Good bye America

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by spence

And yet I think extremist Muslims have killed far more non-American Muslims than Americans.

Sure, then moderate muslims should have the common sense to understant our fear, no?

Not very many if the problem is really Islam. I think there have been a few hundred and many of these are somewhat lower on the threat scale. Out of a billion Muslims worldwide that doesn't make for a lot of terrorists.

It only takes one to kill me or my family, just one. Millions of people across this country will drink and drive tonight. Possibly none will die, however I wont do it.

Don't forget that he was also an American citizen, business person and wore more Kenneth Cole than Islamic dress.

I wont forget, all the more reason for my mistrust. Againt to my point they dont wear uniforms. But - there was ONE thing that would identify him, isnt there?

Just like Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, Michael Fortier and Coleen LaRose?

You might want to take this comment back, it's pretty ugly.

Of those mentioned above, which ones belonged to a cult, cult of tens of thousands that declared war on you and your family? Of those above, which ones danced in the streets when thousands of Americans died? Which one of those people beheaded innocents in cold blood? If you took a computer and loaded it with data on the last 50 yrs of air travel and had it calculate a risk factor for each religion, race or background. To which would it assign the highest, unbiased risk? Again Spence, common sense. Its your friend and may someday save your life. Im not advocating living in fear or any restrictions of muslims rights, but to say there is no grounds for fear or scrutiny based on that religion is plain stupid.


Common sense would really dictate that the trepidation be somewhat on parity with the actual threat. The chances of someone in Islamic dress on an airplane actually being a terrorist out to do you harm are probably as low (or lower) than the chances of you dying from an accident on the same plane.

I agree, Im petrified of flying and take pills when I do. That said, any cause of a airline crash is most likely beyond my control. However, I may have control if I, like the passengers of flight 83 did on 9/11 and passengers of board with the shoe bomber did, act to save my and others lifes. Im not saying we shouldnt allow muslims to fly, Im saying that the fear and uncomfort are rational and reasonable, And should be understood, not silenced.

What percentage of black men are Black Panthers? You're stereotyping again...might want to take this one back as well.

Hardly any, just like hardly any muslims are terrorists. However if the black panthers threatened to kill americans, I as most would, would be cautious and potentially nervous in the presence of black men. We have been born with survival instincts, your liberal PC may someday be your end. Most dog dont bite, however I dont stop and pet rotweillers. Common sense.

The movie is from 1985, made during a period when the US was in a tense period with Libya, making them an ideal target. While a Muslim, I'd consider Gaddafi's identity to be more of a socialist or Arab nationalist and not really an Islamist at all. The fact that he sought reconciliation with the West might have been partially a survival instinct, but certainly isn't the behavior of someone driven by dogma.

Not the point. Today was made in 2010, a period when muslim extremists have declared war and have killed thousands of americans, using jets as brutal weapons.


-spence

usually there is some division of opinion on topics, but Spence stands alone on this one. reminds of those wacky animal owners that believe they can hold hands with gorillas or keep tigers in their home.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Sure, then moderate muslims should have the common sense to understant our fear, no?

You should turn this around and ask why you don't understand why much of the Islamic world doesn't trust the USA.

This issue isn't really about the fear, it's how you deal with it.

It only takes one to kill me or my family, just one. Millions of people across this country will drink and drive tonight. Possibly none will die, however I wont do it.

This analogy makes no sense.

I wont forget, all the more reason for my mistrust. Againt to my point they dont wear uniforms. But - there was ONE thing that would identify him, isnt there?

Jim, seriously. You're starting to sound like paranoia is taking over.

Of those mentioned above, which ones belonged to a cult, cult of tens of thousands that declared war on you and your family? Of those above, which ones danced in the streets when thousands of Americans died? Which one of those people beheaded innocents in cold blood? If you took a computer and loaded it with data on the last 50 yrs of air travel and had it calculate a risk factor for each religion, race or background. To which would it assign the highest, unbiased risk? Again Spence, common sense. Its your friend and may someday save your life. Im not advocating living in fear or any restrictions of muslims rights, but to say there is no grounds for fear or scrutiny based on that religion is plain stupid.

Common sense would balance the negative things done by a small minority of Muslims with the far larger weight of positive and peaceful actions by the vast majority of Muslims.

If you dwell just on the visceral imagery there's no chance you'll let common sense guide your actions. How many innocent people have Mexican drug gangs (Catholics right?) beheaded in just the last few years alone?

I agree, Im petrified of flying and take pills when I do. That said, any cause of a airline crash is most likely beyond my control. However, I may have control if I, like the passengers of flight 83 did on 9/11 and passengers of board with the shoe bomber did, act to save my and others lifes. Im not saying we shouldnt allow muslims to fly, Im saying that the fear and uncomfort are rational and reasonable, And should be understood, not silenced.

In stark contrast you as an individual seem to do little to understand your fear and a lot to justify them.

The violent minority has a challenge in that to be effective they often have to conceal their behavior. There are traits that identify them.

Hardly any, just like hardly any muslims are terrorists. However if the black panthers threatened to kill americans, I as most would, would be cautious and potentially nervous in the presence of black men. We have been born with survival instincts, your liberal PC may someday be your end. Most dog dont bite, however I dont stop and pet rotweillers. Common sense.

Again, your analogy doesn't make a lot of sense. You don't pet a rotty because they're easily identifiable and are thought to have pre-disposed tendencies for aggression. I don't see how this would apply to a black person or Muslim...unless...oh %$%$%$%$.

Not the point. Today was made in 2010, a period when muslim extremists have declared war and have killed thousands of americans, using jets as brutal weapons.

Um, ok.

usually there is some division of opinion on topics, but Spence stands alone on this one. reminds of those wacky animal owners that believe they can hold hands with gorillas or keep tigers in their home.

I love the "Spence stands alone" line you keep rehashing. It really shows how you're working hard to reach an understanding.

One thing I've noticed repeatedly is that you seem to place the responsibility for understanding completely on the other party, treating all Muslims as a gigantic monolithic block. You blame moderates for not speaking out more against violence, but have you ever raised an ear to see if any are talking? You blame all innocent Muslims for not doing more, instead of taking ownership for the fear that you alone have control of. It's like a fear of all guns rather than those people who would use them for violence. In this respect you're acting pretty Left wing.

People tend to be more uncomfortable with things they're not used to. In an effort for outreach many Imam's have Open Mosque Days. You should seek one out and go talk to people.

-spence

[detbuch]

[QUOTE=spence; One thing I've noticed repeatedly is that you seem to place the responsibility for understanding completely on the other party, treating all Muslims as a gigantic monolithic block. You blame moderates for not speaking out more against violence, but have you ever raised an ear to see if any are talking? You blame all innocent Muslims for not doing more, instead of taking ownership for the fear that you alone have control of. It's like a fear of all guns rather than those people who would use them for violence. In this respect you're acting pretty Left wing.

People tend to be more uncomfortable with things they're not used to. In an effort for outreach many Imam's have Open Mosque Days. You should seek one out and go talk to people.

-spence[/QUOTE]

I have talked to two young Saudi Muslims who are here to study in our universities. They are very charming. One has the sentiments of a poet, the other is more into women and fast cars. What unites them is their love of their culture and religion. Neither approves of nor understands terrorists. Yet, both completely accept Shariah as being the only legitimate form of law. Though they enjoy the freedom of America, they totally accept the suppression of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia. They don't see it as suppression. It is simply the will of God.

While I was listening to the Dennis Prager show, an American born Muslim from N.Y. called in to complain about Islamophobia and couldn't understand why we are afraid of loyal American Muslims. As the discussion progressed, Prager asked him if the U.S. population was predominantly Muslim, would he want us to be under Shariah law. After a brief pause, he said yes. I have heard sentiments from Muslim callers to talk shows that we would be better off if we had Shariah law.

Oklahoma has a proposal on the Nov. 2 ballot to prohibit Islamic law from being used in rulings of Oklahoma courts. Muneer Awad, executive director of the Oklahoma branch of the Council on American Islamic Relations opposes the ammendment.

I googled "do Muslims want Shariah law in the U.S?" and found, among many entries, a worldwide forum called Islamic Board which discusses all manner of Islamic related topics. Most of the members are Muslim, though there are non-Muslims--the latter often initiate controversial discussions. There were seven pages of discussion related to my search topic. It was a good 3 hour session of reading those and then browsing other topics. There was great unity of opinion on all topics, especially in response to non-Muslim members. There was a poll of members on whether they would choose democracy or Shariah law. At that point it was 42 for Shariah and 4 for democracy. There was a comment that "democracy is a man-made system, meaning rule by the people for the people. Thus it is contrary to Islam, because rule is for Alaah, the most high, the almighty, and it is not permissible to give legislative rights to any human being." There was a quotation from the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwahs that "the one who understands the true nature of the democratic system and ruling therein, then he nominates himself or someone else for election is approving this system, and is working with it, is in grave danger, because the democratic system is contrary to Islam . . ." The ruling goes on to have an exception--that if you involve with a system of democratic election in order to "be able to change the system to one that operates according to the Sharee'ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government" it would be acceptable to participate. Further "the Muslims in a country that is not governed according to Islamic Sharee'ah should do their utmost and strive as much as they can to bring about rule according to Islamic Sharee'ah . . . As for supporting one who calls for no implementation of Islamic Sharee'ah, that is not permissible, rather it may lead to kufr." Probably why the C.A.I.R. opposes the Oklahoma ammendment.

Another interesting thread on this forum is titled "what is a moderate Muslim?" Within the 4 page discussion, it is asked if it follows that persons who strictly follow the Qu'ran and the Sunnah are what, on the forum are called "good Muslims" are, actually, what non-Muslims refer to as Extremist or Radical Muslims. And if those who don't strictly follow the Qu'ran and the Sunnah and are called "bad Muslims" on the forum are what, in fact, non-Muslims refer to as moderate Muslims. One of the forum Muslims immediately responds that, yes, that would indeed follow, and that 99 percent of the muslims on the forum, and perhaps the world, would on that basis be viewed as extremist/fundamentalist/fanatical/overzealous Muslims.

There is on this forum a general consensus that Islam is both religion AND law. To quote one member, "Islam is a constitution, a covenant a way of life." There is also the opinion that "moderate Muslims" and "extremist Muslims" are phrases that have been invented by non-Muslims, and that there are only Muslims.