PDA

View Full Version : Discrimination and Islamophobia in the EU


azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 01:55 PM
EUMC Media Release
Vienna, 18 December 2006
http://eumc.europa.eu/eumc/index.php?fuseaction=content.dsp_cat_content&contentid=4582ddc822d41&catid=43d8bc25bc89d&lang=EN

The report “Muslims in the European Union: Discrimination and Islamophobia”, published by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) today, presents available data on discrimination affecting Muslims in employment, education and housing. Manifestations of Islamophobia range from verbal threats through to physical attacks on people and property. The report stresses that the extent and nature of discrimination and Islamophobic incidents against European Muslims remain under-documented and under-reported. The EUMC report recommends therefore that Member States improve the reporting of incidents and implement measures to counter discrimination and racism more effectively. Discrimination is illegal and could undermine Muslims’ sense of belonging in the EU.

“This report presents available data showing the extent of the discrimination being suffered by European Muslims,” said Beate Winkler, Director of the EUMC. “It underlines their vulnerability to discrimination and demonstrates that greater efforts need to be made to ensure that all European Muslims enjoy the right to equal treatment and the same quality of life as other Europeans. The report makes it clear that Muslims, along with other migrant and minority groups, frequently suffer different forms of discrimination which reduce their employment opportunities, and affect their educational achievement. This can give rise to hopelessness, and could undermine Muslims’ sense of belonging in the EU.”

The report gives examples of Islamophobic acts, ranging from verbal abuse to physical attacks and arson. “Such behaviour is illegal. Firm political leadership is needed to ensure equal treatment of all Europeans, whatever their background,” said Beate Winkler.

The report highlights that only one Member State - the United Kingdom - publishes criminal justice data which specifically identify Muslims as victims of hate crime incidents.

Anastasia Crickley, Chair of the EUMC Management Board, noted that yet again it had proved difficult to measure the precise nature of the discrimination suffered by European Muslims because of poor or missing official data: “The work of the EUMC in helping governments provide effective policies in the area of discrimination and xenophobia depends on knowing what problems we face. The failure of many Member Stats to collect effective data means that it is very difficult to develop workable policies to counter racism.”

The EUMC lists many examples of good practice by national or local governments, NGOs and others, drawn from several Member States. The report, however, proposes a number of further practical steps to be taken. The EUMC finds that improving educational achievement, granting equal treatment in employment, ensuring equal access to housing, and encouraging participation in public life are further key issues to be tackled, particularly at the local and regional level. The EUMC calls on all Member States to enforce the EU Anti-Discrimination Directives, and to ensure that the Equality Bodies which have been set up in each Member State are adequately resourced.

The report presents an overview of the situation of Muslims in the 25 EU Member States and follows EUMC publications on the situation of Jews, Roma and other groups in the EU. It presents available research and analyses statistical data. It shows that Muslims, as a group, are over-represented in low-paying sectors of the economy. Their educational achievement, in general, falls below average and their unemployment rates are higher than average. They are often disproportionately represented in areas with poorer housing conditions.

The EUMC is publishing a further study on “Perceptions of Discrimination and Islamophobia” at the same time. This study is based on in-depth interviews with members of Muslim organisations and Muslim youth groups in ten EU Member States. The interviews present a snapshot of the opinions, feelings, fears, frustrations, and also the hopes for the future shared by many Muslims in the EU.

“Integration is a two-way process. Many European Muslims acknowledge that they need to do more to engage with wider society. At the same time Europe’s political leaders must make a stronger effort to promote meaningful intercultural dialogue and tackle racism, discrimination and marginalisation more effectively,” said Beate Winkler. “Discrimination and racism are illegal. The key challenge is to strengthen cohesion in European societies. This means respecting diversity, upholding fundamental rights and guaranteeing equal opportunities for all of us.”

“Muslims in the European Union: Discrimination and Islamophobia” and “Perceptions of Discrimination and Islamophobia” can be downloaded at http://eumc.europa.eu/ from 18 December 2006 noon.

Key findings and conclusions
- Regardless of their ethnic background and/or approach to religion, many European Muslims are facing discrimination in employment, education and housing.
- Discrimination against Muslims can be attributed to Islamophobic attitudes as well as to racist and xenophobic resentment, as these elements are often intertwined. Hostility against Muslims must therefore be seen in the more general context of xenophobia and racism towards migrants and minorities.
- It is evident that Muslims are experiencing Islamophobic acts, ranging from verbal threats through to physical attacks, even though data on religiously aggravated incidents is collected on a limited scale.
- The available data on victims of discrimination show that European Muslims are often disproportionately represented in areas with poorer housing conditions, while their educational achievement falls below average and their unemployment rates are higher than average. Muslims are often employed in jobs that require lower qualifications. As a group they are over-represented in low-paying sectors of the economy.
- Many European Muslims, particularly young people, face barriers to their social advancement. This could give rise to a feeling of hopelessness and social exclusion.
- Racism, discrimination and social marginalisation are serious threats to integration and community cohesion.

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:35 PM
Many people aren't interested to work with or hire people who share a different set of values and lifestyle. I do not agree with the tenets of Islam, so I wouldn't see myself hiring a muslim.

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:41 PM
Many people aren't interested to work with or hire people who share a different set of values and lifestyle. I do not agree with the tenets of Islam, so I wouldn't see myself hiring a muslim.
the study finds that muslims have more difficulties finding a job "regardless of their ethnic background and/or approach to religion", which means that they are discriminated against even if they are just nominally muslims. but even so, what you have just said is discrimation plain and simple. that's not acceptable.

roarke
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:42 PM
Genocide is occurring in Darfur.. Arabs are raping and killing black people by the thousands just for their land. These black people are muslims too!

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:45 PM
Genocide is occurring in Darfur.. Arabs are raping and killing black people by the thousands just for their land. These black people are muslims too!
that has nothing to do with the topic, though :shrug:

frenchie
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:45 PM
Anyway in 100 years we will be all muslims....

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:51 PM
the study finds that muslims have more difficulties finding a job "regardless of their ethnic background and/or approach to religion", which means that they are discriminated against even if they are just nominally muslims. but even so, what you have just said is discrimation plain and simple. that's not acceptable.

I know it's discrimination. But regardless of laws and what is acceptable or not, people hire the people they want. And I would hire people I would feel confortable to work with.

fifiricci
Dec 18th, 2006, 02:57 PM
I know it's discrimination. But regardless of laws and what is acceptable or not, people hire the people they want. And I would hire people I would feel confortable to work with.

And then some people on here would criticise muslims for allegedly not wanting to integrate. How are they to do that with any kind of success when there are employers/people like you around?

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 03:19 PM
And then some people on here would criticise muslims for allegedly not wanting to integrate. How are they to do that with any kind of success when there are employers/people like you around?

Each people think differently. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would have no problem to work with muslims.

Having said that, if it was a non-practicing muslim, I wouldn't care. I'm more referring to the type that can't live a day without praying 5 times and is zealot about all the tenets of Islam.

roarke
Dec 18th, 2006, 03:21 PM
that has nothing to do with the topic, though :shrug:

Do unto others..........etc



And then some people on here would criticise muslims for allegedly not wanting to integrate. How are they to do that with any kind of success when there are employers/people like you around?
__________________

Which came first.. the non-integration or the descrimination.....?

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 03:29 PM
Do unto others..........etc



And then some people on here would criticise muslims for allegedly not wanting to integrate. How are they to do that with any kind of success when there are employers/people like you around?
__________________

Which came first.. the non-integration or the descrimination.....?
that's a chicken and egg kinda question. discrimination has always been there and even if it were not the case it wouldn't justify it today. i also don't see how european muslims can be held responsible for what's going on in darfur?

fifiricci
Dec 18th, 2006, 04:53 PM
Each people think differently. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would have no problem to work with muslims.



How convenient. Pass the buck and make it everyone else's responsibility and not yours? You're a tremendous asset to society. :rolleyes:

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 05:23 PM
How convenient. Pass the buck and make it everyone else's responsibility and not yours? You're a tremendous asset to society. :rolleyes:

Maybe I would hire some people that many other employees wouldn't. It works both way.

The majority of people discriminate based on their preference, but it varies from individuals to individuals.

Couver
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:02 PM
Maybe I would hire some people that many other employees wouldn't. It works both way.



Probably, but who knows? You seem to have some deep rooted issues of discrimination and biggotry. I'm assuming you'd only feel comfortable with people who look, think, and act like you, and probably share your prejudices.

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:14 PM
Probably, but who knows? You seem to have some deep rooted issues of discrimination and biggotry. I'm assuming you'd only feel comfortable with people who look, think, and act like you, and probably share your prejudices.

Not really. I don't have a problem with differences, but there are certain sets of values that I reject. I don't agree with some of the tenets of Islam and I want to have as little as possible to do with it.

The Ramadan is one of the issue I have a problem with, but there are a couple more as well.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:15 PM
you complain about discrimination in the EU?

i think we should better talk about discrimination in islamic countries :)

if they don´t get a job in the EU because they are muslim is discrimination, sure
but in islamic countries you can go to jail just for beeing not muslim
or not wearing a burka

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:21 PM
you complain about discrimination in the EU?

i think we should better talk about discrimination in islamic countries :)

if they don´t get a job in the EU because they are muslim is discrimination, sure
but in islamic countries you can go to jail just for beeing not muslim
or not wearing a burka
yeah, that was my dream - the eu turning into saudi arabia :drool: :rolleyes:

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:25 PM
Presumably this report is more trustworthy than the one they did about anti-semitism. :)

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:27 PM
i think a country without discrimination is utopia

and btw. i think we all discriminate people for some stupid reasons

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:27 PM
Presumably this report is more trustworthy than the one they did about anti-semitism. :)
no. i won't ask you why you think that :p

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:29 PM
i think a country without discrimination is utopia
yeah, we all live in some kind of iran, no :p i disagree entirely.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:32 PM
yeah, we all live in some kind of iran, no :p i disagree entirely.


i like your naive way of thinking

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:32 PM
you complain about discrimination in the EU?

i think we should better talk about discrimination in islamic countries :)

if they don´t get a job in the EU because they are muslim is discrimination, sure
but in islamic countries you can go to jail just for beeing not muslim
or not wearing a burka

the fact that there is way much more discrimination in others countries doesn't mean that you can't complain about what's happening here.

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:33 PM
no. i won't ask you why you think that :p

I didn't say what I thought. :p

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:33 PM
the fact that that there is way much more discrimination in others countries doesn't mean that you can't complain about what's happening here.



sure, but why need europe always be "perfect" ????

Helen Lawson
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:34 PM
I think if is was a "normal" Muslim, I wouldn't care, but if he's wearing a turban to the interview, that's sort of a deal-killer for Helen.

I'm a sucker for cute guys and hot chicks. They always get favorable treatment from Helen. Someones someone plain gets the sypathy thing and I go out of my way to be nice and hire, but the cuter the guy or the hotter the chick, the more likely they get an offer!

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:36 PM
i like your naive way of thinking
really? i think europeans who think they are better than their grandparents from the 1930's are not just naive, but also very disrespectful.

they conducted a study and found out it's difficult to be a muslim in europe. europeans don't wanna know, of course.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:39 PM
Well let's try and stop Islamic terrorist attacks on Europe first shall we? How about muslim youths in France burning cars and rioting? When do we get to criticize that?

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:41 PM
really? i think europeans who think they are better than their grandparents from the 1930's are not just naive, but also very disrespectful.

they conducted a study and found out it's difficult to be a muslim in europe. europeans don't wanna know, of course.


noone said it is easy, but imo they should also complain on her muslim leaders
i think all this discrimation is just a result of FEAR, and imo the muslim leader dosn´t help to reduce the fear in europe.

btw. imo Religion is way overrrated

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:44 PM
Well let's try and stop Islamic terrorist attacks on Europe first shall we? How about muslim youths in France burning cars and rioting? When do we get to criticize that?
oh, we got to criticise that enough.

what i would like to see is what europeans have to say about this. it is our own report. this is an eu institution. it's not about america, it's not about muslims. it's about europe. how many people will listen?

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:45 PM
i really have no problems with muslims, i have a lot of muslims as co-worker
and religion isn´t a reason for me to like or dislike them
i like or dislike them for the same reason as i like or dislike other people.

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:47 PM
oh, we got to criticise that enough.

what i would like to see is what europeans have to say about this. it is our own report. this is an eu institution. it's not about america, it's not about muslims. it's about europe. how many people will listen?

I'm waiting for you to comment on their other reports (including the ones they didn't publish) or is your 'no' an admission that they are not trustworthy? :shrug:

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:47 PM
noone said it is easy, but imo they should also complain on her muslim leaders
i think all this discrimation is just a result of FEAR, and imo the muslim leader dosn´t help to reduce the fear in europe.

btw. imo Religion is way overrrated
you think it's a result of fear. the study itself says that "Discrimination against Muslims can be attributed to Islamophobic attitudes as well as to racist and xenophobic resentment, as these elements are often intertwined. Hostility against Muslims must therefore be seen in the more general context of xenophobia and racism towards migrants and minorities." i trust the study more than i would trust my own impressions. easy in this case, mind, because that was my impression anyway.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:48 PM
oh, we got to criticise that enough.

what i would like to see is what europeans have to say about this. it is our own report. this is an eu institution. it's not about america, it's not about muslims. it's about europe. how many people will listen?

Criticizing it is NOT enough! There are still problems. Do you realize that people who attempted terrorism on British planes were muslims who were grown up in the UK? Every muslim must try and distance themselves from terrorism and that means fighting it. It shouldn't be the US army fighting terrorism. Muslims themselves must fight terror. It is their religion and their own people that are causing the problem.

Not all muslims are bad, sure so the good ones must do the fighting.

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:49 PM
I'm waiting for you to comment on their other reports (including the ones they didn't publish) or is your 'no' an admission that they are not trustworthy? :shrug:
give me examples.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:50 PM
oh, we got to criticise that enough.

what i would like to see is what europeans have to say about this. it is our own report. this is an eu institution. it's not about america, it's not about muslims. it's about europe. how many people will listen?


well, i don´t know how it is in other european countries
but in germany we have anti-discrimations-laws
but i agree it is hard to control if they are correctly used
but the same is with women, i would like to know how many women don´t get a job just because they are a women.

i think all this problems can´t be changed fast, it has to grow and this will take time.

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:50 PM
sure, but why need europe always be "perfect" ????

imo, this is not the question.

i think if there's some discrimination in Europe, we need to work to stop it.
for Europe.

because it's not a matter of what whoever wants Europe to do, but what Europe will do to be this respectful continent of freedom that Europe can claim to be.

Well let's try and stop Islamic terrorist attacks on Europe first shall we? How about muslim youths in France burning cars and rioting? When do we get to criticize that?

rioting lolz.

boy i don't know where you check the news but concerning big issues like that you'd better be trying to get multiple sources.

what happened was about social conditions more than anything else.

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:51 PM
Criticizing it is NOT enough! There are still problems. Do you realize that people who attempted terrorism on British planes were muslims who were grown up in the UK? Every muslim must try and distance themselves from terrorism and that means fighting it. It shouldn't be the US army fighting terrorism. Muslims themselves must fight terror. It is their religion and their own people that are causing the problem.

Not all muslims are bad, sure so the good ones must do the fighting.
and the good europeans should do the fighting against discrimination and wars of conquest in islamic countries. otherwise we are as "evil", no? :rolleyes:

that's precisely how the ones you despise think.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:52 PM
you think it's a result of fear. the study itself says that "Discrimination against Muslims can be attributed to Islamophobic attitudes as well as to racist and xenophobic resentment, as these elements are often intertwined. Hostility against Muslims must therefore be seen in the more general context of xenophobia and racism towards migrants and minorities." i trust the study more than i would trust my own impressions. easy in this case, mind, because that was my impression anyway.


well, so we can talk about rassism
isn´t rassism a result of fear?
i think all kind of xenophobia is just a result of fear

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:54 PM
well, i don´t know how it is in other european countries
but in germany we have anti-discrimations-laws
but i agree it is hard to control if they are correctly used
but the same is with women, i would like to know how many women don´t get a job just because they are a women.

i think all this problems can´t be changed fast, it has to grow and this will take time.
but you want your own country to be free, no? new-york gave you a good reply in this regard.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:55 PM
it depends on what you mean with "FREE"

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:55 PM
well, so we can talk about rassism
isn´t rassism a result of fear?
i think all kind of xenophobia is just a result of fear
anti-semitism also was :shrug: at least partly.

that's just a poor excuse.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:57 PM
well, so we can talk about rassism
isn´t rassism a result of fear?
i think all kind of xenophobia is just a result of fear

Yes but in this case we have to ask if fearing islam is right or wrong when you have people like bin laden making threats on TV, masses of people rioting in Pakistan burning embassies and terrorists are being caught red handed.

Is the fear justified?

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:58 PM
give me examples.

OK, I will save you the trouble of googling the words eu and anti-semitism :) and tell you then same people produced a report on the rise in anti-semitic attacks in Europe which concluded that a significant number were perpetrated by muslims...then they buried the findings...then they decided not to publish it (...in case it offended muslims :) ). I suppose thats why you didn't get to post it.

I'm just not sure how seriously I should take anything else they say. :)

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 09:59 PM
anti-semitism also was :shrug: at least partly.

that's just a poor excuse.

Jews were not terrorists. They were victims. Case closed. Low of you to bring up a comparison.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:01 PM
and tell you then same people produced a report on the rise in anti-semitic attacks in Europe which concluded that a significant number were perpetrated by muslims...then they buried the findings...then they decided not to publish it (...in case it offended muslims :) ).

Wow. Unbelievable. Terrorism, anti-semitism and yet we're supposed to think they're the victims? :rolleyes:

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:07 PM
OK, I will save you the trouble of googling the words eu and anti-semitism :) and tell you then same people produced a report on the rise in anti-semitic attacks in Europe which concluded that a significant number were perpetrated by muslims...then they buried the findings...then they decided not to publish it (...in case it offended muslims :) ). I suppose thats why you didn't get to post it.

I'm just not sure how seriously I should take anything else they say. :)
yeah, i'm so scared our future anti-semitism is gonna get inspired by muslims :p

rubbish!

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:08 PM
well, i don´t know how it is in other european countries
but in germany we have anti-discrimations-laws
but i agree it is hard to control if they are correctly used
but the same is with women, i would like to know how many women don´t get a job just because they are a women.


Well, I applied for a job in a halal abattoir and I didn't get it. Maybe I'm just underqualified. Is there an NVQ I can do? :shrug:

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:09 PM
Jews were not terrorists. They were victims. Case closed. Low of you to bring up a comparison.
zionists were actually very terrorist even by today's standards :o

which isn't saying anything, mind :shrug:

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:09 PM
yeah, i'm so scared our future anti-semitism is gonna get inspired by muslims :p

rubbish!

OK, their reports are rubbish. I'm glad we cleared that up. :)

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:12 PM
Yes but in this case we have to ask if fearing islam is right or wrong when you have people like bin laden making threats on TV, masses of people rioting in Pakistan burning embassies and terrorists are being caught red handed.

Is the fear justified?

of course you can be afraid of terrorists.

but you try to be reasonable enough not to want to kill all the New Yorkers because Brooklyn has a serial killer.

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:15 PM
of course you can be afraid of terrorists.

but you try to be reasonable enough not to want to kill all the New Yorkers because Brooklyn has a serial killer.




well, i mean as long i don´t know that the serial-killer has a kind of a serial-killer-army i wouldn´t be afraid

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:16 PM
OK, their reports are rubbish. I'm glad we cleared that up. :)
no!

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:17 PM
of course you can be afraid of terrorists.

but you try to be reasonable enough not to want to kill all the New Yorkers because Brooklyn has a serial killer.



Who said anything about killing them all? :rolleyes:

I'm just sick of the good muslims sitting on their asses and doing nothing when christians, jews and others are dying due to terrorism. Also a lot of them send their money back to Middle East countries and god knows where that ends up. And they probably support charities that who knows where that money ends up.

I've seen maybe 1 or 2 muslims speak up against terrorism and the problems within their religion. That's it. What's the rest of them doing?

matthias
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:17 PM
i think this thread/discussion and the whole discrimination issue just show once more how many problems Religion cause in this world.

i will go to bed now - and i don´t pray to any god

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:18 PM
zionists were actually very terrorist even by today's standards :o

which isn't saying anything, mind :shrug:

You are ridiculous. :rolleyes:

Chris 84
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:28 PM
Who said anything about killing them all? :rolleyes:

I'm just sick of the good muslims sitting on their asses and doing nothing when christians, jews and others are dying due to terrorism. Also a lot of them send their money back to Middle East countries and god knows where that ends up. And they probably support charities that who knows where that money ends up.

I've seen maybe 1 or 2 muslims speak up against terrorism and the problems within their religion. That's it. What's the rest of them doing?

I'm sick of good Christians, Jews and others sitting on their asses and doing nothing when Muslims and others are dying due to America and her allies (sic) blowing people up in the ongoing quest for oil :D

azdaja
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:29 PM
You are ridiculous. :rolleyes:
why? their actions in the 1930' were like that :p

Chris 84
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:30 PM
You are ridiculous. :rolleyes:

He's far from ridiculous.
American, British and Israeli actions of late are quite obviously of a terrorist nature. It isn't only the Muslims that have blown people up lately you know.

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:30 PM
"killing" was an image. maybe it was too much.

i'm just sick of hearing that a whole community is responsible when some of them are violent.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:34 PM
I'm sick of good Christians, Jews and others sitting on their asses and doing nothing when Muslims and others are dying due to America and her allies (sic) blowing people up in the ongoing quest for oil :D

What quest of oil? It's called the war on terror? None of this would be happening if it weren't for 9/11, so blame the blameworthy.

Chris 84
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:36 PM
What quest of oil? It's called the war on terror? None of this would be happening if it weren't for 9/11, so blame the blameworthy.

It is really very sad if you believe that.
Not many people do nowadays.
Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th anyway.

Epigone
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:37 PM
You are ridiculous. :rolleyes:Read this (http://www.amazon.com/Brother-Against-Violence-Extremism-Assassination/dp/0684853442/sr=8-1/qid=1166484998/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-5514875-3993563?ie=UTF8&s=books) and get a clue

King of Prussia
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:37 PM
What's the rest of them doing?

Maybe thinking to what happened to Salman Rushdie, for example.

Martian Willow
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:41 PM
I'm sick of good Christians, Jews and others sitting on their asses and doing nothing when Muslims and others are dying due to America and her allies (sic) blowing people up in the ongoing quest for oil :D

I guess you missed all those marches.

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:43 PM
What quest of oil? It's called the war on terror? None of this would be happening if it weren't for 9/11, so blame the blameworthy.

basically 9/11 allowed United-States to do everything with legitimacy?

please, we all know that there are some interests in the fight against terrorism that are not exactly linked with saving life.

quest of oil also implied so damages that would have needed justification anyway.

Chris 84
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:44 PM
I guess you missed all those marches.

No, but I didn't miss the re-elections of Bush and Blair either.

Sam L
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:45 PM
Read this (http://www.amazon.com/Brother-Against-Violence-Extremism-Assassination/dp/0684853442/sr=8-1/qid=1166484998/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-5514875-3993563?ie=UTF8&s=books) and get a clue

I don't read anti-semitic bullshit propaganda. And I was specifically talking more about Jews living in US and Europe in the past or now. Not Israel.

new-york
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:47 PM
I've seen maybe 1 or 2 muslims speak up against terrorism and the problems within their religion. That's it. What's the rest of them doing?

what do you expect from the common muslim man who's living his life?
ask them, get in the streets & ask some muslim about that, i'm sure you'll find out that they are aginst all that violence.

they are victims of terrorism too if they are automatically labelled terrorists because of their religion.
they aren't more responsible because some men claim that they are killing people in the name of a religion that IS not what they want to make it.

Epigone
Dec 18th, 2006, 10:55 PM
I don't read anti-semitic bullshit propaganda.WTF?

How can that book be characterised in such a way? :scratch:And I was specifically talking more about Jews living in US and Europe in the past or now. Not Israel.Okay :shrug:

Qrystyna
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:12 AM
I don't read anti-semitic bullshit propaganda. And I was specifically talking more about Jews living in US and Europe in the past or now. Not Israel.

Errrm if you looked at the listing, the book is written by Ehud Sprinzak, a professor in political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem... and an israeli jew. :p

And besides, you are one to talk, most of what you post is anti-islamic and pro-imperialist bullshit propaganda. :wavey:

Veritas
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:03 AM
you complain about discrimination in the EU?

i think we should better talk about discrimination in islamic countries :)

if they don´t get a job in the EU because they are muslim is discrimination, sure
but in islamic countries you can go to jail just for beeing not muslim
or not wearing a burka

Typical line used by closet racists: "if they do this to us, then we have every right to give it back to them."

In other words, instead of condeming racism, you find excuses for it :rolleyes:

Just so you know, discrimination in the Middle East doesn't justify discrimination in Europe. Try to remember that in the future so you (and other like-minded people) can avoid looking like hypocrites.

Veritas
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:07 AM
Criticizing it is NOT enough! There are still problems. Do you realize that people who attempted terrorism on British planes were muslims who were grown up in the UK? Every muslim must try and distance themselves from terrorism and that means fighting it. It shouldn't be the US army fighting terrorism. Muslims themselves must fight terror. It is their religion and their own people that are causing the problem.

Not all muslims are bad, sure so the good ones must do the fighting.

What exactly are you trying to imply there? :confused:

Fingon
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:23 AM
He's far from ridiculous.
American, British and Israeli actions of late are quite obviously of a terrorist nature. It isn't only the Muslims that have blown people up lately you know.

only American, British and Israeli?, funny that while we are talking here, the Palestinian are killing each other, they executed, yes, executed three children because they didn't like their father.

Oh sorry, it must be the CIA or the Mossad doing that, muslims can do no wrong

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:26 AM
only American, British and Israeli?, funny that while we are talking here, the Palestinian are killing each other, they executed, yes, executed three children because they didn't like their father.

Oh sorry, it must be the CIA or the Mossad doing that, muslims can do no wrong

:haha:

Fingon I wouldn't even bother with these bleeding heart liberals anymore. They think USA, UK and Israel are the enemies and yet they live in those countries and they think the Islamic governments will accept their gay, liberal atheist asses with open hands. LOL!

Fingon
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:28 AM
basically 9/11 allowed United-States to do everything with legitimacy?

in geopolitical terms, yes
that's what supports certain conspiracy theories (which I disagree with).

They have the resources, they have the weapons, they only needed to convince their public opinion that they needed to go to war, and they could be angry enough so nobody would dare to oppose them.

In moral terms, it's a longer discussion, to summarize: yes in Afghanistan, no in Iraq.

In legal terms, well, what is a law if there is no way to enforce it? that's what basically the UN is, a wish list.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:31 AM
in geopolitical terms, yes
that's what supports certain conspiracy theories (which I disagree with).

They have the resources, they have the weapons, they only needed to convince their public opinion that they needed to go to war, and they could be angry enough so nobody would dare to oppose them.

In moral terms, it's a longer discussion, to summarize: yes in Afghanistan, no in Iraq.

In legal terms, well, what is a law if there is no way to enforce it? that's what basically the UN is, a wish list.

I'm so glad that Kofi Annan is gone. That guy's only good for singing Kumbaya. And yes UN is basically a wish list, no results.

SelesFan70
Dec 19th, 2006, 05:31 AM
Studies like this one are always slanted towards whomever did the study. I'm sure it's not as bad as they make it, nor as rosy as others make it. It's probably somewhere near the middle. :)

Mother_Marjorie
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:01 AM
Criticizing it is NOT enough! There are still problems. Do you realize that people who attempted terrorism on British planes were muslims who were grown up in the UK? Every muslim must try and distance themselves from terrorism and that means fighting it. It shouldn't be the US army fighting terrorism. Muslims themselves must fight terror. It is their religion and their own people that are causing the problem.

Not all muslims are bad, sure so the good ones must do the fighting.

You make very valid points, Sam.

The problem being that the everyday Muslim around the world is doing NOTHING to stop their radical brothers from spreading terrorism. NOTHING.

And until they reign in their own, Muslims around the world will be looked down upon by the rest of the world.

Dementieva_Dude
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:51 AM
You make very valid points, Sam.

The problem being that the everyday Muslim around the world is doing NOTHING to stop their radical brothers from spreading terrorism. NOTHING.

And until they reign in their own, Muslims around the world will be looked down upon by the rest of the world.

EVERY religion has extremists that can't be "reigned in" by the majority, yet people don't disrespect Catholics/Christians/Jews/Hindus etc for this reason. Why the discrepancy?

fifiricci
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:07 AM
sure, but why need europe always be "perfect" ????

Because some Europeans hold themselves up as being culturally and morally superior, that's why. A number of "Western European" posters on here really and seriously believe that they are culturally and racially superior, just because they are from a country like Holland, Belgium, France, the UK or Germany. ;)

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:22 AM
Because some Europeans hold themselves up as being culturally and morally superior, that's why. A number of "Western European" posters on here really and seriously believe that they are culturally and racially superior, just because they are from a country like Holland, Belgium, France, the UK or Germany. ;)
Care to give names instead of just vague accusations? ;)

fifiricci
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:47 AM
Care to give names instead of just vague accusations? ;)

No thanks. Some of them know where I live! :help:

But no worries, they will become apparent soon enough, without me having to identify them (or else they will have to keep stumm on this topic, which will be rather nice) ;)

hingis-seles
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:48 AM
you complain about discrimination in the EU?

i think we should better talk about discrimination in islamic countries :)

if they don´t get a job in the EU because they are muslim is discrimination, sure
but in islamic countries you can go to jail just for beeing not muslim
or not wearing a burka

I live in an Islamic country. I have friends who are Christians and Hindus, who live here, and none of them have been sent to jail for not being Muslims. No female relative of mine wears a burqa or covers her head in any way. None of them have served any time.

Epigone
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:51 AM
Care to give names instead of just vague accusations? ;)Care to explain this (http://www.wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=9650318&postcount=68) post?

hingis-seles
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:59 AM
what do you expect from the common muslim man who's living his life?
ask them, get in the streets & ask some muslim about that, i'm sure you'll find out that they are aginst all that violence.

they are victims of terrorism too if they are automatically labelled terrorists because of their religion.
they aren't more responsible because some men claim that they are killing people in the name of a religion that IS not what they want to make it.

Thank you for summing up so succintly, the point I was going to make.

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 10:15 AM
i was very annoyed last night because of something that has nothing to do with this board and that influenced some of my posts in a negative way :o i will try to give more articulate replies now :p

to matthias: i think what you're saying is not alright. europe is far from perfect, but it's alright and it's much better than in the past. and it's much better than in the past because a lot of people wanted to improve things. some of them wanted to create a utopia, others were more realistic. but they all worked towards "utopian" goals and that's what counts. they didn't waste their time on finding excuses for injustice which is what you basically do, regardless of your intentions. discrimination in other places does not justify discrimination here. you certainly don't want workers from the middle east to be treated like in saudi arabia (a big problem hardly ever reported here)? places where you can find second-class citizens are not free in my opinion and that's not good for any society. and of course islamophobia and xenophobia are at least partly a result of fear. in fact, that's what the word "phobia" means. but every kind of phobia is a disorder and not desirable. and fear is only a part of the story.

one of the more worrying aspects of all this is not simply discrimination. a lot of politicians in europe are using islamophobia in order to implement some reactionary laws that will affect all of us.

sam l :rolleyes: don't call me a liberal :p as for the rest: no comment :tape:

to the poster formerly known as catherine :p i heard about that report, but there is a lot of twisting and turning around of facts on your part. if people all over europe are so afraid of muslim reactions then how come they still manage to discriminate against them? :confused: i read negative stuff about muslims every day, a lot of that stuff is also very hateful, so i don't have the impression that people are so scared of them.

and to people who complain that muslims are not doing enough against terrorism - just take a look at how people react to findings about discrimination in europe. almost instantly people are finding excuses. accordingly, muslims can readily return the question - what are we doing about this? and have we done enough against wars our armies wage in their countries? can we really claim a higher moral ground as long as this is happening?

zut16
Dec 19th, 2006, 10:50 AM
EVERY religion has extremists that can't be "reigned in" by the majority, yet people don't disrespect Catholics/Christians/Jews/Hindus etc for this reason. Why the discrepancy?

Amen. :worship:

new-york
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:26 PM
:haha:

Fingon I wouldn't even bother with these bleeding heart liberals anymore. They think USA, UK and Israel are the enemies and yet they live in those countries and they think the Islamic governments will accept their gay, liberal atheist asses with open hands. LOL!

first you don't even bother to read the article that finally was about a rabbi.
then you don't even bother to read a so-called "anti-jew bullshit"article that finally was written by a jew.
now you don't even bother to discuss because we are what?

please.

we are not saying that some islamic countries are the best place to live in, we are just tryin not to lack nuance.
if that was so good there, we would be there. there are so many things i would want some islamic country to change, but first, i try not to mix cultural differences & things that i think should be corrected because it does not respect human rights.

i know that these past years, muslims terrorists are giving the world some big troubles & i know that some government hasn't been clear enough on their positions.
yet, you choose to point the muslim as the ennemy.

a terrorist is my ennemy. a muslim is not.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:29 PM
first you don't even bother to read the article that finally was about a rabbi.
then you don't even bother to read a so-called "anti-jew bullshit"article that finally was written by a jew.
now you don't even bother to discuss because we are what?

please.

we are not saying that some islamic countries are the best place to live in, we are just tryin not to lack nuance.
if that was so good there, we would be there. there are so many things i would want some islamic country to change, but first, i try not to mix cultural differences & things that i think should be corrected because it does not respect human rights.

i know that these past years, muslims terrorists are giving the world some big troubles & i know that some government hasn't been clear enough on their positions.
yet, you choose to point the muslim as the ennemy.

a terrorist is my ennemy. a muslim is not.

When and where did I say a muslim was the enemy? :rolleyes:

Veritas
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:31 PM
first you don't even bother to read the article that finally was about a rabbi.
then you don't even bother to read a so-called "anti-jew bullshit"article that finally was written by a jew.
now you don't even bother to discuss because we are what?

please.

we are not saying that some islamic countries are the best place to live in, we are just tryin not to lack nuance.
if that was so good there, we would be there. there are so many things i would want some islamic country to change, but first, i try not to mix cultural differences & things that i think should be corrected because it does not respect human rights.

i know that these past years, muslims terrorists are giving the world some big troubles & i know that some government hasn't been clear enough on their positions.
yet, you choose to point the muslim as the ennemy.

a terrorist is my ennemy. a muslim is not.


WTAWorld should set up a sticky thread for posts like these to remind us not everyone's a hopeless cause :yeah:

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:37 PM
But when you see things like the below, are we supposed to be ok with it? :(

In her article “Anti-Semitism: The Old Hatred Returns,” associate editor Pamela Bone states that “according to a European Union report, most of the anti-Semitism in France—the burning of Jewish schools, defacing of graves and attacks on individuals—is coming from young Muslim immigrants, and anti-Muslim feeling is not coming from France’s Jewish community, which is old and established and has better things to do than deface mosques.


“In the Arab world, hatred of Jews pours out on television, newspapers and mosques: Israel is to blame for every wrong that besets Arab countries; the Holocaust is either a lie or didn’t go far enough; the ancient Christian ‘blood libel’, that Jews kill children and use their blood to make Passover bread, is repeated in mainstream newspapers. It is common wisdom that Jews were behind the September 11 attacks, and that Jews persuaded the Americans to invade Iraq” (The Age).


From: http://www.realtruth.org/articles/253-wice.html

That EU report is what Willow was talking about before.

Epigone
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:38 PM
first you don't even bother to read the article that finally was about a rabbi.
then you don't even bother to read a so-called "anti-jew bullshit"article that finally was written by a jew.
now you don't even bother to discuss because we are what?

please.

we are not saying that some islamic countries are the best place to live in, we are just tryin not to lack nuance.
if that was so good there, we would be there. there are so many things i would want some islamic country to change, but first, i try not to mix cultural differences & things that i think should be corrected because it does not respect human rights.

i know that these past years, muslims terrorists are giving the world some big troubles & i know that some government hasn't been clear enough on their positions.
yet, you choose to point the muslim as the ennemy.

a terrorist is my ennemy. a muslim is not.
Thank you for taking the time to explain things so well :bowdown:

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:47 PM
Care to explain this (http://www.wtaworld.com/showpost.php?p=9650318&postcount=68) post?

Just because I didn't bother read the book or the author does not mean what I said isn't true.

There are some disillusioned people in this world who thinks that their governments are out to get them and that their own people are their enemy.

I remember some American Jews were criticizing Israel for invading Lebanon. Whilst, it may be wrong to use "anti-semitism" on paper for them and for this Rabbi, stupidity, delusion and naïveté are probably strong alternates that will go to describe them.

And like I said before I was talking about European and other diaspora Jews been not responsible for terrorist acts. That book is only about Israel. But what Israel's trying to achieve is not terrorism. But then again there are Americans that think their current administration is a terrorist group. :rolleyes:

Asif_Nawaz
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:50 PM
Finally!! A positive article. Ok, I agree with Sam L. Muslims like myself and others on this board have to fight extremist notions that are springing up in our religion. THESE ARE INCORRECT. It's some sort of warped version of the Quran that the Taliban and all those other terrorist groups have come up with. Also, many people who are Muslims aren't "extremists" or "terrorists", so if those people don't speak the Western world will automatically assume that everyone is a terrorist. No offence but if the Muslims of this world who aren't extremists don't speak up and don't make a positive impression on this world then every good thing that the Muslims have done over the years will evaporate. The "savior" of the Muslim world is not Osama Bin Laden. The "saviors" of the Muslim world are those Muslims who speak up against terrorism and extremism.

Anyways, that is my opinion and It's not gonna change.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 12:57 PM
Finally!! A positive article. Ok, I agree with Sam L. Muslims like myself and others on this board have to fight extremist notions that are springing up in our religion. THESE ARE INCORRECT. It's some sort of warped version of the Quran that the Taliban and all those other terrorist groups have come up with. Also, many people who are Muslims aren't "extremists" or "terrorists", so if those people don't speak the Western world will automatically assume that everyone is a terrorist. No offence but if the Muslims of this world who aren't extremists don't speak up and don't make a positive impression on this world then every good thing that the Muslims have done over the years will evaporate. The "savior" of the Muslim world is not Osama Bin Laden. The "saviors" of the Muslim world are those Muslims who speak up against terrorism and extremism.

Anyways, that is my opinion and It's not gonna change.

Thanks. :kiss:

There was this expat Iranian lady who was a muslim went on I think UK TV and criticized Hezbollah and all that. She was saying that she gets death threats all the time but she'll still speak up. I think we need more like her.

Right now, we need everyone to be against terrorism but unfortunately what we're getting is people who are more concerned with discrimination and racism.

Guess what?

There's discrimination and racism against everybody! Anti-semitism still exists in Europe, you think all Blacks are living it up? How about Asians? What about Armenian christians? What about the poor Sikhs? :rolleyes:

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:07 PM
Right now, we need everyone to be against terrorism but unfortunately what we're getting is people who are more concerned with discrimination and racism.
i'm concerned with many things. being obsessed with just one thing can stupify people.

and you failed to notice that the poster you thanked to said that the article i posted is positive:
Finally!! A positive article.
and to be honest i'm pretty sure that people who care about discrimination against muslims are more likely to reach out to moderate and progressive muslims than bigots who constantly bitch about islam.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:14 PM
i'm concerned with many things. being obsessed with just one thing can stupify people.

and you failed to notice that the poster you thanked to said that the article i posted is positive:

and to be honest i'm pretty sure that people who care about discrimination against muslims are more likely to reach out to moderate and progressive muslims than bigots who constantly bitch about islam.

He's saying it's a positive article about muslims finally. And it is, so what?

Funny, you've never spoken up about any other discrimination. What were your feelings exactly on that ATP player who called a black person a monkey or something? :rolleyes:

And like I said anything muslims are experiencing in the EU, Jews are too and probably Sikhs and blacks too. So what do you have to say about that?

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:26 PM
He's saying it's a positive article about muslims finally. And it is, so what?
i have just explained what in the post you quoted.

Funny, you've never spoken up about any other discrimination. What were your feelings exactly on that ATP player who called a black person a monkey or something? :rolleyes:

And like I said anything muslims are experiencing in the EU, Jews are too and probably Sikhs and blacks too. So what do you have to say about that?
i think i said quite clearly that i think that player is very stupid and should be punished. anyway, this is more than just verbal abuse and if you bothered to read anything you would see that this report does mention discrimination against blacks as well. my posting record is quite clear in this regard - i oppose racism in every shape and form.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:31 PM
their educational achievement falls below average and their unemployment rates are higher than average. Muslims are often employed in jobs that require lower qualifications. As a group they are over-represented in low-paying sectors of the economy.

It's EU's problem that they're not getting good grades? :rolleyes:

Sorry but this whole thing just seems a "cry me a river" story and diverts from the real attention we should be paying to extremism that exists in the Middle east as has been acknowledged by everyone. That's the real problem.

If you want to make this a big issue, make it a big issue about every minority in the EU not just one. They're not special.

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:53 PM
It's EU's problem that they're not getting good grades? :rolleyes:

Sorry but this whole thing just seems a "cry me a river" story and diverts from the real attention we should be paying to extremism that exists in the Middle east as has been acknowledged by everyone. That's the real problem.

If you want to make this a big issue, make it a big issue about every minority in the EU not just one. They're not special.
it is about other minorities as well. how many times i have to repeat it? this particular report is about muslims, but this institution makes reports about other minorities as well. go to their website and you will see. i posted this report simply because it was released that day.

and yes, it is the eu's problem that they are not getting good grades.

Martian Willow
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:53 PM
Because some Europeans hold themselves up as being culturally and morally superior, that's why. A number of "Western European" posters on here really and seriously believe that they are culturally and racially superior, just because they are from a country like Holland, Belgium, France, the UK or Germany. ;)

If there are different cultures it follows that some cultures are better than others (culturally and morally), don't you think? :)

Qrystyna
Dec 19th, 2006, 01:58 PM
Just because I didn't bother read the book or the author does not mean what I said isn't true.

There are some disillusioned people in this world who thinks that their governments are out to get them and that their own people are their enemy.

I remember some American Jews were criticizing Israel for invading Lebanon. Whilst, it may be wrong to use "anti-semitism" on paper for them and for this Rabbi, stupidity, delusion and naïveté are probably strong alternates that will go to describe them.

And like I said before I was talking about European and other diaspora Jews been not responsible for terrorist acts. That book is only about Israel. But what Israel's trying to achieve is not terrorism. But then again there are Americans that think their current administration is a terrorist group. :rolleyes:

Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin. :)

Anyway you seem to think Americans and Israelis should not be critical of their government. Why is that? It is like you think everything they do is 100% correct, and if we question it we are some kind of liberal, terrorist sympathizing scum! You sound like a typical republican - you only believe in democracy and free speech when it is convenient to you.

roarke
Dec 19th, 2006, 05:05 PM
Hate seem almost intrinsic in human beings and this mostly is based on fear. Even today Black people are still being hated simply because of the color of their skin. Greed also is another major motivating factor. In today’s society it is religion and religious intolerance that is leading the way to hatred intertwined with ethnicity. Ironically religion is supposed to teach us how to love, respect and exist in harmony with each other. For most people they use religion as a political tool, and this is usually accompanied by violence. Each religion has its extremists but most recently we have been hearing and seeing a lot from the Islamic Muslims. Presently the extremism in Islamic religion is magnified because of the glaring lights of today’s media, their atrocities are more apparent for all to see.

As a member of a group that has experienced and is still experiencing racism from Arabs, Jews, Whites, some Hispanics and some Asians to varying degrees, I must say the mindset that has been presented in the media about Muslims and Islam is rather troubling. This has led me to dislike Islam because it does not seem to allow you personal choice. It seems as a non-muslim you cannot live without fear of reprisals of some sort in a muslim country. You are not allowed equal rights as muslims. That is no way different than being discriminated by the white establishment, by the KKK, or the skinheads for being Jewish, black or of any other minority group. I dislike Islam it immensely because of the way it treats or allow women to be treated. When I read or see the people in Afghanistan and how they were made to live it hurts my very soul that the leaders of a religion could treat their women and children in that way under the guise of religion. How can anyone pray to a god who allows a husband to beat you, or if you are raped by no fault of your own you are put to death. There are just too many sins that are committed in the name Islam against women for me to accept that religion. Christianity as a religion had it roots in similar teaching but as least it has become enlightened enough to value women. Islam has not change in centuries. It seems it is still predicate on barbaric cultural practices. I dislike Islam immensely because of its apparent tit for tat nature. It does not seem to allow for forgiveness. It seems so focused on exacting revenge that anything which could be gained from it is lost in it’s need to punish anyone and everyone who does not agree with it or even criticize it in any way.

Moderate muslims must be aware also that if the extremist practice of Islam continues to grow you will lose as well as us westerners. The freedom permitted you by living in a western society will be eroded and you will be faced with the extremist as well. There will be nowhere to hide. Right now it is easy to hide behind the freedoms that the Western society allows you! You can defend your religion easily, I am a muslim but I have never…. Or I am a muslin but we don’t… the problem is you might not but there are many other who will. How much of your charitable contributions are reaching the poor? How much have you given back to your people to ensure that they rise above the poverty of their lives, their lack of education, and diseases so they don’t fall victim to extreme Islam? I see Islam as a religion that feeds on the disparity in society but does nothing to reward these people that swell it’s mosques.

Another question for moderate muslims, what will happen to your mothers, sisters, and children if all we have as the basis of your religion; the extremist version that most of you are defending tirelessly today.

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 05:44 PM
I must say the mindset that has been presented in the media about Muslims and Islam is rather troubling. This has led me to dislike Islam
well, that's a part of the problem. it's obvious from your post that you know nearly nothing about islam, muslims or their countries. ignorance and fear are a dangerous combination.

i agree that the way muslims are being presented in the media is troubling, but the troubling part is that the media in free societies can be so misleading.

Lord Nelson
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:00 PM
I have to agree with roarke. I dislike Islam as well but have no problem with other religions. Within Islam perhaps the Druze sect is fine since they do not believe in jihad.
Oh Azadza just because roarke dislike Islam does not mean he knows little about the religion.....

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 06:23 PM
I have to agree with roarke. I dislike Islam as well but have no problem with other religions. Within Islam perhaps the Druze sect is fine since they do not believe in jihad.
Oh Azadza just because roarke dislike Islam does not eman he knows little about the religion.....
of course not. that he does not know much about it is obvious from the rest of his post. i just highlighted the part about the media because that seems to be the source of the confusion.

roarke
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:45 PM
well, that's a part of the problem. it's obvious from your post that you know nearly nothing about islam, muslims or their countries. ignorance and fear are a dangerous combination.

i agree that the way muslims are being presented in the media is troubling, but the troubling part is that the media in free societies can be so misleading.

You haven't presented any arguments that shed any better light on it either. In fact your posts are so defensive, prejudicial,, bating and bordering on hateful (for the same western society whose freedoms you enjoy), simply cements people's fears and views.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:49 PM
and yes, it is the eu's problem that they are not getting good grades.

:lol: Biggest load of BS I've ever seen. So what's the solution then? If everyone requires 50% to pass, just make it 30% for a muslim?

Please tell me I'd really like to know.

roarke
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:50 PM
well, that's a part of the problem. it's obvious from your post that you know nearly nothing about islam, muslims or their countries. ignorance and fear are a dangerous combination.

i agree that the way muslims are being presented in the media is troubling, but the troubling part is that the media in free societies can be so misleading.

and the media in Muslim countries are so fair minded.... wow! I just love how they present the facts clear, fair and straight without bias.

You are one hypocrite and angry muslim..

By the way Islam is just one of the religions I studied in school.

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:51 PM
Spin, spin, spin, spin, spin. :)

Anyway you seem to think Americans and Israelis should not be critical of their government. Why is that? It is like you think everything they do is 100% correct, and if we question it we are some kind of liberal, terrorist sympathizing scum! You sound like a typical republican - you only believe in democracy and free speech when it is convenient to you.

I'm very critical of the US administration's current policy on the environment and climate change. Your point?

Sam L
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:54 PM
You are one hypocrite and angry muslim..


That's my conclusion too.

There are other muslims like ajmojeca who can see from the other perspective, there are some who can't.

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:55 PM
:lol: Biggest load of BS I've ever seen. So what's the solution then? If everyone requires 50% to pass, just make it 30% for a muslim?

Please tell me I'd really like to know.
every country is responsible for education of their own children :shrug: it's really as simple as that.

Chris 84
Dec 19th, 2006, 07:57 PM
and the media in Muslim countries are so fair minded.... wow! I just love how they present the facts clear, fair and straight without bias.

You are one hypocrite and angry muslim..

By the way Islam is just one of the religions I studied in school.

You went to school? :eek:

In this instance, azdaja is certainly not being a hypocrite, and nor is he a Muslim. Of course he is angry.....anyone who doesn't like discrimination should be angry about what's going on.

azdaja
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:03 PM
and the media in Muslim countries are so fair minded.... wow! I just love how they present the facts clear, fair and straight without bias.

You are one hypocrite and angry muslim..

By the way Islam is just one of the religions I studied in school.
i'm glad i didn't go to the same school as you :help:

the media in islamic countries suck, true. the media in the west are(/is)* better, that's also true, but it's still far from perfect, in spite of all the freedoms western journalists enjoy compared to others.

and one thing that clearly proves that you and sam l have no idea what you are talking about is that i am not a muslim and noone from my family is. my parents are nominally christian and i am a convinced atheist. and actually i like islam as much as i like other religions - not at all.

*not sure what's grammatically correct here :scratch:

Lord Nelson
Dec 19th, 2006, 08:44 PM
After all this discussion on islam and 'islamophobia' (funny I never hear the word christianophobia, in nations like Turkey who fear christianity) i dislike Islam even more. What is the need for them to victimize themselves. How about minorities in Muslim nations. Can't they do the same as well? All of the arab nations hush up with what's going on in Darfur.

At least there is one thing I have in common with azadza. She dislikes all religions. I dislike one religion in particular.

Veritas
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:33 AM
Instead of attacking the "religion", why not focus on those who are actually responsible? :confused: I'm sure Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc., don't like being labelled under a blanket statement, so why should Muslims be subjected to such treatment? Surely if you take the time to look for anti-Muslim articles, then you can make the effort to understand maybe it's certain individuals - rather than the doctrines - who are responsible for all the racket. For example, not many realise "jihad" is an arbitrary term that has good or bad connotations depending on how it's applied. Just as there are problems with interpretation in the Christian world, the same could be said for Islam as well. Is that so difficult to understand? :shrug:

Qrystyna
Dec 20th, 2006, 02:18 AM
Instead of attacking the "religion", why not focus on those who are actually responsible? :confused: I'm sure Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc., don't like being labelled under a blanket statement, so why should Muslims be subjected to such treatment? Surely if you take the time to look for anti-Muslim articles, then you can make the effort to understand maybe it's certain individuals - rather than the doctrines - who are responsible for all the racket. For example, not many realise "jihad" is an arbitrary term that has good or bad connotations depending on how it's applied. Just as there are problems with interpretation in the Christian world, the same could be said for Islam as well. Is that so difficult to understand? :shrug:

They just need somebody to scapegoat for all the world's problems. It reminds me alot of how Hitler used the jews as scapegoats for all the hardships in Germany.

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 02:59 AM
The difference is nobody could commit a holocaust against muslims in Europe because they would have to fight past hordes of white western liberal shoe-throwing cultural relativists first. Muslims are the most over-protected 'discriminated against' minority the world has ever seen, and meanwhile synagogues are being burned down and a tiny country smaller than Wales is blamed for all the problems of the entire middle East. :)

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 03:03 AM
Instead of attacking the "religion", why not focus on those who are actually responsible? :confused: I'm sure Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etc., don't like being labelled under a blanket statement, so why should Muslims be subjected to such treatment? Surely if you take the time to look for anti-Muslim articles, then you can make the effort to understand maybe it's certain individuals - rather than the doctrines - who are responsible for all the racket. For example, not many realise "jihad" is an arbitrary term that has good or bad connotations depending on how it's applied. Just as there are problems with interpretation in the Christian world, the same could be said for Islam as well. Is that so difficult to understand? :shrug:

You've just given one reason of many why religion is stupid. Islam is a religion. Therefore Islam is stupid.

mykarma
Dec 20th, 2006, 03:09 AM
and the media in Muslim countries are so fair minded.... wow! I just love how they present the facts clear, fair and straight without bias.

You are one hypocrite and angry muslim..

By the way Islam is just one of the religions I studied in school.
Roarke,

Because you studied Islam in school doesn't mean that it applies to all of Islam. I'm a Buddhist and took a religious class which included Buddhism. Of course I thought that the portion of the class would be easy for me. As it turned out, I had more difficulty with that part of the class because the Buddhism that was being taught in that class was nothing like the Buddhism I practice. I'm now taking nursing classes and the Buddhism they are teaching there is even different than the one that we had in the religious class. All I'm saying is that what you might learn in a class does not necessarily apply on all of Islam.

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 03:17 AM
I think its entirely fair to blame Islam for Islamists.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 05:55 AM
every country is responsible for education of their own children :shrug: it's really as simple as that.

In what world does education equal results?

If you teach two children and one child is getting 100% and the other is failing, is it the fault of the teacher? :rolleyes:

They are getting an education, they're just not doing well probably because they're busy burning down synagogues or cars. :rolleyes:

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 06:01 AM
They just need somebody to scapegoat for all the world's problems. It reminds me alot of how Hitler used the jews as scapegoats for all the hardships in Germany.

With one big difference. Jews did NOT:

http://fixco1.com/xbush911.jpg

http://www.theblackrepublican.net/images/Danish%20Cartoon%20Protest%20Flag%20Burns.jpg

http://www.asiaburning.com/images/r_bali_bombing.jpg

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41286000/jpg/_41286785_tubecarriage1203.jpg

... do all that.

BIG difference. A scapegoat is when one side is without fault. It changes when one side has faults even if it's a small minority doing it.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 11:12 AM
BIG difference. A scapegoat is when one side is without fault. It changes when one side has faults even if it's a small minority doing it.
nonsense. a scapegoat is someone who is blamed for errors and crimes of others. it would be wrong to blame all americans for torture in places like abu ghraib, for example :p people who are responsible for a crime should be punished, not those who happen to share their nationality or religion.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 11:16 AM
The difference is nobody could commit a holocaust against muslims in Europe because they would have to fight past hordes of white western liberal shoe-throwing cultural relativists first.
they existed in the nazi germany as well, only they were called "communists" back then. nazis got rid of them quickly in concentration camps, then proceeded to kill jews.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 11:19 AM
nonsense. a scapegoat is someone who is blamed for errors and crimes of others. it would be wrong to blame all americans for torture in places like abu ghraib, for example :p people who are responsible for a crime should be punished, not those who happen to share their nationality or religion.

Yes but you just shot yourself in the foot there.

Yes it would be wrong to blame all Americans for torture in places like abu ghraib.

But suppose I made that comment:

"Americans are to blame for torture in places in Abu Ghraib".

You can't come back and say Americans are the scapegoats. Because it is true that some Americans did do it.

That's why the word scapegoat for Muslims doesn't work either.

If you want to say Sikhs are the scapegoats for terrorism worldwide. Ok I'll give you that. Did you know that more Sikhs than Muslims were murdered in post 9/11 USA? They're the real victims and scapegoats. Not muslims.

And Jews pre-Shoah were also scapegoats because they didn't do anything they were accused off. Not all, not any, not one. Like the Sikhs.

So please, use correct terms.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 11:30 AM
Yes but you just shot yourself in the foot there.

Yes it would be wrong to blame all Americans for torture in places like abu ghraib.

But suppose I made that comment:

"Americans are to blame for torture in places in Abu Ghraib".

You can't come back and say Americans are the scapegoats. Because it is true that some Americans did do it.
i will actually tell you that there is a strong anti-american sentiment in a lot of places, so no, i did not shoot myself in the foot. is american nation to be blamed for abu-ghraib and are americans inherently violent? of course not. and if anyone would discriminate against americans that would be wrong as well.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 11:40 AM
i will actually tell you that there is a strong anti-american sentiment in a lot of places, so no, i did not shoot myself in the foot. is american nation to be blamed for abu-ghraib and are americans inherently violent? of course not. and if anyone would discriminate against americans that would be wrong as well.

Yes yes we all know that. But the point is Americans cannot be scapegoats for Abu Ghraib. It was their people that actually did it. Not all Americans did it but the people who did it were Americans.

I hate those people who abused others in Abu Ghraib. THERE I said it. And the US military and American people should make sure abuses like that do not happen again (and they have been making a lot of effort). And this is EXACTLY the same thing I've been saying about Muslims.

So if I'm not anti-American then I'm not anti-Muslim.

Thank you for bringing up this brilliant example, now I've got a perfect reason as to why muslims shall never be called scapegoats for Islamic terrorism like 9/11. :lol:

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:09 PM
Yes yes we all know that. But the point is Americans cannot be scapegoats for Abu Ghraib. It was their people that actually did it. Not all Americans did it but the people who did it were Americans.

I hate those people who abused others in Abu Ghraib. THERE I said it. And the US military and American people should make sure abuses like that do not happen again (and they have been making a lot of effort). And this is EXACTLY the same thing I've been saying about Muslims.

So if I'm not anti-American then I'm not anti-Muslim.

Thank you for bringing up this brilliant example, now I've got a perfect reason as to why muslims shall never be called scapegoats for Islamic terrorism like 9/11. :lol:
your brain doesn't work like brains of other people, it seems. you are not saying the same about americans and muslims at all.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:11 PM
your brain doesn't work like brains of other people, it seems. you are not saying the same about americans and muslims at all.
Well then how differently am I saying it, Oh Great one? :rolleyes:

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:30 PM
This book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087/sr=8-1/qid=1166620962/ref=sr_1_1/026-8918423-3921239?ie=UTF8&s=books) blames communism for the deaths of over 100 million people, among other things. It does not blame communists, since clearly there are communists or people who call themselves communists who were not responsible for any deaths. Prejudice against communism is not prejudice against communists, and prejudice against Islam is not prejudice against muslims. However, I think it would be fair to say that the only people responsible for the perpetuation of communism is communists. Its such a simple point. :)

Moreover, Americans and muslims are not analogous because people don't choose to be Americans.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:33 PM
This book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087/sr=8-1/qid=1166620962/ref=sr_1_1/026-8918423-3921239?ie=UTF8&s=books) blames communism for the deaths of over 100 million people, among other things. It does not blame communists, since clearly there are communists or people who call themselves communists who were not responsible for any deaths. Prejudice against communism is not prejudice against communists, and prejudice against Islam is not prejudice against muslims. Its such a simple point. :)

Moreover, Americans and muslims are not analogous because people don't choose to be Americans.

Great analogy in the first paragraph Willow. :)

But I must differ about your last sentence. Some people do not have a choice being muslim or not. Imagine if you were born in an Islamic country. No choice! You can't convert. But of course, in western countries they can. So you're also right in a way.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:39 PM
Well then how differently am I saying it, Oh Great one? :rolleyes:
well, you say that american government is doing a lot to prevent stuff like abu-ghraib doesn't happen again. in reality such things are still happening. we still have the iraq war and guantánamo. you keep on saying that americans should wage wars in the middle east to fight terrorism. you are not saying that someone whould invade the usa to prevent torture and racism (and terrorism). you obviously believe that usa is a better country than any islamic one and i'm sure even you wouldn't deny it. and i would agree that usa is a better place, but that doesn't mean everything americans do is alright. if you would oppose all the wrong things in america and europe as vigorously as you oppose islamic extremism you would be saying the same about each, but you don't (regardless of the reason) and there's no point in denying that.

and actually i am saying what you pretend to be doing. it's up to muslims to do something about their extremists and we should do our best to make that task easier for them. discriminating against them isn't helpful.

Princeza
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:39 PM
With one big difference. Jews did NOT:
... do all that..

easy to know what they did not do ..but also to forget what they are doing
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020412/world2.jpg
http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/uploads/killed-by-iof.jpg


my xmas gift for u

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/intelligence/images/brain_scan.jpg

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:39 PM
Yes, it really only applies to western muslims :) but that goes back to what Wafa whateverhernamewas said about how we should stick to our values in the face of muslim protests (both here and there) because its the only way Islamic hegemony will ever be challenged.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:42 PM
This book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Black-Book-Communism-Crimes-Repression/dp/0674076087/sr=8-1/qid=1166620962/ref=sr_1_1/026-8918423-3921239?ie=UTF8&s=books) blames communism for the deaths of over 100 million people, among other things. It does not blame communists, since clearly there are communists or people who call themselves communists who were not responsible for any deaths. Prejudice against communism is not prejudice against communists, and prejudice against Islam is not prejudice against muslims. However, I think it would be fair to say that the only people responsible for the perpetuation of communism is communists. Its such a simple point. :)

Moreover, Americans and muslims are not analogous because people don't choose to be Americans.
i will repeat once more that this study colcuded that "Discrimination against Muslims can be attributed to Islamophobic attitudes as well as to racist and xenophobic resentment, as these elements are often intertwined. Hostility against Muslims must therefore be seen in the more general context of xenophobia and racism towards migrants and minorities."

accordingly you can shove the analogy to communism up your arse.

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:43 PM
easy to know what they did not do ..but also to forget what they are doing
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020412/world2.jpg
http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/uploads/killed-by-iof.jpg



Funny how they don't do that to Egypt or Jordan, though, isn't it?

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:46 PM
Funny how they don't do that to Egypt or Jordan, though, isn't it?
Because Egypt or Jordan weren't attacking them. One has a right to defend itself.

Martian Willow
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:46 PM
i will repeat once more that this study colcuded that "Discrimination against Muslims can be attributed to Islamophobic attitudes as well as to racist and xenophobic resentment, as these elements are often intertwined. Hostility against Muslims must therefore be seen in the more general context of xenophobia and racism towards migrants and minorities."

accordingly you can shove the analogy to communism up your arse.

Thats OK, we'd already shoved the report up yours. :)

roarke
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:49 PM
You went to school? :eek:

In this instance, azdaja is certainly not being a hypocrite, and nor is he a Muslim. Of course he is angry.....anyone who doesn't like discrimination should be angry about what's going on.

I would care if he/she muslim or athiest would be fair in her arguments. Where is her anger and condemnation against Arab Muslims that are killing black men, women and children in Darfur. If you are going to defend a people against the wrongs committed you should be willing to openly dicsuss the wrongs they commit as well. It's not all christians or westen nations that are committing evil acts, Arabs are no better. Not all Muslims are bad and not all Christians and Jews are bad. Her arguments are biased and one sided. If he/she claims to have no allegiance then she should be able to defend against all levels and types of descrimination. People like him/her with their one sided view of the world are the reason why evil grow and flourish without encumberances.

Lord Nelson
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:50 PM
Maybe Muslims have to fear Christians after all. :lol:


2 million ethnic Muslims adopted baptism in Russia while only 2,5 thousand Russians converted to Islam – expert

Moscow, November 1, Interfax - The number of ethnic Muslims in Russia who adopted Christianity is 2 million, while the number of the Orthodox who have been converted to Islam is only 2,5 thousand, stated Roman Silantyev, executive secretary of the Inter-religious Council in Russia.

‘Christianization happens not so much as a result of some purposeful missionary activity (in which only Protestants are engaged) as under the influence of Russian culture which has express Christian roots’, Silantyev said in a interview published this week by the Itogi weekly.

According Silantyev, the converts are predominantly Muslims by birth, while ‘those who really confess Islamic values and attend mosque on a regular basis rarely change their faith’.

‘The assimilation of ethnic and religious minorities is an inevitable process in any society. In Russia it is accelerated due to extremist activities’, the Islamic researcher believes.

For instance, he says, as a result of what happened in Beslan, the proportion of Muslims in North Ossetia has decreased at least by 30%, while in Beslan itself, where Muslims had comprised from 30 to 40% of the population, their number has decreased at least by half.

‘As even Muslim sources confirm, after each terrorist action, thousands and may be even dozens of thousands of ethnic Muslims adopt baptism’, Silantyev stated.

At the same time, the expert accounts for the small number of ethnic Orthodox people who have adopted Islam for the last 15 years, among other things, by the fact that ‘for some reason Russians seem to be more willing to join sects than Islam’.

Princeza
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:50 PM
Because Egypt or Jordan weren't attacking them. One has a right to defend itself.

there's no need to give me a badrep because i dont agree with u...
is that possible to be that blind?

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:53 PM
there's no need to give me a badrep because i dont agree with u...
is that possible to be that blind?
I didn't agree with Willow but I didn't give her a bad rep. I gave you a bad rep because you didn't know what the hell you're talking about. You posted pics without the story behind them.

Princeza
Dec 20th, 2006, 12:55 PM
dont pretend u dont know what the story is
it's the same old story since 60 years

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:07 PM
Thats OK, we'd already shoved the report up yours. :)
look, just because you disagree with a report it doesn't make it wrong.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:12 PM
I would care if he/she muslim or athiest would be fair in her arguments. Where is her anger and condemnation against Arab Muslims that are killing black men, women and children in Darfur. If you are going to defend a people against the wrongs committed you should be willing to openly dicsuss the wrongs they commit as well. It's not all christians or westen nations that are committing evil acts, Arabs are no better. Not all Muslims are bad and not all Christians and Jews are bad. Her arguments are biased and one sided. If he/she claims to have no allegiance then she should be able to defend against all levels and types of descrimination. People like him/her with their one sided view of the world are the reason why evil grow and flourish without encumberances.
as i said before, my posting record clearly shows that i oppose all forms of racism and oppression everywhere. i am sure i could even give you examples that you haven't even heard of.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:14 PM
as i said before, my posting record clearly shows that i oppose all forms of racism and oppression everywhere. i am sure i could even give you examples that you haven't even heard of.
That's what you say but we've never seen you be anything except ultra-defensive of muslims.

I told you that more Sikhs were killed in hate crimes post 9/11. That was in a US publication. You didn't even acknowledge this fact.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:19 PM
That's what you say but we've never seen you be anything except ultra-defensive of muslims.
that's your problem, not mine.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:31 PM
that's your problem, not mine.
No it's your problem because you have no credibility. You say you condemn all sorts of racism and discrimination but we haven't seen that.

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 01:55 PM
No it's your problem because you have no credibility. You say you condemn all sorts of racism and discrimination but we haven't seen that.
it's my problem that you haven't seen me doing something? :confused:

nonsense.

Sam L
Dec 20th, 2006, 02:00 PM
it's my problem that you haven't seen me doing something? :confused:

nonsense.
Roarke hasn't, willow hasn't.

You say you speak up against all sort of discrimination, we say you haven't. And you haven't. You still haven't said A WORD about more Sikhs than Muslims dying in post 9/11 hate crimes. Is it because you hate to admit that Muslims aren't the biggest victims? That they're not the scapegoats? It's not fitting in with your agenda?

azdaja
Dec 20th, 2006, 02:32 PM
Roarke hasn't, willow hasn't.

You say you speak up against all sort of discrimination, we say you haven't. And you haven't. You still haven't said A WORD about more Sikhs than Muslims dying in post 9/11 hate crimes. Is it because you hate to admit that Muslims aren't the biggest victims? That they're not the scapegoats? It's not fitting in with your agenda?
you, roarke and catherine are not exactly the most important people in my life, so if you draw wrong conclusions about me it won't hurt me much. if you and a few other people would post less crap about muslims i would post less about them as well because most of my posts about that topic were on threads started by others. and i don't post on every thread about muslims either. it depends on my current mood. but apart from that i am pretty consistent when it gets to racism and discrimination, whether you have seen that already or not.

i'm not saying anything about post 9/11 hate crimes because that's not the topic of this thread. but even so, those sikhs were not killed because they were sikhs. they were killed because their killers were too stupid to distinguish them from muslims. their intention was to kill muslims. if someone would kill me because he thinks i'm a muslim that's a hate crime against muslims. if someone would kill me because he thinks i'm a jew that would be a case of anti-semitism. that example does not really help your argument.

i also certainly didn't say that muslims are "the biggest victims". this is not some kind of competition.

Veritas
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:16 AM
azdaja, why do you bother? They're stubborn and have set their minds on hating anything to do with Islam. Their main souce of knowledge are cheaply written news articles that reeks of tabloid bias. Where are the references to the Chomskys, the Huntingtons, the Lewis', the Saids, the Foucault's and Power/Knowledge paradoxes? Have we seen any mention of Orientalism and how ideas perpetrated from Orientalist studies can be dangerous because they influence government policies? And what about how Western interference in the past have played a big part in the mess today?

Journal articles are short. They pick out only the details that are relevant to them and skew them to make a point. And because of that, a lot of information is left out. I mean, can anyone imagine journalists doing the same amount of work as academics? :tape: Newspaper articles are DUMBED-DOWN for a DUMB public who are either too busy or too lazy to go do some proper research and therefore use these articles as their main source of knowledge.

I'm afraid it looks as if the only place for well-informed debates is on university grounds :help:

Fingon
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:47 AM
azdaja, why do you bother? They're stubborn and have set their minds on hating anything to do with Islam. Their main souce of knowledge are cheaply written news articles that reeks of tabloid bias. Where are the references to the Chomskys, the Huntingtons, the Lewis', the Saids, the Foucault's and Power/Knowledge paradoxes? Have we seen any mention of Orientalism and how ideas perpetrated from Orientalist studies can be dangerous because they influence government policies? And what about how Western interference in the past have played a big part in the mess today?


sorry, you were doing ok until you name Chomsky, expressing ideas well doesn't make those ideas right, Chomsky is an opportunist, criticizes everything about capitalism while profiting from it.

Journal articles are short. They pick out only the details that are relevant to them and skew them to make a point. And because of that, a lot of information is left out.


that's why they are journal articles, if you want more detail, go to the library, most people hardly have the time to read newspapers as they are, imagine if they were like books.

I mean, can anyone imagine journalists doing the same amount of work as academics? :tape:

nope, and I can't imagine academics being in the front line in a war like some journalist are, or covering sports (that are important for some people but maybe not the intellectuals down here). I don't know how your compare them and try to put journalists down, they are completely different professions.

Newspaper articles are DUMBED-DOWN for a DUMB public who are either too busy or too lazy to go do some proper research and therefore use these articles as their main source of knowledge.

ok, I believe if you love academics so much, you should use a dictionnary, busy or lazy is equivalent to dumb? maybe some people just don't care about the same things you do, does it make them dumb? See why the leftish intellectuals don't ever get their message accross, because of a simple word that should look up the dictionnary, arrogance, for treating everyone as they are idiots, they own the truth, anyone who disagrees is stupid/dumb.

I'm afraid it looks as if the only place for well-informed debates is on university grounds :help:

not really, in many cases, universities are disassociated from reality, that's why so many terrorist movements have originated in Universities, normally, the utopic views of the world come from Universities, and when students can't see their utopic dreams realized then they become violent.

The leader of shinning path for example, was an academic, most of the members of the terrorist groups that operated in Argentina, Uruguay and Chile came from Universities, that was the preferred ground for recruitment, like mosques are today.

I have a profound respect for sciences, and Universities and academics, but it doesn't mean I take everything they say without questioning it and yes, I do not have the time or the will to do extensive research, but I do have something that is called common sense, unfotunately, not too common in current times.

Sam L
Dec 21st, 2006, 06:14 AM
Newspaper articles are DUMBED-DOWN for a DUMB public who are either too busy or too lazy to go do some proper research and therefore use these articles as their main source of knowledge.


Idiot I do that with science but how do you do some proper research on issues like this? Please tell me how. Are you another Volcana who goes out and "talks" to muslims and all that? :haha:

Sam L
Dec 21st, 2006, 06:19 AM
The leader of shinning path for example, was an academic, most of the members of the terrorist groups that operated in Argentina, Uruguay and Chile came from Universities, that was the preferred ground for recruitment, like mosques are today.

There was an article I posted in which it said UK Universities are the main recruiting ground for Islamic terrorists.

I have a profound respect for sciences, and Universities and academics, but it doesn't mean I take everything they say without questioning it and yes, I do not have the time or the will to do extensive research, but I do have something that is called common sense, unfotunately, not too common in current times.

Only someone who's blind will say that universities are all positive. There are so many subjects out there, not everything is as difficult as quantum mechanics. Anyone can go to uni.

Couver
Dec 21st, 2006, 08:45 AM
azdaja, why do you bother? They're stubborn and have set their minds on hating anything to do with Islam. Their main souce of knowledge are cheaply written news articles that reeks of tabloid bias. Where are the references to the Chomskys, the Huntingtons, the Lewis', the Saids, the Foucault's and Power/Knowledge paradoxes? Have we seen any mention of Orientalism and how ideas perpetrated from Orientalist studies can be dangerous because they influence government policies? And what about how Western interference in the past have played a big part in the mess today?

Journal articles are short. They pick out only the details that are relevant to them and skew them to make a point. And because of that, a lot of information is left out. I mean, can anyone imagine journalists doing the same amount of work as academics? :tape: Newspaper articles are DUMBED-DOWN for a DUMB public who are either too busy or too lazy to go do some proper research and therefore use these articles as their main source of knowledge.

I'm afraid it looks as if the only place for well-informed debates is on university grounds :help:

Excellent post, and you make a very good point. This argument will never be resolved because no one can find a middle ground. Certain posters have choosen to let their fear and ignorance consume them. There is no good Islam or good Muslims for these people. Every Muslim is therefore a terrorist waiting to happen. What their solution to this would be, I shudder to think, but I can wager a guess. And the sad thing is that with such close mindedness the world won't ever move forward. Being cautious and taking measures to ensure ones safety is one thing. Becoming paranoid and discriminatory won't help anything. It only alienates people further which results in even more intolerance and violence on all sides.

Stamp Paid
Dec 21st, 2006, 09:11 AM
Would it be true to say that Muslims have a harder time integrating into European society than American society?

And if it is true, anybody have any ideas why that may be?

Sam L
Dec 21st, 2006, 09:40 AM
Becoming paranoid and discriminatory won't help anything.

Fair enough post. And I agree. But can you give me an example of someone in this thread "becoming paranoid and discriminatory" against muslims?

Please show me a specific post by quoting it.

Asif_Nawaz
Dec 21st, 2006, 09:42 AM
Pfff. I think Sam L could make a living out of harassing people. It sems that the only meaning his life has is to bash Islam and be a sexist and racist just like in the other thread.

fifiricci
Dec 21st, 2006, 09:58 AM
Would it be true to say that Muslims have a harder time integrating into European society than American society?

And if it is true, anybody have any ideas why that may be?

With all due respect, don't you think this is a tad simplistic?

Europe is about 25 different countries (our transatlantic cousins seem to have enormous difficulties grasping this concept)! And I expect that "integration" will be a different experience in different European countries. As I suspect that it will also be a different experience in various US states! I would hazard a guess (because I've been to both places), that a muslim integrating into, for example, a small Texan town might have a tad more trouble on their hands than a muslim integrating into New York City?

:tape:

Stamp Paid
Dec 21st, 2006, 10:10 AM
With all due respect, don't you think this is a tad simplistic?

Europe is about 25 different countries (our transatlantic cousins seem to have enormous difficulties grasping this concept)! And I expect that "integration" will be a different experience in different European countries. As I suspect that it will also be a different experience in various US states! I would hazard a guess (because I've been to both places), that a muslim integrating into, for example, a small Texan town might have a tad more trouble on their hands than a muslim integrating into New York City?

:tape:

Actually, because of 9/11, he may have a better shot settling in small town texas. But I understand your point re:the diverse populations of European people(s).

I meant to put Western Europe, but didnt want to exclude Muslims in central and southern Europe. I guess I was just looking for a general opinion about Muslims and how well they integrate into Western societies, nothing truly specific. :shrug:

I'm interested because a lot of the antisocial behavior and conditions (not terrorism, but shit like crime, poverty, etc.) that I've read about European Muslims does not happen much over here, even though we have a large (and quite prosperous) Muslim populaton across the entire US as well.

fifiricci
Dec 21st, 2006, 10:50 AM
I'm interested because a lot of the antisocial behavior and conditions (not terrorism, but shit like crime, poverty, etc.) that I've read about European Muslims does not happen much over here, even though we have a large (and quite prosperous) Muslim populaton across the entire US as well.

I'm happy to give you my perspective as an ordinary UK citizen who lives in a small Welsh city and works in the capital of Wales (Cardiff). My personal perspective is that in Wales there are many prosperous "integrated" muslims and I assume that this is the result of a large number of Arab students coming to study here and then settling in jobs here after they graduate. I know this happens because one of my oldest friends is married to an Iraqi guy who did just that. Many others are business people who are doing well, just like many other cultures have done in the UK (Indian doctors, Italian cafe owners, etc). The UK is a country that has accepted immigration for at least two centuries now (starting with the industrial revolution back in the early 1800s), so its really no big deal to most people.

We are told that 2.7% of the UK population is muslim, so that gives us a UK base of approximately 1.6 milion muslims. That's a pretty significant number and, despite what some crazy and delusional people on here would have you believe, I perceive that only a tiny proportion of that number are the source of anti-social behaviour in the UK. ;)

Lord Nelson
Dec 21st, 2006, 11:08 AM
With all due respect, don't you think this is a tad simplistic?

Europe is about 25 different countries (our transatlantic cousins seem to have enormous difficulties grasping this concept)! And I expect that "integration" will be a different experience in different European countries. As I suspect that it will also be a different experience in various US states! I would hazard a guess (because I've been to both places), that a muslim integrating into, for example, a small Texan town might have a tad more trouble on their hands than a muslim integrating into New York City?

:tape:
Well i am sure they integrate better in Texas small city than in NYC. Remember 9/11 and the first world trade bombings? There is also a blind sheik impèrisoned in NYC who was the mentor of zarqawi. So since muslims are elss in Texas town, they integrate better. there are also hispanics and so they will not stand out since a lot of muslims I(from Asia) have dark skin.

azdaja
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:01 PM
sorry, you were doing ok until you name Chomsky
oh, really? out of all the people mentioned chomsky makes his post look bad? chomsky is a very credible scholar. this is undisputed in linguistics where he has the same place that einstein has in physics. it is disputed in his more political work because a lot of people don't like what he says, but from i can tell they only attack him as a person and are not able to say anything against his arguments. you have just done the same.

azdaja
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:10 PM
I'm afraid it looks as if the only place for well-informed debates is on university grounds :help:
you are right, this is mostly a waste of time, but i don't think university grounds are the only place where you can have a good debate. i think it is possible and important to reach ordinary people precisely because a lot of them consume only dumbed-down news articles. i don't think this forum is the best place for that, of course, but a lot of people here need to at least understand how little they know abou the topic. saml seems hopeless, though :help:

azdaja
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:20 PM
Would it be true to say that Muslims have a harder time integrating into European society than American society?

And if it is true, anybody have any ideas why that may be?
i think it's different from country to country. i suppose people who say that it's easier in the usa because it is a traditionally immigrant country are right, but there are also countries in europe that are more accepting of immigrants than others. a lot of people in europe are still very nationalist, though, and they don't even accept people from other european countries, let alone people from other continents. i think younger europeans are generally fairly open-minded, though.

fifiricci
Dec 21st, 2006, 12:45 PM
i think it's different from country to country. i suppose people who say that it's easier in the usa because it is a traditionally immigrant country are right, but there are also countries in europe that are more accepting of immigrants than others. a lot of people in europe are still very nationalist, though, and they don't even accept people from other european countries, let alone people from other continents. i think younger europeans are generally fairly open-minded, though.

You're right. And even within countries there will be different experiences and attitudes. For example, South Wales (where I am from) was a major centre of the industrial revolution and people came from all over Europe (and sometimes even further afield) to work in the various industries that were operating in South Wales from around the 1830s onwards. So that in this part of the world, people of different nationalities, races and religions have been part of our scene for a very long time (contrary to what some believe!). And boy am I thankful for that! I'd much rather live in this multicultural, diverse and colourful atmosphere than in a narrow (minded) nationalistic one :D

azdaja
Dec 21st, 2006, 01:21 PM
bad rep from lord nelson :rolleyes:

Chomsky is a person from the far left. Please come back to the center. Don't have extremist views.
chomsky is a person from the far left, he isn't even denying it and neither would i. it must suck that this is the only "argument" you can find against him, i suppose :p

i am not chomsky, though. and i don't care about this "left" vs "right" nonsense. it's just another way to stupify yourself and people who are trying to find a "ballanced" view tend to get confused a lot, so fuck that. a lot of people are stereotyping chomsky because of this. chomsky would actually agree with some of the stuff fingon posted and his view on capitalism is more complex than fingon apparently realises. he calls him an opportunist because he is anti-left and so are you. i don't want to talk about chomsky here, but if i do i would prefer to talk about his arguments and not about personal attacks on him. or anyone else for that matter.

Qrystyna
Dec 21st, 2006, 01:33 PM
bad rep from lord nelson :rolleyes:


chomsky is a person from the far left, he isn't even denying it and neither would i. it must suck that this is the only "argument" you can find against him, i suppose :p

That's kind of funny coming from Lord Nelson, because he is on the far right himself. :angel:

Fingon
Dec 22nd, 2006, 01:44 AM
oh, really? out of all the people mentioned chomsky makes his post look bad? chomsky is a very credible scholar. this is undisputed in linguistics where he has the same place that einstein has in physics.

absolutely, I won't argue with him about linguistics or with Einstein about physics, but because Einstein was a genius in maths and physics it doesn't mean his opinion was as qualified in other fields.

Same applies to Chomsky. If I have a pain, I go to a good doctor, not to a good Lawyer.

it is disputed in his more political work because a lot of people don't like what he says, but from i can tell they only attack him as a person and are not able to say anything against his arguments. you have just done the same.
I would attack his arguments if they were posted, the thread wasn't about him was it?

And the reason why I attack his person is because I believe he isn't a good person, I believe he has an agenda and is a liar.

but of course you would like Chomsky, he criticizes the US, that's good enouogh for you.

Fingon
Dec 22nd, 2006, 01:53 AM
bad rep from lord nelson :rolleyes:


chomsky is a person from the far left, he isn't even denying it and neither would i. it must suck that this is the only "argument" you can find against him, i suppose :p

i am not chomsky, though. and i don't care about this "left" vs "right" nonsense. it's just another way to stupify yourself and people who are trying to find a "ballanced" view tend to get confused a lot, so fuck that. a lot of people are stereotyping chomsky because of this. chomsky would actually agree with some of the stuff fingon posted and his view on capitalism is more complex than fingon apparently realises. he calls him an opportunist because he is anti-left and so are you. i don't want to talk about chomsky here, but if i do i would prefer to talk about his arguments and not about personal attacks on him. or anyone else for that matter.

that post shows your deep level or ignorance. I don't know what stuff Chomsky would agree with me about. I don't call him an opportunist because I am anti-left, I am in fact anti-left and the reason why I am is the same reason why I don't agree with Chomsky, because I do not believe left's ideas make practical sense (but that would be the subject of a much broader discussion). It's not about stereotypes, in fact, you act a lot more like the stereotype of the left, it seems that because you leftwing you automatically have to believe/support a number of things that have nothing to do with the political or economic camp, and you have demonstrated it many times.

I am right wing economically, and politically, but I am an atheist, I believe in everyone's right to healthcare, I don't oppose (I don't really care) same sex marriage, I am for religion freedom (I want to be free to choose to be an atheist, but I want you to be free to choose to be a muslim if you want to), so hardly the right stereotype.

Chomsky is like you (of course, he supports his argument a lot better than you mind you), he simply attacks the common enemy, some of the things he say do make sense, but they are buried among the non-sense he spread just out of hatred. It's like you, out of 10 things you can make sense once, but your views are so incredibly one-sided that it's difficult to take them seriously. If there is any controversial issue I can predict exactly what you will say (in fairness, you can probably predict what I will say in certain areas).

fifiricci
Dec 22nd, 2006, 08:29 AM
How satisfying it is that European laws and principles of freedom are now such that the right wingers will never get their way! :D

Sometimes it's difficult to believe that we've come such a long way, when just sixty one years ago the most outrageous attempt at ethnic/religious cleansing ever was still going strong and nearly succeeding on Western European soil and under the very (and often turned away) noses of people in occupied Western European countries like France, Belgium and Holland.

azdaja
Dec 22nd, 2006, 11:12 AM
that post shows your deep level or ignorance. I don't know what stuff Chomsky would agree with me about.
perhaps you don't know, but that simply shows your deep level of ignorance. i could now go to your original post and tell you where you are in agreement with chomsky because unlike you i actually know what he is talking about. i won't do it though because that's not the topic of this thread. it's good you have admitted that you are rigth-wing. it's not good that you won't admit that you are stereotyping the left because you clearly do. you are throwing random accusations around that you wouldn't be able to support with any evidence. you may be more sophisticated than some other posters here, but if you take a look at the 2 replies you have just given me you will see that there is very little substance in there, just empty talk, unsubstantiated allegations and personal attacks. you could have as well simply posted an honest "fuck you" :shrug:

Sam L
Dec 22nd, 2006, 01:55 PM
European muslims may be victims but not all of them are saints either:

For a forthcoming television documentary and DVD about contemporary anti-Semitism, New York producer Andrew Goldberg interviewed academicians, theologians and journalists on four continents. Many of the experts were Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East, because, as the documentary shows, that region is the source of most anti-Semitism today.

For another, less-intellectual, perspective, Goldberg also wanted a look at public opinion, the �Arab street.� So he went to an Arab street.

One overcast afternoon last year, Goldberg�s six-person crew unloaded its van on the median of a wide road on the outskirts of Cairo and began filming. The area, Goldberg says, was residential but with few residents and many unfinished apartment buildings.

Working with an Egyptian interpreter, Goldberg asked passersby their opinions of Israel and the Middle East peace process. He approached a group of teenage boys.

�Do you know any Jews?� Goldberg asked one of the youths.

�No.�

�What do you think of Jews?� Goldberg asked.

�We hate them.�

�What would you do if you saw Jews right now?�

�We would kill them,� the teen said, speaking for his friends.

That interview did not make the final cut for �Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century: The Resurgence,� Goldberg says. �It was the exception.�

The hour-long documentary hosted by veteran television journalist Judy Woodruff, which traces the roots of anti-Semitism to interpretations of Christian scripture and introduces such familiar expressions of anti-Semitism as the blood libel, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and finally, the Holocaust, presents a balanced picture, neither downplaying nor exaggerating the threat posed to Jews today. It quotes Arab voices of hate and voices of moderation.

The program focuses on the recent growth of anti-Semitism, especially among young Arab-Muslim immigrants in Europe, which is fueled by the media, the mosques and other opinion leaders in the Middle East, and spread instantaneously via the Internet and satellite TV back to Europe.

Europe, which makes headlines for attacks against Jews and Jewish sites, �is not the whole story,� Goldberg says. �Europe is a symptom. The core problem grows in the Middle East, in the Arab and Muslim world,� as an outgrowth of the ongoing Israeli-Arab conflict.

�Anti-Semitism in the region is further complicated because the lines between references to the State of Israel, and to Jews as people are often blurred, making distinctions nearly impossible,� Woodruff states in the documentary.

�Israel is a catalyst, not a cause [of anti-Semitism],� Goldberg says. �It would happen without Israel.� He adds, �Anti-Semitism is inseparable from the Arab-Israeli conflict, [which is] perceived in the Middle East as a Jewish issue.�

�Anti-Semitism is an important human rights issue,� says Goldberg, who has produced a documentary on the vanished world of European Jewish culture, and several that deal with the early 20th-century genocide of Turkey�s Armenian population, and is at work on a study of Jerusalem as the center of three faiths.

He spent two-and-a-half years on the anti-Semitism documentary, updating it for developments in Iran and Lebanon.

Part of his inspiration, he says, was the murder in 2002 of Wall Street Journal writer Daniel Pearl by Muslim extremists in Pakistan.

The program features incendiary clips from Arab-language dramas, a college student in Syria who calls the Protocols a �true book,� and an Egyptian television producer who calls a blatantly anti-Semitic series �a historical show.�

Among the experts interviewed are Princeton University�s Bernard Lewis, the Washington Post�s David Ignatius and the American Jewish Committee�s David Harris.

Goldberg filmed in Egypt and Syria � in addition to the U.S., Israel, the Palestinian territories, France, Belgium, Germany and England � because �if you want to study anti-Semitism, you talk to anti-Semites. The true experts on anti-Semitism are the anti-Semites.�

Goldberg says he had �total access� in Egypt and Syria; sometimes an undercover police unit accompanied him, for the crew�s protection.

While most of the people he interviewed in Egypt and Syria held openly unfavorable views about Jews and questioned Israel�s right to exist, no one, besides the teen in Cairo, spoke of inflicting physical damage on individual Jews, Goldberg says. And he, a Chicago-born Jew whose religious identity was usually known among interviewees in the West Bank�s Ramallah, and sometimes in Syria, says he was never threatened or harmed.

�You have to differentiate the population [of Arab and Muslim countries] from the leadership,� who use anti-Semitism for political means and call for �holy wars� against both the State of Israel and Jews elsewhere.

Individual residents of those lands, Goldberg says, �don�t hate Jews. They don�t hold a sustained desire to harm Jews as people.

�If you were to walk down the street in Syria with a sign �I am Jewish,� no one would bother you,� he says.

The chief threat of contemporary anti-Semitism, the documentary states, is physical attacks on Jews in Europe, and the still-political attacks against Israel.

�I think for Israelis it is a real daily threat, something to worry about,� David Ignatius of The Washington Post says in the documentary. �I think that when the president of Iran says he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map at some level he really means it.�

The teenager whom Goldberg interviewed in Cairo, who said he would kill a Jew on sight, answered one final question.

What would you do, Goldberg asked him, if you saw a Jew hit by a car?

�We�d call an ambulance,� the youth said.

For many Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East, Jews exist as an object of hatred �in the abstract,� but not in the flesh, Goldberg says. �They have not spent a lot of time thinking about it. They don�t have anyone educating them.�

In the Middle East, dislike of Jews does not get translated into actual acts of violence, as happened in Europe for centuries, Goldberg says. �It�s far more complicated. It is not one-dimensional.� n

�Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century: The Resurgence,� produced in association with Oregon Public Broadcasting, will premiere Monday, Jan. 8 at 10 p.m. For information: www.twocatstv.com.

Link (http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13442)

Fingon
Dec 22nd, 2006, 03:58 PM
perhaps you don't know, but that simply shows your deep level of ignorance. i could now go to your original post and tell you where you are in agreement with chomsky because unlike you i actually know what he is talking about. i won't do it though because that's not the topic of this thread. it's good you have admitted that you are rigth-wing. it's not good that you won't admit that you are stereotyping the left because you clearly do. you are throwing random accusations around that you wouldn't be able to support with any evidence. you may be more sophisticated than some other posters here, but if you take a look at the 2 replies you have just given me you will see that there is very little substance in there, just empty talk, unsubstantiated allegations and personal attacks. you could have as well simply posted an honest "fuck you" :shrug:


No, I don't stereotype the left, you do with your behaviour, I would hope that people wouldn't follow in stereotyped characters so often, but they do, because they accept a certain ideology, they have to get the full package.

And when you talk about hard evidence and empty talk, I can help but lmao.

What hard evidence do you provide? this is not a court, you clearly have no sense of proportion or what is appropriate, I won't prepare a thesis to back up each of my posts, and you do not support anything with evidence anyway, everything you have said about Chomsky is "empty talk", where is your evidence? and what do you call evidence? you seem to like universities, is it scientific evidence? I think you try to play the intellectual in a tennis message board, using sophisticated language. I really have better things to do with my time than finding "hard evidence" for you, my arguments are enough, if you don't like them, refute them, but don't throw empty arguments as "lack of evidence", I can say the same about you, it's much easier to put the veracity of a statement in doubt than actually following the logic and refuting it isn't it? your argument is the same as those who say God exists because there isn't hard evidence to proof it doesn't, forgetting that not all branches of science are the same or use the same kind of evidence. In politics, you won't find hard evidence, period, it's not physics, it's not maths, it's a social science, there isn't a hard logic algorithm or experimental results, so if you try to appear intellectual, get your academic terms right.

oh, and fuck off.

azdaja
Dec 22nd, 2006, 04:31 PM
and what do you call evidence? you seem to like universities, is it scientific evidence? I think you try to play the intellectual in a tennis message board, using sophisticated language. I really have better things to do with my time than finding "hard evidence" for you, my arguments are enough, if you don't like them, refute them, but don't throw empty arguments as "lack of evidence", I can say the same about you, it's much easier to put the veracity of a statement in doubt than actually following the logic and refuting it isn't it? your argument is the same as those who say God exists because there isn't hard evidence to proof it doesn't, forgetting that not all branches of science are the same or use the same kind of evidence. In politics, you won't find hard evidence, period, it's not physics, it's not maths, it's a social science, there isn't a hard logic algorithm or experimental results, so if you try to appear intellectual, get your academic terms right.
i have gotten my academic terms right, thank you very much. there is such things as evidence in social sciences as well and while they are not exactly of the same nature like in physics they are rather reliable. we learned to deal with them at the university. suggesting that you can't prove absolutely anything in social sciences is complete nonsense. one could say that the most difficult thing in social sciences is asking the right questions. you can't learn about the laws of physics by watching a leaf fly through the air. you analyse all physical forces separately. you can do that in social sciences as well. but even that is irrelevant in this case because if you say that chomsky is a liar you definitely should be able to provide us all with a couple of examples. that's not really at a scientific level. it is a very simple statement. and it could be called an argument if backed up by a couple of examples. the same goes for your personal attacks against me. otherwise it's empty talk and as such at the same level as:
oh, and fuck off.
thank you for finally speaking at your true intellectual level :yeah: :p

Veritas
Dec 25th, 2006, 02:06 AM
sorry, you were doing ok until you name Chomsky, expressing ideas well doesn't make those ideas right, Chomsky is an opportunist, criticizes everything about capitalism while profiting from it.

I'm not a fan of Chomsky - I think there are a lot of weaknesses in his arguments - but there's no denying the man does a lot of work and therefore earned his mark as a respected scholar.

Besides, Chomsky wasn't the only guy I mentioned. People like Samuel Huntington and Bernard Lewis focus more on how culture and history impacts on a civilization's perspective which is different from the cold hard figures Chomsky relies on. I named them to show that the academic world is a mixed bag.

that's why they are journal articles, if you want more detail, go to the library, most people hardly have the time to read newspapers as they are, imagine if they were like books.

I realise journal articles need to be short and simple to understand. My point was that if people want to make a well-informed opinion on the issue, then they should look beyond the tabloids precisely because a lot of important points are left out. I cannot imagine, for example, people fully understanding the Power/Knowledge complex by reading an article with just 500 words. If people can't compromise their time to do the extra work, then it's fair they should also compromise their opinions by being open-ended about them.

nope, and I can't imagine academics being in the front line in a war like some journalist are, or covering sports (that are important for some people but maybe not the intellectuals down here). I don't know how your compare them and try to put journalists down, they are completely different professions.

Like you said, journalists and academics are involved in different professions, but a lot of their work often overlaps. And it's ironic you criticise me for putting journalists down (implying I make generalisations about them) when you do the same for universities and "leftish intellectuals."

ok, I believe if you love academics so much, you should use a dictionnary, busy or lazy is equivalent to dumb? maybe some people just don't care about the same things you do, does it make them dumb? See why the leftish intellectuals don't ever get their message accross, because of a simple word that should look up the dictionnary, arrogance, for treating everyone as they are idiots, they own the truth, anyone who disagrees is stupid/dumb.

I get criticised for making assumptions, yet you do the same yourself? :confused:

First of all, I don't "love" academics. I have issues with some, but overall I have respect for them because they dedicate themselves to working long hours that involves an insane amount of research which many people (including myself) can't hope to match.

As for the public, maybe "dumb" wasn't the right word - "ignorant" would've been more appropriate. Of course, not everyone takes the media's word at face value, but on a general level, relying on tabloid material is one of the reasons misconceptions come up in the first place. Not having the time or interest to do the proper research is understandable, but in that case, these people shouldn't present their opinions as be all and end all.

Secondly, you assumed that I think that everyone who "dont care about the same things" I do is "dumb", yet what makes you different by doing the same thing to "leftish intellectuals"? Not all of them treats others as "stupid" or "idiots" and not all of them act as if they "own the truth".

And obviously you implied that I'm a "leftish" myself, which I'm not :tape:

not really, in many cases, universities are disassociated from reality, that's why so many terrorist movements have originated in Universities, normally, the utopic views of the world come from Universities, and when students can't see their utopic dreams realized then they become violent.

I can't speak for all universities, but the subjects I've studied at the one I go to don't have "utopic views". Rather, they analyse societal problems and stress the importance of PRIMARY SOURCES in research. Isn't that trying to immerse themselves in "reality" as much as possible?

I don't deny there are radical organisations on campus grounds, but to tie them to the university institutions themselves is stretching it. They exist because it's thanks to the universities for sticking to what they preach about the freedom of speech. The faculties and administration may not agree with what they say, but at least they give them a fair degree of autonomy. So how does that make universities "disassociated from reality"? :confused:

The leader of shinning path for example, was an academic, most of the members of the terrorist groups that operated in Argentina, Uruguay and Chile came from Universities, that was the preferred ground for recruitment, like mosques are today.

I have a profound respect for sciences, and Universities and academics, but it doesn't mean I take everything they say without questioning it and yes, I do not have the time or the will to do extensive research, but I do have something that is called common sense, unfotunately, not too common in current times.

Like I said before, not having the time to "do extensive research" is fine, but don't belittle those who do - namely the "leftish intellectuals".

Veritas
Dec 25th, 2006, 02:20 AM
Idiot I do that with science but how do you do some proper research on issues like this? Please tell me how. Are you another Volcana who goes out and "talks" to muslims and all that? :haha:

I'm not surprised you asked this because I have yet to see any evidence of "proper research" in your posts (at least in this thread).

As for Volcana, I have respect for him because unlike you, he doesn't resort to personal attacks.

Fingon
Dec 25th, 2006, 02:32 AM
I'm not a fan of Chomsky - I think there are a lot of weaknesses in his arguments - but there's no denying the man does a lot of work and therefore earned his mark as a respected scholar.


doing a lot of work doesn't automatically make his conclusions right

of course it is, I didn't have an objection to any of the other (and to be honest, I don't know all of them).

[quote]
I realise journal articles need to be short and simple to understand. My point was that if people want to make a well-informed opinion on the issue, then they should look beyond the tabloids precisely because a lot of important points are left out. I cannot imagine, for example, people fully understanding the Power/Knowledge complex by reading an article with just 500 words. If people can't compromise their time to do the extra work, then it's fair they should also compromise their opinions by being open-ended about them.


not necessarily, people are not like that, right or wrong, everyone has the right to an opinion, some times it's well funded, some times is just gut feeling or just emotion, some times is common sense.

I have a good example, the existence of God, I can't say I have done a lot of research on the subject, I haven't read theology texts or philosophy texts, but if the greatest expert in the world tells me that God exists I still think it doesn't, why? because my mind tells me it doesn't, my mind tells me something with the definition of "God", is not possible to exists, and that's the end of the story for me, reading 1000000 books won't change my position, and it's not being stuborn, it's being logical.


Like you said, journalists and academics are involved in different professions, but a lot of their work often overlaps. And it's ironic you criticise me for putting journalists down (implying I make generalisations about them) when you do the same for universities and "leftish intellectuals."


you are right, I shouldn't put all academics in the same basquet, it's a little more difficult to differentiate with leftish intellectuals, I give the benefit of doubt and hope there are some that think differently, but as with our mutual friend azdaja, I can know what they think about something without the need to listen to them, maybe not with all of them, but at least with all I have met or heard of.


I get criticised for making assumptions, yet you do the same yourself? :confused:

you always make certain assumptions, as long as you know that it's ok, your conclusions are true as long as the assumptions are true.

First of all, I don't "love" academics. I have issues with some, but overall I have respect for them because they dedicate themselves to working long hours that involves an insane amount of research which many people (including myself) can't hope to match.


it's just a different profession, I don't put them at a higher level than other people, of course there are exceptions but not every academic is Eisntein, or Bohr, or Heisenberg.

As for the public, maybe "dumb" wasn't the right word - "ignorant" would've been more appropriate. Of course, not everyone takes the media's word at face value, but on a general level, relying on tabloid material is one of the reasons misconceptions come up in the first place. Not having the time or interest to do the proper research is understandable, but in that case, these people shouldn't present their opinions as be all and end all.

again, it depends, I consider myself to be intelligent enough to distiguish between real facts and bullshit.

On the other hand, researching or going deeper will not always give you the answer, some times it will confuse you more, if you look for another source that is biased, then you have different biased accounts, which one is true? do you have the capacity to know that? what are primary sources? do you really have access to them?
take Iraq for example, what are the primary sources there? the Pentagon? the CIA? Al Qaeda? do you really have access to them? do academics have access to them?

Secondly, you assumed that I think that everyone who "dont care about the same things" I do is "dumb", yet what makes you different by doing the same thing to "leftish intellectuals"? Not all of them treats others as "stupid" or "idiots" and not all of them act as if they "own the truth".


not all of them, but most of them do.

And obviously you implied that I'm a "leftish" myself, which I'm not :tape:

certainly, you have a lot in common with them.

I can't speak for all universities, but the subjects I've studied at the one I go to don't have "utopic views". Rather, they analyse societal problems and stress the importance of PRIMARY SOURCES in research. Isn't that trying to immerse themselves in "reality" as much as possible?

read above, you normally don't have access to primary sources, neither do they. Research is a word with a wide meaning, depending on the subject, one thing is research in physics, very different is in philosophy or political science, in physics, in most cases you can prove your concepts in the lab, in polical science, you can't, there isn't a lab. In physics, if it cannot be demonstrated experimentally, it's not accepted, in political sciences, any position that has some logic is acceptable.

I don't deny there are radical organisations on campus grounds, but to tie them to the university institutions themselves is stretching it. They exist because it's thanks to the universities for sticking to what they preach about the freedom of speech. The faculties and administration may not agree with what they say, but at least they give them a fair degree of autonomy. So how does that make universities "disassociated from reality"? :confused:


not all universities, but some of them, I've been in one.


Like I said before, not having the time to "do extensive research" is fine, but don't belittle those who do - namely the "leftish intellectuals".
I won't, as long as they come with good conclusions, otherwise they wasted their time (and money).

azdaja
Dec 25th, 2006, 11:22 AM
as with our mutual friend azdaja, I can know what they think about something without the need to listen to them
bwahaha, yeah right, smart-ass. on this thread already you misinterpreted me (and chomsky) several times and that with hardly even saying anything of substance. you say "it's a little more difficult to differentiate with leftish intellectuals" and that you hope that "there are some that think differently" which basically shows that you do put them all in the same basket on ideological basis and have no idea what they are really saying. there are vast differences among various "leftish intellectuals" just as there are vast differences between intellectuals at the other end of the political spectrum. you simply pathologically hate everything that smells of "the left" and don't care about these differences. you appreciate only those intellectuals who "come with good conclusions", which basically means those who agree with you ideologically. perhaps that's not too bad. a lot of leftists feel the same about right-wingers. but that's not my thing, regardless of the ideology in question.

Fingon
Dec 25th, 2006, 04:01 PM
bwahaha, yeah right, smart-ass. on this thread already you misinterpreted me (and chomsky) several times and that with hardly even saying anything of substance. you say "it's a little more difficult to differentiate with leftish intellectuals" and that you hope that "there are some that think differently" which basically shows that you do put them all in the same basket on ideological basis and have no idea what they are really saying. there are vast differences among various "leftish intellectuals" just as there are vast differences between intellectuals at the other end of the political spectrum. you simply pathologically hate everything that smells of "the left" and don't care about these differences. you appreciate only those intellectuals who "come with good conclusions", which basically means those who agree with you ideologically. perhaps that's not too bad. a lot of leftists feel the same about right-wingers. but that's not my thing, regardless of the ideology in question.

oh, the always calm and "intellectual azdaja is losing his cool, maybe because he is running out of arguments.

again, you are trying to play with words to make your hollow arguments sound better "pathologically hate", an intellectual like you should know it makes no sense.

Of course I appreciate those who come with the right conclusions.

and stop claiming you support your assertions with facts, you don't. You know, a good thing with message boards is that you can ignore what others say and pretend you are right. You feel you are smart, but you are not, you are not so calm anymore, starting to call names.


you misinterpreted me (and chomsky)


that's hillarious, I might not agree with Chomsky, but he is an intellectual that actually speaks in Universities and writes books, you post on a message board (I do too, but I don't pretend to be an "intellectual" and don't put myself in the same sentence with an academic) :smash:

azdaja
Dec 25th, 2006, 04:35 PM
Of course I appreciate those who come with the right conclusions.
and how do you know what the right conclusions are? in your post you say that you wouldn't put your name in the same sentence with a scholar, yet you will boldly say which conclusions a scholar draws are right or wrong :weirdo:

and stop claiming you support your assertions with facts, you don't. You know, a good thing with message boards is that you can ignore what others say and pretend you are right. You feel you are smart, but you are not, you are not so calm anymore, starting to call names.
if i make an assertion i do support it with facts if asked to do so and if i am in a position to do it. but in this instance you are the one who is making big assertions and calls people names when they ask you for such a simple thing as an example of chomsky lying.

that's hillarious, I might not agree with Chomsky, but he is an intellectual that actually speaks in Universities and writes books, you post on a message board (I do too, but I don't pretend to be an "intellectual" and don't put myself in the same sentence with an academic) :smash:
:weirdo: it's not like i'm saying i'm as smart as him, only that you have no clue about what i really think about a lot of things. and i am not pretending that this is discussion is intellectual - in fact it's very vulgar :p and you should make up your mind - either a normal person has the intellectual capacity to understand what scholars say and even think on their own (this is what chomsky would say, btw) or not.

Fingon
Dec 25th, 2006, 05:26 PM
and how do you know what the right conclusions are? in your post you say that you wouldn't put your name in the same sentence with a scholar, yet you will boldly say which conclusions a scholar draws are right or wrong :weirdo:

I do have a brain you know, I can actually draw my own conclusions. I wouldn't put my name next to an academic (funny you call them scholars, nevermind) because it's rather ridiculous but I have enough brain cells to decide if I think what they say is right or wrong, I wouldn't dare to publish my conclusions in a university paper or a scientific magazine for example.

if i make an assertion i do support it with facts if asked to do so and if i am in a position to do it.


you don't, nevermind.

but in this instance you are the one who is making big assertions and calls people names when they ask you for such a simple thing as an example of chomsky lying.


where did I call anybody names? huh? your have a vivid imagination, and I know what Chomsky is and frankly couldn't care less if you believe it or not, I stated an opinion, period, I don't have the time or the will to go through Chomsky's writings (which don't interest me) just to satisfy you

:weirdo: it's not like i'm saying i'm as smart as him, only that you have no clue about what i really think about a lot of things. and i am not pretending that this is discussion is intellectual - in fact it's very vulgar :p and you should make up your mind - either a normal person has the intellectual capacity to understand what scholars say and even think on their own (this is what chomsky would say, btw) or not.

what is a normal person? huh? a 35 years old male with post secondary education that has 2 children, blah blah blah.

that shows your level of understanding, there are some people that can undestand some things that some academics say, it's not black and white, not you either understand everything or undestand nothing, some people can think by their own and some can't, some people are good a maths and suck at economy, some are good at languages and bad at music, your over-generalizations are truely laughable, you are laughable.

I am done with you, this obvioulsy won't take anywhere and it's like talking to a little kid, keep ranting about how bad the west is and how good muslims are.

Are you from Bosnia dragon?

azdaja
Dec 25th, 2006, 05:55 PM
I do have a brain you know, I can actually draw my own conclusions. I wouldn't put my name next to an academic (funny you call them scholars, nevermind) because it's rather ridiculous but I have enough brain cells to decide if I think what they say is right or wrong, I wouldn't dare to publish my conclusions in a university paper or a scientific magazine for example.
alright. everyone has enough brain cells to decide what they think, that's true :p

you don't, nevermind.
i do, but never mind.

where did I call anybody names? huh? your have a vivid imagination, and I know what Chomsky is and frankly couldn't care less if you believe it or not, I stated an opinion, period, I don't have the time or the will to go through Chomsky's writings (which don't interest me) just to satisfy you
:lol: you don't have to do it. but if chomsky doesn't interest you don't post about him.

what is a normal person? huh? a 35 years old male with post secondary education that has 2 children, blah blah blah.

that shows your level of understanding, there are some people that can undestand some things that some academics say, it's not black and white, not you either understand everything or undestand nothing, some people can think by their own and some can't, some people are good a maths and suck at economy, some are good at languages and bad at music, your over-generalizations are truely laughable, you are laughable.
that's perfect nonsense. i don't over-generalise anything, you are doing it, especially about me :p just because you don't like some of the stuff i say doesn't mean that i see the world in black and white. or do you consider people who disagree with you completely stupid just for that?

I am done with you, this obvioulsy won't take anywhere and it's like talking to a little kid, keep ranting about how bad the west is and how good muslims are.
where exactly do i rant about how "bad the west is and how good muslims are"? :confused: oh, that's just another stereotype you invented, i see.

i can tell you a lot of positive things about the west and a lot of negative things about muslims. i don't like discrimination against muslims in the west and i don't like discrimination against minorities in some islamic countries. i oppose wars if they are being fought for wrong reasons and i oppose terrorism in all cases i can think of. like saml, you did not see enough of me to know what i think. i prefer him to you because at least he's trying to bring some information into discussion, while all you do is say your opinion in an abusive way.

Are you from Bosnia dragon?
no :p

samsung101
Dec 26th, 2006, 03:03 PM
Chomsky?
Hugo Chaves' favorite guy? Matt Damon's Good Will Hunting fave?

Well, then, it must be so!


The guy who said the Kosovo wars were all about oil, and that
in fact, Clinton was nothing more than a shill for business and
money leaders in that war, and in other military conflicts.

In fact, that all American Presidents from, I think it was FDR
on down, were only puppets for big corporations and the profit
makers of the world, c/o: Chomsky.


He writes what his students and the Left want to hear.

He is no more legitimate than Ann Coulter. The famous linguist
who writes about everything but linguistics.


Bottom line is that Muslim population grown in Europe is far outdoing
the non-Muslim population zero birth rate. By sheer numbers,
given time, the Muslim population may in fact be the majority
sooner than later in the EU. So, what's the point of worrying
about it much.


The discrimination seems to be the other way. How many open
non-Muslims from the West can live and thrive and go about
their business peacefully in Muslim nations? Is it the West or
The Mideast/MiddleAsia that promotes tolerance, respect
for other relgions, and freedom to practice that religion?


When Chomsky and others take on Theo Van Gogh's murder,
the train bombings, the many cells all over Europe of Islamic fanatics
who want to kill westerners, and the mosques where murder is
preached alongside loving Allah...let me know.

azdaja
Dec 26th, 2006, 03:15 PM
The guy who said the Kosovo wars were all about oil, and that
in fact, Clinton was nothing more than a shill for business and
money leaders in that war, and in other military conflicts.

In fact, that all American Presidents from, I think it was FDR
on down, were only puppets for big corporations and the profit
makers of the world, c/o: Chomsky.
see, that's what i'm talking about. he does not say any of the above. he does write about connections between corporations and states, though.

azdaja
Dec 26th, 2006, 06:55 PM
actually i decided to use this opportunity to show that people who dislike chomsky usually either really don't understand what he is saying or deliberately distort it. for people like fingon, this is what is called presenting some "evidence". it's very easy, really :p


The guy who said the Kosovo wars were all about oil, and that
in fact, Clinton was nothing more than a shill for business and
money leaders in that war, and in other military conflicts.
in fact chomsky's position is that serbia/yugoslavia was punished for disobedience:
"(...) Strobe Talbott, now director of the Brookings Institution, who was the lead American negotiator and director of a joint National Security Council-Pentagon-State Department task force on diplomacy during the bombing. Talbott wrote the foreword to a recent book on the war by his director of communications, John Norris. In it, Talbott writes that thanks to Norris’s book, anyone interested in the war in Kosovo “will know...how events looked and felt at the time to those of us who were involved” in the war. That sounds fairly authoritative. Presenting the position of the Clinton administration, Norris writes that “it was Yugoslavia’s resistance to the broader trends of political and economic reform – not the plight of Kosovar Albanians – that best explains NATO’s war.” That had been surmised, but is now confirmed from a very high level."


In fact, that all American Presidents from, I think it was FDR
on down, were only puppets for big corporations and the profit
makers of the world, c/o: Chomsky.
in reality chomsky clearly sees corporate and state power as separate entities:
"(...) Big Oil and the state often conflict -- and the very same individuals make different decisions when they are working within the industry and when they are running the State Department -- which is concerned not with the short-term parochial interests of one component of the US corporate system but with its long-term global predominance, which introduces other considerations (...)".

it is a very popular strategy of a lot of people to make an inferior version of someone's arguments and then criticise that inferior version as if it were what the person in question is saying. each way, these 2 quotes, taken from chomsky's blog, are enough to show that samsung does not give us correct interpretation of chomsky's positions.

for the record, i appreciate chomsky primarily for his work in linguistics and the media analysis (which is seen as a part of linguistics actually). that does not mean his work in politics is not valuable, though. it is simply a bit overrated because a lot of other people are saying the same, and not only on the left. he is very popular and there is almost a personality cult surrounding him.

i read only 2 political books by him and both are very old, the more recent one was published in 1992. most of the things i know about him are from trancriptions of his lectures. there is also this letter exchange between him and a polish professor about dissidents in eastern europe and dissidents in the west. that was a really eye-opening read and i think it's probably my favourite piece of political writing by him.

having said that, it would be wrong to assume that my views are the same as his, but that's another matter. and even this was totally off-topic anyway.

VRee_Willario
Feb 28th, 2007, 06:26 PM
Two of my cousins are muslims, but they are tatars and look like finnish people

Lord Nelson
Feb 28th, 2007, 06:38 PM
Two of my cousins are muslims, but they are tatars and look like finnish people
Are Muslims supposed to look like something? :confused:
by the way Tatars USUALLY have Mongoloid features.

samsung101
Feb 28th, 2007, 06:55 PM
The same EUMC that in 2002 did not publish its own findings on
anti-semitism in Europe because it showed that a lot of it was
from Muslims towards Jews. That was considered inflammatory.

Is there a report on Christian-phobia in Europe? Since the word
Christian, and Christian practices, and open Christian symbols in
public places are frowned upon, snickered at, and have largely
been educated- out of the system.

Europe should stop bending over backwards to accomodate the
Islamic faith. They have freedom of religion. That's the #1 thing
they won't find in many parts of Northern Africa or the Midde East
in Islamic nations.

It is true within a generation, Islamic Europeans, legal and illegal,
natural born and immigrant, will be the majority in Europe. So, all that
won't matter. I'm sure the EUMC will be dismantled in an Islamic
majority society anyway.

Conform to Islam or shut up. That's the future of Europe at this rate.

No one has the right to physically assault you, or to discriminate against
you in the work place or renting or buying a home or car, based upon
your faith.

Tolerance means to tolerate. Not like, endorse, love, or care about.
Just put up with.

azdaja
Feb 28th, 2007, 07:00 PM
The same EUMC that in 2002 did not publish its own findings on
anti-semitism in Europe because it showed that a lot of it was
from Muslims towards Jews. That was considered inflammatory.
lies. there is a reaction to these claims on their website.

Johno_uk
Feb 28th, 2007, 07:49 PM
No, but I didn't miss the re-elections of Bush and Blair either.


Umm, well the main opposition party also backed the war, so the British people were supposed to express their feeling, how exactly? Vote Lib Dem? Erm I don't think so....

SelesFan70
Feb 28th, 2007, 11:50 PM
Anyway in 100 years we will be all muslims....

Over my dead body... :)