The two faces of Islam.

[Velociryx]

PS: IIRC, no group ever came forward to claim responsibility for the attack on the USS Cole, but it is known that there are a number of active cells in Yemen operating for the group calling themselves the "Islamic Jihad." Curious name, yes? Islamic Jihad.....Islamic Holy War. The looking I just did on the subject revealed (big surprise) no condemnation of the attack by Islamic leadership.....no, that's not quite true, Islamic leaders in the US condemned the attack, but nowhere else in the world....at least not that I've turned up so far.

-=Vel=-

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx
And I congratulate you for taking me to task on my misrepresentation of terrorist groups. A well-deserved point.

MY point remains as constant as ever. I'm not talking about India. I'm not talking about Lybia. It's good that followers of Islam didn't take to the streets in celebration, but I would ask....where are the religious leaders....the enlightened wise men of Allah, spouting condemnations for bombings carried out in His name? Where are they in India? Where are they in the ME? We see NONE. None reported in any media, condemning either the party atmosphere or the methods.

I think Sikander and Imran have already answred this assertion. Also, the Us meadi has no reaon to show the condemnations anyway. Its not the type of news that sell here.

Why do you suppose that is, and do you not see a *marked* difference in that behavior and say....when attacks were made on Mosques in the USA shortly after 9/11, the rapid and unequivocal outpouring of condemnation against such terrorist acts on the followers of Islam by clergy from nearby christian churches! In fact, after the initial attacks, members OF those christian churches offered to guard the mosques! Amazing.....simply amazing.

There's no difference at all there, eh?

-=Vel=-

This is again very faulty thinking. Would the sam have been true of chirche in lebanon if Maronites had burned a Shia mosque? The reaction of US christians does not equal the reaction of christians, any more than the reaction of any one group of Muslims equals the behavior of all. To go back to the ME reality: When an Israeli caffee is bombed, the general reacion of joy comes from a small group of Palestinians (you certainly don't see massed celebrations, at most a few hundread for a big attack), and very few (at best tens) of individuals in neihboring Aab states- none in states where the government would quash such independent shows (Syria, Egypt, jordan).

Let me be clear. you have seen a few things on TV, and made a decision. Well, TV media is crap overall, bereft of context and argument, made for soundbites and quick images that make the blood boil. Take a few months to study the history, read books and newspapers, and then come talk. Basing such a wideranging argument based on CBS, ABC, Foxnews (god heaven) of CNN is no way to create such vast assumptions about the faith of 1/6 of humanity.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Sikander: I contend that if the entire sphere of the Arab Middle East is better educated and is more enriched, then most of this crap will stop. Yes, the people that join up are educated, but they are educated in the system. When the entire population is educated, then you will have a movement away from Islam and towards secularism.

Right now you have an anti-globalism movement around the world and people are looking for things in their culture that show the power of their respective cultures. For the Mid East it is the memory of the great Arab empires led by Islam. Islam has not been tainted by the European West, whose culture is eclipsing all. After all, in Egypt, the fundies came out after Sadat began to open up the west and open up nightclubs and the sort.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Velociryx
PS: IIRC, no group ever came forward to claim responsibility for the attack on the USS Cole, but it is known that there are a number of active cells in Yemen operating for the group calling themselves the "Islamic Jihad." Curious name, yes? Islamic Jihad.....Islamic Holy War. The looking I just did on the subject revealed (big surprise) no condemnation of the attack by Islamic leadership.....no, that's not quite true, Islamic leaders in the US condemned the attack, but nowhere else in the world....at least not that I've turned up so far.

-=Vel=-

Al qaeda carried out this attck- it is no mystery.

Also, there is no such thing as the islamic leadership- islam is like protestanism- every individual is equally close to God, equally able to interpret scripture, which is why Osama, who is not a cleric, can declare a fatwa. May I also add, that i saw no condemnations of the Cole attack by any Latin American church leaders, no leaders of the Orthodox hierarchy in eastern Europe, no hindu holymen, not a single Buddhist priest or the Lamas. So the Islamic hiearchy outside the US (it was an American ship) you think exists was not alone in silence.

[Drake Tungsten]

Sikander: I contend that if the entire sphere of the Arab Middle East is better educated and is more enriched, then most of this crap will stop. Yes, the people that join up are educated, but they are educated in the system. When the entire population is educated, then you will have a movement away from Islam and towards secularism.

I don't buy this. The Arab world is more enriched and educated than the majority of the Muslim world, yet it is the most violent group among Muslims. I contend that the violence is a result of peculiarities in the current Arab culture, not the poverty and lack of education that afflicts most of the world.

Right now you have an anti-globalism movement around the world and people are looking for things in their culture that show the power of their respective cultures. For the Mid East it is the memory of the great Arab empires led by Islam. Islam has not been tainted by the European West, whose culture is eclipsing all. After all, in Egypt, the fundies came out after Sadat began to open up the west and open up nightclubs and the sort.

I completely agree with you on this. I don't see how increased wealth and education would solve this, however. In all likelihood, it would probably make things worse. Wealth and education can only be achieved through modernization (which inevitably brings along an onslaught of Western culture) and since it is this culture that the Islamists are railing against, increased modernization most likely would make the situation worse.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't buy this. The Arab world is more enriched and educated than the majority of the Muslim world, yet it is the most violent group among Muslims.

Um... just because a select few are rich doesn't mean the whole is rich?

And I can uneqivocally say that African Muslims are more violent. Hell, African anything are more violent, because they have nothing and can only fight for spoils.

I don't see how increased wealth and education would solve this, however. In all likelihood, it would probably make things worse.

Stress advances made under Islamic empires. Algebra was invented under Islam. Modernization doesn't have to be Western. The problem is the Coca-Colaization of the area, not the machines those areas have.

[Drake Tungsten]

Um... just because a select few are rich doesn't mean the whole is rich?

The average Muslim in an Arab country is far better off than his African brothers. The two hotbeds for Arab fundamentalism, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, provide good examples for the Arab situation vis a vis the rest of the Muslim world. Egypt has a per capita GDP close to far less violent Indonesia. Saudia Arabia has a per capita GDP close to far less violent Malaysia. Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia have significantly higher per capita GDP's than India and Pakistan, both with huge Muslim populations. You don't hear of many Indian terrorists and the Pakistani terror groups are creations of Arab fundamentalist movements and funded by Saudi money. I really don't think that poverty has much to do with terrorism. It's the current Arab culture.

And I can uneqivocally say that African Muslims are more violent. Hell, African anything are more violent, because they have nothing and can only fight for spoils.

I think that African Muslims only seem more violent because of the complete lawlessness of the entire region. I don't think the conflicts in that area would be anywhere near as horrible as they are if functioning governments existed in the region.

Besides, it is dangerous to use tribal conflicts as a basis for claiming that a people are violent. I don't really consider Croatians, Bosnians, or Serbs to have a violent culture, but a tribal conflict turned them into monsters. I certainly don't think that you can "unequivocally" say that African Muslims are more violent than Arabs. Both are bad.

Stress advances made under Islamic empires. Algebra was invented under Islam. Modernization doesn't have to be Western. The problem is the Coca-Colaization of the area, not the machines those areas have.

What does the historical success of Islamic empires have to do with modernization in the present day? You can modernize while trying to limit the influence of Western culture, but you can't avoid the influence of Western culture completely. Your students will have to be educated in Western universities, until there are enough Western educated scholars to create and maintain an indigenous education system. Much of the capital for your business ventures will have to come from Western corporations, who will bring along Western employees and their culture. You will have to deal with international organizations, most of which are dominated by Western nations and reflect Western cultural values. You can't modernize without any sort of cultural influence from the West and the Islamists sure aren't going to like it.

[Ned]

Drake, The world of Islam can no longer live in isolation from Western Culture even if it tried. Sattelite TV, the Internet, and the all-pervasive CD and DVD cannot be surpressed.

The Islamic fundamentalists see the world of stict Islam slipping from their grasp. It is not so much the military power of the United States they fear, but the hamburger, rock and roll and liberated women.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The average Muslim in an Arab country is far better off than his African brothers. The two hotbeds for Arab fundamentalism, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, provide good examples for the Arab situation vis a vis the rest of the Muslim world. Egypt has a per capita GDP close to far less violent Indonesia. Saudia Arabia has a per capita GDP close to far less violent Malaysia. Both Egypt and Saudi Arabia have significantly higher per capita GDP's than India and Pakistan, both with huge Muslim populations. You don't hear of many Indian terrorists and the Pakistani terror groups are creations of Arab fundamentalist movements and funded by Saudi money.

Egypt is far more violent than Indonesia? Tell the East Timorans that. India and Pakistan have fought 3 wars and are close to war every day. Just because I stated poverty breeds violence doesn't mean I SIMPLY meant terrorism. Terrorism is simply a style of warfare.

Besides, it is dangerous to use tribal conflicts as a basis for claiming that a people are violent. I don't really consider Croatians, Bosnians, or Serbs to have a violent culture, but a tribal conflict turned them into monsters. I certainly don't think that you can "unequivocally" say that African Muslims are more violent than Arabs. Both are bad.

I think tribal conficts are a VERY good basis for claiming people are violent. Croatians, Bosnians, and Serbs are all violent. Just because they are white doesn't exonerate them. They've been fighting for ages.

If you say tribal conflict turned those people into monsters, you have to say the situations surrounding the Arabs turned them 'violent'. After all the culture wasn't a 'violent' one in 1900 (though you can say the Balkan ethnicities were).

The moral of the story is NO ethnic culture is inherantly violent. The situations surrounding each culture is what makes them violent.

And yes you can modernize without making it seem like you are being Westernized. Some Islamists might not mind if the modernization seems to come from within.

[Drake Tungsten]

The moral of the story is NO ethnic culture is inherantly violent. The situations surrounding each culture is what makes them violent.

I never said that any ethnic culture is inherently violent. I certainly don't think that Arabs are inherently violent. There are certain factors that have made the Arab culture of today become violent. I just don't think that poverty is one of them.

Egypt is far more violent than Indonesia? Tell the East Timorans that. India and Pakistan have fought 3 wars and are close to war every day. Just because I stated poverty breeds violence doesn't mean I SIMPLY meant terrorism. Terrorism is simply a style of warfare.

State violence is completely different from violence produced and supported by the society at large. I don't see the same sort of broad based support for violence in Indonesian and Indian society that I do in Arab society.

And yes you can modernize without making it seem like you are being Westernized.

Theoretically, yes you can. I don't see how you could do it in actuality, however. Western culture is too pervasive and too entrenched in the global system one must become a part of if you want to modernize.

[Ned]

Just one more observation: During the height of the problems in the ME last April, the news media interviewed Islamic youth in the US. I believe this was on 60 Minutes. These American kids were supportive of the Palestinian suicide bombers, and believed they indeed were martyrs that would enter paradise.

This was and probably still is a common attitude in the world of Islam, at least among the youth. The parents of these kids were "appalled."

But the point of the matter is that these kids were in the United States. They were not suffering poverty, oppression or anything of the kind. Yet they still felt a common bond with their Islamic brethren in the ME, and approved of their actions against Israel.

I am a Catholic – but a weak Catholic at best. I recognize the failings of the Church. I, however, will defend her if she is attacked "unfairly" because I feel oneness with other Catholics. I see the same with those of the Islamic faith.

But where the Church at one time burned Joan of Arc at the stake for being a witch, or placed converted Jews on the rack in order to force them to "confess," those barbarous times are gone, hopefully, never to return. It seems to me that Islam today is somewhat like what Christianity used to be. It seems to have no problem in killing for the sake of religion or purity of faith (Salomon Rusdie?). This medieval attitude is, I believe, a threat the whole world peace, as witnessed by OBL and 9/11.

If Christianity could change, so can Islam. But it own leaders have to speak out strongly against the use of violence to advance the religion. This is what we do not see to any great extent in the world. We need an Islamic Ghandi.

[Velociryx]

Well said, Ned!

-=Vel=-

[chequita guevara]

Don't mistake the idea that poverty creates terrorism for saying that it is the only cause of terrorism. Certainly ideology plays a large part. In the case of American tennage Muslims, it is not their own poverty that fans the fire in their hearts, but the poverty of their fellow Muslims abroad, the conditions of the Palestinian people. In this case the ideology of shared nationhood or shared religion causes them to feel the poverty and oppression of others as their own. Certainly bin Laden, a billionaire, has never known real poverty. He could have left his mountainous hiding hole and lived a life of luxery.

Doing justice to others does a lot to assuage the fires of youth. Hypocracy and injustice are what make people like me become ideologues in the first place. It was the hypocracy of the US and the injustice that our country does to others that drove me from being a Republican to a Democrat to a socialist to ultimately a communist.

[Drake Tungsten]

Don't mistake the idea that poverty creates terrorism for saying that it is the only cause of terrorism. Certainly ideology plays a large part.

I don't think anyone has claimed that poverty is the only cause of terrorism, at least in this thread. I think that the disagreement is over how much of a role poverty plays, not whether it is the sole cause. In my view, poverty is not a major cause of terrorism. It is a minor contributor to terrorism on the whole, dwarfed by demographics and ideology.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Don't mistake the idea that poverty creates terrorism for saying that it is the only cause of terrorism. Certainly ideology plays a large part. In the case of American tennage Muslims, it is not their own poverty that fans the fire in their hearts, but the poverty of their fellow Muslims abroad, the conditions of the Palestinian people. In this case the ideology of shared nationhood or shared religion causes them to feel the poverty and oppression of others as their own. Certainly bin Laden, a billionaire, has never known real poverty. He could have left his mountainous hiding hole and lived a life of luxery.

Doing justice to others does a lot to assuage the fires of youth. Hypocracy and injustice are what make people like me become ideologues in the first place. It was the hypocracy of the US and the injustice that our country does to others that drove me from being a Republican to a Democrat to a socialist to ultimately a communist.

Well, Che, it is time to go full circle. Bush is not a hypocrite, as far as I can tell. But communists have been the ultimate hypocrites. They promise equality, but once in power, they bring authoritarian rule of the worst kind.

This said, I must say that I am quite impressed by the economic progress of communist China. Aside from the lack of political freedom, the communists seem to have brought good government to its people.