Friday, October 17, 2008
The perils of equating Islam with terrorism
So, here's some brilliant public relations from the foreign minister of Kazakhstan: Equating Islam with terrorism will cause... terrorism! Now, in fairness, his point was that it is in nobody's best interest for the world to divide along confessional lines, and I quite agree. The suggestion, however, that mere conflation of Islam with terrorism by ignorant people in the West might cause otherwise peaceful Muslims to become violent only serves to remind us that it is more dangerous to criticize Islam than other opinions.
15 Comments:
By 
Punditarian, at
Fri Oct 17, 10:35:00 PM:
If we don't admit that Islam is the "religion of peace" they will kill us!
By MEANA55, at
Sat Oct 18, 12:08:00 AM:
Knowing what there is to know about taqqiya, who is it that is dividing the world along confessional lines?
By masjidwebsites, at
Sat Oct 18, 12:31:00 AM:
Equating Islam with terrorism will cause the net to catch Muslims who have never committed a crime. So it makes sense to address the threat of a few thousand terrorists and not conflate it to include the religion of 1.5 billion people.
By 
, at
Sat Oct 18, 02:53:00 AM:
"Never committed a crime" because in Muslim countries, killing the infidel is not a crime, it is rather required.
In Western Countries, Muslims cannot by definition be anything other than terrorists, since all Muslims must abide by Sharia, among which is Jihad, killing infidels. Along with polygamy, stoning adulterers, and child marriage, among other lovely traditions.
Lest anyone think this an exaggeration, recent polls in the UK had 45% of British Muslims openly wishing for Sharia Law, which would make British natives by definition despised, fifth-class residents with few if any rights. As Muslim preachers constantly (and correctly under the Koran) say, a "kaffir" (infidel) is fit for whatever a Muslim wishes to do with him or her: kill them, enslave them, rob them, whatever.
UK's MI5 estimate there are something like 15,000 active terrorists in the nation, with the support of 4 million or so Muslims.
Of course we cannot all get along. When tribal peoples practicing polygamy (and the consequent social uproar to export young men as suicide killers or conquerors) have nukes, no we can't get along. We certainly can't when Muslims demand Sharia which is guaranteed to cause a civil war, in England and elsewhere.
You can't have a little bit of Sharia, the polygamy and child marriage and divorce law, and not the rest. Britain and most of Europe is doomed to a bloody, ugly civil war over who will rule and which law: Sharia and Islam, or European will control every single aspect of people's lives.
By , at
Sat Oct 18, 08:26:00 AM:
Equating Islam with terrorism will cause...terrorism. Snowstorms and increasing coldness is caused by...Global Warming, eh, climate change.
To state otherwise is strictly prohibited and is a type of racism. Taught as a mandatory course at all EurAsian and American universities.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Oct 18, 09:54:00 AM:
Islam itself divides the world along confessional lines. 'Muslim' and 'Everyone Else.'
By Mystery Meat, at
Sat Oct 18, 11:15:00 AM:
We should demonize demons, not entire races or religions. That being said, I think it was the arab editor of a Dubai newspaper who said (I am paraphrasing) while it is true that not all muslims are terrorists, nearly all terrorists are muslims.
By , at
Sat Oct 18, 01:10:00 PM:
Perhaps the unnamed "arab editor of a Dubai newspaper" should get out more.
The Irish Republican Army and the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka are not Muslims, nor are the various Marxist terror outfits in Columbia and the Philippines, nor ETA Basque separatists in Spain, nor Somalia's Mooryaan, among many others across the world.
In fact, non-Muslim terror groups have provided us (right here in the US) with such gems as Eric Rudolph, Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and William Krar.
I would, however, agree with the assertion that nearly all terrorists are fundamentalists of one variety or another.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Oct 18, 01:35:00 PM:
"Perhaps the unnamed "arab editor of a Dubai newspaper" should get out more."
Islamic Jihad. Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Ansar al-Sunna. Fatah al-Islam. Al Qaeda. The Taliban. Hezb Allah. Hamas. Fatah, including the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade. The DFLP. The PFLP. The PFLP-General Command. Abu Nidal Organization. Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Jaam'at Islamia. Islamic Group for Call and Combat. Jaish-e Muhammad. Abu Sayyaf. Jund al-Islam.
These are just names I'm familiar with.
That's not counting the decentralized movements such as the ones in Thailand, Chechnya, and most Western countries, or the smaller and/or defunct ones that have since died out. That's also not counting Islamic government sponsored organizations that regularly carry out or abet terrorist acts. (Iran and Pakistan are foremost in my mind, here)
Perhaps you ought to get out more. And, perhaps, do a little something about that arrogance that causes you to believe that you know someone else's culture better than they do.
By , at
Sat Oct 18, 02:25:00 PM:
"[I]t does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson
This is my culture.
It has bothered me, during this election season, to see Americans' fears of the "other" extended in hateful ways (as, for example, in making hay of a candidate's middle name).
I personally believe that religious intolerance and xenophobia are not American values. Quite the contrary.
By Dawnfire82, at
Sat Oct 18, 06:54:00 PM:
"I personally believe that religious intolerance and xenophobia are not American values."
But they are Islamic values. Which is why most terrorists are Muslim. Which, I believe, was the key point made.
"[I]t does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."
This must have been before the Barbary Pirates told him that they refused to negotiate with infidels unless it was a question of ransom.
By , at
Sat Oct 18, 09:00:00 PM:
FTM:
It has bothered me, during this election season, to see Americans' fears of the "other" extended in hateful ways (as, for example, in making hay of a candidate's middle name).
Pray tell why would a person get so upset at mention of his middle name?
Might it be because that person opposed a war to topple a genocidal tyrant with that same name, and that person doesn't like being reminded that he preferred to keep a genocidal tyrant in power, instead of toppling him?
Sort like if John Adolf Smith had been opposed to declaring war against Germany in 1941.
By Consul-At-Arms, at
Sun Oct 19, 04:11:00 AM:
I've quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms.blogspot.com/2008/10/re-perils-of-equating-islam-with.html
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:37:00 PM:
The only people that I see consistently equating all of Islam with terrorism are Jihadis.
By , at
Sun Oct 19, 01:59:00 PM:
Another, perhaps related, point to be made: There is nothing wrong with being Arab.
McCain might have said so when that woman brought the subject up at one of his rallies recently.
On a related note, I thought McCain missed a chance to score points (at least with me) when he didn't take the opportunity to at least figuratively embrace Muslims at a time when Obama seemed determined to literally keep them out of the picture.
