Long-feared by US intelligence, Muslim radicalization is gaining momentum in the United States, hit by a spate of recent cases featuring youths recruited and trained overseas for jihad, analysts say...
Some analysts say the United States has been slow to respond and still has little understanding of the scope and nature of the problem.
"Twelve warning signs is 12 too many," said Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University in Washington.
"For too long, I think we may have been complacent in the United States, thinking this was a problem that occurred elsewhere and that it wasn't a problem we really had to address in the US," he added, acknowledging it was difficult to determine the extent of the development.
Read the whole article here.
That's a real shock there, Nabeel. We kill a million Muslims in Iraq based on a pack of lies taller than the Tower of Babel itself, provide Israel the means to slaughter additional Muslims, and we just can't believe that Muslims are suddenly becoming more extreme. What should we do? Bomb them more?
So you agree with the radicalization of Muslims in the west? I'm glad we're on the same page. Whatever the reason, it's clearly happening and people need to be aware.
Hi Jon... still wanting to ignore thate 90% off those supposed deads happened due to intra-islamic violence? On the other hand it's great to see thate you agree withe the radicalization off muslims in the west... your true colours are justt jumping arounde...
I'm not an expert on that, but I would expect that it's true that Islamic fundamentalism and radicalism is on the rise. I think there is a correlation between violence perpetuated against Muslims and radicalization of Muslims. What I think we should do in response is look at the data and try to figure out the causes of the radicalization, and when we do that I think we find that the very policies supported on this website are the very causes of the radicalization.
OBL tells us what motivated him. Violence against Muslims. A person interested in reducing terror would consider his grievances and, where they are legitimate, correct them. Where they are illegitimate you ignore them. Was it illegitimate of him to object to a million starved Iraqi children or the fact that we provide Israel the means to reject the peaceful resolution to the conflict there? I don't think so. So let's correct that.
What we've done instead is the very opposite. We've expanded our aggression against Muslims and supported Israel as they've engaged in additional atrocities. We've seen a corresponding increase in radicalization. This is exactly what we should expect based upon the data.
It would seem that our government isn't interested in protecting the citizens or preventing radicalization of Muslims. Their policies promote the very opposite. So why do people at this website ignore the causes of the radicalization if you're really interested in reducing it?
Justify your assertion that 90% of the dead are the result if intra-Islamic violence. I am confident your assertion is false, but it shouldn't be my burden to find the evidence that contradicts each false assertion you make. You should provide evidence to justify your assertions.
I don't know enough about our foreign policy (mainly because I wouldn't be able to do anything about it even if I did) to comment on your opinion. Should there be violence and hatred against Muslims? Absolutely not. The authors of this website are entirely against violence and hatred.
But I'm pretty certain that even in places where there is no violence and/or hatred against Muslims, they would still perceive it and radicalize themselves. I say this because I've seen it myself.
Jon thanks for the classic response.
"OBL tells us what motivated him. Violence against Muslims."
Why you are correct OBL did tell us what motiviated him you are wrong in that motivation. What motivated him is the Quran and the Sunnah.
What came first Radical Muslims or Kuffar defending themselves against the radical muslims?
What came first the Crusades or the Muslim conquest?
What came first security at air ports or Radical Muslims hijacking air planes?
What came first Islamic Radicalism or the "WAR ON TERROR"?
What came first Mohamed or Jihad?
The funny thing with blaming the victims of radical muslims is your saying that the kuffar victims are more powerful then Peacefull islam.
Either we are really good debaters convincing good pios muslims that there relegion is a violent and extreame. Or Islam is so weak that evil Kuffar can convince pious peacfull muslims not to follow there relegion.
One last thought do u ever wonder why that in all cases a muslism behavior is dictated by the behavior of the KUFFAR?
What I find most intersting about the typical westernized muslim resonse to Radical Muslims. Is that it is the fault of the Kuffar taht Muslims are becoming radicalized. Even more, is that Muslims who are citizens of western countries, either through birth or naturalization have no problem either sympathizing or supporting openinly and in some cases actively the enimies of their nations.
Now I for one was against the invasion of Iraq from the begging. I singed patitions, and even wore a "Peace Now" button on my laptop bag to work.
However after the go ahead was givin by our President to invade Iraq I felt it was my duty as a citizen and christian to stand behind the decison of the president that God had put in the position to lead, and to pray for a quck victory and end to the war.
However after the war dragged on and the complete failure's of the adminstration to heed the advice of their top generals. It became apparent that the venture was flawed from its inception. I then decided that it was my duty as a citizen and christin to activly speak out, petition, protest, and vote against those taht would continue a failed policy.
ONE THING I DID NOT DO, ONE THING I WILL NEVER DO, as a citizen and as a CHRISTIAN. Is openly sympathize and or suport the enemies of my nation.
You raise your hand to the United States of America, your hand will be knocked down to never be raised again. You exort violence towords my fellow citizens then i will respond with "Extreame Prejudice"
I have no sympathy for the hardships of my nations enimies, or for their dead. The oject of war is not to die for your nation or your cause, but to get the other fool to die for his.
For those enimies that ask for mercy, mercy has and will be given. If no quarter is saught then none will be granted.
As God says in Proverbs 8. "All who hate me LOVE DEATH'
Words you muslims would be wise to take heed.
only if you knew the real radicalism. sounds to me your just like any clueless person who thinks theres 2 sides to a story when it comes to islam. maybe i should buy you a first class ticket to the heart of kabba with a sign saying Islam is false. why dont you go search the real deal yourself .
Hi Jon... justte take the number you want for the people who died in Irak since the external forces when there and made a subtraction for all the deads thate happened due to intra-islamic violence tahte are presented in the following site thate makes an account for almost all muslim violente actions in Irak thate were presented in the media...
I have done thate in August and the number was 86% off deads due to islamic violence from the number (then supposed to be from 93.000 to 102.700) presented by
thats whie, dear Jon, people at least small informed reffer to whate existes in Irak as a "civil war"...
Nabeel, you should not base conclusions like this on your own subjective assessment of the causes of radicalization. The scientific method (collecting data, controlling for different variables, performing statistical analysis) is the right way. To just say you've seen people radicalize despite the fact that they haven't been influenced by violence is simply not something you can know. Do you know all of the causes that lead to these people's radicalization? Do you interview them, determine their motivations, etc? Much of this work has been done and it shows that you are exactly wrong.
I can list several acts of terrorism right off the top of my head and in every case the motivations are political. 9/11, Leon Klinghoffer, the attacks against Jewish athletes at the Olympics, the attacks at Bali. They can occur for other reasons. The cartoon violence comes to mind and I object to it, as I object to terrorism in all forms. The point is though the vast majority is retaliatory.
Want to stop it? Encourage governments like the United States to stop engaging in behavior that encourages it. That's the best way, maybe the only way short of total genocide, to stop it.
Fernando, vague reference to research you did "in August" is by no means evidence of your assertions. Iraq Body Count records strictly "documented" and "non-combatant" casualties only. This means it is a gross undercount as they well know and admit. It's a complete lower bound of the casualty figures, but a number that cannot be denied by either side.
Bottom line though, nothing you've shown proves that 90% of the dead die due to Muslim on Muslim violence. Where is the data? If you're going to make an assertion about the data then back it up. Or is it good enough to just make stuff up? Can I just say "90% of the deaths are due to U.S. military forces" and that's good enough for proof? I want to know the basis for your claim.
Jon, I would like to wake you up with the statistics on Muslim casualties:
85% of the people that died due to Al Qaeda attacks between 204 and 2008 were Muslims.
In the years 2006 to 2008 the casualties were as high as 98% (Source http://ctc.usma.edu/Deadly%20Vanguards_Complete_L.pdf)
Furthermore, the past weeks there have been several terrorist attacks: perpetrators MUSLIMS - victims MUSLIMS. Here are the facts on ONLY ONE WEEK:
2009.12.04 (Pakistan, Rawalpindi) 40deas and 86 injured: Seventeen children at a mosque are among nearly forty people cut down in a barbaric shooting and bombing attack by Sunni hardliners.
2009.12.04 (Pakistan, Mohmand Agency) 6 dead and 13 injured: Mujahideen bombers take out six members of a wedding party traveling in a mini-bus.
2009.12.07 (Iraq, Tarmiyah) 8 dead: Six Iraqis are gunned down by al-Qaeda. Two more bodies are discovered in Kirkuk.
2009.12.07 (Pakistan, Peshawar) 11 dead and 45 injured: Eleven people at a courthouse are blown to bits by a Fedayeen suicide bomber.
2009.12.07 (Pakistan, Lahore) 50 dead and 150 injured: At least fifty people are incinerated by twin bombings at a crowded marketplace.
2009.12.07 (Iraq, Baghdad) 8 dead and 40 injured: Seven children are among eight dead when Sunni radicals bomb a Shia school.
2009.12.08 (Pakistan, Multan) 12 dead and 20 injured: A dozen Pakistanis are blown to bits by Taliban bombers
2009.12.08 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Five car bombs, one outside a fine arts center, leave at least one-hundred and twenty Iraqis dead and nearly five hundred more in agony.
2009.12.08 (Multan, Pakistan) - A dozen Pakistanis are blown to bits by Taliban bombers.
2009.12.09 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Two streetsweepers are among four Iraqis murdered by Islamic bombers in attacks on a library and minibus.
Remember, these are only excerpts from a mouhtain of data about Muslims killing Muslims. I dont know about you, Jon, but maybe, just maybe the Muslims behave like that because their religion teaches them to behave this way. After all, all of the rightly guided khaliphs were butchered by fellow Muslims. That was how the first Muslims settled the score with one another. Muslims today are simply mimicking the behaviour of their role models.
Lastly, I would like to point out that "we" dont blow up mosques and marketplaces with trucks full of explosions for the sole purpose of killing as many people as possible. That is something that the Muslims do and they dont care if they kill fellow Muslims, women and children included, in the process.
Now since we have provided the data, at your request, can you please be so accomodating and substandiate your claim that "we" killed a million Muslims in Afghanistan? Thank you...
The Fat Man,
Here are a few citations from Bin Laden's videos. I simply called up the most recent ones, but you can look at a variety of them and the message is the same.
Sep 25, 2009
In summary: We demand neither something unjust nor absurd; and it is certainly part of justice for you to stop your injustice and withdraw your soldiers. It would also be sensible not to treat your neighbors badly.
Sep 13, 2009
At the beginning, I say that we have made it clear and stated so many times for over two decades that the cause of the quarrel with you is your support for your Israeli allies, who have occupied our land, Palestine. This position of yours, along with some other grievances, is what prompted us to carry out the 11 September events. Had you known the magnitude of our suffering as a result of the injustice of the Jews against us, with the support of your administrations for them, you would have known that both our nations are victims of the policies of the White House, which is in fact a hostage in the hands of pressure groups, especially major corporations and the Israeli lobby.
Jan 19, 2009
I don't see a transcript, but it is entitled "A Call for Jihad to Stop the Aggression Against Gaza". This is during the awful Israeli incursion into Gaza that killed 1400 basically defenseless people trapped in a concentration camp called Gaza.
Here's an interesting one where OBL talks about how he has no quarrel with Christians and Jews generally who live in peace in Muslims territories and how the holocaust was a European incident, not a Muslim one. I won't quote it because it's quite long, but I think it again makes clear what has been said so many times by him. The occupation and the issue of Palestine, the violence of which is enabled by U.S. policy, is his motivation.
Don't be ignorant. You're commenting off of what you think (i.e. you think the attack from 9/11 was politically motivated); you can't know for sure. There's nothing "scientific" about your assumption; Your presumption of their motivations is just as valid (or invalid) a guess as anyone else's.
I've commented beyond that; I've commented on what I've seen personally in the lives of Muslims I know well; how they react to stimuli and why they radicalize. If you're talking about scientific method, that's what one would call a valid observation of data (more valid than someone's opinion about people he's never met based off of news reports from biased, emotional media).
If anything, your observation is more subjective than mine, but they are both observations and they are both subjective. From the way you criticize virtually everyone who posts on this blog, I'd expect you to be more familiar with these kinds of basics.
Besides, I agreed with you about not antagonizing Muslims with hatred and violence! My friend, at least know when to argue - and then when you do, use valid arguments!
I pray you'll be less trigger happy on criticism and more open-eyed and open-minded. Sincerely,
Great quotes, interesting you can pull those up. But I noticed something those are from 2009 got anything from say 1997?
Nakdimon, I said a million dead in Iraq, not Afghanistan. Here's the basis for the claim.
The Fat Man,
Here's one from 1997:
March 1997 Interview with Peter Arnett
REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, you've declared a jihad against the United States. Can you tell us why? And is the jihad directed against the US government or the United States' troops in Arabia? What about US civilians in Arabia or the people of the United States?
BIN LADIN: We declared jihad against the US government, because the US government is unjust, criminal and tyrannical. It has committed acts that are extremely unjust, hideous and criminal whether directly or through its support of the Israeli occupation of the Prophet's Night Travel Land (Palestine). And we believe the US is directly responsible for those who were killed in Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq. The mention of the US reminds us before everything else of those innocent children who were dismembered, their heads and arms cut off in the recent explosion that took place in Qana (in Lebanon). This US government abandoned even humanitarian feelings by these hideous crimes. It transgressed all bounds and behaved in a way not witnessed before by any power or any imperialist power in the world. They should have been considerate that the qibla (Mecca) of the Muslims upheaves the emotion of the entire Muslim World. Due to its subordination to the Jews the arrogance and haughtiness of the US regime has reached, to the extent that they occupied the qibla of the Muslims (Arabia) who are more than a billion in the world today. For this and other acts of aggression and injustice, we have declared jihad against the US, because in our religion it is our duty to make jihad so that God's word is the one exalted to the heights and so that we drive the Americans away from all Muslim countries. As for what you asked whether jihad is directed against US soldiers, the civilians in the land of the Two Holy Places (Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina) or against the civilians in America, we have focused our declaration on striking at the soldiers in the country of The Two Holy Places. The country of the Two Holy Places has in our religion a peculiarity of its own over the other Muslim countries. In our religion, it is not permissible for any non-Muslim to stay in our country. Therefore, even though American civilians are not targeted in our plan, they must leave. We do not guarantee their safety, because we are in a society of more than a billion Muslims. A reaction might take place as a result of US government's hitting Muslim civilians and executing more than 600 thousand Muslim children in Iraq by preventing food and medicine from reaching them. So, the US is responsible for any reaction, because it extended its war against troops to civilians. This is what we say. As for what you asked regarding the American people, they are not exonerated from responsibility, because they chose this government and voted for it despite their knowledge of its crimes in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and in other places and its support of its agent regimes who filled our prisons with our best children and scholars. We ask that may God release them.
Jon... so you habe a data base from Bin Laden... hummm... now we see who are your friends...
so, Jon, you do not wantt to make some maths... thates a problem with you... the evidences are clearly there... you justt habe to make maths: X-Y and there you'll bae itt... unless you still say thera are still "combatents" nowadays in Irak...
and iff you wanted to take inn account non-acounted deads I would guess the % off muslims killed by other muslims woulde rise eben higher...
don't play the foll... every muslims thate woulde habe been killed by external forces woulde habe been denounced bie persons like you...
wake upp and just do the maths... teh evidence is there to anyone who are not affraide to do so...
Hi Jon... ounce again withe Palestiania? you jumpw from one topic to another as you will: you habe a confused mind just willing to play the foll arounde... you're soo foonie...
wats is the connection wiithe the Holocaust withe the opinion off "Osama bin Laiden"? the only thingue I see is thate (besides you pick up only sone words thate do not show "his" barbaric ideologie) Osama, following islamic key sources, would love to do another Holocaust iff he had the oportunity... thats whie external forces are nowadays in Apheganistan: to not allow thate country to become more a state in the hands off some true muslims who would turn itt again into a nation who beads the seedas off another Holocaust to every non-muslim... you know thate...
Jon... had teh arabs people accepted the partition off the British Palestian into the 10%-90% according withe the stimated number off Jews and arabs in thate protectorate and there woulde nott be any problem... the faultt is in muslims hands, mie friend... therea are no way to denie itt unless you are brainwashed... iff you do nott like the state off Israel you should not lile the state off Jordan thate emerged att the same time... were's your honesty, coherence and truth? well... iff you post some supposed "pacific" bin Laden's comments, we already know the answer: they are nowhere... another proof there are no "us" or "we", mie friend...
Guys,I have just been listening to RICHARD CARRIER a bit in a 2008 speech he made in the youtube video "Skepticon One pt.1 Richard Carrier and PZ Myers" and in MINUTE 6 he actually says HITLER " was a DEVOUTED CHRISTIAN despite the LIES told about him,he was a BELIEVER."
ON WHAT BASIS?
I was so shocked.I mean,he is in general a serious enough scholar,I assume,but to make such a statement when all the evidence shows Hitler did NOT consider himself a Christian,really makes me highly doubt his sincerity and even intelligence.Wow,what a low way to go,it makes him look,I don't like to say it,but the word is foolish as can be.I am not writing this to humiliate him but really you can expect THAT from an AHMED DEEDAT or an AHMADINEJAD but not from him.
i saw your youtube video sharia.why do not you go to ahmedies convention (jalsa),with the camera?you trying to asking question from them they do not have answer.so please come to ahmedies programe,and ask question
If you can set up a dialogue between us and some Ahmadi scholars, we'd love to participate!
jessus (peace be upon him)is dead like other prophet.his grave is kashmir INDIA.so prove this is wrong beleve of ahmedies muslim if you prove, that grave is not hazrat jessus its somebody else millions of ahemedi muslim might be converted in chistianity.could you do that?
You just changed the subject. But here again, if you'd like to set up a debate or dialogue between us and some Ahmadi scholars, we'd be happy to participate.
In the meantime, why don't you try to prove that Jesus was buried in India. Since there isn't a scholar in the world who supports your position, you'll have to show us that all of the world's scholars are wrong.
Post a Comment