what is happening in Afghanistan.

I guess you were composing while I posted and missed my post... which pre-empts your reasoning... you CAN point fingers' about whats happening in places as disparate as Sudan and the Phillipines (for openers).

reason

11-13-2002, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by abu afak
Killing Christians
By Amitai Etzioni - November 12, 2002
On October 17, bombs killed 6 people and wounded 143 in Zamboanga, the Philippines. While press accounts mentioned in passing that the victims were Christians, few conveyed to the reader that these were people assaulted by Muslim extremists because of their religion. On September 25, militant Muslims shot dead 7 Christian Pakistanis execution style in Karachi. Most of the media failed to report this at all, though it was at least the fifth bloody attack on Christians in Pakistan in the last twelve months.

And the media almost never point out that Christians are being killed, often at places of worship, in several countries with Islamic majorities or governments, not because they are Westerners or Americans (many are neither) but because they are Christians. Nor is the White House or Congress nearly as attentive--to put it mildly--to this pattern of killing as it is to any injury on either side of the conflict in Israel.

People who follow international news are aware that a civil war raged in Ethiopia for more than 30 years. But few realize that it was a religious war--between Muslim Eritrea and Christian Ethiopia--in which tens of thousands perished. Many know that the people of East Timor were savaged, but it is rarely mentioned that most East Timorese are Christian, while the Indonesian militants who killed many of them and brutalized the refugees in West Timor are Muslim. Indeed, Christians in other parts of Indonesia have hardly fared better; for instance, thousands died during riots in the Moluccan Islands in 2000.

The bloody war in the Sudan, similarly, pits the Muslim government in the North against the Christian and animist South. And in Nigeria, as Muslims try to impose a strict version of the legal code called sharia in several provinces, armed conflicts between Muslims and Christians have erupted and thousands have died. Just lately, in the Ivory Coast, Muslims in the North have been attacking Christians in the South. On a smaller scale but very much along the same lines, scores of Coptic Christians were killed in Egypt in January 2000; several churches were burned in Kenya the following year.

It seems somehow inflammatory to point to the religious element of these and many other conflicts. Nearly every day, meanwhile, some scholar assures us that Islam is a peaceable and loving religion. What is going on here? >From the beginning, Islam drew a distinction between Christians and Jews and other non-Muslims. The former were "people of the book." They had to pay special taxes and wear identifying clothing, yet their status reflected a certain respect for what Muslims saw as the earlier but incomplete and corrupted revelation recorded in the Bible. In the modern period, Christians and Jews are typically called Kuffr, or infidels. In countries under strict sharia, apostasy is a capital crime, and in the minds of extremists like Osama bin Laden, infidels too deserve death. While Muslim societies differ widely in their levels of tolerance, pluralism, and religious freedom, full respect for Christianity is virtually absent.

This matter came up last spring at a conference held by Iranian reformers in Isfahan. The gathering brought together a number of Islamic and Western intellectuals in opposition to the thesis advanced by Samuel Huntington of Harvard University that Western and Islamic civilizations are bound to clash. During his presentation, Ebrahim Moosa, an imam from South Africa now teaching at Duke University, urged that Islam be recast so as to accommodate liberal attitudes. He stressed the need for three changes: recognition of women's equality with men; toleration of capitalism; and recognition of the full dignity and humanity of nonbelievers. But we are still waiting to hear from many other Muslim leaders as to whether they wish to move Islam in this direction.

The White House has solid tactical reasons for stating and restating that our fight is only with terrorists, not Muslims. We must face the fact, however, that while the prophet has many moderate followers, the terrorists command great sympathy in the Islamic world not only because Islamic populations are anti-American or anti-Western, but also because the terrorists are attacking infidels. An elderly Afghan freed from detention at Guantanamo last week made a telling statement to a Washington Post reporter: "The Americans treated me well, but they were not Muslims, so I didn't like them."

It is true that other religions have passed through violent and intolerant phases. And it is possible that moderate interpretations of Islam may again come to predominate. But we shall be unable to recognize and foster that development if we refuse to acknowledge that the violence currently erupting in many parts of the Islamic world is aimed not simply at the political and economic leadership of the West but also at its Judeo-Christian tradition. When Christians and Jews are no longer characterized as Kuffr, we shall know we have turned a corner.

©2002 - The Weekly Standard

Sadly these are facts, no one can deny that many Muslims with political goals have taken the religious path to attain that goal.Its a fact I would be dishonest to deny, but you would be dishonest to deny that catholics and protestants in Ireland are going through the same thing. Islam and christianity are the world 2 largest religions thats why there are more clashes between them than any other two religions. Who do we blame? I think this is a moot question.It is moot because I believe the two sides are equally guilty through out history and both sides have shown equal tolerance and non tolerance of other religions (not the actual religions but their supposed "followers").But as of today there is no doubt in my mind that some Muslim countries are alot more backward than some secular western ones, interm of civil rights, human rights, and what ever rights.Yes Muslims are the ones who must reform, adapt, and return to what god intended his religion to be , simple, peaceful,tolerant and good.That is why Muslims MUST speak out against these acts.

Now after saying all this , I have to add that the vast majority of Muslims are not violent , Islam is a religion of peace and those who disagree with the latter I would love to answer his concerns.I dont blame christianity for what the Inquistions did, so please dont blame Islam for what Bin Laden does.

abu afak

11-13-2002, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by reason
Sadly these are facts, no one can deny that many Muslims with political goals have taken the religious path to attain that goal.Its a fact I would be dishonest to deny, but you would be dishonest to deny that catholics and protestants in Ireland are going through the same thing. Islam and christianity are the world 2 largest religions thats why there are more clashes between them than any other two religions. Who do we blame? I think this is a moot question.It is moot because I believe the two sides are equally guilty through out history and both sides have shown equal tolerance and non tolerance of other religions (not the actual religions but their supposed "followers").But as of today there is no doubt in my mind that some Muslim countries are alot more backward than some secular western ones, interm of civil rights, human rights, and what ever rights.Yes Muslims are the ones who must reform, adapt, and return to what god intended his religion to be , simple, peaceful,tolerant and good.That is why Muslims MUST speak out against these acts.

Now after saying all this , I have to add that the vast majority of Muslims are not violent , Islam is a religion of peace and those who disagree with the latter I would love to answer his concerns.I dont blame christianity for what the Inquistions did, so please dont blame Islam for what Bin Laden does.

Muslims HAVEN'T 'spoken out against these acts' in any meaningful or large way.. WHERE are These guys?? Why wasn't there a demonstration of Pro-America Muslims in Washington DC since 9/11?

Please read my string "The vast Majority of Muslims are not Violent, blah blah"..

and Christianity IS to blame for the Inquisitions. As Islam is to Blame NOW.

If Islam was just fighting with Christianity, we might have to look closer if it might be the Christians fault (Though in places like Sudan and Indonesia etc etc etc, Christians are clearly Being Butchered through no fault of their own)

BUT, it's not Just Christians/Christianity. Wherever Islam touches another religion there is WAR. War with the Hindus on the Asian Subcontinent, War with the Jews in their 1/800 of the Middle East, and barring an opponent from another religion, Muslims kill each other (Iraq/Iran, Iraq Kuwait, Algerian Civil War, Afghan war we just Interupted, etc etc etc)

It's NOT ISRAEL! ..... Israel is just a Tiny Spot on the Long 'Islamic Frontline' where HUNDREDS DIE EVERY DAY..

reason

11-13-2002, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by abu afak
Muslims HAVEN'T 'spoken out against these acts' in any meaningful or large way.. WHERE are These guys?? Why wasn't there a demonstration of Pro-America Muslims in Washington DC since 9/11?

Please read my string "The vast Majority of Muslims are not Violent, blah blah"..

and Christianity IS to blame for the Inquisitions. As Islam is to Blame NOW.

If Islam was just fighting with Christianity, we might have to look closer if it might be the Christians fault (Though in places like Sudan and Indonesia etc etc etc, Christians are clearly Being Butchered through no fault of their own)

BUT, it's not Just Christians/Christianity. Wherever Islam touches another religion there is WAR. War with the Hindus on the Asian Subcontinent, War with the Jews in their 1/800 of the Middle East, and barring an opponent from another religion, Muslims kill each other (Iraq/Iran, Iraq Kuwait, Algerian Civil War, Afghan war we just Interupted, etc etc etc)

It's NOT ISRAEL! ..... Israel is just a Tiny Spot on the Long 'Islamic Frontline' where HUNDREDS DIE EVERY DAY..

No Christianity is not to blame for the Inquistions as Islam is not to blame for 911. The rest of the post is your personal opinion that I will respect, but they are not backed up by anything. Muslims have spoken out against 9-11 almost every Arab leader and clergy men condemn it.

Mediocrates

11-13-2002, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by reason
No Christianity is not to blame for the Inquistions

Yeah it is, kind of. The Spanish Inquisition was instituted to create a wholly Catholic nation. The Portugese followed the Spanish example in 1498. And they were rather late to the Inquisition game. The English expelled Jews in 1200, the French about a hundred years later.

And even though muslim presence in Spain was greatly reduced after their defeat at the Battle of Tours there were still muslim city states in Spain into the 16th Century. The Inquisition was caused the self appointed Catholic leaders for specificall Catholic goals. So just as clearly the intent of de Torquemadas purge was to eliminate all other non Catholics as well. Don't forget also that by the latter half of the 15th C. saw the emergence of Protestantism across Europe. Jan Hus had already made his mark, as did Savonarola by the way.

Saying that Chrisitianity did not cause the Inquistion is like saying Christianity did not start the Crusades.

IlyaFurman

11-13-2002, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by abu afak
Muslims HAVEN'T 'spoken out against these acts' in any meaningful or large way.. WHERE are These guys?? Why wasn't there a demonstration of Pro-America Muslims in Washington DC since 9/11?

Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS - [b]Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:

“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur'an: 'No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another' (Surah al-Isra 17:15).”
MSANews, September 14, 2001,

Shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi, Qatar; Tariq Bishri, Egypt; Muhammad S. Awwa, Egypt; Fahmi Huwaydi, Egypt; Haytham Khayyat, Syria; Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani, U.S.:

“All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason. Islam has declared the spilling of blood and the destruction of property as absolute prohibitions until the Day of Judgment. ... [It is] necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and [punished] appropriately. ... [It is] a duty of Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means.”
The Washington Post, October 11, 2001, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40545-2001Oct10.html
Full text of this fatwa in English and Arabic.

Shaykh Muhammed Sayyid al-Tantawi, imam of al-Azhar mosque in Cairo, Egypt:

“Attacking innocent people is not courageous, it is stupid and will be punished on the day of judgement. ... It’s not courageous to attack innocent children, women and civilians. It is courageous to protect freedom, it is courageous to defend oneself and not to attack.”
Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001

Abdel-Mo'tei Bayyoumi, al-Azhar Islamic Research Academy, Cairo, Egypt:

“There is no terrorism or a threat to civilians in jihad [religious struggle].”
Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 20 - 26 September 2001, http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/552/p4fall3.htm

Muslim Brotherhood, an opposition Islamist group in Egypt, said it was “horrified” by the attack and expressed “condolences and sadness”:

“[We] strongly condemn such activities that are against all humanist and Islamic morals. ... [We] condemn and oppose all aggression on human life, freedom and dignity anywhere in the world.”
Al-Ahram Weekly Online, 13 - 19 September 2001, http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2001/551/fo2.htm

Shaykh Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah, spiritual guide of Shi‘i Muslim radicals in Lebanon, said he was “horrified” by these “barbaric ... crimes”:

“Beside the fact that they are forbidden by Islam, these acts do not serve those who carried them out but their victims, who will reap the sympathy of the whole world. ... Islamists who live according to the human values of Islam could not commit such crimes.”
Agence France Presse, September 14, 2001

‘Abdulaziz bin ‘Abdallah Al-Ashaykh, chief mufti of Saudi Arabia:[b]

“Firstly: the recent developments in the United States including hijacking planes, terrorizing innocent people and shedding blood, constitute a form of injustice that cannot be tolerated by Islam, which views them as gross crimes and sinful acts. Secondly: any Muslim who is aware of the teachings of his religion and who adheres to the directives of the Holy Qur'an and the sunnah (the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad) will never involve himself in such acts, because they will invoke the anger of God Almighty and lead to harm and corruption on earth.”
http://saudiembassy.net/press_release/01-spa/09-15-Islam.htm

[b]Shaykh Muhammad bin ‘Abdallah al-Sabil, member of the Council of Senior Religious Scholars, Saudi Arabia:

“Any attack on innocent people is unlawful and contrary to shari'a (Islamic law). ... Muslims must safeguard the lives, honor and property of Christians and Jews. Attacking them contradicts shari'a.”
Agence France Presse, December 4, 2001

IlyaFurman

11-13-2002, 01:35 PM

Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a prominent religious scholar in Qatar:

“Our hearts bleed for the attacks that has targeted the World Trade Center [WTC], as well as other institutions in the United States despite our strong oppositions to the American biased policy towards Israel on the military, political and economic fronts. Islam, the religion of tolerance, holds the human soul in high esteem, and considers the attack against innocent human beings a grave sin, this is backed by the Qur’anic verse which reads: ‘Who so ever kills a human being [as punishment] for [crimes] other than manslaughter or [sowing] corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and who so ever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind’ (Al-Ma’idah:32).”
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article25.shtml
See also Qaradawi's web-site: www.qaradawi.net

Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i, supreme jurist-ruler of Iran:

“Killing of people, in any place and with any kind of weapons, including atomic bombs, long-range missiles, biological or chemical weopons, passenger or war planes, carried out by any organization, country or individuals is condemned. ... It makes no difference whether such massacres happen in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Qana, Sabra, Shatila, Deir Yassin, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq or in New York and Washington.”
Islamic Republic News Agency, September 16, 2001, http://www.irna.com/en/hphoto/010916000000.ehp.shtml

President Muhammad Khatami of Iran:

“The horrific terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, in the United States were perpetrated by cult of fanatics who had self-mutilated their ears and tongues, and could only communicate with perceived opponents through carnage and devastation.”
Address to the United Nations General Assembly, November 9, 2001, reported in The New York Times, November 10, 2001, http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/10/international/10KHAT.html

League of Arab States:

“The General-Secretariat of the League of Arab States shares with the people and government of the United States of America the feelings of revulsion, horror and shock over the terrorist attacks that ripped through the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, inflicting heavy damage and killing and wounding thousands of many nationalities. These terrorist crimes have been viewed by the League as inadmissible and deserving all condemnation. Divergence of views between the Arabs and the United States over the latter’s foreign policy on the Middle East crisis does in no way adversely affect the common Arab attitude of compassion with the people and government of the United States at such moments of facing the menace and ruthlessness of international terrorism. In more than one statement released since the horrendous attacks, the League has also expressed deep sympathy with the families of the victims. In remarks to newsmen immediately following the tragic events, Arab League Secretary-General Amre Moussa described the feelings of the Arab world as demonstrably sympathetic with the American people, particularly with families and individuals who lost their loved ones. “It is indeed tormenting that any country or people or city anywhere in the world be the scene of such disastrous attacks,” he added. While convinced that it is both inconceivable and lamentable that such a large-scale, organised terrorist campaign take place anywhere, anytime, the League believes that the dreadful attacks against WTC and the Pentagon unveil, time and again, that the cancer of terrorism can be extensively damaging if left unchecked. It follows that there is a pressing and urgent need to combat world terrorism. In this context, an earlier call by [Egyptian] President Hosni Mubarak for convening an international conference to draw up universal accord on ways and means to eradicate this phenomenon and demonstrate international solidarity is worthy of active consideration. The Arabs have walked a large distancein the fight against cross-border terrorism by concluding in April 1998 the Arab Agreement on Combating Terrorism.”
September 17, 2001, http://www.leagueofarabstates.org/E_Perspectives_17_09_01.asp

Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference:

“Following the bloody attacks against major buildings and installations in the United States yesterday, Tuesday, September 11, 2001, Dr. Abdelouahed Belkeziz, secretary-general of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), stated that he was shocked and deeply saddened when he heard of those attacks which led to the death and injury of a very large number of innocent American citizens. Dr. Belkeziz said he was denouncing and condemning those criminal and brutal acts that ran counter to all covenants, humanitarian values and divine religions foremost among which was Islam.”
Press Release, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, September 12, 2001, http://www.oic-oci.org/press/english/september%202001/america%20on%20attack.htm

Organization of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers:

“The Conference strongly condemned the brutal terror acts that befell the United States, caused huge losses in human lives from various nationalities and wreaked tremendous destruction and damage in New York and Washington. It further reaffirmed that these terror acts ran counter to the teachings of the divine religions as well as ethical and human values, stressed the necessity of tracking down the perpetrators of these acts in the light of the results of investigations and bringing them to justice to inflict on them the penalty they deserve, and underscored its support of this effort. In this respect, the Conference expressed its condolences to and sympathy with the people and government of the United States and the families of the victims in these mournful and tragic circumstances.”
Final Communique of the Ninth Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Conference of Foreign Ministers, October 10, 2001, http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/All%20Download/frmex9.htm

Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, Head of the Directorate of Religious Affairs of Turkey:

“Any human being, regardless of his ethnic and religious origin, will never think of carrying out such a violent, evil attack. Whatever its purpose is, this action cannot be justified and tolerated.”
Mehmet Nuri Yilmaz, “A Message on Ragaib Night and Terrorism,” September 21, 2001, http://www.diyanet.gov.tr/duyurular/regaibing.htm

Harun Yahya (Adnan Oktar), Turkish author:

“Islam does not encourage any kind of terrorism; in fact, it denounces it. Those who use terrorism in the name of Islam, in fact, have no other faculty except ignorance and hatred.”
Harun Yahya, “Islam Denounces Terrorism,” http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.com

Shaikh Muhammad Yusuf Islahi, Pakistani-American Muslim leader:

“The sudden barbaric attack on innocent citizens living in peace is extremely distressing and deplorable. Every gentle human heart goes out to the victims of this attack and as humans we are ashamed at the barbarism perpetrated by a few people. Islam, which is a religion of peace and tolerance, condemns this act and sees this is as a wounding scar on the face of humanity. I appeal to Muslims to strongly condemn this act, express unity with the victims' relatives, donate blood, money and do whatever it takes to help the affected people.”
“Messages From Shaikh Muhammad Yusuf Islahi,” http://www.icna.org/wtc_islahi.htm

Abdal-Hakim Murad, British Muslim author:

“Targeting civilians is a negation of every possible school of Sunni Islam. Suicide bombing is so foreign to the Quranic ethos that the Prophet Samson is entirely absent from our scriptures.”
“The Hijackers Were Not Muslims After All: Recapturing Islam From the Terrorists,” http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/masud/ISLAM/ahm/recapturing.htm

Syed Mumtaz Ali, President of the Canadian Society of Muslims:

“We condemn in the strongest terms possible what are apparently vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Canadians in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts.”
Canadian Society of Muslims, Media Release, September 12, 2001, http://muslim-canada.org/news09112001.html

15 American Muslim organizations:

“We reiterate our unequivocal condemnation of the crime committed on September 11, 2001 and join our fellow Americans in mourning the loss of up to 6000 innocent civilians.”
Muslim American Society (MAS), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), Muslim Student Association (MSA), Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), Solidarity International, American Muslims for Global Peace and Justice (AMGPJ), American Muslim Alliance (AMA), United Muslim Americans Association (UMAA), Islamic Media Foundation (IMF), American Muslim Foundation (AMF), Coordinating Council of Muslim Organizations (CCMO), American Muslims for Jerusalem (AMJ), Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA), October 22, 2001, http://www.icna.org/wtc_pr.htm

IlyaFurman

11-13-2002, 01:37 PM

American Muslim Political Coordination Council:

“American Muslims utterly condemn what are apparently vicious and cowardly acts of terrorism against innocent civilians. We join with all Americans in calling for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators. No political cause could ever be assisted by such immoral acts.”
http://capwiz.com/cair/issues/alert/?alertid=49818&type=CU&azip=

Dr. Agha Saeed, National Chair of the American Muslim Alliance:

“These attacks are against both divine and human laws and we condemn them in the strongest terms. The Muslim Americans join the nation in calling for swift apprehension and stiff punishment of the perpetrators, and offer our sympathies to the victims and their families.”
http://www.amaweb.org/AMA%20Condemns.html

Hamza Yusuf, American Muslim leader:

“Religious zealots of any creed are defeated people who lash out in desperation, and they often do horrific things. And if these people [who committed murder on September 11] indeed are Arabs, Muslims, they're obviously very sick people and I can't even look at it in religious terms. It's politics, tragic politics. There's no Islamic justification for any of it. ... You can't kill innocent people. There's no Islamic declaration of war against the United States. I think every Muslim country except Afghanistan has an embassy in this country. And in Islam, a country where you have embassies is not considered a belligerent country. In Islam, the only wars that are permitted are between armies and they should engage on battlefields and engage nobly. The Prophet Muhammad said, ``Do not kill women or children or non-combatants and do not kill old people or religious people,'' and he mentioned priests, nuns and rabbis. And he said, ``Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees and do not poison the wells of your enemies.'' The Hadith, the sayings of the Prophet, say that no one can punish with fire except the lord of fire. It's prohibited to burn anyone in Islam as a punishment. No one can grant these attackers any legitimacy. It was evil.”
San Jose Mercury News, September 15, 2001, http://www0.mercurycenter.com/local/center/isl0916.htm

Nuh Ha Mim Keller, American Muslim author:

“Muslims have nothing to be ashamed of, and nothing to hide, and should simply tell people what their scholars and religious leaders have always said: first, that the Wahhabi sect has nothing to do with orthodox Islam, for its lack of tolerance is a perversion of traditional values; and second, that killing civilians is wrong and immoral.”
“Making the World Safe for Terrorism,” September 30, 2001, http://66.34.131.5/ISLAM/nuh/terrorism.htm

Muslims Against Terrorism, a U.S.-based organization:

“As Muslims, we condemn terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. Ours is a religion of peace. We are sick and tired of extremists dictating the public face of Islam.”
http://www.muslimsagainstterrorism.org/aboutus.html

Abdulaziz Sachedina, professor of religious studies, University of Virginia:

“New York was grieving. Sorrow covered the horizons. The pain of separation and of missing family members, neighbors, citizens, humans could be felt in every corner of the country. That day was my personal day of “jihad” (“struggle”) - jihad with my pride and my identity as a Muslim. This is the true meaning of jihad – “struggle with one’s own ego and false pride.” I don’t ever recall that I had prayed so earnestly to God to spare attribution of such madness that was unleashed upon New York and Washington to the Muslims. I felt the pain and, perhaps for the first time in my entire life, I felt embarrassed at the thought that it could very well be my fellow Muslims who had committed this horrendous act of terrorism. How could these terrorists invoke God’s mercifulness and compassion when they had, through their evil act, put to shame the entire history of this great religion and its culture of toleration?”
“Where Was God on September 11?," http://www.virginia.edu/~soasia/newsletter/Fall01/God.html

Ali Khan, professor of law, Washburn University School of Law:

“To the most learned in the text of the Quran, these verses must be read in the context of many other verses that stipulate the Islamic law of war---a war that the Islamic leader must declare after due consultation with advisers. For the less learned, however, these verses may provide the motivation and even the plot for a merciless strike against a self-chosen enemy.”
“Attack on America: An Islamic Perspective, September 17, 2001, http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew29.htm

Muqtedar Khan, assistant professor of political science, Adrian College, Michigan, USA:

“What happened on September 11th in New York and Washington DC will forever remain a horrible scar on the history of Islam and humanity. No matter how much we condemn it, and point to the Quran and the Sunnah to argue that Islam forbids the killing of innocent people, the fact remains that the perpetrators of this crime against humanity have indicated that their actions are sanctioned by Islamic values. The fact that even now several Muslim scholars and thousands of Muslims defend the accused is indicative that not all Muslims believe that the attacks are unIslamic. This is truly sad. ... If anywhere in your hearts there is any sympathy or understanding with those who committed this act, I invite you to ask yourself this question, would Muhammad (pbuh) sanction such an act? While encouraging Muslims to struggle against injustice (Al Quran 4:135), Allah also imposes strict rules of engagement. He says in unequivocal terms that to kill an innocent being is like killing entire humanity (Al Quran 5:32). He also encourages Muslims to forgive Jews and Christians if they have committed injustices against us (Al Quran 2:109, 3:159, 5:85).”
“Memo to American Muslims,” October 5, 2001, http://www.ijtihad.org/memo.htm

Dr. Alaa Al-Yousuf, Bahraini economist and political activist:

“On Friday, 14 September [the first Friday prayers after 11 September], almost the whole world expressed its condemnation of the crime and its grief for the bereaved families of the victims. Those who abstained or, even worse, rejoiced, will have joined the terrorists, not in the murder, but in adding to the incalculable damage on the other victims of the atrocity, namely, Islam as a faith, Muslims and Arabs as peoples, and possibly the Palestinian cause. The terrorists and their apologists managed to sully Islam as a faith both in the eyes of many Muslims and non-Muslims alike.”
Interview with the International Forum for Islamic Dialogue, London, http://www.islam21.net/pages/keyissues/key7-6.htm

Dr. S. Parvez Manzoor, Swedish-based Muslim author:

“If these acts of terror indeed have been perpetrated by Muslim radicals or fundamentalists, they have reaped nothing but eternal damnation, shame and ignominy. For nothing, absolutely nothing, could remotely be advanced as an excuse for these barbaric acts. They represent a total negation of Islamic values, an utter disregard of our fiqhi tradition, and a slap in the face of the Ummah. They are in total contrast to what Islamic reason, compassion and faith stand for. Even from the more mundane criteria of common good, the maslaha of the jurists, these acts are treasonous and suicidal. Islamic faith has been so callously and casually sacrificed at the altar of politics, a home-grown politics of parochial causes, primeval passions, self-endorsing piety and messianic terror.”
Interview with the International Forum for Islamic Dialogue, London, http://www.islam21.net/pages/keyissues/key7-6.htm

IlyaFurman

11-13-2002, 01:38 PM

Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Islamic activist and former deputy prime minister:

“Never in Islam's entire history has the action of so few of its followers caused the religion and its community of believers to be such an abomination in the eyes of others. Millions of Muslims who fled to North America and Europe to escape poverty and persecution at home have become the object of hatred and are now profiled as potential terrorists. And the nascent democratic movements in Muslim countries will regress for a few decades as ruling autocrats use their participation in the global war against terrorism to terrorize their critics and dissenters. This is what Mohammed Atta and his fellow terrorists and sponsors have done to Islam and its community worldwide by their murder of innocents at the World Trade Center in New York and the Defense Depart-ment in Washington. The attack must be condemned, and the condemnation must be without reservation.”
Anwar Ibrahim, “Growth of Democracy Is the Answer to Terrorism,” International Herald Tribune, October 11, 2001, http://www.iht.com/articles/35281.htm

Ziauddin Sardar, British Muslim author:

“The failure of Islamic movements is their inability to come to terms with modernity, to give modernity a sustainable home-grown expression. Instead of engaging with the abundant problems that bedevil Muslim lives, the Islamic prescription consists of blind following of narrow pieties and slavish submission to inept obscurantists. Instead of engagement with the wider world, they have made Islam into an ethic of separation, separate under-development, and negation of the rest of the world.”
Ziauddin Sardar, “Islam has become its own enemy,” October 21, 2001, http://www.observer.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,577942,00.html

Khaled Abou El Fadl, Kuwaiti-Egyptian-American legal scholar:

“It would be disingenuous to deny that the Qur'an and other Islamic sources offer possibilities of intolerant interpretation. Clearly these possibilities are exploited by the contemporary puritans and supremacists. But the text does not command such intolerant readings. Historically, Islamic civilization has displayed a remarkable ability to recognize possibilities of tolerance, and to act upon these possibilities.”
Khaled Abou El Fadl, “The Place of Tolerance in Islam: On Reading the Qur'an -- and Misreading It,” Boston Review, December 2001/January 2002, http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR26.6/elfadl.html

See also:

Bernard Haykel, assistant professor of Islamic law at New York University:

“According to Islamic law there are at least six reasons why Bin Laden's barbaric violence cannot fall under the rubric of jihad: 1) Individuals and organizations cannot declare a jihad, only states can; 2) One cannot kill innocent women and children when conducting a jihad; 3) One cannot kill Muslims in a jihad; 4) One cannot fight a jihad against a country in which Muslims can freely practise their religion and proselytize Islam; 5) Prominent Muslim jurists around the world have condemned these attacks and their condemnation forms a juristic consensus (ijma') against Bin Laden's actions (This consensus renders his actions un-Islamic); 6) The welfare and interest of the Muslim community (maslaha) is being harmed by Bin Laden's actions and this equally makes them un-Islamic.”
The Dawn newspaper, Karachi, Pakistan, October 8, 2001, http://www.dawn.com/2001/10/08/op.htm#2

See other collections of statements:

Omid Safi, Colgate University, “Scholars of Islam & the Tragedy of Sept. 11th,” http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

Tim Lubin, Washington and Lee University, “Islamic Responses to the Sept. 11 Attack,” http://home.wlu.edu/~lubint/islamonWTC.htm

The Becket Fund, “Osama Bin Laden Hijacked Four Airplanes and a Religion,” October 17, 2001, http://www.becketfund.org/other/MuslimAd.html

Islam for Today, “Muslims Against Terrorism,”
http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

abu afak

11-13-2002, 02:35 PM

Great Ilya.. you've lined up a few Muslim leaders who 'condemn' terrorism ........ Like Arafat Condemns it... LOL

Where are the Muslims who want to get rid of Sadam, the Biggest Killer of Muslims of all time??.. The Bigoted Tribalism of these people is astonishing... we could never have gone after Milosevich if we had their sick Mindset. They are defending Sadam from 'the Christians/Zionists'.

And where are the American Muslims demonstrations of Support for America since 9/11!!! You think these people could have at least put on a Faux one in DC... but they can't... That's the Problem..there is quiet support for their Genocidal brothers.

IlyaFurman

11-13-2002, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by abu afak
Great Ilya.. you've lined up a few Muslim leaders who 'condemn' terrorism ........ Like Arafat Condemns it... LOL

Where are the Muslims who want to get rid of Sadam, the Biggest Killer of Muslims of all time??.. The Bigoted Tribalism of these people is astonishing... we could never have gone after Milosevich if we had their sick Mindset. They are defending Sadam from 'the Christians/Zionists'.

And where are the American Muslims demonstrations of Support for America since 9/11!!! You think these people could have at least put on a Faux one in DC... but they can't... That's the Problem..there is quiet support for their Genocidal brothers.

Sadly I agree with almost everything you said.

Micah

11-13-2002, 03:41 PM

There is a famous saying. It goes like this...

Talk is cheap. It's quite easy for me to make a large paragraph condeming terrorist attacks, but it takes quite a bit more work to organize and carry out a public show of condemnation in the streets. Got to get the people, get some signs, find a nice public and throughly watched spot in the US (like DC perhaps?) and call out for the stop of terrorist attacks and for human and civil rights to be introduced into Muslim countries. I mean, there were plenty outside CNN's door calling out for them to stop reporting biased news against Muslims. Why can't they do that for condemnation of terrorism?

MichaelC

11-13-2002, 11:53 PM

Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Sadly I agree with almost everything you said.

I respect you for publically acknowledging this. But in the post that follows yours, Micah points out something that I, and anyone with a brain has also noticed, and that is that whenever Muslims feel that their honor has been impugned, they raise their voice and make a lot of noise.

If they decried the crimes perpetrated in Islam's name with the same fervor, they would be respected by all of us. But they do not do that, and every poll taken in the Islamic world continues to find a great majority of Muslims in support of such heinous people as Bin Laden and Arafat. And though they may hate Saddam as much as we do here in the West, they oppose any attempt by Western powers to remove him.

There is just too big of a disconnect between the statements you quoted to us and the actual feelings of Muslims throughout the world as evidenced by their support of terrorism.

elke

11-14-2002, 03:53 AM

Here is a thought:

Large majority of Muslims are not strapping bombs on their bodies and heading to the nearest pizzeria. Neither are they taking up AK-47s and moseying along to the day care center next door. Therefore, they are not combatants. Here in the US, there are many Muslims who do not have any trouble whatever with living, working, and being friends with either Christians or Jews.

IMO, an average Muslim's responsibility for the terror is in the same vein as that of an average German noncombatant during WWII - theirs is the sin of silence, of omission rather than commission. There are various possible psychological - as opposed to ideological - reasons for this silence, which I believe should be kept in mind.

Just as an average German - or Catholic, for that matter, - has been smeared with the odium of tacit collaboration with the Nazis, an average Muslim is commonly seen as a collaborator with the terrorists. It may be right or wrong, but such is human nature and therefore - reality.

The only way for the Muslims to shed this image is to come out in force against all terrorism, and only they can do that. However, we can and should help - first and foremost, by encouraging those who have already done so, by publicizing their efforts relentlessly, and by stretching out our hand to them in friendship and cooperation.

reason

11-14-2002, 06:35 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
I respect you for publically acknowledging this. But in the post that follows yours, Micah points out something that I, and anyone with a brain has also noticed, and that is that whenever Muslims feel that their honor has been impugned, they raise their voice and make a lot of noise.

If they decried the crimes perpetrated in Islam's name with the same fervor, they would be respected by all of us. But they do not do that, and every poll taken in the Islamic world continues to find a great majority of Muslims in support of such heinous people as Bin Laden and Arafat. And though they may hate Saddam as much as we do here in the West, they oppose any attempt by Western powers to remove him.

There is just too big of a disconnect between the statements you quoted to us and the actual feelings of Muslims throughout the world as evidenced by their support of terrorism.

Where is that evidence you speak of ? have you personally taken a poll of the 1.5 billion Muslims , who many of them cant read or write?You have to provide sources, statistical numbers to support your "evidence" until then this is your opinion.

IlyaFurman

11-14-2002, 01:49 PM

Micah

11-14-2002, 06:38 PM

http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/saudi_support.htm

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-10/09/article9.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/stories/plo021098.htm

Now for polls

http://www.jmcc.org/publicpoll/results/1998/no25.htm#results <--- notice in the results, Q #4

http://www.americanvoiceinstitute.org/DailyNewsBriefing07-19-02.htm#53

And unless you don't call Saddam Hussein a terrorist, it shows just a few links to prove support of terrorism in the Arab nations.

http://www.house.gov/wexler/speeches/speech_Sep18_2002.htm <--- Syria

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-3.htm

http://freelebanon.org/articles/a284.htm

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wnyc/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=405437

IlyaFurman

11-14-2002, 07:48 PM

hey micah I saw your signature, and I hope you dont think he like the jewish people or anything, it was quite the opposite, here are two quotes that I could dig up, he said he was "predujice against the jews"

heres the whole article I bet you have read it already if you or others havent

http://www.underthesun.cc/Classics/Twain/jews/

Micah

11-14-2002, 08:35 PM

Trying to avoid my response? :P

Man, don't be so transparent. =-/

I just read part of that link you gave, it seems you have a hard time with English, as even when he spells out that he ISN'T prejudiced against Jews, you don't quite seem to understand

I will begin by saying that if I thought myself prejudiced against the Jew, I should hold it fairest to leave this subject to a person not crippled in that way. But I think I have no such prejudice. A few years ago a Jew observed to me that there was no uncourteous reference to his people in my books, and asked how it happened. It happened because the disposition was lacking. I am quite sure that (bar one) I have no race prejudices, and I think I have no color prejudices nor caste prejudices nor creed prejudices. Indeed, I know it. I can stand any society. All that I care to know is that a man is a human being -- that is enough for me; he can't be any worse. I have no special regard for Satan; but, I can at least claim that I have no prejudice against him. It may even be that I lean a little his way, on account of his not having a fair show. All religions issue bibles against him, and say the most injurious things about him, but we never hear his side. We have none but the evidence for the prosecution, and yet we have rendered the verdict. To my mind, this is irregular. It is un-English; it is un-American; it is French. Without this precedent Dreyfus could not have been condemned. Of course Satan has some kind of a case, it goes without saying. It may be a poor one, but that is nothing; that can be said about any of us. As soon as I can get at the facts I will undertake his rehabilitation myself, if I can find an unpolitic publisher. It is a thing which we ought to be willing to do for any one who is under a cloud. We may not pay him reverence, for that would be indiscreet, but we can at least respect his talents. A person who has for untold centuries maintained the imposing position of spiritual head of four-fifths of the human race, and political head of the whole of it, must be granted the possession of executive abilities of the loftiest order. In his large presence the other popes and politicians shrink to midges for the microscope. I would like to see him. I would rather see him and shake him by the tail than any other member of the European Concert. In the present paper I shall allow myself to use the word Jew as if it stood for both religion and race. It is handy; and, besides, that is what the term means to the general world.
In the above letter one notes these points:

And I am sure you'll most likely focus on this rather then the actual topic at hand, it's what I expect from people like you.

MichaelC

11-14-2002, 11:40 PM

Originally posted by IlyaFurman
I dont think he does have "evidence" hes just speaking from what he thinks, which is very very very faulty and probably very one sided.

Both you and Reason chose what must have appeared to you to be the weakest part of my observation with which you hoped to undermine the other point I made. You seem to have taken it as an insult instead of a honest and, I believe, accurate comment.

I would have like to have seen you address the more important issue which is, why are Muslims so vocal when they feel that they are not being respected yet remain essentially silent, unless cornered, with regard to the crimes being committed on a daily basis in their name?

I truly am not intending any insult but you have proven my point by what you have chosen to respond to. Impress me. Deal with the greater issue. Whether you agree with or challenge my grasp of the disconnect in the Muslim world, the point is, as I have said twice now: Why so much anguish over perceived disrespect and so little said about the depravity of terrorism.

The only thing that we in the West are left to surmise is that silence equals agreement. The crimes after all are done in Allah's name.

reason

11-15-2002, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by Micah
http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/saudi_support.htm

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-10/09/article9.shtml

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/stories/plo021098.htm

Now for polls

http://www.jmcc.org/publicpoll/results/1998/no25.htm#results <--- notice in the results, Q #4

http://www.americanvoiceinstitute.org/DailyNewsBriefing07-19-02.htm#53

And unless you don't call Saddam Hussein a terrorist, it shows just a few links to prove support of terrorism in the Arab nations.

http://www.house.gov/wexler/speeches/speech_Sep18_2002.htm <--- Syria

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-3.htm

http://freelebanon.org/articles/a284.htm

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wnyc/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=405437

"And unless you don't call Saddam Hussein a terrorist, it shows just a few links to prove support of terrorism in the Arab nations."

First your polls prove nothing, they are irrelevant.Show me a poll that takes into account 1.5 billion Muslims, instead of a most likely fabricated inaccurate poll taken from an obscure website, then you will have my attention.Notice you said there is support in the Arab nations, not the Islamic world.And where did you get that Arab nations supported Saddam even from these polls you posted?The question was do you sympathise with Iraq during its crisis, how did saddam get into it, the people in the poll sympathise with the Iraqi people who are under an embargo.

Next time I ask you kindly not to assume anything, and provide relevant sources.

reason

11-15-2002, 06:44 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
Both you and Reason chose what must have appeared to you to be the weakest part of my observation with which you hoped to undermine the other point I made. You seem to have taken it as an insult instead of a honest and, I believe, accurate comment.

I would have like to have seen you address the more important issue which is, why are Muslims so vocal when they feel that they are not being respected yet remain essentially silent, unless cornered, with regard to the crimes being committed on a daily basis in their name?

I truly am not intending any insult but you have proven my point by what you have chosen to respond to. Impress me. Deal with the greater issue. Whether you agree with or challenge my grasp of the disconnect in the Muslim world, the point is, as I have said twice now: Why so much anguish over perceived disrespect and so little said about the depravity of terrorism.

The only thing that we in the West are left to surmise is that silence equals agreement. The crimes after all are done in Allah's name.

NO it was not my intention to undermine your post. The only reason I didnt answer any other point was because it was your opinion and lacked any sources.I cant refute your opinion but if you provided sources to your claims I would reply to them.Like I did with micah.

ibrodsky

11-15-2002, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by reason
Where is that evidence you speak of ? have you personally taken a poll of the 1.5 billion Muslims , who many of them cant read or write?You have to provide sources, statistical numbers to support your "evidence" until then this is your opinion.

No, it isn't necessary to poll all 1.3 billion Muslims to determine Muslim attitudes. Polls are routinely taken of cross sections of societies. If well designed, such polls provide a representative opinion within some reasonable margin of error.

There was a very large poll conducted by a reputable research organization regarding attitudes towards terrorism in several Muslim countries. The results showed a large minority of Muslims were sympathetic to terrorists.

Is this really so surprising? There were numerous first-hand reports of celebrations or at least expressions of general satisfaction in Arab capitals after the WTC massacre. Palestinians celebrated openly, and when a videotape of this was aired, there was a rumor that CNN had used a tape from a year earlier just to make the Palestinians look bad. But then the person who started the rumor admitted he had been given bad information, and CNN reiterated that the tape was authentic.

Instead of whitewashing Islam here, you should focus on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil, that while some Muslims are terrorists they deserve no sympathy or understanding, and promoting the idea that Muslims in particular must take action to disassociate their religion from terrorism.

One obvious step would be to say that whether or not the Palestinians have just grievances, there is no excuse for terrorism against civilians, and good Muslims must fight groups like Hamas and support others fighting them.

MichaelC

11-15-2002, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by reason
NO it was not my intention to undermine your post. The only reason I didnt answer any other point was because it was your opinion and lacked any sources.I cant refute your opinion but if you provided sources to your claims I would reply to them.Like I did with micah.

So, you disagree with my "opinion" that Muslims are very vocal when they feel disrespected, but as a whole remain silent concerning the much more important issue of terrible crimes done in their name? You appear to be joining this group by avoiding the topic yourself.

If I understand your responses to my queries, you are exactly like those I have an "opinion" of. You, Reason, are clearly not an ignorant person and I have the "opinion" that you are being disengenuous here and avoiding having to intelligently address the real issue.

If you think this is just my opinion and not something to be dealt with in an honest manner, then you miss one of the most important aspects of how many, many people in the world relate to the silence of Islam on this issue.

If you won't deal with the issue, that is your choice, but do not just throw it back at me as being a mere opinion. You, as the very people I refer to, are avoiding the issue.

Respectfully, I will not play the game anymore. It is just a bunch of words now. Nothing of value is being exchanged since you defined my observations as irrelevant, being merely one man's personal opinion and not a matter of concern to a great many others.

Do you really not recognize this issue as important? Are you playing a game in avoiding talking about it?

reason

11-15-2002, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by ibrodsky
No, it isn't necessary to poll all 1.3 billion Muslims to determine Muslim attitudes. Polls are routinely taken of cross sections of societies. If well designed, such polls provide a representative opinion within some reasonable margin of error.

There was a very large poll conducted by a reputable research organization regarding attitudes towards terrorism in several Muslim countries. The results showed a large minority of Muslims were sympathetic to terrorists.

Is this really so surprising? There were numerous first-hand reports of celebrations or at least expressions of general satisfaction in Arab capitals after the WTC massacre. Palestinians celebrated openly, and when a videotape of this was aired, there was a rumor that CNN had used a tape from a year earlier just to make the Palestinians look bad. But then the person who started the rumor admitted he had been given bad information, and CNN reiterated that the tape was authentic.

Instead of whitewashing Islam here, you should focus on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil, that while some Muslims are terrorists they deserve no sympathy or understanding, and promoting the idea that Muslims in particular must take action to disassociate their religion from terrorism.

One obvious step would be to say that whether or not the Palestinians have just grievances, there is no excuse for terrorism against civilians, and good Muslims must fight groups like Hamas and support others fighting them.

Ofcourse its not necessary Ibro, what they do is take statistical sample sizes and then extrapolate a result.But even that is not provided, I dont deny that some sick people celebrated WTC , but they are a minority so focusing on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil is pointless since most of them know that.

Ibro I get the feeling eventhough you know most Muslims are not Arabs, you subconsciously make that assumption. You cant help but lump all Muslims toghther as this makes it easier to define the enemy.Fact is that there are 300 million Arabs and there are 1.3 billion Muslim , the Arabs dont represent the majority of Muslims. 19 hijackers in WTC and lets assume 10,000 Muslim Terrorists through out history(a large exageration for the sake of argument) that is almost 0.00077% of the Muslim population.

reason

11-15-2002, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
So, you disagree with my "opinion" that Muslims are very vocal when they feel disrespected, but as a whole remain silent concerning the much more important issue of terrible crimes done in their name? You appear to be joining this group by avoiding the topic yourself.

If I understand your responses to my queries, you are exactly like those I have an "opinion" of. You, Reason, are clearly not an ignorant person and I have the "opinion" that you are being disengenuous here and avoiding having to intelligently address the real issue.

If you think this is just my opinion and not something to be dealt with in an honest manner, then you miss one of the most important aspects of how many, many people in the world relate to the silence of Islam on this issue.

If you won't deal with the issue, that is your choice, but do not just throw it back at me as being a mere opinion. You, as the very people I refer to, are avoiding the issue.

Respectfully, I will not play the game anymore. It is just a bunch of words now. Nothing of value is being exchanged since you defined my observations as irrelevant, being merely one man's personal opinion and not a matter of concern to a great many others.

Do you really not recognize this issue as important? Are you playing a game in avoiding talking about it?

No I dont disagree that Muslims should speak out against terrorists every chance they have.Infact they should be the first to clear its name. This is what I disagree with " But they do not do that, and every poll taken in the Islamic world continues to find a great majority of Muslims in support of such heinous people as Bin Laden and Arafat" . I asked you to provide the polls that support your claim and until now you have not provided any, this is where I disagree with you, and that Is why I replied to you in the first place.This remains your opinion until you provide some reputable sources.

Micah

11-15-2002, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by reason
Ibro I get the feeling eventhough you know most Muslims are not Arabs, you subconsciously make that assumption. You cant help but lump all Muslims toghther as this makes it easier to define the enemy.Fact is that there are 300 million Arabs and there are 1.3 billion Muslim , the Arabs dont represent the majority of Muslims. 19 hijackers in WTC and lets assume 10,000 Muslim Terrorists through out history(a large exageration for the sake of argument) that is almost 0.00077% of the Muslim population.

You forgot to put into account all of the Muslims supporting or condoning terrorism. "What was done was bad, BUT" should be non-existent.

Micah

11-15-2002, 01:23 PM

IlyaFurman

11-15-2002, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by Micah
Did you happen to check any of the links I gave?

That was funny, Saddam isnt a terrorist, hes a brutal war criminal, those links are irrevalent. Most of them alteast

MichaelC

11-16-2002, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by reason
No I dont disagree that Muslims should speak out against terrorists every chance they have.Infact they should be the first to clear its name. This is what I disagree with " But they do not do that, and every poll taken in the Islamic world continues to find a great majority of Muslims in support of such heinous people as Bin Laden and Arafat" . I asked you to provide the polls that support your claim and until now you have not provided any, this is where I disagree with you, and that Is why I replied to you in the first place.This remains your opinion until you provide some reputable sources.

I do not wish to be rude, but you are still avoiding the issue. It is a weak response to say that you do not disagree that Muslims should speak out against terrorism and then turn from the issue to harp on a non issue. I am certain that you are intelligent enough to know what you are doing and that you are choosing to put one aspect of an argument under a microscope in order to avoid the argument itself. Let me put it this way.

Here is my original statement minus the stumbling block of a reference to any statistical support:

“I respect you for publicly acknowledging this. But in the post that follows yours, Micah points out something that I, and anyone with a brain has also noticed, and that is that whenever Muslims feel that their honor has been impugned, they raise their voice and make a lot of noise.

If they decried the crimes perpetrated in Islam's name with the same fervor, they would be respected by all of us……….And though they may hate Saddam as much as we do here in the West, they oppose any attempt by Western powers to remove him.

There is just too big of a disconnect between the statements you quoted to us and the actual feelings of Muslims throughout the world as evidenced by their support of terrorism.”

I believe this statement stands on its own without need of statistics to prove or disprove the point, but the point, nonetheless, has been ably supported by Micah’s contribution from within this thread and by this exchange within A THREAD (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=1867) from another posting.

I will confess, that though I have seen many polls over the years and have made reference to them within this thread, I am not prepared at the moment to list them here. My heartfelt question remains however, a question I believe to be in the hearts of many people, independent of polls and proofs, and it is this question to which I hope you will direct your own intellect.

Conceding, for the moment, a lack on my part of proof in the form of “polls”, are you able to deal with the actual issue? I apologize for any imprecision I may have demonstrated in arriving at my point. I have done my best to solicit your true feelings on the matter but we have been sidetracked by an issue that does not add nor detract from my premise as stated above.

My simple point is that Terrorists are allowed to control the agenda of Islam by lack of opposition from within the Islamic community. A few statements made after the horrific events of 9-11-01 is not enough. I’d like to see some action, some passion, some genuine fervor on the part of those same people in inspiring Muslims everywhere to take to the streets and the airwaves, to use whatever access they have to network and cable TV, to post ceaselessly on the internet, decrying the crimes of terrorism. Until they do that, these tepid defenses for Islam ring false to every ear.

I am sincerely interested in the views of any intelligent person from the “other side of the issue” who is able to discuss why it is that Muslims seem incapable of providing anything more than a desperately brief disclaimer when cornered, amounting to little more than, “well of course, people shouldn’t go around blowing up other people”.

In another posting of yours in this thread you replied to Ibrodsky with the following comment:

* * *

"Of course its not necessary Ibro, what they do is take statistical sample sizes and then extrapolate a result. But even that is not provided, I don’t deny that some sick people celebrated WTC , but they are a minority so focusing on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil is pointless since most of them know that."

* * *

We DO NOT KNOW that Muslims think terrorism is evil. We see too much evidence to the contrary. I will engage in no further games concerning “evidence” . You use it as a ploy to avoid issues. You make statements with no substance that demonstrate far more than I ever have, a “personal opinion”.

There would be little to speak of at all in this forum if a majority of Muslims were innocent of supporting the activities of terrorists.

The very word “terrorist” might as well have been coined to refer exclusively to Islamic militants as that is the only image to occur to most anyone upon hearing the word.

reason

11-18-2002, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
I do not wish to be rude, but you are still avoiding the issue. It is a weak response to say that you do not disagree that Muslims should speak out against terrorism and then turn from the issue to harp on a non issue. I am certain that you are intelligent enough to know what you are doing and that you are choosing to put one aspect of an argument under a microscope in order to avoid the argument itself. Let me put it this way.

Here is my original statement minus the stumbling block of a reference to any statistical support:

“I respect you for publicly acknowledging this. But in the post that follows yours, Micah points out something that I, and anyone with a brain has also noticed, and that is that whenever Muslims feel that their honor has been impugned, they raise their voice and make a lot of noise.

If they decried the crimes perpetrated in Islam's name with the same fervor, they would be respected by all of us……….And though they may hate Saddam as much as we do here in the West, they oppose any attempt by Western powers to remove him.

There is just too big of a disconnect between the statements you quoted to us and the actual feelings of Muslims throughout the world as evidenced by their support of terrorism.”

I believe this statement stands on its own without need of statistics to prove or disprove the point, but the point, nonetheless, has been ably supported by Micah’s contribution from within this thread and by this exchange within A THREAD (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=1867) from another posting.

I will confess, that though I have seen many polls over the years and have made reference to them within this thread, I am not prepared at the moment to list them here. My heartfelt question remains however, a question I believe to be in the hearts of many people, independent of polls and proofs, and it is this question to which I hope you will direct your own intellect.

Conceding, for the moment, a lack on my part of proof in the form of “polls”, are you able to deal with the actual issue? I apologize for any imprecision I may have demonstrated in arriving at my point. I have done my best to solicit your true feelings on the matter but we have been sidetracked by an issue that does not add nor detract from my premise as stated above.

My simple point is that Terrorists are allowed to control the agenda of Islam by lack of opposition from within the Islamic community. A few statements made after the horrific events of 9-11-01 is not enough. I’d like to see some action, some passion, some genuine fervor on the part of those same people in inspiring Muslims everywhere to take to the streets and the airwaves, to use whatever access they have to network and cable TV, to post ceaselessly on the internet, decrying the crimes of terrorism. Until they do that, these tepid defenses for Islam ring false to every ear.

I am sincerely interested in the views of any intelligent person from the “other side of the issue” who is able to discuss why it is that Muslims seem incapable of providing anything more than a desperately brief disclaimer when cornered, amounting to little more than, “well of course, people shouldn’t go around blowing up other people”.

In another posting of yours in this thread you replied to Ibrodsky with the following comment:

* * *

"Of course its not necessary Ibro, what they do is take statistical sample sizes and then extrapolate a result. But even that is not provided, I don’t deny that some sick people celebrated WTC , but they are a minority so focusing on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil is pointless since most of them know that."

* * *

We DO NOT KNOW that Muslims think terrorism is evil. We see too much evidence to the contrary. I will engage in no further games concerning “evidence” . You use it as a ploy to avoid issues. You make statements with no substance that demonstrate far more than I ever have, a “personal opinion”.

There would be little to speak of at all in this forum if a majority of Muslims were innocent of supporting the activities of terrorists.

The very word “terrorist” might as well have been coined to refer exclusively to Islamic militants as that is the only image to occur to most anyone upon hearing the word.

Non issue? You blatantly tried to push your opinion as a fact, I asked for sources and you didnt provide any.Then you claim that this is a non issue , well if it was a non issue why did you post it in the first place? This just shows how biased you are, posting non issues to try and push your biased opinions. I replied to your post before and said that the only statement I didnt agree with was that the majority of Muslims support Binladen. I also said that we should speak against terrorism( if you apply logic , this would mean that we are currently silent) hmmmm could you be arguing for the sake of non issues?

And with all due respect if you think Micahs links are legitimate you need a course in critical thinking.

MichaelC

11-18-2002, 11:03 AM

Originally posted by reason
Non issue? You blatantly tried to push your opinion as a fact, I asked for sources and you didnt provide any.Then you claim that this is a non issue , well if it was a non issue why did you post it in the first place? This just shows how biased you are, posting non issues to try and push your biased opinions. I replied to your post before and said that the only statement I didnt agree with was that the majority of Muslims support Binladen. I also said that we should speak against terrorism( if you apply logic , this would mean that we are currently silent) hmmmm could you be arguing for the sake of non issues?

And with all due respect if you think Micahs links are legitimate you need a course in critical thinking.

Enough said. Nitpicking instead of discussion is a waste of time. I hope that reasonable conversation on important issues may be found elsewhere.

Good luck at communicating your issues. From the "evidence" in this thread, you need it.

reason

11-18-2002, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
Enough said. Nitpicking instead of discussion is a waste of time. I hope that reasonable conversation on important issues may be found elsewhere.

Good luck at communicating your issues. From the "evidence" in this thread, you need it.

Nitpicking? Go to my post and look up this sentence "I replied to your post before and said that the only statement I didnt agree with was that the majority of Muslims support Binladen" It clearly states that I AGREE with you on almost everything except that Most muslims support Bin Laden. Now If you want to discuss this so be it, but you cant claim its a non issue and push it as nitpicking.This discussion is completely up to you.

abu afak

11-19-2002, 09:53 AM

[i] It clearly states that I AGREE with you on almost everything except that Most muslims support Bin Laden. Now If you want to discuss this so be it, but you cant claim its a non issue and push it as nitpicking.This discussion is completely up to you. [/B]

Hard to know if they support bin Laden, when most don't even think he carried out the 9/11 attack!

"Poll of Muslim Nations"
""... But three-fifths of the people polled said that Arabs had not carried out the September 11 attacks, and another fifth said they didn't know whether they had or not. That's not an opinion, that's a false judgment of fact....""
http://home.attbi.com/~jontweet/jotjihadpoll.html

80% of Muslims refuse to accept the truth... so one would doubt they hate bin-Laden if they don't think he was responsible for 9/11.

IlyaFurman

11-19-2002, 08:36 PM

Well someone skipped the main point in that article of graph

67% of MUSLIMS CONSIDERED THE 9/11 attack WRONG

while only

9% of MUSLIMS CONSIDERED THE 9/11 attacks justified.

http://home.attbi.com/~jontweet/jotjihadpoll.html

NewsGuy

11-19-2002, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by IlyaFurman
67% of MUSLIMS CONSIDERED THE 9/11 attack WRONG

False.

In fact, the percentage of Muslims supporting the 9/11 mass murder of 3000 Americans varied from one Muslim country to the next.

In many Muslim countries, support for the Jihad-mass terrorist attack was as high as 80 or 90%, unlike what was shown by the sourceless phony graph on that page you link to.

And with all due respect to you, the author of that silly personal Web page is obviously somewhat of a wacko apart from the misinformation he posts. Take a closer look at it.

I'm surprised that you would link to that page, much less take it seriously at all in the first place.

abu afak

11-19-2002, 09:34 PM

Originally posted by NewsGuy
False.

In fact, the percentage of Muslims supporting the 9/11 mass murder of 3000 Americans varied from one Muslim country to the next.

In many Muslim countries, support for the Jihad-mass terrorist attack was as high as 80 or 90%, unlike what was shown by the sourceless phony graph on that page you link to.

And with all due respect to you, the author of that silly personal Web page is obviously somewhat of a wacko apart from the misinformation he posts.

You don't have to give Ilya 'due respect', he's obviously wackier than his friend ever will be..

"Bin Laden Still a Hero in Pro-U.S. Kuwait

uploaded 12 Sep 2002

KUWAIT (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden is still a hero for most people in close U.S. ally Kuwait, according to a poll published on Tuesday.

Eleven years after U.S.-led troops ousted Iraqi forces from Kuwait, many Kuwaiti residents have a positive view of the man accused of inflicting a terrible blow on their saviors last September 11.

Many Arabs believe they are suffering the fallout from the "war on terror" which the United States launched in the aftermath of the September attacks on Washington and New York that killed more than 3,000 people. That frustration has translated into rising anti- Americanism and street protests.

An opinion poll published in Kuwait's al-Rai al-Aam daily on Tuesday said 74.35 percent of 11,695 correct answers by Kuwaitis and residents said bin Laden was a "hero."

The oil-rich state has a foreign population of some 1.4 million people and 870,300 Kuwaitis. The poll did not say how many respondents were Kuwaitis.

The poll showed that 19.44 percent of respondents regarded the Saudi- born dissident as a "criminal," while 6.21 percent had no opinion on the issue.

Kuwait has come out strongly against the September attacks, which the United States blames on bin Laden and his al Qaeda network, and has sided with Washington in its war on terror.

Senior Kuwaiti officials, possibly led by Crown Prince and Prime Minister Sheikh Saad al-Abdulla al-Sabah, are due to attend a ceremony at the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait on Wednesday to commemorate the anniversary of the attacks.

Source: Reuters

http://www.khilafah.com/home/catego...ID=5051&TagID=7

IlyaFurman

11-20-2002, 01:29 PM

ibrodsky

11-20-2002, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by reason
Ofcourse its not necessary Ibro, what they do is take statistical sample sizes and then extrapolate a result.But even that is not provided, I dont deny that some sick people celebrated WTC , but they are a minority so focusing on convincing Muslims that terrorism is evil is pointless since most of them know that.

Ibro I get the feeling eventhough you know most Muslims are not Arabs, you subconsciously make that assumption. You cant help but lump all Muslims toghther as this makes it easier to define the enemy.Fact is that there are 300 million Arabs and there are 1.3 billion Muslim , the Arabs dont represent the majority of Muslims. 19 hijackers in WTC and lets assume 10,000 Muslim Terrorists through out history(a large exageration for the sake of argument) that is almost 0.00077% of the Muslim population.

reason, be reasonable.

Yes, I know most Muslims aren't Arabs. What was possibly the most oppressive government in history -- the Taliban regime in Afghanistan -- was a non-Arab Muslim regime. The Taliban terrorized their own people (forced women to stay indoors, forced men to grow beards, outlawed radio, TV, and indoor plumbing), and collaborated with Arabs to terrorize others.

Sympathy for terrorism is also rampant in Pakistan, which is probably Osama bin Laden's new home.

And let's not forget the Muslims who started this wave of mass murder with hostage-taking, chanting "Death to America!" and Death to Israel!," and sponsoring the Hizbollah mass murder gang: the Iranians.

I appreciate your insistence that Islam is a religion of peace. But let's not wear blinders. Terrorism and sympathy for terrorism are rampant in the Muslim world. Even many Muslims who insist they oppose terrorism blame 9/11 on the U.S.

abu afak

02-08-2003, 11:25 PM

Originally posted by reason
. I asked you to provide the polls that support your claim and until now you have not provided any, this is where I disagree with you, and that Is why I replied to you in the first place.This remains your opinion until you provide some reputable sources.

".... Elsewhere in the Arab world, a poll published yesterday found that terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden was still admired by most people in Kuwait, a startling figure 11 years after the United States went to war to liberate that country from occupying Iraqi forces.
The poll by the al-Rai al-Aam daily said 74 percent of 11,695 respondents said bin Laden was a "hero." It found that 19 percent regarded him as a "criminal," and that 6 percent had no opinion..."""

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20020911-21258354.htm

andak01

02-09-2003, 08:18 AM

OK, how about a little perspective here. ASSUMING, that 75% of Kuwait and 75% of Palestine think Osama Bin Laden is a hero- which is not even a crime, there are people in the US and Germany that still think Hitler was a hero and who never break the law or cause any problems. ASSUMING that these polls are unbiased and true, you have accounted for 23/100ths of 1% of the world's Muslim population. You extrapolate without any data that people who are being bombed by American made planes (Palestinians) and people whose society has been turned upsidedown by western values (Kuwaitis) have exactly the same opinions as those who have voluntarily moved to the west, to America, to France, to England, to South America searching for opportunities. Or, that they have the same opinions as Chinese Muslims (millions upon millions of them). That's really scientific. Why don't I do a poll among Israelis and extrapolate that all the worlds Jews are in 100% agreement with what THEY think? Why don't I say that sephardic Jews think like ashkenazis and Lubavichers think like Hassids? That's what the world is doing when they make a monolith of Sufis, Shiites, Nation of Islam, Ishmailis, etc.

MichaelC

02-09-2003, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by andak01
OK, how about a little perspective here. ASSUMING, that 75% of Kuwait and 75% of Palestine think Osama Bin Laden is a hero- which is not even a crime, there are people in the US and Germany that still think Hitler was a hero and who never break the law or cause any problems. ASSUMING that these polls are unbiased and true, you have accounted for 23/100ths of 1% of the world's Muslim population. You extrapolate without any data that people who are being bombed by American made planes (Palestinians) and people whose society has been turned upsidedown by western values (Kuwaitis) have exactly the same opinions as those who have voluntarily moved to the west, to America, to France, to England, to South America searching for opportunities. Or, that they have the same opinions as Chinese Muslims (millions upon millions of them). That's really scientific. Why don't I do a poll among Israelis and extrapolate that all the worlds Jews are in 100% agreement with what THEY think? Why don't I say that sephardic Jews think like ashkenazis and Lubavichers think like Hassids? That's what the world is doing when they make a monolith of Sufis, Shiites, Nation of Islam, Ishmailis, etc. I no longer see the point in providing any information at all to you. You disregard the fact that much of the world is concerned with a serious threat coming from avowed Muslims. Your only rejoinder to these concerns are along the lines of, "it's just a couple of guys who aren't really Muslims at all."

This type of thinking may please other Muslims but it does nothing for those who have died at the hands of these "few" nor those who will join them if nothing is done.

I am grateful that your view is essentially ignored by those in the position to do something about this threat.

abu afak

02-09-2003, 11:26 AM

Originally posted by MichaelC
I no longer see the point in providing any information at all to you. You disregard the fact that much of the world is concerned with a serious threat coming from avowed Muslims. Your only rejoinder to these concerns are along the lines of, "it's just a couple of guys who aren't really Muslims at all."

This type of thinking may please other Muslims but it does nothing for those who have died at the hands of these "few" nor those who will join them if nothing is done.

I am grateful that your view is essentially ignored by those in the position to do something about this threat.

Oooops.. Better add some more.. EVEN IN BRITAIN! (and this may be the Best Case scenario among Muslims for 'Lack' of Support for bin Laden) (add 10+% of 2 million)

"Over 10 percent of British Muslims back bin Laden: poll
Thursday, 05-Dec-2002 7:10PM PST Story from AFP
Copyright 2002 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LONDON, Dec 6 (AFP) - Almost one in five of Britain's estimated two million Muslims feels little loyalty towards Britain and more than ten percent believe Osama bin Laden is justified in terrorising the West, according to a poll published Friday.

The overwhelming majority of those surveyed said the atrocities in the United States on September 11, 2001 were not justified, but eight percent were not prepared to condemn the attacks, reported the right-wing Daily Telegraph publishing the findings of the poll.

The attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon were definitely not carried out by Muslims according to 21 percent of those polled by YouGov, while 13 percent believed bin Laden's campaign was justified.

The poll showed that the majority of British Muslims wish no ill towards the West and are concerned that the attitudes of some radicals are damaging Islam's reputation in the eyes of the world, the newspaper reported.

Thirteen percent of those questioned said they felt "not very loyal" towards Britain, six percent "not at all loyal", 31 percent felt "very loyal", and 44 percent "fairly loyal".

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/ac/Qbritain-islam.Re6K_CD6.html

andak01

02-09-2003, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by abu afak
[B]The overwhelming majority of those surveyed said the atrocities in the United States on September 11, 2001 were not justified...

That about says it all. That is the truth everywhere. And how many of your Kuwaitis that say Bin Laden is a hero even admit that he was connected with the attacks on 9/11? There are plenty of Arabs that are making erroneous assumptions based upon what is available to them in the news. If they think that 9/11 was a CIA plot, then they are going to think that Bin Laden is a hero for standing up to the CIA.

As for British or American Muslims and their loyalty, I suggest you poll some Orthodox Jews or pious Catholics as to whether their faith is stronger than their patriotism. I think that most religious people would answer the same way. It doesn't mean that they are a danger to the governments they live under.

Am Yisrael

02-09-2003, 01:11 PM

LONDON, Dec 6 (AFP) - Almost one in five of Britain's estimated two million Muslims feels little loyalty towards Britain and more than ten percent believe Osama bin Laden is justified in terrorising the West, according to a poll published Friday.

The overwhelming majority of those surveyed said the atrocities in the United States on September 11, 2001 were not justified, but eight percent were not prepared to condemn the attacks, reported the right-wing Daily Telegraph publishing the findings of the poll.

Hmm... kind of scary! I was discussing this in another forum a few days ago. Most of these who voted "for" Bin Laden are probably young muslim men who are naive and oblivious to whats going on around them. Im sure there is a fair share of new converts within these figures aswell. This figure rate is sure to rise.

andak01

02-09-2003, 01:39 PM

abu afak

02-09-2003, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by andak01
OK, how about a little perspective here. ASSUMING, that 75% of Kuwait and 75% of Palestine think Osama Bin Laden is a hero- which is not even a crime, there are people in the US and Germany that still think Hitler was a hero and who never break the law or cause any problems. ASSUMING that these polls are unbiased and true, you have accounted for 23/100ths of 1% of the world's Muslim population. You extrapolate without any data that people who are being bombed by American made planes (Palestinians) and people whose society has been turned upsidedown by western values (Kuwaitis) have exactly the same opinions as those who have voluntarily moved to the west, to America, to France, to England, to South America searching for opportunities. Or, that they have the same opinions as Chinese Muslims (millions upon millions of them). That's really scientific. Why don't I do a poll among Israelis and extrapolate that all the worlds Jews are in 100% agreement with what THEY think? Why don't I say that sephardic Jews think like ashkenazis and Lubavichers think like Hassids? That's what the world is doing when they make a monolith of Sufis, Shiites, Nation of Islam, Ishmailis, etc.

I didn't make an attempt to extrapolate, but did point out that Kuwait isn't Exactly a hot bed of Radicals and the Support for bin Laden there probably is not Isolated..

YOU, on the other hand, Dishonestly, and as usual, seek to say that somehow his support is limited to 23/100 of 1% of Muslims and that somehow THAT miniscule # is representative, and his support stops at the Kuwaiti Border.

Thus my Poll of the UK Muslims, showing even there, more than 10% support bin Laden.

The Usual Contemptuous Dishonest Baloney from you.

andak01

02-09-2003, 03:09 PM

I stated that 75% of Palestine and 75% of Kuwait makes up 23/100ths of 1% of the Islamic world. That's a fact Jack. Get over it. 10% of 2,000,000 (and I think more) is 200,000. We haven't passed 1% yet, of people who THINK differently from us. How about people who ACT differently? 300 suicide bombers EVER? Are you about to prove to us that 1 billion people belong to Al Qaida cells, 1 million, 100,000? No, Al Qaida, Fatah, Hizbollah together is a VERY small army. Something to be taken very seriously, but not to vilify an entire religion over.

And your 2,000,000 civil war casualties in Sudan when you neglect to mention that there is an army on the other side (actually more than one, with more than one general) receiving weapons from Israel and assistance from the CIA??? Show me ANY civil war in Africa (Liberia, Congo, Zaire, Chad, Angola, Zimbabwe) that hasn't experienced significant war crimes. Where life is cheap, lives are taken easily.

abu afak

02-09-2003, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by andak01
I stated that 75% of Palestine and 75% of Kuwait makes up 23/100ths of 1% of the Islamic world. That's a fact Jack. Get over it. 10% of 2,000,000 (and I think more) is 200,000. We haven't passed 1% yet, of people who THINK differently from us. How about people who ACT differently? 300 suicide bombers EVER? Are you about to prove to us that 1 billion people belong to Al Qaida cells, 1 million, 100,000? No, Al Qaida, Fatah, Hizbollah together is a VERY small army. Something to be taken very seriously, but not to vilify an entire religion over.

And your 2,000,000 civil war casualties in Sudan when you neglect to mention that there is an army on the other side (actually more than one, with more than one general) receiving weapons from Israel and assistance from the CIA??? Show me ANY civil war in Africa (Liberia, Congo, Zaire, Chad, Angola, Zimbabwe) that hasn't experienced significant war crimes. Where life is cheap, lives are taken easily.

Do you have an Honest bone in your body, or do you just think you can get away with your Disingenuous postings?

I have posted on Many Message boards, of many different persuasions (including Arab ones where posters say 'Hitler's Job should be finished'), for many years, and never seen anyone as Dishonest.

EVER

LionOfLoyalty

02-09-2003, 05:57 PM

Funny, all I'm seeing is you accusing andak of being dishonest. However you haven't so much as offered a single piece of evidence to support the claim. Now, I'm all for open debate, happen to disagree with andak on many things and frankly if you want to accuse someone of dishonesty, it's within your free speech rights. But it might help your credibility if you brought with you something, anything, to try and back up your claims. Don't just make accusations unless you can keep up some semblance of backing them up.

Originally posted by abu afak
Do you have an Honest bone in your body, or do you just think you can get away with your Disingenuous postings?

I have posted on Many Message boards, of many different persuasions (including Arab ones where posters say 'Hitler's Job should be finished'), for many years, and never seen anyone as Dishonest.

EVER

abu afak

02-09-2003, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
Funny, all I'm seeing is you accusing andak of being dishonest. However you haven't so much as offered a single piece of evidence to support the claim. Now, I'm all for open debate, happen to disagree with andak on many things and frankly if you want to accuse someone of dishonesty, it's within your free speech rights. But it might help your credibility if you brought with you something, anything, to try and back up your claims. Don't just make accusations unless you can keep up some semblance of backing them up.

Isreal Forum lets you read back everyone's posts.. Please read back mine in other strings detailing his nonsense.

You are new, so you don't know the long history... and obviously... haven't checked.

Please do before commenting

... and if you can't see through his attempted deceptions (23/100th of 1%) in this string... You just don't get it..

LionOfLoyalty

02-09-2003, 06:29 PM

Mr. Afak, perhaps you could simply explain to me that history, I would quite honestly very much like to hear your side of the matter and should I find that I am mistaken I will admit it fully. I invite you to attempt to bring me to your side, as I am always open to valid arguments. There are many stances of which we share, such as the opinion that Israel is not at fault for the conflict and that Palestinian terror must stop completely before negotiations can begin. Frankly, though you are a bit more extreme than I am, there is much we have in common. Please, elaborate on your position. It would be my pleasure to hear it.

,LionOfLoyalty

Originally posted by abu afak
Isreal Forum lets you read back everyone's posts.. Please read back mine in other strings detailing his nonsense.

You are new, so you don't know the long history... and obviously... haven't checked.

Please do before commenting

abu afak

02-09-2003, 06:40 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
Mr. Afak, perhaps you could simply explain to me that history, I would quite honestly very much like to hear your side of the matter and should I find that I am mistaken I will admit it fully. I invite you to attempt to bring me to your side, as I am always open to valid arguments. There are many stances of which we share, such as the opinion that Israel is not at fault for the conflict and that Palestinian terror must stop completely before negotiations can begin. Frankly, though you are a bit more extreme than I am, there is much we have in common. Please, elaborate on your position. It would be my pleasure to hear it.

,LionOfLoyalty

His history of Deception/Minimization/you-too-ism/ is Well known here...

Perhaps this will help: 2/1

Originally posted by MichaelC
The article says it all, Abu Afak. Before I'd gotten two paragraphs in, I knew that the first respondent would be andak01 with his whitewashing brush in hand.

Why does anyone wish to ignore those who defame their religion and hoped for way of life?

Fact: Too many deaths from the "peaceful" hand of Islam.

Inarguable.

But, with a good brush and lots of whitewash........

My friend, it is incumbent on you to document Your post.. I have already documented my charge Many Times..

YOU do the work if you want more.. and please Don't embarass yourself before you know what you are talking about .... again

LionOfLoyalty

02-09-2003, 06:44 PM

In the interest of accuracy, I will most certainly take the time to do so. Thank you for your time. Again, I must repeat that there should be no reason why we shouldn't get along, considering that most of our positions are similar. Furthermore, while researching the origins of your screenname I found some information that moved me slightly closer to your point of view on the matter.

,LionOfLoyalty

abu afak

02-09-2003, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
In the interest of accuracy, I will most certainly take the time to do so. Thank you for your time. Again, I must repeat that there should be no reason why we shouldn't get along, considering that most of our positions are similar. Furthermore, while researching the origins of your screenname I found some information that moved me slightly closer to your point of view on the matter.

,LionOfLoyalty

I agree, and thank you as well for your time.

And I stand by all of my posts here.

Their facts and their intent.

I hope we will become friends, and also see no reason why we shouldn't. Even forgetting one's exact positions, I have many friends who I do have honest disagreement with on this and other boards.

and BTW.. Welcome... (and I love when people discover my handle's meaning... nice work)

andak01

02-10-2003, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by abu afak
YOU do the work if you want more.. and please Don't embarass yourself before you know what you are talking about .... again

Lion,

Get used to this ...again phrase. Abu uses that one with a great degree of confidence without going to the trouble of saying what he is talking about. Discrediting people is a specialty of his. To his credit, he lays off until I come up with some hard data.

In the case of the Sudan, he maintained that millions of Christians were massacred because they wouldn't convert. That the entire conflict there centers around religion and 'natural' Muslim barbarism.

Coincidently, there is an oil pipeline running straight into the disputed territory.

http://www.oilandgasinternational.com/departments/world_industry_news/sudan4.gif

Coincidently, there is a rebel army armed by Israel and aided by the CIA in the south. And coincidently, the government in the north has always received support from Russia. So, we see yet another Cold War conflict playing itself out in Africa like those in Angola and elsewhere.
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/spla.htm

And even an investigative team sent to research slavery turned up empty handed. That doesn't prove that there aren't any slaves, but outside of Christian missionary groups, I haven't heard of anyone who has gone on the ground to investigate. Manumission (buying freedom for slaves) is a great source of blessings in Islam. I would suggest that we send a team of Muslims over to buy up all these slaves, if we can find any.
http://www.aboutsudan.com/delegatio...legislators.htm

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 12:22 PM

Seeing as this is a forum for discussion of ideas, not people, and that while on different points I agree with both of you, I think I'll limit my comments to those on concepts, and stay out of any personal histories, at least till I've been here a while longer.

I'm unaware of the history of the Sudan, though after this I will most certainly take the time to perform some research into it of my own. However, from various news reports, I understand that the charge of Israel arming these rebels is disputed, and that it is far from a generally accepted fact. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Having seen that Oil is involved always makes things both ten times more complicated to deal with, yet so much easier to understand, I believe.

Considering my relatively low opinion of the UN (arrived to by viewing their failing endeavours throughout their history, not just by the current matter, though the fact that they've just named Libya to chair the human rights council and Iraq to chair the disarmnent one doesn't help them in my eyes) and similar organizations, I'm not inclined to accept any investigative team as the last word on any matter, so on the topic of slavery in the area, I'll have to withhold comment till I've taken some time to research.

Thankyou both for your time.

,LionOfLoyalty

Originally posted by andak01
Lion,

Get used to this ...again phrase. Abu uses that one with a great degree of confidence without going to the trouble of saying what he is talking about. Discrediting people is a specialty of his. To his credit, he lays off until I come up with some hard data.

In the case of the Sudan, he maintained that millions of Christians were massacred because they wouldn't convert. That the entire conflict there centers around religion and 'natural' Muslim barbarism.

Coincidently, there is an oil pipeline running straight into the disputed territory.

http://www.oilandgasinternational.com/departments/world_industry_news/sudan4.gif

Coincidently, there is a rebel army armed by Israel and aided by the CIA in the south. And coincidently, the government in the north has always received support from Russia. So, we see yet another Cold War conflict playing itself out in Africa like those in Angola and elsewhere.
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/spla.htm

And even an investigative team sent to research slavery turned up empty handed. That doesn't prove that there aren't any slaves, but outside of Christian missionary groups, I haven't heard of anyone who has gone on the ground to investigate. Manumission (buying freedom for slaves) is a great source of blessings in Islam. I would suggest that we send a team of Muslims over to buy up all these slaves, if we can find any.
http://www.aboutsudan.com/delegatio...legislators.htm

abu afak

02-10-2003, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Am Yisrael
Hmm... kind of scary! I was discussing this in another forum a few days ago. Most of these who voted "for" Bin Laden are probably young muslim men who are naive and oblivious to whats going on around them. Im sure there is a fair share of new converts within these figures aswell. This figure rate is sure to rise.

SEPT 11 / ONE YEAR ON

Thai Muslims doubt bin Laden the culprit

US agenda dividing world into two camps

Anucha Charoenpo

Muslim leaders in Thailand do not believe Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda movement were responsible for the Sept 11 attacks in the United States, and instead see the US using the event to disunite the world.

Chidchanok Rahimmula, a political science lecturer from Prince of Songkhla University, said the US hurriedly wanted to find a ``scapegoat'' for the incident and tried to convince the world it was the work of bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

``I think such attempts are unreasonable and also cause disunity among countries in the world,'' she said.

``Any country disagreeing with the US is treated as an enemy of the US, prompting countries to be divided into two camps. The US imposed economic sanctions on opposing countries while they were more flexible with allies on economic matters to secure their support for their anti-terrorism agenda.''

In spite of videotapes showing bin Laden talking about how the attacks had exceeded his expectations, she was not convinced that he or al-Qaeda had masterminded the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington DC.

``The United States cannot so far find reliable and supporting evidence to show the international community that the attacks were really the work of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda members.

``Even the collapse of the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan, which the US has continuously alleged was backed by al-Qaeda, does not mean they launched such fatal attacks against the US,'' Mrs Chidchanok said. The US started a war against Afghanistan killing thousands of civilians, including children, but still failed to capture bin Laden. She believed he was still alive.

Abdullah Abru, an economics lecturer of the College of Islamic Studies of the same university, said the US unleashed a great tragedy on the Afghan people.

Mr Abdullah said the US failed to maintain peace and order in the country even though the Taliban had been overthrown. The US was also disrespectful of the country's Islamic culture and had introduced western lifestyles such as night entertainment venues.

Mr Abdullah said the US continued to threaten other Muslim nations just because they did not comply with US policies and later classified them as terrorist nations.

Adul Alihamad, an Islamic leader in Narathiwat, said the US had also tried to link terrorist groups in Southeast Asia to al-Qaeda to convince countries in the region to side with it.

http://scoop.bangkokpost.co.th/bkkpost/2002/sep2002/bp20020911/news/11Sep2002_news05.html

abu afak

02-10-2003, 01:57 PM

The Big Lie

Sept. 4, 2002

(CBS) If ever the world became a global village, it was last Sept. 11, when hundreds of millions of people around the world saw and heard the attacks on the World Trade Center.

But the very technology that made that the most communicated and most witnessed event in history also has contributed to what some are calling "the big lie."

It turns out an overwhelming majority of people in the Muslim world, according to a Gallup poll, do not believe the attacks of Sept. 11 were orchestrated by Osama bin Laden, or by Arabs, or by Muslims.

Many believe, instead, that the whole thing was a conspiracy orchestrated by Jews.

Where did they hear that? From the television and the Internet.

How pervasive is the belief in "the big lie"? We found out when we visited a wedding party in a small town in Pakistan.

The scene: Muslims walking into a large tent where wedding party guests are gathered. Americans are rarely seen in places like this these days. But our guide, Khalid Khawaja, grew up there, and CBS reporter George Crile accepted an invitation to join him at this wedding party.

All the town's leading citizens were there: the mayor; the pediatrician; a chemical engineer; a businessman; a journalist. And not one of them had anything friendly to say about America.

Said one guest: "People hate America. Yeah, that's true."

Such statements have come almost to be expected in the Islamic world. But what came next caught reporter Crile completely by surprise.

The Jews did it. That's exactly what they are saying: the mayor, the businessman, the journalist, the baby doctor...everyone. And, as one of them said, "Osama is totally innocent!"

Totally innocent? It sounds incredible - the idea that Osama bin Laden had nothing to with the World Trade Center attacks. But as the Gallup poll later confirmed, that's exactly what most Muslims believe.

"I was surprised that very few, even among the elites, believe that bin Laden did it," says Dr. Shibley Telhami, the man whom Gallup commissioned to analyze the findings of its survey.

What is most important about the results of the polls?

Says Telhami, "Well, if you look at the polls - and the ones that I have done in the Arab world - pertaining to Sept. 11, it's clear that there's almost a unanimous view that bin Laden was not responsible for Sept. 11. And that actually comes as a shock to Americans, given the evidence that is obviously out there. How could this be?"

It's a perplexing question. In this information age, it may be that the Sept. 11 attack was witnessed by more people than any event in history. And there was every reason to believe and hope that a consensus would have formed around the world about what had happened and who was responsible.

Mass murder had been committed and pictures of the 19 militant Muslim hijackers were printed in the papers. In America, there has never been any doubt about who was ultimately responsible. In the words of President Bush: "The evidence we have gathered points to a person named Osama bin Laden."

But as pollster Telhami explains it, when the president talks, most Moslems simply don't listen. He explains, "People say, 'Yes, you're giving me evidence. But frankly, I don't trust the system. I don't trust the messenger. I don't trust the message. I just don't believe.'"

But what is widely believed across the Muslim world, is the story we heard of the Jewish conspiracy, in which 4,000 Jewish employees at the World Trade Center were warned to stay home.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/04/60II/main520768.shtml

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 02:18 PM

I think we both know that the Jewish conspiracy theory is idiotic. My shul lost a member in the September 11th attacks as did many others across the country. However, I maintain that the reason that this obvious lie is so commonly believed in Pakistan and the Arab World, is because of the governments and state-sponsored media that propogates it. It's because of the culture that makes people in these countries capable of believing such things, indeed wanting to believe these things. It's because of the culture of Islamic Extremism, spread by those clerics, terrorists and despots that anti-US and anti-semitic sentiment is present. That militant minority is brainwashing, through the tried and true Goebbelistic technique of constant repition, the rest of the Islamic population. Our only difference of opinion is if the true Islam is the Islam of the clerics, terrorists and despots or the Islam of the many peaceful minded muslims around the world. What I believe is that we (the western world) needs to find a way to encourage the peaceful majority and stop the militant minority from it's continued hijacking of Islam.

abu afak

02-10-2003, 02:28 PM

By Zafir Jamaal | Islamic Affairs Reporter

Osama Bin Laden is the world's most sought-after man. The Unites States of America places his value at some $25 M, the largest reward every offered for a single man in US history as a bounty for information leading to his death or capture. He is named in numerous indictments including the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, the bombing of two US Embassies in Africa, the bombing of the USS Cole, the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon. He heads the CIA's Most Wanted list. The families of the victims of the September 11th attacks have filed several civil law suits against Bin Laden and other countries are also actively pursuing him for suspected affiliations to other guerilla operations.

Osama is also sought after by Muslims and non-Muslims, young and old, who see him in an entirely different light: as a spiritual leader, a man of action who not only follows the letter of the Islamic law taught by the Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him), but also a defender of the righteous who actively battles the oppression, poverty and plunder of Muslims that has occurred over many centuries. His supporters (who number in the millions and who are increasing every day) are often transparent, as only a fraction publicly support him. Osama has wide spread support underground, from Muslim and non-Muslim youths, from inside mosques and college campuses, and from citizens in every country of the world who oppose "global Americanization", "Imperialism" and the "New World Order" and who honor him as a hero for exposing what they believe to be sinister US motives...."""

http://www.jihadunspun.net/thePlayers/oblwif.html

abu afak

02-10-2003, 02:31 PM

Bin Laden Popular in Saudi Arabia (BBC)

Has the diplomacy been in vain?

By the BBC's Middle East correspondent Frank Gardner in Saudi Arabia
Support for Osama Bin Laden appears to be running high in his native Saudi Arabia, while anger grows at the US bombing campaign in Afghanistan.

Many Saudis refuse to believe that Bin Laden was connected to the terror attacks of 11 September.

Instead, many hail him as a Muslim hero, who stands up to the United States.

They hate the West for what they see as its biased policies against Muslims.

They adore Bin Laden.

Willing to die

Grown men tell you they love him, and that they would die for him if necessary. And some probably already have.

An unknown number of Saudi citizens have left for Afghanistan since September to join the fighters of Al-Qaeda, Bin Laden's organisation.

A Muslim hero in the eyes of many Saudis

Al-Qaeda's opposition to the West and its policies strike a chord with people throughout this devout Muslim country.

Worryingly for leaders such as UK Prime Minister Tony Blair who recently visited the Middle East, many Saudis refuse to believe the evidence presented by the FBI.

Arabs doubt evidence

The FBI says Bin Laden was behind the attacks in New York and Washington.

But many Saudis insist that the Arabs on board the hijacked planes were just passengers, nothing more.

It was an inside job, they say, by American fanatics, or maybe by Israelis.

Such beliefs have been compounded by the initial delay in releasing the alleged evidence against Bin Laden.

Saudi suspicions also deepened because of errors by US investigators.

The FBI was quick to release a list of alleged hijackers, but some of them turned up alive and well in the Arab world.

The result has been a proliferation of rumours, both in Saudi Arabia and in the wider Middle East.

These have destroyed any hope of popular Arab support for the West's military campaign in Afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1636416.stm

HOW IS ANDAK'S 23/100THS OF 1% HOLDING UP?

andak01

02-10-2003, 02:46 PM

So what does this tell us? If someone is polled and responds that Bin Laden is a hero, but does not believe that Bin Laden had anything to do with 9/11 it is very different from someone who celebrates the death of innocent people on 9/11. They may be deluded or misinformed or many other things, but they are not getting the same data with which to draw conclusions. I have had several Muslims suggest to me that 9/11 was a Jewish plot, not so much since the latest Bin Laden smoking gun tapes, but still occasionally. And I have had German Americans tell me about the Protocols of Zion. So anti-semitism is alive and well, both among the Muslims and among the Lutherans, and others.

Osama has wide spread support underground, from Muslim and non-Muslim youths, from inside mosques and college campuses, and from citizens in every country of the world who oppose "global Americanization", "Imperialism" and the "New World Order" and who honor him as a hero for exposing what they believe to be sinister US motives....

So, in other words, it's impossible to be against global Americanization and the New World Order and not support Osama? And from your Afaked up point of view, impossible also to be Muslim without being suspect of supporting Bin Laden???

All of which makes it very convenient. The more we protest our innocence the more guilty we are. Where are the witch dunking chairs?

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 02:53 PM

Oddly enough abu, the information you give me here just proves my point. It shows that these people in the Arab World are growing up in a culture and an environment that is so backward and extremist that they think these things. Whose fault is it that they're in that culture though? Their governments. Should they have grown up in democratic, stable governments with a seperation of church-excuse me mosque and state then their opinions would be adjusted accordingly. There is a problem, and Bin Laden has considerable support on the Arab and Persian street. But I think that that support comes not from the religion of Islam but from government of despotism and the culture of extremism.

abu afak

02-10-2003, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
Oddly enough abu, the information you give me here just proves my point. It shows that these people in the Arab World are growing up in a culture and an environment that is so backward and extremist that they think these things. Whose fault is it that they're in that culture though? Their governments. Should they have grown up in democratic, stable governments with a seperation of church-excuse me mosque and state then their opinions would be adjusted accordingly. There is a problem, and Bin Laden has considerable support on the Arab and Persian street. But I think that that support comes not from the religion of Islam but from government of despotism and the culture of extremism.

I see... 'bad upbringing'..... on an international and universal level in the Islamic world... I agree

Like uh.... our Prison Population...

You're unconsciously admitting the astounding depth of the problem...

and It must be 'treated' (and defended against) regardless of HOW they got that way..

You're proving my point

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:04 PM

Yes, it does have to be treated the same way, by installing democratic governments with the seperation of mosque and state. However, there's a big difference between saying Islam is the problem and saying despotism is.

Look, I'm not one of those people who think the US or Israel or the West is responsible for these terrorists, I don't. But I don't place the blame at all of Islam, just the extremist strain and the governments. You'll find that the most of these places where Bin Laden has support or despotic countries who are stuck way behind the rest of the world. Blame the religious establishments, blame the governments but I refuse to believe that One billion people are inherently bad. What needs to be done is to do away with the religious establishment and the government system that promotes these things. It doesn't mean that by nature Islam is bad.

,LionOfLoyalty

abu afak

02-10-2003, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
Yes, it does have to be treated the same way, by installing democratic governments with the seperation of mosque and state. However, there's a big difference between saying Islam is the problem and saying despotism is.

Look, I'm not one of those people who think the US or Israel or the West is responsible for these terrorists, I don't. But I don't place the blame at all of Islam, just the extremist strain and the governments. You'll find that the most of these places where Bin Laden has support or despotic countries who are stuck way behind the rest of the world. Blame the religious establishments, blame the governments but I refuse to believe that One billion people are inherently bad. What needs to be done is to do away with the religious establishment and the government system that promotes these things. It doesn't mean that by nature Islam is bad.

,LionOfLoyalty

"Separation of Mosque and State"?!!!!!!!!!! (you got my vote anyway!!)

Sorry LOL.. That is LOL ... For Muslims

Take a year off posting and at least read the Newspaper.

You Are obviously clueless about Islam

I'd like to indulge you further ... but honestly... .. This is obviously now hopeless

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:09 PM

Our response may be the same, but the reasons for them are different. We agree, you just call the corrupt religious establishment and government Islam, while I call it a corrupt religious establishment and government system that's doing things in the name of Islam. The greatest hijacking done by terrorists was that of a religion. Frankly, the response must be the same, however I think that their may come a time when Islam takes it's place besides every other religion. Just as Christians have (mostly) stopped killing in the name of their religion, I think Islam can as well.

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:11 PM

I do read the paper, every day as a matter of fact and I don't appreciate you turning this debate into a personal attack.

As I said before, our disagreement is one of semantics. Read my last post.

Originally posted by abu afak
"Separation of Mosque and State"?!!!!!!!!!! (you got my vote anyway)

Sorry LOL.. That is LOL ... For Muslims

Take a year off posting and at least read the Newspaper.

You Are obviously clueless about Islam

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:13 PM

We're arguing over the philosophy, not the action.

My opinion on the matter is somewhere in between yours and andak's, at least from a philosophical/debating. However on what to do, our opinions are much closer, from what I can gather from your opinion on what to do, since I can't say I'm exactly clear on it.

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:34 PM

Well, that seems a very ungraceful way to back out of a debate when you're having trouble responding.

Originally posted by abu afak
I'd like to indulge you further ... but honestly... .. This is obviously now hopeless

andak01

02-10-2003, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
...The greatest hijacking done by terrorists was that of a religion.

I hope it won't upset you to know that I hear many Muslims saying exactly these words. That is precisely what we feel. They didn't hijack the reliigon, but they certainly hijacked the public perception.

Frankly, the response must be the same, however I think that their may come a time when Islam takes it's place besides every other religion. Just as Christians have (mostly) stopped killing in the name of their religion, I think Islam can as well.

Our values are not all that different. Family and community and charity are cornerstones of our religions. Yes, Christians have (mostly) stopped killing, except abortion clinic bombers and occasionally the IRA. But if I started every conversation with a Christian by railing against abortion clinic bombers, where would we be? What if I wouldn't let them talk about anything else? What if I insisted that Christianity was only about abortion clinic bombers? What if I said that any Christian who doesn't speak out constantly against abortion clinic bombers is supporting them? What if I demanded that Christians march against abortion clinic bombers? What if I took links to anti-abortion websites to prove that Christians are violent? What if I could show you photos of head wounds from killed abortion clinic doctors? Am I doing a public service?

LionOfLoyalty

02-10-2003, 03:38 PM

I think most of us here would agree that this is not a battle of Islam vs. Judiasm, but a battle of democracy and tolerance vs. despotism and extremism.

Originally posted by andak01
I hope it won't upset you to know that I hear many Muslims saying exactly these words. That is precisely what we feel. They didn't hijack the reliigon, but they certainly hijacked the public perception.

Our values are not all that different. Family and community and charity are cornerstones of our religions. Yes, Christians have (mostly) stopped killing, except abortion clinic bombers and occasionally the IRA. But if I started every conversation with a Christian by railing against abortion clinic bombers, where would we be? What if I wouldn't let them talk about anything else? What if I insisted that Christianity was only about abortion clinic bombers? What if I said that any Christian who doesn't speak out constantly against abortion clinic bombers is supporting them? What if I demanded that Christians march against abortion clinic bombers? What if I took links to anti-abortion websites to prove that Christians are violent? What if I could show you photos of head wounds from killed abortion clinic doctors? Am I doing a public service?

andak01

02-11-2003, 04:23 AM

Go and read Plato's 'Republic' and you will see that democracy is one step prior to tyranny. We are quickly turning the corner in America. And if this new Patriot Act goes through, 1984 is going to look like a walk in the park (with heavy surveillance).

Mediocrates

02-11-2003, 05:15 AM

There are by some estimates 3 million survellience cameras in the UK. Is the UK a tyranny?

andak01

02-11-2003, 07:44 AM

Rights to privacy have greatly deteriorated. This is happening at an even greater rate in the US. We are still a long ways from a tyranny, but we should be vigilant. The Constitution and our Bill of Rights needs to be protected both from external threats as well as threats from within. It is a common pattern that governments use wartime emergencies to take rights away from the citizens. These rights, once lost are very difficult to replace.

LionOfLoyalty

02-11-2003, 12:26 PM

I agree that vigilance is necessary, especially after such things as the creation of the Total Information Awareness office, a concept that I feel ambigious (though not totally against) about. However the placement of an admiral deeply involved in Iran-Contra in charge of the office was a grave miscalculation.

andak01

02-11-2003, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by LionOfLoyalty
I agree that vigilance is necessary, especially after such things as the creation of the Total Information Awareness office, a concept that I feel ambigious (though not totally against) about. However the placement of an admiral deeply involved in Iran-Contra in charge of the office was a grave miscalculation.

If they had been totally aware of the information concerning this admiral, perhaps they wouldn't have placed him there. LOL.

LionOfLoyalty

02-11-2003, 12:50 PM

Somehow I doubt they were unable to discover what TIME magazine located as soon as the press conference was over. No, the current administration was well aware of John Pointdexter's complicity in Iran-Contra, it appears that our current Bush is following in his father's footsteps in this respect.

Originally posted by andak01
If they had been totally aware of the information concerning this admiral, perhaps they wouldn't have placed him there. LOL.

andak01

02-11-2003, 03:13 PM

It was a joke, Total Information Awareness, were they totally aware of the information. Get it? (Rimshot) Tough crowd in here. I'm bombin' here... (Rimshot) But seriously folks, I'm going in for eye surgery this week. Doc says instead of lasers, they're gonna try surgical bombing.

Mediocrates

02-11-2003, 03:18 PM

I'm going to the Franz Kafka Penal Colony where the name of my crime will carved into my back.

LionOfLoyalty

02-11-2003, 03:28 PM

*laughs* Oh, I get it. *laughs again* Good one, Andak.

Originally posted by andak01
It was a joke, Total Information Awareness, were they totally aware of the information. Get it? (Rimshot) Tough crowd in here. I'm bombin' here... (Rimshot) But seriously folks, I'm going in for eye surgery this week. Doc says instead of lasers, they're gonna try surgical bombing.

MichaelC

02-11-2003, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by andak01
If they had been totally aware of the information concerning this admiral, perhaps they wouldn't have placed him there. LOL. I hope they find the name of every single criminal that you would just love to defend here on the board. Of course, they are just "peaceful people" who'd never do anyone "any" harm.

LionOfLoyalty

02-11-2003, 05:25 PM

Look, I don't deny that the system can be useful. Nor am I saying that terrorists and criminals should not be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, because they should considering they are dangerous. But I am saying that power corrupts proportionally with the amount that's given and Total Information Awareness, while not a awful idea in and of it's self, needs to be one that recieves considerable oversight and also needs to have a commander that has not already shown himself to be willing to abuse power and trample the constitution.

Originally posted by MichaelC
I hope they find the name of every single criminal that you would just love to defend here on the board. Of course, they are just "peaceful people" who'd never do anyone "any" harm.

andak01

02-11-2003, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by MichaelC
I hope they find the name of every single criminal that you would just love to defend here on the board. Of course, they are just "peaceful people" who'd never do anyone "any" harm.

The biggest criminal I know around here is me. My crime is I would desparately like to see Bush voted out of office in the next election. Oh, and I'm a liberal. We used to be called commies, but they've changed the term to terrorist now. And the McCarthey panel is now known as the Patriot act. But you can still shut off people's brain activity simply by calling someone a terrorist. Doesn't have to be true, just say the magic word.

Yeah, I admit, I don't think 50,000 or more dead Iraqi citizens and Saddam living like Marcos in Marina Del Rey is going to reduce the number of terrorists in the world one iota. He deserves a lot worse than that, but like Bin Laden, he'll probably die in his sleep at an advanced age.

MichaelC

02-12-2003, 03:31 PM

Originally posted by andak01
The biggest criminal I know around here is me. My crime is I would desparately like to see Bush voted out of office in the next election. Oh, and I'm a liberal. We used to be called commies, but they've changed the term to terrorist now. And the McCarthey panel is now known as the Patriot act. But you can still shut off people's brain activity simply by calling someone a terrorist. Doesn't have to be true, just say the magic word.

Yeah, I admit, I don't think 50,000 or more dead Iraqi citizens and Saddam living like Marcos in Marina Del Rey is going to reduce the number of terrorists in the world one iota. He deserves a lot worse than that, but like Bin Laden, he'll probably die in his sleep at an advanced age. Well, it is, of course, not yet a crime to defend the indefensible and to mislead as many as possible by refusing to concede the inhuman and criminal acts committed against humanity by those who appear to have dedicated their entire lives to Allah.

What, after all, are we here in the West to think, when we hear verse after koranic verse justifying the jihads that have taken the lives of thousands, if not millions.

This is not something that you, in your own pious manner, have ever honestly addressed. You dig up historical dirt on other religions as though dumping it here will convince reasonable people that, well gee, other people have done terrible things in the name of their religion, shouldn't we let Muslims do terrible things also?

Yeah. That's the ticket. We need to let Islam catch up in the carnage department.

When first you came to this board, you dwelt upon religion and the wonderful aspects thereof, but as time went on, you became an apologist for all the terrible things done in the name of your adopted religion, as though to admit wrongdoing would somehow invalidate your choice of deity. How sad.

When people kill in the name of their God, there is nothing to do but condemn. You don't need to comb through history to find every horrible thing that has occurred and then attempt to tell us how, "well, everyone else did it first." What a sad defence.

A great number of the world's people are at WAR with dangerous elements within Islam. Nothing, I repeat NOTHING is being done from within Islam about their bad boys. So Okay, we'll do it. You don't believe it's real? Tough. Stay out of the way. It is a happening thing and your whitewashing of the crimes committed in the name of Allah are weak and unconvincing, though I'm sure your compatriots at the local mosque love such specious arguments.