Announcement

**MikeH** · June 13, 2003, 04:33

I've seen the usual arguments that governments only represent a small portion of the population, and that most people are just regular working people trying to make a living.

If that is the case, why don't they stand up for what is right? Why do they allow politicians, lobyists, and extremists to hijack their government to justify illegal overseas wars They should be on local media denouncing Government activities. They should make it well known that they do not support their Government.

There have been reports of widespread government funding by the civlilian population in western countries and people in other nations such as the U.S. Their entire constitution and government was initially created through warfare. Without warfare they would have no country or government of their own. They are encouraged to spread their culture through any means including warfare.

Not that I agree with this, just making the point.

**Zylka** · June 13, 2003, 04:53

Not everyone is a born activist, and not everyone should be obligated to surrender survival for a chip at what's wrong. Many of these people have sh*t, and are simply trying to survive

As an old humanities Professor mimicked, a handful of well off knights running around old Europe demanding "allegiance to the just and logic sect of God's approval, on punishment of death!" aren't often going to receive much more than "Whu?" in sincere response from the average peasant, covered in dirt and rags.

**Al'Kimiya** · June 13, 2003, 07:15

Most of the civilian, well-behaved, populace support the militants, freedom-fighters, and what have you. It's their "boys", i.e. equivalence of an army. It's the propaganda and indoctrination that tells them they're at war though.

**MrFun** · June 13, 2003, 09:09

Re: Is the muslim civilian population really "innocent"

Originally posted by Dissident
Note: I don't actually believe this, I'm just posing this question for discussion amongst the posters.

I've seen the usual arguments that terrorists only represent a small portion of the population, and that most people are just regular working people trying to make a living.

If that is the case, why don't they stand up for what is right? Why do they allow terrorists, militants, and extremists to hijack their religion to justify genocide and murder? They should be on local media denouncing terrorists activities. They should make it well known that they do not support terrorism.

There have been reports of widespread terrorist funding by the civlilian population in muslim countries and muslims in other nations such as the U.S. Their entire religion was initially spread through warfare. Without warfare they would have no religion. They are encouraged to spread their religion through any means including warfare.

discuss

As for my opinion, I have to believe the muslim population is scared of the terrorists themselves. They fear consequences of standing up to the militants. The religious leaders lack the courage to change the focus of the religion from war to peace. The terrorists can be compared to gangs in some neighborhoods in the U.S. The residents are forced to put up with it, if they stand up for what is right, they will be killed. But it still bothers me all these muslim "charities" are fronts for supporting terrorists. There are still millions of people who want to see all jews and christians dead.

There are many Americans who have been disgusted with the various genocides of Rwanda and Bosnia, yet they never actively did anything to protest such crimes against humanity.
Does this mean that those same Americans really support genocidal acts? No, it does not.
Same applies to Muslims who have not actively protested terrorist acts, even though they are not happy about such things.

Christianity in the Middle Ages was spread through violence and pillage, so does this mean that Christians today are evil because of what unrelated ancestors have done to other people? No, it does not mean that.
Same applies to Muslims today, who are probably sick and tired of being told they are responsible for the Arabian jihad of the late ancient era.

**Cruddy** · June 13, 2003, 09:13

Re: Is the muslim civilian population really "innocent"

Originally posted by Dissident
If that is the case, why don't they stand up for what is right? Why do they allow terrorists, militants, and extremists to hijack their religion to justify genocide and murder? They should be on local media denouncing terrorists activities. They should make it well known that they do not support terrorism.

Because you are equating passivity with active support.

Those with the guns tend to give the orders. Those without survive as best they can.

If you think I'm going to comment further on the culpable guilt of over a billion people, you must think I'm an arrogant bastard.

**Spiffor** · June 13, 2003, 10:42

"Here we go with the old oxymoron again : Innocent civilians of Palestine"

(The Mad Monk and CyberGNU would understand

)

I think the Palestinian civilians are about as innoicent as the Israeli civilians : they don't want war at all costs, at first, but they are living under so ****ty living conditions, and under such fear, that they are being radicalised into listening to the hawks rather than to the doves.

**MikeH** · June 13, 2003, 10:45

Yeah, but the guy who runs my local shop is a Muslim civilian and he's not guilty of anything. Even gave us a special discount for buying many beers in one go once.

**Whaleboy** · June 13, 2003, 10:55

Its only a tiny proportion of the Muslim population that are terrorists and members of terrorist organisations.

What is not in question is that many Muslims, probably the majority, support actions against the West. Nonetheless, they are entitled to an opinion, and that is about as bad as those that support the West's actions, and wish harm on Muslim populations and nations.

Having an opinion or a belief is not putting them at fault for the actions of the terrorists, an idea is not responsible for those that believe in it, and despite the popular support for terrorists, for various reasons, some of them very valid, we should differentiate between the two.

**MikeH** · June 13, 2003, 11:16

What is not in question is that many Muslims, probably the majority, support actions against the West.

That most certainly is in question!!!

**GePap** · June 13, 2003, 11:49

Yes, they are as innocent as any civilian population is. Most people are inherently apolitical. At most, they might voice vocal support for somehting, but will never actually do anything to activelly support the cause. Most will just live their lives.

**Dis** · June 14, 2003, 02:13

uhh, Mike H we did protest the war.

did you not see that? hundreds of thousands of people were protested the war.

the argument is stupid. we have freedom of speech in the U.S., and many people utilize that fully,

**Dis** · June 14, 2003, 02:17

I am suprised by how many no votes there are.

I wonder how many of those are serious votes. That is the primary reason I created this poll. I wanted to see who felt this way but were not going to every post their views publically.

I already said my opinion above. I equate the terrorists with gangland activity in the U.S. Most of the population is too scared to speak out against the gangs. Yet I'm still bothered by how many people cheered the 9/11 attacks.

**yavoon** · June 14, 2003, 02:27

I think they're all serious(w/in normal proportion) dissident.

**yavoon** · June 14, 2003, 02:37

to be more in depth. I can't tell how many of these are american. but I don't think americans are as passive to anti americanism anymore.

Yes	41.38%	12 votes
No	41.38%	12 votes
everyone is guilty of something- including the mighty banana	17.24%	5 votes

Announcement

Is the muslim civilian population really "innocent"

Is the muslim civilian population really "innocent"

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment