Muslim clerics denounce terrorism

[bobblehead]

The clerics in America are generally very moderate. I'm sure there are some extreme ones, but they're the lunatic fringe characters that eventually get arrested anyway.

I think Islam in America is the best representation of it. America has freedom. Muslims here have the ability to learn concepts on their own without peer pressure, coercion, and corrupt teachers. This results in a pure, undistorted learning, leading to the ability to think critically and empathize with people of different cultures and religions as well. This results in a peaceful, relaxed Muslim (which is what Muslims are supposed to be to begin with).

Muslims protest against terrorism all the time. You just never hear about it.

1. Jordanians protest Al Qaeda:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/jordan-continues-to-protest-al-qaida.html

2. More Indian Muslims denounce terrorism:

http://www.anindianmuslim.com/2008/09/muslims-against-terrorism.html

3. A Muslim organization against terrorism:

http://www.freemuslims.org/

4. A Muslim website full of denunciations of terrorism from many sources:

http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

Just like you, Tex, I have an issue with the MSM for not reporting these things ever. I think there's a profit motive involved - bad news is far more lucrative than good news, so you only hear about how bad things are.

wonderful stats...when are those organizations or the denouncing clerics going to actually DO something to prevent terrorism?? You know, things like provide intel, or infiltrate radical islam and report their activities back to the US intel units?

Speaking out against smoking is cool, but if you hand a child a pack of cigarettes after your speech its kinda pointless.

[th87]

The clerics in America are generally very moderate. I'm sure there are some extreme ones, but they're the lunatic fringe characters that eventually get arrested anyway.

I think Islam in America is the best representation of it. America has freedom. Muslims here have the ability to learn concepts on their own without peer pressure, coercion, and corrupt teachers. This results in a pure, undistorted learning, leading to the ability to think critically and empathize with people of different cultures and religions as well. This results in a peaceful, relaxed Muslim (which is what Muslims are supposed to be to begin with).

Muslims protest against terrorism all the time. You just never hear about it.

1. Jordanians protest Al Qaeda:

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/jordan-continues-to-protest-al-qaida.html

2. More Indian Muslims denounce terrorism:

http://www.anindianmuslim.com/2008/09/muslims-against-terrorism.html

3. A Muslim organization against terrorism:

http://www.freemuslims.org/

4. A Muslim website full of denunciations of terrorism from many sources:

http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm

Just like you, Tex, I have an issue with the MSM for not reporting these things ever. I think there's a profit motive involved - bad news is far more lucrative than good news, so you only hear about how bad things are.

wonderful stats...when are those organizations or the denouncing clerics going to actually DO something to prevent terrorism?? You know, things like provide intel, or infiltrate radical islam and report their activities back to the US intel units?

Speaking out against smoking is cool, but if you hand a child a pack of cigarettes after your speech its kinda pointless.

1. How do you know they don't provide intel, etc.?

2. Muslims aren't somehow psychic to know the motivations of every other Muslim.

3. Why do some people think it's a normal Muslim's duty to "do something" about something some fringe lunatic does? Would you ask a normal, unrelated Christian to do something about White supremacist groups, for example? What about that conservative who shot up the church? Were conservatives asked to do anything to prevent future examples of that?

4. Is anyone handing out the figurative pack of cigarettes? You're just making baseless assumptions.

[bobblehead]

1. How do you know they don't provide intel, etc.?

2. Muslims aren't somehow psychic to know the motivations of every other Muslim.

3. Why do some people think it's a normal Muslim's duty to "do something" about something some fringe lunatic does? Would you ask a normal, unrelated Christian to do something about White supremacist groups, for example? What about that conservative who shot up the church? Were conservatives asked to do anything to prevent future examples of that?

4. Is anyone handing out the figurative pack of cigarettes? You're just making baseless assumptions.

1) Because our administration is constantly asking them to, but we end up bombing al qaida in pakistan only to have our "friendly clerics" complain about it.

2) Not sure what the hell you are saying here, I am talking about real intel help.

3) I didn't say its their "duty" but if they want us to view them as allies actions speak louder than words. They don't have to help us, but don't cry when we treat them accordingly.

4) Again, no clue what you are getting at, but I think I have given you the reason/evidence behind my "baseless assumptions" that are based on fact.

[th87]

1. How do you know they don't provide intel, etc.?

2. Muslims aren't somehow psychic to know the motivations of every other Muslim.

3. Why do some people think it's a normal Muslim's duty to "do something" about something some fringe lunatic does? Would you ask a normal, unrelated Christian to do something about White supremacist groups, for example? What about that conservative who shot up the church? Were conservatives asked to do anything to prevent future examples of that?

4. Is anyone handing out the figurative pack of cigarettes? You're just making baseless assumptions.

1) Because our administration is constantly asking them to, but we end up bombing al qaida in pakistan only to have our "friendly clerics" complain about it.

2) Not sure what the hell you are saying here, I am talking about real intel help.

3) I didn't say its their "duty" but if they want us to view them as allies actions speak louder than words. They don't have to help us, but don't cry when we treat them accordingly.

4) Again, no clue what you are getting at, but I think I have given you the reason/evidence behind my "baseless assumptions" that are based on fact.

1. This doesn't mean that they're not getting intel. The clerics complain because of the loss of innocent life.

3. I'm talking about the regular "Joe Muslim". Why would he be judged for the actions of some weirdo far away unless he does a dance for you? I don't see a Christian and immediately think he molested an altar boy. That's something some people need to condition out of their system when they think Muslim.

4. Your reason and evidence constitute hasty generalizations and stereotyping.

[texaspackerbacker]

First of all, let's NOT assume there are a billion Muslims in the world. The figure most often quoted of 600 million is MORE than enough.

Secondly, even though you are Muslim and in a better position to know, I just do NOT accept your premise that the majority of Muslim clerics are NOT radical--in the sense of advocating or at least excusing terrorism and other violent behavior against non-Muslims. I accept even less the reason you give--the idea that the vast majority of Muslims are NOT radical by the definition I just gave. If that is the case at all in absolute numbers, it could only be true if you include the relatively innocuous Muslims in Indonesia and India--and probably in Bangladesh too--a possible explanation for your rosy picture of the situation. If you take Muslims in north Africa and Asia west of India, though, I would assert that the HUGE majority fit the definition of radical.

Even if your premise is true, that would still leave lots of enemy combatants. In the several millions. If that were the case, they'd all be in Iraq, and the Army would be actively fighting all day, as in a "classic" war. Instead, there's a trap set up here, and a terrorist there, and another terrorist hiding out in the city. This seems to imply that the numbers are relatively low - much, much lower than the several millions.

Joe Muslim, that's cute.

I've read your point of view for a long time, TH87, and as I said, I tend to respect and believe it to a limited extent--at least in part, because I've known a lot of "good Muslims" who apparently aren't taken in by the crap the radical clerics put out.

Just the same, your premise would be a lot more credible if the large majority of "good Muslims" you describe would "take out their own trash"--take steps to assert themselves and rein in the perpetrators of terrorism, tyranny, gender discrimination, etc.

As for the "classic" war you spoke of, you know (or should) why they wouldn't do that. They'd get killed off in massive numbers. Nobody fights the U.S. military straight up these days without getting their ass kicked big time.

I never claimed that there is a majority of Muslims actively perpetrating terrorism or even sitting in reserve, getting ready for all out war. I just said, and still say, that the significant majority of Joe Muslims SYMPATHIZE with the radical few--kinda like those huge crowds you see listening to Hitler before WWII--who, IMO, really DID sympathize with what Hitler said and did.

If that's wrong, and it is just a matter of fear, not sympathy/empathy, as you seem to indicate, then WHY would such a large majority fail to stand up and stop the bad guys?

[bobblehead]

1. How do you know they don't provide intel, etc.?

2. Muslims aren't somehow psychic to know the motivations of every other Muslim.

3. Why do some people think it's a normal Muslim's duty to "do something" about something some fringe lunatic does? Would you ask a normal, unrelated Christian to do something about White supremacist groups, for example? What about that conservative who shot up the church? Were conservatives asked to do anything to prevent future examples of that?

4. Is anyone handing out the figurative pack of cigarettes? You're just making baseless assumptions.

1) Because our administration is constantly asking them to, but we end up bombing al qaida in pakistan only to have our "friendly clerics" complain about it.

2) Not sure what the hell you are saying here, I am talking about real intel help.

3) I didn't say its their "duty" but if they want us to view them as allies actions speak louder than words. They don't have to help us, but don't cry when we treat them accordingly.

4) Again, no clue what you are getting at, but I think I have given you the reason/evidence behind my "baseless assumptions" that are based on fact.

1. This doesn't mean that they're not getting intel. The clerics complain because of the loss of innocent life.

3. I'm talking about the regular "Joe Muslim". Why would he be judged for the actions of some weirdo far away unless he does a dance for you? I don't see a Christian and immediately think he molested an altar boy. That's something some people need to condition out of their system when they think Muslim.

4. Your reason and evidence constitute hasty generalizations and stereotyping.

1) yet when they had the chance to provide intel they did nothing...making them as guilty in the loss of innocent life as the US gov't. We need the "good" muslims to help us in this war....for their own sake.

3) who is "judging" joe muslim...not me. but i refuse to accept your original premise that he is REALLY REALLY on our side...he is not, he is staying neutral and giving blanche statements about loss of innocent life.

4) I am not generalizing or stereotyping, I have given very clear concrete opinions. I could just say something like:

"I am very saddened by the mistreatment of muslims in america" which in effect, does nothing but cover my own ass....get the point?