The two faces of Islam.

[MrFun]

Ok, some questions:

There are many, many whites who have joined violent militia groups.
Does this mean that all whites should be held as potential suspects of supporting such militia groups?

And why was it that not all white men were racially profiled after the Oklahmoma City bombing several years ago?


Just as not all Muslims should be suspected of supporting terrorism, not all whites should be suspected of supporting violent militia groups.

[Drake Tungsten]

There are many, many whites who have joined violent militia groups.
Does this mean that all whites should be held as potential suspects of supporting such militia groups?

And why was it that not all white men were racially profiled after the Oklahmoma City bombing several years ago?

White militia groups don't enjoy widespread popular support in the white community; Islamic fundamentalist groups do enjoy widespread support in the Islamic community. I'm not saying that I support the profiling of Muslims (I'm still torn on that issue), but the vast differences betwwen Islamic terrorist groups and American white militias makes any sort of comparison between the two worthless.

[MrFun]

Actually, they are good parallels -- they're both examples of extremist groups within a much larger, majority group of moderates.

[Drake Tungsten]

Actually, they are good parallels -- they're both examples of extremist groups within a much larger, majority group of moderates.

If you believe this is true, then you need to do more research on the subject. It is unknown how much of the population supports Islamic fundamentalism in Arab Islamic countries, but it is certainly a large segment of the population. In some countries, fundamentalists may be the majority, not the much balleyhooed Islamic moderates.

Meanwhile, militias in America are without a doubt a fringe group, despised by the vast majority of the American population. Don't you see the glaring differences here?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Mr Fun, don't bother. Velo has already shown himself to be a moron that really can't comprehend complex issues and tries to make them as simple as possible so his small brain can handle them. It's useless to argue. It is like arguing with Giancarlo.

Let it go.

Though I think jimmytrick said it best of anyone here:

If Christain fundies were in the position that Islamic fundies are they would be capable of the same behavior.

I bet there will be plenty of dancing in the streets when OBL is killed, even if we take out thousands of civilians in the process.

[Drake Tungsten]

It is like arguing with Giancarlo.

Come on, that's hitting below the belt, isn't it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well it's kinda true.

I mean you can't say there is a fundamental difference in mindsets of two religions by simply taking a small amount of time in the history of both religions and a small sample size of people following the religion.

[Drake Tungsten]

Oh, I completely agree with you. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with Islam that is causing the current violence. You could possibly make a case like that in regards to Arab culture, but not Islam. Islam is such a huge and diverse religion that it is impossible to determine what its "mindset" really is, let alone how that mindset might differ from an equally unknowable Christian mindset.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think there might be something with Arab Culture, but I don't think it is inherant in that culture, but rather the problems that arose with colonialism and the whole Israel thing.

Hell, I don't care who you are, if you are poor and uneducated, you listen to the first guy that says he can help you... and you are much more likely to scapegoat someone else.

[Ned]

Imran, Listening to talk radio last night, I heard that Islam decided to be "tolerant" in the eighth century and to co-exist with its neighbors. If you know, could you give us more on the circumstances for this "change?"

[Drake Tungsten]

I think there might be something with Arab Culture, but I don't think it is inherant in that culture, but rather the problems that arose with colonialism and the whole Israel thing.

I don't think that it is inherent either; it's just the way Arab culture happens to be at this time.

Similarly, European culture during the Crusades had a distinct militarist and violent bent to it. This culture led to a lot of violence at the time, but European culture eventually changed into something different. I think that Arab culture is going through a similar period right now, for whatever reasons. It certainly isn't the fault of Islam, at any rate, any more than the Crusades were caused by Christianity.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It happens when you go from top dog to third world.

If you've ever been to a 3rd World country, no matter what the religion, you won't find much tolerance for the culture of the 1st World.

[Drake Tungsten]

It happens when you go from top dog to third world.

If you've ever been to a 3rd World country, no matter what the religion, you won't find much tolerance for the culture of the 1st World.

I don't think it really has much to do with living in a 3rd World country. If that were true, Africans would be the most violent people on earth.

I think it has more to do with these things:

- The massive population boom in Arab states. Large numbers of young males almost always leads to broad-based social movements and (usually) violence. Sticking with the Crusades analogy, Europe was experiencing a explosion of population around that time, IIRC.

- Anger at the sad state of the Arab world. Like you said, they used to be the world's more enlightened civilization, but now they are one of the least advanced areas on Earth. The fact that the West, the longtime opponent of Islam, is on top right now only exacerbates the anger and jealousy.

Poverty definitely plays some role in the current rise of fundamentalism, but I think that it has a relatively small contribution. As bad as things are in the Middle East, there are people who live in far worse conditions and haven't turned to violence.

[Faeelin]

Fundamentalism has been setting in in the arab world since the 16th, to 18th, century. The Ottomans banned printing presses in their empire, for fear of the consequences. After their defeat at lepanto, they blamed muslims for impiety, and hence God's disfavor. When the Sultan tried to modernize the army, the ulema supported the janissaries in launching a coup against him.

Paiktis is wrong about a hell of a lot of things, but the ottomans deserve a fair bit of the blame. Although they were the most advanced islamic nation, after grenada was conquered.

BTW, I'm curious. One person blamed the lack of banking in the islamic world, which he blamed on a verse in the qu'ran which said muslims couldn't loan money, with interest. Yet christians in the middle ages believed this as well. What changed in the christian world, but didn't in dar-islam?

[Imran Siddiqui]

If that were true, Africans would be the most violent people on earth.

*Points to the massive warfare in Africa, including Rwanda, Congo, Angola, Sudan... etc, etc.*

Though your ideas are very good. The younger population and they are angry at their position in the world and lack of power they hold.

BTW, I'm curious. One person blamed the lack of banking in the islamic world, which he blamed on a verse in the qu'ran which said muslims couldn't loan money, with interest. Yet christians in the middle ages believed this as well. What changed in the christian world, but didn't in dar-islam?

Because the Christians turned away from religion . Remember for a long time only Jews could lend money. In the Renaissance the Christians decided that maybe they could violate that part of the Bible.