Report finds prejudice rising against U.S. Muslims

How do you expect them to do that? More violence?

Maybe they can get a bunch of hollywood stars and put on a theatrical show to draw attention to their plight. Jack Black can play Allah, and you can get M. Cho to be some suicide bomber..

In theory, this is how we get things ACTUALLY accomplished in this world. Look how well it worked for Prop 8...

Oh... wait....

Why don't they try to be more VOCAL about it? Why do they wait until something happens TO THEM before they say anything. The only reason they say anything at all is when it becomes negative TO THEM. They are utterly silent when stuff happens and it doesn't include them as victim. Almost as if their silence is tacit approval.

Muslim Clerics in America should be banned and arrested for spreading hate messages. Maybe this will curb the tendency for this rise in prejudice. But I think that following a close ally's ways of letting muslim leaders get away with calling for their host country's downfall will not help the situation much. We are our own worst enemies. People like Smith is living proof of this.

Is reverand Jeremy wright muslim? bushlove, looks like your problem lays elsewhere.

[quote]Muslim Clerics in America should be banned and arrested for spreading hate messages. Maybe this will curb the tendency for this rise in prejudice. But I think that following a close ally's ways of letting muslim leaders get away with calling for their host country's downfall will not help the situation much. We are our own worst enemies. People like Smith is living proof of this.[/quote] Is reverand Jeremy Wright muslim?

1) Or, please, do prove to us that all Muslims are terrorists... or prove to us even more than a very few are.

2) I can gladly point out the number of terrorists involved in the Mumbai attack (all dead but one),

3) as well as the number of people who flew the planes into US buildings on 9/11

How convenient for you to leave out any correlative data between #1 and #'s 2 and 3. I don't have to give you numbers of terrorists. All I have to do is provide the number of terrorists in KNOWN terrorist attacks, such as those above. I can include Spain, Chechnya, etc..

Make you a deal. I'll give you the number of terrorists who have perpetrated known terrorist attacks in the past 10 years, and you give me the number of those who were NOT Muslim. Deal?

Terrorist attacks are not being carried out by fanatical Amish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu's or just about anything else. Other than a desire to kill as many people as possible or being men, WHAT do the VAST MAJORITY, and we are talking the very high 90 percentile here, of all the participants in any terrorist attack over the past 5, 7 or even 10 years have in common?

The only moronic thing around here is the belief that if we just be compassionate enough, they will leave us in peace. They refuse to believe that. And the handful of those that have the same culture and race who are speaking out are just that - a handful. If the terrorists only represent a very small fraction of total Muslims followers, those speaking out are even a smaller fraction.

Sarge, do you think it is justified to commit hate crimes against Muslims because a tiny minority of Muslims commit terrorist acts? Come out and say it if you do - otherwise I suggest you condemn violence against anyone, including US soldiers murdering civilians in the Middle East.

FnC

Smithinjapan:

" Sorry, Loki, but that's based on fact. Or, please, do prove to us that all Muslims are terrorists.. "

That´s a typical strawman. Nobody ever said that "all muslims are terrorist". The point is all jihadists are muslim, the jihadist message addresses muslims (not Buddhists or Norwegian Lutherans), and only muslims are potential recipients. So it is totally idiotic to blank islam out of the the jihadist problem.

Bushlover:

" Muslim Clerics in America should be banned and arrested for spreading hate messages. "

They might just cite the Koran and the haddith. The hate messages are right there. The problem is more general: We allow violent political speech under the label of "religous freedom". That should not be so. Religions should not be excempt from rules about hate speech. Muslim preachers should be asked to make a clear stand that they refuse the hate suras in the Koran. If they refuse, they should be prosecuted liek any other hate speech provider.

Muslim Clerics in America should be banned and arrested for spreading hate messages. Maybe this will curb the tendency for this rise in prejudice. But I think that following a close ally's ways of letting muslim leaders get away with calling for their host country's downfall will not help the situation much. We are our own worst enemies. People like Smith is living proof of this.

all they have to do is not go to the U.S. it'll be interesting to see an era when a foreign country invades the U.S,. or whatever it'll be in the future, only to face an independence movement amongst the locals, i.e. 'terrorists', and then speaks about prejudice rising against like-kinded people back in their own home country. LOL. remember Babylon? that was a superpower back then. ironic.

Loki

Here's an idea. Instead of telling the world that it's not, why not SHOW us and control the very, at least according to YOU, minority of fanatics that want to kill everyone with different beliefs?

How do you expect them to do that? More violence?

Loki250: "...at least according to YOU..."

Sorry, Loki, but that's based on fact. Or, please, do prove to us that all Muslims are terrorists... or prove to us even more than a very few are. I can gladly point out the number of terrorists involved in the Mumbai attack (all dead but one), as well as the number of people who flew the planes into US buildings on 9/11. Can you tell me how many terrorists there are? Of COURSE you can't! You're just angry, and you want to misdirect that anger towards the closest possible source you can that has had a few of its people commit terrible crimes.

While I agree that Muslims should come out more against these kinds of things, I would also like to point out that it's far easier to do so with a bit of support and not automatic condemnation, or worse yet, when they DO come out having morons immediately thereafter tell them they are not speaking loud enough, or that actions speak louder than words.

While you may think peace talks are not working, I can tell you they work better than hate talk and weapons of war. Clearly, with the debacle of Iraq and Afghanistan, that should be proof enough.

Look who furnished the report.

'Nuff said.

"prejudice rising against U.S. Muslims"

Maybe they should try Australia ! I'm sure they would be welcome "down under" !

Sarge, they are NOT militants. They are simply unfairly prosecuted, misunderstood, freedom fighters.

You know... this GWOT started 207 years ago with the Barbary Pirates. Their rhetoric has not changed in more than 200 years. Enough of the coddling and the mistaken belief that we will be able to "talk" them to peace. If peace talks actually worked, the middle east would be the most peaceful place on earth.

These random Muslims that decry terrorist acts need to speak out LOUDER. They need to recruit others to their cause so that their voices grow. And they need to understand that their less than ear-piercing vocal protests is a tacit approval of what those minority few are doing in the name of the faith they share.

for routinely equating Islam with terrorism.

Here's an idea. Instead of telling the world that it's not, why not SHOW us and control the very, at least according to YOU, minority of fanatics that want to kill everyone with different beliefs?

I wonder if this has anything to do with all these Islamic militants running around causing murder and mayhem these days...

Remember that Pakistan was established as the homeland for the subcontinent´s muslims, with Koranic principles and all that. Since its foundation, the Hindu, Buddhist and Christian populations in Pakistan have dwindled to almost nothing... gee, one wonders why. The 130 million muslims who stayd in India are free to practise their religion, have equal rights... and still listen jihadists imams and go on jihad. And Hindu society, like we in the West, is stuck with PC dogma that islam has nothing to do with. Insane!

Molenir: a Muslim who criticises Jihad is in danger of being regarded as a heretic, and thus an enemy of Allah, and we all know what happens next. Muslims are victims of Islam too, that's why I said free-thinking Muslims are in a no-win situation.

Very hard to fight prejudice, when you hear about bombs going off murdering women and children. Most recently the Muslim cowards in India. The more we hear about this, the more inclined we are towards prejudice. Its completely normal and natural. As an earlier poster said, the Muslims in America, and elsewhere, need to do more, much more to fight back. Not talking about how we shouldn't be prejudiced, but rather going and joining the military, begging to be involved in helping fight against terrorists. Doing everything they can, and making it clear that they are Muslim as well, fighting for their country, against those who hate America.

As far as I'm concerned, a Muslim who fails to serve, is essentially condoning the actions of other Muslims. Or at the very least, not condemning them.

The Aussie writer and blogger Tim Blair got this parody of the lefty media from a reader after the 7/7 London bombing:

"British Muslims Fear Repercussions Over Tomorrow's Train Bombing."

Muchakucha: While you're right on most counts, this is a conspiracy by radicals and their "moderate" muslim apologists. The Mainstream media is just looking for a good story and it goes both ways on this.

TooFarGone: I totally agree. The problem can't be tackled until its root cause is recognized, and the mainstream media is trying desperately to hide this root cause. In its attempts to hide the world from the truth of what Islam teaches, it's getting more and more blood on its hands.

Note that the Islamic jihadists say they're obeying Koran, and Islamic clerics say the jihadists are obeying the Koran, so why do the 'apologists' (the mainstream media and the PC-at-all-costs brigade) drone on that has nothing to do with the Koran? Do the apologists think they understand Islam more than these obviously completely devout Muslims? What phenomenal arrogance.

Some of the major Lefty media have already rushed to exonerate the mass murderers of Mumbai.It won't be long till 'Liberals' are faithfully parroting these ridiculous talking points:

Joshua Kurlantzick, at the New Republic - "After years of moderation, India’s Muslims—including even some middle-class Muslims—finally may be striking back at the discrimination stacked against them."

Even some middle class Muslims? Hmmmm, and just how did they get to be middle class? Does this never occur to such people? Hey - India is full of "brown people." Aren't we constantly told by the post-colonial theorists that discrimination and "oppression" are uniquely "white" sins?

The incorrigible, preachy Lefty moralists at Time Magazine were not to be outdone:

"...the roots of Muslim rage run deep in India, nourished by a long-held sense of injustice...."

If Time says so. It must tbe true. Their partners in crime at Newsweek proved to the world how much Muslim rage is out there when 17 died in Pakistan a few years back rioting over a completely fabricated story about 'Koran abuse' somewhere in an American prison holding Mohammedan combatants taken off battlefields in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The above should be remembered when people313 come here denying that the overwhelmingly Leftist mainstream media help enable the kind of barbarism we now face.

Muchakucha:

Absolutely right! As long as the dogma stands that the Koran and the Sunna must not be criticised, there will be Jihadists.

Moderate muslims (such as Irishad Manji and Bassam Tibi) call on muslims to drop the jihad and shariah. But that means refusing part of the Koran and the Sunnah. So back to square one.

Suberlib: and what of the texts in the Koran and Hadiths which command Muslims to 'strike at the necks' of 'unbelievers'; and which state that women are the property of men and can be beaten; and which command Muslims to give unbelievers the choice between paying an infidel levy, being converted, or death; are you saying these don't exist? Are they simply typos? Or do you just choose to ignore them? Because the terrorists don't ignore them, they draw their inspiration from them, and they state very clearly that this is the case.

And what about the jihadists who tried to blow up a departure lounge at Prestwick Airport in Scotland? One of them was a highly trained surgeon working in a prestigous hospital. Guess it must've been poverty that drove him to it.

The worldwide problem of jihad will never be solved while people insist on pussy-footing around the unfortunate fact the the Koran and the Hadiths contain clear incitements to violence.

Egyptian Cleric Hassan Abu Al-Ashbal Calls on President-Elect Obama to Convert to Islam, Threatens: We Have People Who Are Eager For Death: http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1934.htm

Now, try to explain that away with "prejudice" against "Arab Americans".

Another slanted report by an islamist front group. How investigating the prejudice against Kuffars in general and Israel and the US specifically that is inherent in political islam? And ask what to do about that, instead of playing the victim card again?

You're right, Ossan... instead of sitting here and doing nothing while >people call for rounding up and killing all Muslims (and 1.4 billion of >the world's population, no less!), we should DO something this time! I >don't want you, TooLongGone, Helter_Skelter, and others to look back on >your 'inability' to act and say, "Well shucks, we had no choice!" Act >out NOW and show your support for innocent Muslims world-wide! Good >idea, Ossan.

As usual you don't comprehend anything that other people write. Read my post. I am saying that Muslim Americans themselves need to do more to "prove" their loyalty just like te Japanese-Americans did during WWII. That will prevent the prejudice against them.

The Headline:

Report finds prejudice rising against U.S. Muslims

Betzee's responses:

Huckabee was Governor if Arkansas. It was up to the administration to set the agenda in the wake of 9/11. GWB could have asked the American people for anything and gotten it. Instead he simply said "Go shopping." It's gonna be harder now; last month's job lay offs were the largest since 1974. And personal debt, from all that shopping, has skyrocketed since GWB uttered those famous words back in 2001. The other part of the reason for Republican reluctance is the environmental benefits of weaning ourselves off fossil fuels are something many dismiss. Globe warming is just a liberal hoax. Conservation is for wussies. Yet change will come simply because we have no choice. And when it does; I'm sure those who resisted and contributed nothing will be happy to proclaim, "The US is #1." So let's exploit the strengths that make it so rather than pandering to our basest fears.

Why couldn't he sell himself to the Republican electorate then? They seemed to prefer "drill, baby, drill" for an energy policy which proves my point. Keep in mind it's not just oil-exporting nations, it's also the oil industry which has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

The oil industry no doubt has a lot of wealth to "redistribute" in Washington and that's an impediment to changing the status quo. Could it be that's why GWB didn't lift a finger to broker passage of H.R. 6049 “The Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008" which extended tax credits for various types of renewable energy? Instead he spoke of opening up Anwar for drilling. I want to treat Saudi Arabia the way we treat Sweden, Huckabee is right, addicts aren't in a position to pick a fight with their pushers. Guess most Republicans prefer the status quo since his stocked dropped rapidly after Iowa.

Do you own the site or something? heh

When logic fails, where do American radicals turn to:

Bill Clinton

Liberal media conspiracy.

But...but...you can't judge me because I'm not quite as radical as their radicals.

Heh.

Taka

Here's a question for the Lefties all worried about Muslims in America.

Where falls, on the Big Index of Grievances and Oppressions that the Left watches like the right does the Dow Jones, the recent genuinely racist attack made upon President-elect Barack Obama by Al Qaeda's Number 2 Al-Zawahiri?

How many attacks on American Muslims did that "cause" ?

Will the media bother to investigate?

Now, toofargone would like to pish posh the whole thing away saying that American racism over the airways has little chance of reaching the ears of any radical, therefore, those people are above any and all blame, which is simply stupid.

Identity Politics and the suicidal inanities of Multiculturalism have made rational discussion impossible.

Islam is not a race.

is it as high as the prejudice against those of the Jewish faith? welcome to the club. racism is rampant on the continental u.s. to arabs, it's not worth going to the u.s. anymore. there are places on earth that are way better.

Superlib,

Actually taka, the discussion is about the use of Islam by radicals.

I think a better term would be, "...about the abuse of Islam by radicals."

Anyway, regarding the socio-economic point you made, I agree whole heartedly.

However, I also believe that some members of the U.S. media, talk radio in particular, don't do us any favors either, in that regard. The above conversation between Keith Ellison and glenn beck being a very good example.

Now, toofargone would like to pish posh the whole thing away saying that American racism over the airways has little chance of reaching the ears of any radical, therefore, those people are above any and all blame, which is simply stupid. Apparently he has never heard of the concept of translators, newspapers or the radio and he doesn't think that any of the radical islamic element are capable of news gathering and/or propaganda campaign. I think he's foolish to think so.

I think the things you mentioned are far greater contributers however, they are also far more difficult to solve. I also think what I mentioned also contributes and could be minimized if any of those people (the aforementioned talk radio people) were capable of putting anything ahead of their egos and money.

Taka

The oil industry no doubt has a lot of wealth to "redistribute" in Washington and that's an impediment to changing the status quo. Could it be that's why GWB didn't lift a finger to broker passage of H.R. 6049 “The Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008" which extended tax credits for various types of renewable energy? Instead he spoke of opening up Anwar for drilling.

I want to treat Saudi Arabia the way we treat Sweden,

Huckabee is right, addicts aren't in a position to pick a fight with their pushers. Guess most Republicans prefer the status quo since his stocked dropped rapidly after Iowa.

Keep in mind it's not just oil-exporting nations, it's also the oil industry which has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Status quo means Democrats also. Which proves my point and sure undercuts yours.

Too bad that he was villified as just a Christian hick from the elite class. Much rather be on this course now then latter. I don't see Obama or the Dems showing that they "get it".

Why couldn't he sell himself to the Republican electorate then? They seemed to prefer "drill, baby, drill" for an energy policy which proves my point.

Keep in mind it's not just oil-exporting nations, it's also the oil industry which has a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Actually taka, the discussion is about the use of Islam by radicals. This particular conversation isn't about how to fight radical Islam. I think we're all trying to define just what role Islam plays in terrorism.

It's something I've been struggling to define. Like I said I know Islam doesn't create terrorists, but I know terrorists use a perverted form of Islam to create other terrorists. On it's own Islam is harmless and that's how it's practiced by 99.999% (or whatever) of Muslims, but for those who are able to manipulate Islam to create terrorists, they're effective enough to convince people to not only kill themselves but also innocent people.

Personally, I think it starts with poverty and a lack of options that give someone a sense of hopelessness. That's the pool of potential candidates that terrorists search from. Once they find their "mark" they start to indoctrinate him with a radical form of Islam. Most of those teachings are rejected by regular Muslims as radical, but for some it essentially consumes them. I don't think there's anything special about Islam that makes some people more open to the radical teachings; maybe it's a situational thing (poverty, hopelessness, region, family, history, etc). That's why I reject any claims that the problem is (real) Islam, but I'm not going to go around listing off non-Islamic terrorist groups to say that we can ignore Islam.

I don't think your going to find a better answer as to what radical Islam really is and our response to it as a Nation then this.

Too bad that he was villified as just a Christian hick from the elite class. Much rather be on this course now then latter. I don't see Obama or the Dems showing that they "get it".

He sure does.

http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=M1HSO5UxRxo

http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=M1HSO5UxRxo

'It was up to the administration to set the agenda in the wake of 9/11. GWB could have asked the American people for anything and gotten it. Instead he simply said "Go shopping." '

LOL. Bush did nothing! Told people to go shopping! The Left is still traumatized.

You made my weekend,betzee. Made me laugh the way 'squandered sympathy' used to.

I don't see a whole of Democrat movement on that issue either. Why don't you address that also instead of trying to make this into just another attempt to bash all things Republican.

Huckabee was Governor if Arkansas. It was up to the administration to set the agenda in the wake of 9/11. GWB could have asked the American people for anything and gotten it. Instead he simply said "Go shopping." It's gonna be harder now; last month's job lay offs were the largest since 1974. And personal debt, from all that shopping, has skyrocketed since GWB uttered those famous words back in 2001.

The other part of the reason for Republican reluctance is the environmental benefits of weaning ourselves off fossil fuels are something many dismiss. Globe warming is just a liberal hoax. Conservation is for wussies.

Yet change will come simply because we have no choice. And when it does; I'm sure those who resisted and contributed nothing will be happy to proclaim, "The US is #1." So let's exploit the strengths that make it so rather than pandering to our basest fears.

Betzee,

Huckabee and his priority if he was elected President.

It's from your favorite newspaper the NYT.

For too long, we have been constrained because our dependence on imported oil has forced us to support repressive regimes and conduct our foreign policy with one hand tied behind our back. I will free that hand from its oil-soaked rope and reach out to moderates in the Arab and Muslim worlds with both. I want to treat Saudi Arabia the way we treat Sweden, and that will require the United States to be energy independent. The first thing I will do as president is send Congress my comprehensive plan for achieving energy independence within ten years of my inauguration. We will explore, we will conserve, and we will pursue all types of alternative energy: nuclear, wind, solar, ethanol, hydrogen, clean coal, biomass, and biodiesel.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/huckabee-strikes-at-bush-foreign-policy/

Now where are the Democrats on this??????

Moreover, as I pointed out above, the enemy is a radical, violent variant of Islam which is financially sustained by our own energy purchases.

...

No one addressed the reasons for Republican reluctance to reduce our dependence on ME

Typical. Blame America first, absolve the enemy of any moral or ethical responsibility for their actions and policies, and then quickly try and make it about the Republican party.

Who built the Clinton Library?

No one addressed the reasons for Republican reluctance to reduce our dependence on ME and ultimately render what they have in the ground worthless through the development of renewable energy sources.

I don't see a whole of Democrat movement on that issue either. Why don't you address that also instead of trying to make this into just another attempt to bash all things Republican.

By the way Huckabee was and is the biggest promoter of the very program you and I would like to see implemeneted to get off Foreign oil.

Taka: "Did Dick Durbin and John Murtha's words offend you, as a veteran or are you spit-balling here?"

Shhhh! You're making TooFarGone look even sillier by proving him wrong and giving him the proof he asked for. You should know already that when you prove him wrong he'll just say, "Well gosh, that's only words, not action," or, "Oh, well... compare the body count between that act and this!", or, "Oh, well that pales in comparison!", etc. Basically, the guy throws out lame comments and says, "Prove me wrong" and when you do he changes his tack and demands you do it again. In short, he's wrong all around, but cannot admit it.

Ossan: "When war between Japan and the US broke out after Pearl Harbor a great many Americans of Japanese decent put their lives on the line to prove their loyalty by fighting in the US Army in the European theater, even as their familers were "interned" in what can now only be called concentration camps."

In other words, you yourself admit that rounding up all those people and putting them in camps simply because they were Japanese is one of North America's most shameful acts, and a dark part of history. You yourself admit they were nothing short of concentration camps; ie. like the possibility of imprisoning Muslims, putting whole groups into concentration camps (Japanese and Jews) and possibly trying to kill them off (Jews) in said camps NEVER works, is always wrong, and is ALWAYS something to be ashamed of.

You're right, Ossan... instead of sitting here and doing nothing while people call for rounding up and killing all Muslims (and 1.4 billion of the world's population, no less!), we should DO something this time! I don't want you, TooLongGone, Helter_Skelter, and others to look back on your 'inability' to act and say, "Well shucks, we had no choice!" Act out NOW and show your support for innocent Muslims world-wide! Good idea, Ossan.

Meanwhile, we can also encourage Muslims like the ones world-wide who condemned these attacks, and like the ones in India who showed action by refusing Muslim burial rites to the men who committed the heinous acts, etc. to keep doing more of the same. We can all work together if we keep open minds.

I don't think people are disputing that there is a problem with radical islam. I think people are disputing the effectiveness of the current method of dealing with radical islam.

Thank you for pointing that out, Taka. And the status quo is, in fact, the war on terror. Given there's been no apparent dimunition in Islamic-inspired violence, judging from the lists provided by the links pasted in above, it's appropriate to question the success of a strategy predicated on the view we can prevail against a religion on the battlefield.

Moreover, as I pointed out above, the enemy is a radical, violent variant of Islam which is financially sustained by our own energy purchases. In other words, we are financing both sides in this war on terrorism: namely our soldiers in uniform through our tax dollars (and borrowed funds), and Islamist charities, madrassah schools and terrorist organizations through our dependence on ME oil.

No one addressed the reasons for Republican reluctance to reduce our dependence on ME and ultimately render what they have in the ground worthless through the development of renewable energy sources. This only strengthens my conviction it is due the perception this is a sign of weakness. Nope, we can't let them force us to change our high resource consumin' lifestyle one bit. Yet bankrupting ourselves to support an open-ended war on terror is presented as the road to victory.

As a Saudi national once observed, "We are rich and you are wealthy. I'd rather be wealthy than rich." So would I. Being rich simply means have a large bank balance, the House of Saud can certainly claim that. Being wealthy means being able to draw on lots of resources like our unparalleled ability to innovate. Instead all this is being squandered to engage in mindless Muslim bashing as if that's going to change anything.

Maruku: first of let me say I reset being called prejudiced. I'm totally agnostic, and support freedom of faith, sexual orientation, and I support gender equality, democracy and free-thinking. These things are completely contrary to what Islam teaches; therefore I don't like Islam. That's not prejudice, just sound reasoning. If I said I didn't like Muslims I'd be prejudiced. Please acknowledge this important difference.

Secondly, Christians. Obviously in the last 2000 years there have been countless wars fought by Christians. However, as anyone with any theological knowledge would know, and as you obviously do from reading your post, this is completely contrary to the teachings of Jesus, who was totally anti-conflict, and famously advised people to 'turn the other cheek' and 'love your enemy'. Muhammed on the other hand urges you to slaughter your enemies, and he personally beheaded 700 prisoners of war. And futhermore, Muhammed said that people who refuse to convert to Islam are automatically enemies of Islam, and thus can be legitimately attacked.

This is the difference; many wars have been fought by fools in the name of religions which advocate peace. However, Islam clearly advocates violence and war. Just read the Koran! Why is this so difficult to see?

"Do you really think glenn beck [Glenn Beck] thought about the repurcussions his comments to Keith Ellison could possibly reap [have] on our troops in Iraq in Afghanistan?"

Yes, I'm sure the reports are out there:caves and hideouts all over Afghanistan reverberated with noisy indignation as illiterate jihadis barely out of their teens parsed, in terms from the latest and most fashionable deconstructionist theories on American campuses, the real meaning of Glenn Beck's politically incorrect challenge to then Representative-elect Keith Ellison (formerly Keith X. Ellison;Hakim-Mohammed;Keith Ellison-Muhammad) seen on an English language broadcast of CNN.

Really toofargone?

Did Dick Durbin and John Murtha's words offend you, as a veteran or are you spit-balling here?

Taka

"Do you really think glenn beck thought about the repurcussions his comments to Keith Ellison could possibly reap on our troops in Iraq in Afghanistan?"

It pales, into complete insignificance, compared with the comments of Democrats like Dick Durbin or John Murtha - who do the Mohammedan extremists' work for them by comparing US troops to Nazis.

beambreak,

I don't think people are disputing that there is a problem with radical islam. I think people are disputing the effectiveness of the current method of dealing with radical islam.

Many people, self-included think that we'll never win a war against radical islam because the harder we fight, the more radicals we end up creating. Whether you agree in this particular situation or not, I think you can see the merit behind believing, when the result of an action makes the condition worse, you may want to stop that action.

Secondly, I think many people, self-included, think that many in the media hurt the cause by putting their ratings ahead of their countrymen. Do you really think glenn beck thought about the repurcussions his comments to Keith Ellison could possibly reap on our troops in Iraq in Afghanistan? How about some of the things ann coulter has said, or rush limbaugh? Do you think they care that radical islam can take those words and use them as evidence of America being "the great satan?" Do you think they care that those words can be used to recruit new soldiers to fight against America? I do not. I think they know that by promoting that kind of talk, they keep their ratings and can continue to feed their egos and their bank accounts at the expense of our military and that they do not care any further than that.

I will say, they are within their rights to say those types of things and it is within the rights of many here at JT to parrot them. However, it's also within my rights to condemn it as anti-productive, intensely stupid and short-sighted.

Taka

You have a hard sell trying to convince the people of the many countries targeted by radical islamists that there is not a problem with radical islam.

Yet we tried your solution, an unsophisticated combination of ballots and bullets, and it didn't work out too well.

Your status quo solution didn't work very well, just ask Clinton, the people of Australia, and the people of India just to name a few. The referendum on Bush's performances is clearly shown in his poll numbers and in the number of Republicans returning to Washington in January. The America people have spoken

Time for some thinking out of the box.

Where is the “out of the box” thinking in your argument? What I hear is “criticism of any muslim is criticism of ALL muslims” from you. That paralyses constructive action and promotes off-topic arguments that go in circles. This doesn't do anything to stop actions like blowing up buddhist statues, beheadings of the infidel, and suicide bombing.

You have a hard sell trying to convince the people of the many countries targeted by radical islamist that there is not a problem with radical islam.

come here championing the cause of ALL muslims

You've championed the cause of Muslim female oppression many times. Yet here's the real voice of empowerment: "My husband says the Koran tells him he can control his wife however he wants," says [Afghani] Banaz, 32, a mother of seven. "But I have read the Koran, and nowhere does it say this. He is lying to me."

Ironically, she might she you as in cahoots with her hubby, albeit with different motives. His motives are obvious; yours are to dominate the discourse with a certain view of Islam which is reinforced by each new act of terrorism. Yet we tried your solution, an unsophisticated combination of ballots and bullets, and it didn't work out too well. Time for some thinking out of the box.

adaydream

If Beck said to the first-ever Muslim congressman what he is alleged to have said (I did not see the video), then I think it is disgusting and Beck should be called to the carpet for it.

There were 140 victims of anti-Islamic hate crimes in 2007. That is 140 too many but there are approximately 3.5 million muslims in America. Don’t you think that if a large percent of 300 million Americans felt ALL muslims were terrorist, that 140 out of 3.5 million would be a lot higher?

Food for thought

I believe my last post addressed specific comments.

Do you agree or disagree with my post?

Islamic radicals are evil and should be arrested, tried and convicted for their crimes. Is that what you want to hear?

But Mr. beambreak I've been here under this same handle for about 8 years and most of the posts put out here about Muslims in the past has been pretty much, rid the earth of Muslims. So I post to a well voiced belief here on JT.

So do you agree or disagree with my 02:04 AM post? < :-)

adaydream

It is amazing that even though most on this board that are critical of the islamic radicals specifically state "Islamic radicals", people like you prompt come to there defense by insulating them with the warm human shield called “all muslims”.

You and smith are the first ones to come here championing the cause of ALL muslims when you are the only people talking about ALL muslims. How about discussing the problem once in a while, that being the Islamic radicals.

CNN's Beck to first-ever Muslim congressman: "What I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies' "

So...yeah, a lot of the times, it's not ALL Muslims. It's just the ones they know they can insult to their face without having to join the military to do so.

Taka

When war between Japan and the US broke out after Pearl Harbor a great many Americans of Japanese decent put their lives on the line to prove their loyalty by fighting in the US Army in the European theater, even as their familers were "interned" in what can now only be called concentration camps. After 911 we have heard nothing of any conseqence from the American Muslim communiity condemning the actions of Islamic terrorists, much less any real action. To be fair some potential acts of terrorism within the US were stopped with the help of American muslims. But the general impression that the American public gets is that all muslims remain quiet about terrorism and therefore condone it. This is what leads to bigotry and prejudice.

smithinjapan again displaying his ignorance:

"Shame it doesn't date back to the millions upon millions killed by Christianity over the centuries... we'd have to condemn ALL Christians the same way they want to condemn all Muslims for killing far fewer. "

Do they condemn all Muslims? I have yet to see it. Got proof for the numbers you throw up?

"Millions upon millions" ?

Why is it the Left's apologists for Islam always have to go all the way back to the Crusades in order to try and justify their defense of militant Islam?

The premise of this article is ludicrous. Look at the recent Proposition 8 in California.

One of the the most liberal states in America. But in protesting the recent referendum, not opposed to gay marriage so much as it was pro-family, the Left never attacked mosques the way they did churches or Mormon temples.

prejudice against Muslims

Maruku What does your 01:10 AM post have to do with prejudice of Muslims? It is naive to believe that almost everything boils down to oil.

Maruku, I'll take your points on the problems of Christianity's past and assume that Islam is now going through that ascendant phase. That is why I truly believe religeon is the root of the whole problem whatever the brand I have no tolerence for anyone who does anything "in god's name"

Maruku

So you want me to believe that the much shorter Islamic wars

Christians and Islamists have been fighting each other for centuries. Please do not dilute yourself by believing that wars involving Islam are a relatively recent phenomenon.

somehow worse than the much longer, deadlier wars of the non-muslims.

There's that moral relativism. At what point, after you feel that "Islamic wars" have caught up to the carnage of "Christians wars" will you speak out against "Islamic wars".

I hope they didn't spend too much on this study as its conclusion is pretty obvious. Most people in the US didn't care about Islam or Muslims in the 80s and 90s because we hadn't been touched by the radical elements yet. After 9/11 the easiest thing to do was to blame the entire religeon for its nutters who attacked us. Not saying its right just human nature.

Truth be told though, this is not an American issue (proliferation of fossil fuel use), it's a gloabl issue. Consumers need to apply pressure on all car makers - from the politically correct SAAB, Volvo, BMW and Merc - to the oil importing Nissan, Hyundai, Toyota folks - all have been jacking the consumer off for far too long (any colour so long as its black-kinda thing).

This is not a Mori Tower where you build and they will come. This should be much more consumer-centric. Our reliance on oil, dependence on oil, and the resultant animosity toward the folks who have it (to keep with the topic), is tied up with freeing ourselves from this addiction.

If only our politicians would let us do that. We need an alternative energy bailout. The Street should sould sort itself out.

Betzee - great post at at 09:55 PM JST - 5th December. Thanks. Will look it up.

Muchakucha. The gays have been bashed by Reps and Religious right in the US much more frequently and for decades longer than some Channel 4 expose in London. I promise.

Secondly, I think Smith's point is (he would tell you himself but maybe you need it from another source), that the world has been dominated by Christianity for longer than it has been dominated by Islam. I must assume you agree to this point. Yes?

In that time wars have been fought, and these wars have involved covert opps, insurgence, propaganda, bombing, raping and pillaging. Yet, these wars fought in Gods name - more accurately, in the name of the people who said that were representing God - and these wars were somehow "just" wars.

So you want me to believe that the much shorter Islamic wars against the people who said they were representing God, that these wars are somehow worse than the much longer, deadlier wars of the non-muslims.

Now Mucha, why do you want me to believe that? Because it is true (in which case Christianity would be the minority) or to justify your own prejudice?

Superlib Great post at 05:17 PM

smithinjapan: it's amazing how people like you can hide from the truth when for the last 15 years or so, Islamic terrorist have regularly been committing atrocities and citing the word of Allah as their inspiration. What would it take to convince you? If a website quotes an Islamic cleric, is that propaganda? Islamic extremists are screaming that they're doing it in the name of Allah; they even cite the relevant verses in the Koran. Don't you believe them? Why else would they say it? When Channel 4 in the UK filmed a cleric in a mosque in London preaching that all homosexuals should be killed in the name of Allah, was that propaganda?

If you don't like the site I pointed you to, perhaps you should just stick with www.jihadwatch.com, where every article is based on a report in a major world newspaper or website; where the webmaster clearly and calmly reports on what the terrorists and the Islamic clerics who support/fail to condemn them are saying. It's all there, and it's easy to verify. And what's more, the webmaster never resorts to abuse, unlike you sadly.

about a month before the elections I got that Dvd in the mail. -true story.

Gee I feel left out, I didn't get one (maybe cuz I don't live in a swing state).

This is a better response to smith (from a letter to the LA Times):

To hint that we should not focus on the ever-increasing dangers in the spread of Islamic radicalization because there are other people behaving badly is just plain and reckless foolishness and logic from another universe.

What we need is a plan of action, something those engaging in Muslim-bashing have failed to provide. Some acknowledgment that we're underwriting both sides with our (non)energy policy is a good place to start.

about a month before the elections I got that Dvd in the mail. -true story.

It is still sort of a rarity to get a DvD in the mail. -AOL CD/DVDs were almost a monthly occurance at one time though.

smith...you said:

Hell, you can see it time and time again even on this board; people with little or no education or morals coming on here and, and this is fact, even saying, "All Muslims should die by the sword".

Specifically, who says this?

Can't I say that the predudice against muslims occurs with only a tiny, tiny fraction of people in the US? Doesn't that argument sound familiar?

I'd pass that along to Hillary if I were you, seems she and her supporters were reading the "McCarthy playbook" long before the Republicans were.

How is that possible when the book was written by the Republicans? Somehow it eluded that McCain people, if it didn't work for her it wasn't gonna work for them. I don't want a slow learner in the WH.

According to James Zogby, mentioned above:

From late summer through November, a shadowy group with ties to the Republican Party (and also to an Israel-based charity) attempted, in their own way, to insert Islam into the campaign. Beginning at both conventions, they were the responsible for the distribution of tens of millions of copies of an Islamophobic DVD called Obssession: Radical Islam's War against the West. In September alone, the group sent out 28 million copies of "Obsession" to households in battleground states playing the fear card to influence voters. The group has strong ties to the above-mentioned Reverend Hagee and his Christians United for Israel, and the National Jewish Republican Coalition - both of which also engaged in Muslim-baiting tactics this year in an effort to influence voters.

A much more effective strategy is the development of alternative sources of energy. Why are Republicans so resistant?

It's kinda funny, because you know I DID look at India first and found heaps of domestic related incidents related to Hindu uprisings and revolts by wannabe separatists, and even Maoist groups.

I counted over 70 incidents to Islamic extremists in the first 5 pages alone. Since there were over 4000 terrorists attacks just in India and over 40 pages with a hundred entries each. I quit after 5, I'd be here all night just counting. You didn't look very hard smith. The proof is right in front of you. I'd start with Pakistan next.

sailwind: " I'd start with India first."

It's kinda funny, because you know I DID look at India first and found heaps of domestic related incidents related to Hindu uprisings and revolts by wannabe separatists, and even Maoist groups.

sailwind: An interesting site. I'm still looking for the proof of 'tens of thousands' of Muslim terrorists, though, not a site that lists ALL incidents of terrorist activity world-wide -- I mean, you literally dropped the proof in my hands that there are a huge number of incidents out there that have zero to do with Islam, which is very much against what TooFarGone and the like want you to hear.

Shame it doesn't date back to the millions upon millions killed by Christianity over the centuries... we'd have to condemn ALL Christians the same way they want to condemn all Muslims for killing far fewer. Fortunately, there are people wise-enough on here to know that you cannot condemn an entire belief system based on the acts of a few (or a whole lot if you take the history of Christianity into account!).

Again, though, thanks for the interesting link.

the appeal of Islamic fundamentalism than dusting off Joseph McCarthy's playbook.

I'd pass that along to Hillary if I were you, seems she and her supporters were reading the "McCarthy playbook" long before the Republicans were. I did notice you had no comment on that one, when I posted it earlier. You are quite the partisan I'll give you that. Here another for you.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/12/06/clinton-volunteers-anti-obama-e-mail-causes-stir/

Smith

I don't call a site like that 'proof' any more than I call posts a George Bush fan club site 'proof' that he is a good president. I asked for proof, not propaganda.

http://wits.nctc.gov/RunSearchCountry.do?countryId=20

Database compiled since 2004 to mid 2008 so far. Knock yourself out. I'd start with India first.

http://wits.nctc.gov/RunSearchCountry.do?countryId=20

As Tom Friedman noted back in 2005:

The Bush energy policy should be called "No Mullah Left Behind."

By adamantly refusing to do anything to improve energy conservation in America, or to phase in a $1-a-gallon gasoline tax on American drivers, or to demand increased mileage from Detroit's automakers, or to develop a crash program for renewable sources of energy, the Bush team is - as others have noted - financing both sides of the war on terrorism. We are financing the U.S. armed forces with our tax dollars, and, through our profligate use of energy, we are generating huge windfall profits for Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan, where the cash is used to insulate the regimes from any pressure to open up their economies, liberate their women or modernize their schools, and where it ends up instead financing madrassas, mosques and militants fundamentally opposed to the progressive, pluralistic agenda America is trying to promote. Now how smart is that?

Long ago I came to the conclusion that for many Republicans making any sacrifices, in this case to achieve energy independence, is a sign of weakness and therefore out of the question. So they are reduced to providing laundry lists of acts of Islamic terror and mistreatment of women while offering no means to combat it.

I believe your point is to tar Republicans as the ones that tar all Muslims as terrorists.

No. My point is that the McCain campaign played to people's basest fears for electoral advantage. Yet it is important to note that, in the end, this Muslim or Arab bashing was not successful. Introducing Obama's "connection" to Rashid Khalidi, a Palestinian-American, on whose behalf he attended a dinner, did not put McCain on top. Colin Powell, along with many other Americans, was not doubt heartened to see the public reject demagoguery. Perhaps next time the Republicans can stick to the issues. One of those is Islamic fundamentalism, but discussion needs to focus on reducing its ability to attract adherents. A good place to start is the Saudi connection.

Talk is cheap, however. By contrast, taking concrete steps to end our reliance on fossil fuels will do more to undercut the appeal of Islamic fundamentalism than dusting off Joseph McCarthy's playbook.

TooFarGone: "Why don't you try with the site muchakucha pointed you to?"

I don't call a site like that 'proof' any more than I call posts a George Bush fan club site 'proof' that he is a good president. I asked for proof, not propaganda.

Muslim Terrorists: The Liberal Marxists never had it so good.

-only thru destabilization can these people get their way. Fear is their ally.

smithinjapan:

"Oh! www.thereligionofpeace.com, eh? I'm sure it's a picture-perfect example of a truth only site, with no bias or exaggerated stats whatsoever!"

You ask sarge to prove his claims.

Why don't you try with the site muchakucha pointed you to?

Go on, disprove their daily updates of Islamofascist terror in S. Thailand, the Philippines, Iraq, Afghanistan, India, Nigeria, Somalia, Palestine, Egypt, Russia, even China.

You can't.

You have no comeback.

Muchakucha: Oh! www.thereligionofpeace.com, eh? I'm sure it's a picture-perfect example of a truth only site, with no bias or exaggerated stats whatsoever! hahaha... You know, I'm sure if you searched you could find a few sites created by radical Muslims which say that they are only attacking others in defense... would you say those are true as well simply because they are on the internet? Fool.

Jon Stewart, Islamophobe:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=210920&title=mumbai-tragedy

It's official. Even Obama is an "Islamophobe."

"...But Mr Riedel, a former CIA official and now a member of Mr Obama’s policy working group on national security, said it’s difficult to believe the Pakistani government’s assertions “given the size of its (LeT) activities in Pakistan”.

[...]

"Mr Riedel also backed claims by other US officials that global terrorist networks like Al Qaeda were also involved in the attacks."

“The evidence is already pretty clear that this attack had links to the global jihad and that those involved in it were going after the targets of the global jihad,” he said.

smithinjapan: just have a look at http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

You'll see reports of almost daily attacks by terrorists in the name of Islam. However, most of them don't occur in the West. Is that why you appear somewhat blasse about Islamic jihad?

sarge: "It's tens of thousands. The question is, why are there tens of thousands of terrorists committing terrorist acts in the name of Islam?"

Where's your proof? Give us the stats, sarge, and not your personal opinion.

The question is, why are there tens of thousands of terrorists committing terrorist acts in the name of Islam?

A Muslim Cleric will answer that question. It ain't pretty.

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1934.htm

SuperLib: "I've lost 10 KG in the last 6 months, but technically my weight has risen overall since 1985...when I was a school boy. I guess I'll have to go around telling people that my weight is on the rise!"

Perhaps the present progressing 'rising' or passive 'is on the rise' is indeed a bit misleading, but I guarantee you go to your school reunion and someone's going to say, "Wow, you've filled out since I last saw you!"

Super - "If it were then we'd have 1.4 billion terrorists instead of thousands or tens of thousands or whatever"

It's tens of thousands. The question is, why are there tens of thousands of terrorists committing terrorist acts in the name of Islam?

superlib: you basically backed me up.. I have said it many times and even when against my own kind, stereotyping usually starts from within the group. If you are so concerned about how you are perceived, look inside your group first.

Free-thinking Muslims are in a no-win situation. On the one hand, they must be able to see that the Koran and Hadiths 1)call for the conversion, subjugation or killing/fighting of non-believers (Hadith 19,4294) 2)say quite clearly that women are the property of men, and can be beaten (Koran 4:34). They must also know of those Muslim groups in America who have called for the USA to be turned into an Islamic state. To quote:

"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." -- Omar Ahmad, founder of CAIR, the Council for America Islamic Relations.

Unfortunately, speaking out against these abominations incurs the wrath that Sharia Law reserves for such 'heretics'(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy in Islam) (spaces should be underscores)

Anger shouldn't be directed at individual Muslims, but Muslims leaders who fail to temper the excesses of the Koran, and who fail to drag Islam, a religion created by a 7thC Arab warlord, into the 21stC.

one thing I keep seeing on this board is "those right wingers, its all their fault..." Well, I really wish some of you would take a deeper look into things. First of all, can you tell the differences between "right wingers" and Muslims? Look at both agendas, there are very few differences and in fact, at least the right wingers give women a lot more respect!

Now for my 2 cents....

Islam doesn't create terrorists. Period. Some people abuse Islam and twist it to fulfill their own selfish goals, but terrorism is in no way built in to Islam. If it were then we'd have 1.4 billion terrorists instead of thousands or tens of thousands or whatever.

BUT....If you want to know why people link terrorists and Muslims I think you'd have to give the most credit to the terrorists themselves since it's usually the first thing out of their mouths. You can talk about Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter all you want but the ones linking Islam and terrorism with the greatest impact are people like Osama Bin Laden and the Palestinians. Show me a bombed out cafe with a terrorist firing his AK-47 in the air praising Allah and Islam and I'm guessing people will remember that more than whatever tiny percent even bother listening to a woman like Coulter. That's why it is important for peace loving Muslims to speak out and show people what real Islam is and what it isn't.

Check out this documentary shown on Al Jazeera about Muslims in America:

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/general/2008/10/200810179817753730.html

It shows once again that the ignorance is mostly on the part of people who know little to nothing about America.

hehe that is one hell of a headline, isn't it? LOL

It's a flat out lie is what it is. If something has been decreasing since 2001 you don't present it as "rising." Obviously people are going to think the rise is this year compared to last year or something recent, not the 1980s. I've lost 10 KG in the last 6 months, but technically my weight has risen overall since 1985...when I was a school boy. I guess I'll have to go around telling people that my weight is on the rise!

Yes, but if hate crimes against Muslims are up, then hate crimes are up. There is no real way to measure an increase in prejudice. This is probably as good as it gets."

seems that is what you want.. I don't think reaction, much less the existence of such a report, would be the same had it said prejudice decreasing against US Muslims. Face it, this is method of getting people to do what you want. As for any profiling, hey, if you go klan hunting, won't you be looking for any white guy?

The FBI has not endorsed it yet. And since when have we trusted the FBI anyways?

Consistent with FBI data is good enough for me until someone gives a source proving otherwise. Wandering around disbelieving everything just isn't practical.

Only when reports like this come up. as for any prejudice, man, tell me where and what group of people in the US is not prejudiced against one another. Prejudice is a fact of life and it is not limited to race, religion, culture, nationality,

Yes, but if hate crimes against Muslims are up, then hate crimes are up. There is no real way to measure an increase in prejudice. This is probably as good as it gets.

Mmmmm, red meat. America and 'prejudice'.

I'll try to get worked up.

The FBI agrees that hate crimes against Muslims are up actually. But I don't think they feel hated by everyone. However, the prejudice is real." the article states "The group collected data for the report on its own, in part using anecdotal information. But its hate crime numbers are consistent with those of the FBI, which reported about 140 victims of anti-Islamic hate crimes in 2007, up from about 40 in 1995 and down sharply from more than 500 in 2002." The FBI has not endorsed it yet. And since when have we trusted the FBI anyways? Only when reports like this come up. as for any prejudice, man, tell me where and what group of people in the US is not prejudiced against one another. Prejudice is a fact of life and it is not limited to race, religion, culture, nationality,

I do not see people say bad words about Kareem Abdul jabar and Mohammed Ali they are also turned to islam.

If Muslims feel they are so hated by everyone,

The FBI agrees that hate crimes against Muslims are up actually. But I don't think they feel hated by everyone. However, the prejudice is real.

Betzee, Powell is correct in his statement. Of course there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim but bear in mind, if you don't like certain things about a society that is not Islamic, you don't go around and cry bigotry. How about "what if he is a Christian" while he is trying to run for an office in an area that is predominantly Muslim (Queens,Chicago). They say the same damn things too and no one is getting funding for any report such as this.

Again, of those incidents where bodily harm was done against any member of the Muslim community, how many of them were due to robbery? What is the break down as to who are the perps?

I've been called all sort of derogatory names due to my mix, I haven't filed any suit. Hey, I was threatened and called a bunch of names by a girl's male family members who happen to had been Muslim - can I call it a hate crime?

No, it fits with my point, something addressed by Colin Powell in his endorsement of Obama when he denounced insinuations that Obama is a Muslim:

I believe your point is to tar Republicans as the ones that tar all Muslims as terrorists.

You do know when the rumors way before McCain was even nominated came out that he might be a Muslim instead of a Christian......Who the Obama campaign blamed?

"It's the fact that he's black, let's be blunt about it," and that the Somali tribal garb in the picture taken when Obama was on a visit to Kenya, his father's homeland, reminds people of Muslim dress, Shaheen said.

The Obama campaign accused the campaign of rival Democrat Hillary Clinton of "the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering" when the photograph of the Illinois senator, turned up on a Web site this week.

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2862934020080229?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

The Clinton campaign denied releasing the photo.

Ahh, don't you just love the stereotypes people cart in their heads when it comes to the Republicans.

Betzee, that is a great quote that defines what the United States should be. It shouldn't be a country where people are required to check in their religious believes, political beliefs, before entering. The greatest strength of the US is the practice of diversity, not the practice of division.

No, it fits with my point, something addressed by Colin Powell in his endorsement of Obama when he denounced insinuations that Obama is a Muslim:

"Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian," he said. "But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, 'He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.' This is not the way we should be doing it in America."

Hate to press the point skip,but I think you have missed out a couple of important terms in your definition. I was thinking along the lines of "doctor-shopping" and "chicken hawk." Then again, Rush (who I have not listened to for about 5 years) is one of my pet peaves.

Betzee

Why did you leave this part out of from Dr. Zogby's article?

"And while we are pleased to see that the senator is trying to dispel rumors about Senator Obama, we feel the need to point out that Arab Americans are also decent men and women with full rights of citizenship as enumerated under the Constitution.

Didn't fit in with your argument perhaps?

Could somebody please define who Limbaugh's group is?" Christian, Bush types. Isn't it?

how has he provoked anyone to hate Muslims, as the article doesn't tell us.

I don't listen to Rush and in fact I've finally seen what he looked like for the first time. Sorry, he is solid to his group as much as Tom Joyner is to his.

Could somebody please define who Limbaugh's group is? I have tried to in the past, but every time the powers that be delete my posts.

sabi, no, that's not my point. My point was if you feel you are soo hated, why go to that place? Look, I don't go hopping around certain country towns because I know there are people who would probably shoot me and that same with going to certain cities, I know I'm not liked so I do go trying to buy property there nor do I give them my business (in my case, its always been Haitians).

This board is filled with anti-islamic and anti-arab, the same thing for these posters, comments that if turned around at christians would be rejected as lunacy." Yeah, I see just as much anti-semtism and anti-Christian and Anti-American. Sometimes we need to deal with ourselves internally and find out what type of image are we putting out that is causing hate (my family hates me saying this).

I am sure very few people wake up one day and decide they are going to hate a particular group for no reason. We need to find what is being pushed out of one group that would make another hate them.

I don't listen to Rush and in fact I've finally seen what he looked like for the first time. Sorry, he is solid to his group as much as Tom Joyner is to his. BTW, I said before, but some of you if you really want to hear some hate, you need to listen to non-English radio once in a while. Talk about anti-Muslim, man, Spanish radio has a lot but I say wait before you want to be some pointed finger person see what is the problem. Apparently, many Spanish speakers have been barred from attending festivities sponsored by Muslims (only NOI seems to accept all).

The rest of this shlock piece is nothing more than slamming conservative commentators and a thinly disguised McCain bash.

He was hardly innocent of using McCarthy tactics to attack Obama. The aging Senator would get the crowds on the campaign trial riled up by asking "Who is the real Barack Obama" which elicited the response "an Arab" from a woman in a Minnesota crowd.

The reason this even made the news was because McCain came to the defense of his opponent by correcting her, "No, ma'am. He's a decent family man and citizen..." Needless to say the crowd booed. But not because they objected to the implication that an Arab male is less then a "decent family man," something that did not go unnoticed in other quarters however:

In response, Dr. James Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute, said, "Enough is enough! From the beginning of this campaign there have been those who have used 'Muslim' and 'Arab' in an effort to smear Barack Obama. This exploitation of bigotry and the stoking of racist fires to forward an agenda is reprehensible. This is not only offensive to Arab Americans, but to all Americans. As any ethnic group who has ever been used to scare the electorate knows, this is a dangerous game that, tragically, can get innocent people hurt.

The blatherings of Mr. Limbaugh, et. al., do little more than wind up hatred among people who know no better.

Well according to even this article.......

That is up slightly from the roughly 90 annual reports it received during the 1980s but down dramatically from the roughly 700 incidents reported in the weeks after the Sept 11 attacks.

As far as their ability to incite the ignorant masses to hate all muslims and see each one as terrorists.

Have to say they pretty much suck at it. They should try something different if they want that Stat to go up. Or maybe the ignorant masses aren't so stupid after all?

It particularly faulted the news media for allowing political commentators to inflame fears that Muslims are terrorists.

Finally!!! They are starting to acknowledge the media problem.

If Muslims feel they are so hated by everyone, why are they immigrating to said places?

All countries will have a few cretins who think Islam is the problem, especially where there is excessive TV-viewing.

That would pretty much eliminate the MSM. But I've got to give you credit. At least your Stalinist approach to the right of free speech is unbiased.

And what of the right to freedom of religion? The blatherings of Mr. Limbaugh, et. al., do little more than wind up hatred among people who know no better. If it is OK to single out US muslims for vilification, what about other minorities that don't fit nicely with the "warm, cozzy deception" that Limbaugh, et. al. perceive as being "good Americans." Who's up next? Let's go after the African Americans because they are blxck and speak "ebonics". What about those orthodox jews whose beliefs are different from the perceived mainstream? And then there are the all-American, blue-eyed mormons whose believes see then shirking military responsibility. Get real, if the zealots of the left and right have no meaningful contribution to make to reasoned discourse, they should be taken off the air permanently. Let them employ their high intellects in some more meaningful pursuit. I hear that the Golden Arches is alway looking for burger flippers.

Even though the majority of muslims may not be terrorists, there is an issue of daily bombings, rocket launchings, and so forth from a minority of the muslim sector. The majority does nothing to restrain the minority, and thereby is in passive support of their activities.

"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." Albert Einstein

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing" Edmond Burke

"He who does not punish evil, commands it to be done" Leonardo DiVinci

"When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail" Pearl S. Buck

What are you talking about? They just elected one as President!

Typical Bias reporting.

The Headline......Report finds prejudice rising against U.S. Muslims

Yet the very next paragraph says

Discrimination and hate crimes against Arab-Americans have dropped in recent years after a spike after the Sept 11, 2001, attacks, but such prejudice is still more common than in the 1980s and 1990s, according to a report by an advocacy group.

Okay, which is it rising or dropping? And the obvious, ya think hate crimes agaisn't Muslims wouldn't have risen higher then in the 80's and 90's after 9/11?

Common sense would tell anybody that one after all it was us that was attacked not the other way around by the Muslim fanatics. And I'm rather suprised that the level only rose as small as it did after all.

The rest of this shlock piece is nothing more than slamming conservative commentators and a thinly disguised McCain bash.

Reuters actually has this story and how it should be have been reported in its non-biased form.

They lead with the headline

Arab-American hate crimes down since 9/11

And they point out something extremely important that A.P just couldn't squeeze in with their article as the late Jerry Falwell was more important to include with them then this.

Incidents tended to increase after other terrorist attacks, such as the 2005 London subway bombings, the group said. Many incidents did not begin with a clear motivation of bias, but assailants would use racial or ethnic slurs as the situation intensified, the group said.

Law-enforcement authorities for the most part have thoroughly investigated these violent incidents, the group said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE4B30V920081204

Compare the two stories, the bias is pretty clear when you do.

If Muslims feel they are so hated by everyone, why are they immigrating to said places? I know where I stand in any of their countries and I ain't going, even if I can pass for one of them. Mind you, I'm not talking about the American born.

before many of you start sticking your bird chests and pounding, look at the article a bit deeper. First of all, what exactly did the commentators say that constitutes hate? It is purposefully left out. Second, look at who the study was done by. People get government sponsored grants to perform these studies and they don't have to be verified nor disputed. I know this because my sister does just this: inflate much of the date, stats, and keep getting paid to write these up. The media loves it. Now, how many of these crimes were actually theft? Third, I haven't heard anyone denouncing Muslim holidays in the US, but I have heard calls for toning Christmas holidays down, preventing stores from putting up Christmas decoratios... you don't think that after being hit on this there would be no reaction. The Army Office says he hears anti-Muslim talk in his unit. I wasn't in the Army long, but I do know that an officer can make you stop saying basically anything (we were never allowed to use swear words and if caught, we were either put on extra duty or charged with disobeying an order) so I am skeptical.

Christianity would by FAR outweigh Islam in murder, hate, ignorace, and terrorists (by modern definition). Fortunately, I know for a fact that it is wrong to condemn an entire religion or set of beliefs based on said small number of terrorists." Then why bring it up? Face, you feel this way and like the article, you fail to put up proof and probably going off the glorified myths of the Crusades which was/is BS. I could careless about the comparison as both religions should be condemned.

Interesting article on this hate crime stuff: http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.smith03dec03,0,504953.column

I look at these studies, with no FBI backing or the time it takes the FBI to sugar coat the numbers to help push certain agendas. As for my sister and her Hispanics have it so bad studies, all I can say is if you read her work, dig deeper and I say the same here.

for the people who are victims of such crimes, my heart goes out to you. But when I hear a political group making these studies, I always know the end of the story as being a hate victim group does bring in special rewards.

Lastly, I would like to know what is this group doing about hate crimes within their religion/culture against others. Did this group come out and denounce any attacks against infidels? Did this group come out and defend the teddy bear teacher? I will wager they didn't and probably laughed it off like a certain friend of mine.

Only an ignorant leftist could miss the fact that there's a problem with Islam when they're blowing up women and children on a daily basis in every corner of the globe.

Every corner of the globe and on a daily basis? You exaggerate.

But I must not be one of those ignorant leftists. Click on my name and you will find that I do think there is a problem with Islam, I just don't exaggerate it.

Also, western Christian countries at this time are in a state of relative peace. Middle eastern Muslim countries are not. All you have to do is look at the history and you will find that as soon as the peace ends, the Christian terrorists appear. Or worse, the colonizers. Christianity can also be connected to senseless violence.

The era of the Christian colonizer is almost completely closed now, but it still clings to life. And it still has an effect today. The IRA exists because the English took over Ireland and moved in Protestant Scottish to offset the Catholic population. A lot of instability in the Middle East owes its origins to the British. They carved it up by drawing lines in the sand purposely splitting up ethnic groups. They also moved Jews enmasse to Israel. How much terrorism has that sparked?

How convenient that you live in a time where the colonizing slaving Christians are far more dormant than in the past, though they still are still responsible for more wars and death than actual Islamic terrorists even in this century. Yes, Islamics and Middle Easterners have a bent toward terrorism and they deserve to be called out on it. But please, do not exaggerate. 1.4 billion Muslims in the world prove everyday that the overwhelming majority are not terrorists and do not deserve hate crimes just for believing in the Koran.

It should be possible to address this problem without name calling.

Some have pointed out Hindu violence against their Muslim compatriots in Indian as evidence other groups are capable of engaging in such behavior. Yet it will never be seen in the same way by Western governments and their citizens who are not threatened by localized incidents of Hindu extremism.

While it would make no difference to law enforcement and the penalties which should be imposed for such acts, it's not clear the perpetrators were motivated to act by religious beliefs; over half of all Hindus are vegetarians. If you can't kill an animal, then it's unlikely you can kill another human being.

By contrast Islamic fundamentalists do claim to be religiously motivated. This makes it difficult for Muslim communities around the world to avoid being tainted by the actions of violent extremists in the absence of strenuous denunciations of such acts.

For those who feel acts of terrorism forfeit any claim to a cause, did you also feel so strongly about that when the IRA was planting bombs? It should make no difference that they had a specific goal, namely to get the Brits out of Ulster, and lacked any larger agenda. Terrorism is terrorism, except when it's not....

"Perhaps we should do a number count of victims of these groups versus victims of Islamic terrorism. Actually, why even bother."

Or perhaps you should just admit that your ilk saying 'all terrorists are Muslim' and the like is just plain not true. Ah, but can't do that once you've said it... gotta try and deflect the fact that you're 100% wrong.

While we're at it, let's add Christianity to the mix to point out just how ridiculous the logic that all members of a religion or group are terrorists by virtue of a very small number who commit terrorist acts. Of course, if we went back in time and looked at witch hunts, the crusades, etc., then Christianity would by FAR outweigh Islam in murder, hate, ignorace, and terrorists (by modern definition). Fortunately, I know for a fact that it is wrong to condemn an entire religion or set of beliefs based on said small number of terrorists.

Helter_Skelter: "Only an ignorant leftist could miss the fact that there's a problem with Islam when they're blowing up women and children on a daily basis in every corner of the globe."

Sorry, but Islam is not only not plural and cannot be 'strapping themselves' up, but not all believers of Islam are doing so anyhow. But anyway, do tell us, since you haven't answered me any other of the five times I've asked you, since you want Islam destroyed what your proposal or 'solution' is to Islam.

"Perhaps we should do a number count of victims of these groups versus victims of Islamic terrorism. Actually, why even bother."

Indeed... why even bother to answer your own question/query -- simply because you can't. Irregardless, my pointing out non-Muslim terrorist groups was in response to neverknow's ignorant belief that all terrorists are Muslims (much like TooFarGone thought the other day until I educated him). To then go and say, "Oh, well... chortle yeah... ummm... sure there are other terrorists... but uh... guffaw how many people have they killed -- WAIT! Don't answer that, please!" shows how credible your argument is. Next you'll be asking us to show you where Muslims condemn terrorist attacks, and when we show you you'll say, "Well, actions speak louder than words!" and when we show you actions you'll just think of another reason to spread the exact same kind of hate the terrorists do.

timorborder

I am also in favor of the nutjobs on the far left being taken off the airwaves.

That would pretty much eliminate the MSM. But I've got to give you credit. At least your Stalinist approach to the right of free speech is unbiased.

the IRA, Aum Shinryoku, Tamil Tigers...

Perhaps we should do a number count of victims of these groups versus victims of Islamic terrorism. Actually, why even bother.

Moderator: All readers back on topic please. The subject is U.S. Muslims.

What a joke. Media "commentators" who peddle in racial/religious villification should be taken off the air permanently. It would be different if such people had something of intellectual merit to say, however, Limbaugh and his fellow travelers of the Josef Goebells school of journalistic integrity are knee-jerk populatists whose intellectual faculties match the average bowel movement.

And before you start arguing about a liberal bias, I am also in favor of the nutjobs on the far left being taken off the airwaves. Gee, for one of the smartest countries in the world, the US sure has a lot of morons....

Only an ignorant hillbilly could miss the disparity between that fact and what they so firmly want to believe.

Only an ignorant leftist could miss the fact that there's a problem with Islam when they're blowing up women and children on a daily basis in every corner of the globe. Did you hear about Mumbai? How many times do we have to list the dozens of countries where there's Islamic terrorism before you get it?

1.4 billion Muslims in the world and they still have not all strapped dynamite to themselves yet.

Yes, let's take comfort in this fact. :-D

rush limbaugh, glenn beck, ted nugent, michael reagan and bill o'reilly are islamic militants? Sure, they fuel hate and prejudice but...to the best of my knowledge, not against themselves. Their enormous egos would never allow for it.

Taka

Asahara is a ... a ... well, not exactly a Buddhist, but you get the drift.

neverknow: "...but all terrorists are Muslims"

Funny... didn't know the IRA, Aum Shinryoku, Tamil Tigers, and whatever group that guy that you all claimed Obama was in league with are all Muslims!

Again, good example of ignorance of facts. Not all terrorists are Muslims, and only a very very very very very miniscule number of Muslims are terrorists.

All terrorists are muslim? Funny, I don't ever recall timothy mcveigh reciting the Q'uran.

Two more words:

Islamic militants.

It particularly faulted the news media for allowing political commentators to inflame fears that Muslims are terrorists.

Two words: talk radio.

Taka

Report finds prejudice rising against U.S. Muslims

Significant factor: Man with the middle name of Hussein wins the U.S. presidential election. Ignorant hillbillies can fathom that a Christian would have such a middle name, and add it to all the other ignorant hillbilly excuses to attack Muslims.

1.4 billion Muslims in the world and they still have not all strapped dynamite to themselves yet. Only an ignorant hillbilly could miss the disparity between that fact and what they so firmly want to believe.

Some of the study’s harshest criticism was directed toward media outlets

Why? Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims. Gofigure.

"The study gives Hollywood some credit for presenting a more balanced view of Arabs and Muslims in recent films. But it said prejudice is worse than ever in popular culture. It particularly faulted the news media for allowing political commentators to inflame fears that Muslims are terrorists."

It's a shame that people rely on Hollywood and the media for their education. You would think in this day and age, particularly with no children, ahem, 'being left behind', and particularly in countries with mixed ethnic backgrounds that there would be LESS hatred than in the past.

But, as adaydream right pointed out, and as I have said time and time again, there are many people who are easily susceptible to hate and ignorance, and who all too often want to be miserable and hate others rather than see the truth. This in turn causes those who are the target of said misdirected hatred then lash out in what they call 'revenge' attacks, and so on and so on.

Hell, you can see it time and time again even on this board; people with little or no education or morals coming on here and, and this is fact, even saying, "All Muslims should die by the sword". They say that Islam and Muslims are the source of the world's pain, in statements that bring about the exact same thing to Muslims, without realizing the hypocrisy of what they are saying.

Much of this in particular of late can be attributed to the McCain campaign in particular -- with he and Palin fueling fear and hatred about Obama, leading to morons like the woman who shouted, "I don't trust him! He's an ARAB!" to go on being allowed to spread their hate.

It's not surprising.

I'm sure that my friendly republican posters will be soon be calling for the death of all Muslims. < :-)