Sunday, December 6, 2009

The Myth of the Anti-Muslim Backlash (vs. Actual Facts)

Whenever Muslim terrorists kill a bunch of Westerners, their fellow Muslims immediately start complaining about an impending backlash against Muslims. This is largely due to the way many Muslims think. When someone does something that offends a Muslim (e.g. drawing a cartoon of Muhammad), there's an immediate backlash against non-Muslims, often involving a worldwide killing spree. Thus, Muslims assume that other people think like literalist Muslims do, and that since many Muslims kill at random when offended, so will the rest of the world.

Fortunately, the anti-Muslim backlashes rarely occur. Indeed, Muslims struggled to come up with instances of anti-Muslim hate crimes after the Fort Hood Massacre, and the best example they found was a Muslim woman who had her scarf tugged in a grocery store. This is startling evidence of Western tolerance.

But the statistics are even more staggering. According to an FBI study on hate crimes, it's actually much safer to be a Muslim in America than a Jew in America:

There were 1,606 hate crime offenses motivated by religious bias in 2008. A breakdown of these offenses shows:

65.7 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-other religion.
7.7 percent were anti-Islamic.
4.7 percent were anti-Catholic.
4.2 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.7 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.9 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

Yet, while the majority of religiously-motivated hate crimes are directed at Jews, we hear relatively little complaining from Jews. Muslims, on the other hand, proclaim their mythical mistreatment from the rooftops, in an effort to keep the peace until the next terrorist attack.

Note: The population of Jews and Muslims in America is roughly comparable. According to CAIR, in 2001 there were 6-7 million Muslims in the US, and according to Jewish American Yearbook, in 2006 there were 6.4 million Jews in the US.

54 comments:

The Fat Man said...

Wow a woman tugs on a muslim head scarf and this is the Backlash. I wonder if there is a defense fund for this womam, to defend her against this naked islamic agression. Dont the muslim know they are provoking us by wearing there relgious symbols. Dont they know that it causes post tramatic stress disorder when we see the Hijab after the 9-11 attacks?

Jon said...

You're right. Muslims are safe in America.

But not in Afghanistan or Iraq or Pakistan. In Lebanon Israel is able to invade and wipe out 20,000 civilians in just 3 months with no credible pretext, mostly with U.S. weaponry. Though in fairness they kill a lot of Christians as well in Lebanon.

I agree with you likewise in condemning the Muslim violence that resulted from the cartoons. But then it's easy to point out the flaws in others. I like Dr. Laura's approach. Start by looking in the mirror.

minoria said...

Jon,there is something you forgot.Yet alot of Muslim civilians have been killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan and Lebanon but it was not the intention of the army to do so.

9/11

Besides,before 2001 NOBODY was in Afghanistan or Iraq,yet Al-Qaida attacked New York.As for the 1 million children who died in Iraq,the UN imposed sanctions on SADDAM HUSSEIN's NUCLEAR PROGRAM.He only had to stop and they would have stopped.But he didn't care about his own people.I think the sanctions were a bad idea,but alot of Muslims have been brainwashed with conspiracy theories.

J. said...

Whoa. I expected the Muslim percentage to be higher than that.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Hey Jon

you said:
I like Dr. Laura's approach. Start by looking in the mirror.


I respond

Let me get this strait

Do you really wish to condemn Christians by referencing the actions of a secular Jewish nation because they used a weapons produced by a multinational corporations based in a secular western nation?

And this is all in response to the David's evidence that Muslims are relatively safe in that country compared to Jews

Not sure I follow you.

It would be like me condemning the followers of Confucius because Cuba used Chinese weapons in africa


peace

Jon said...

In fact, Minoria, it was the intention of the Israeli military to inflict civilian casualties.

9/11 was also a travesty. We are in agreement on that. My point though is when your condemning the death of 3000 innocent people try to remember the million dead in Iraq, the 20,000 dead in Lebanon, the 40,000 dead in Nicaragua, and on and on the list goes. People are very good at zeroing in on the sins of the enemies of the state and not so good at doing the same thing with their own government, especially when they are threatened with charges of lack of patriotism, etc.

As far as Saddam, let's face facts. We punished the innocent victims of his tyranny with the sanctions, and we blocked relief every step of the way. Saddam was a monster of course, but once again I say stop doing the easy thing and criticizing the enemies of the state and do the difficult thing and look in the mirror.

Jon said...

FMM, I actually am not condemning Christianity. I believe there is a lot of good in Christianity. Also some wickedness, but that's true for anything.

My point is simple. We Americans (assuming you are American) provide Israel the means to slaughter tens of thousands of innocent people. They couldn't do it without our military support. Likewise they wouldn't be able to reject the long standing offer of peace in the region and instead go with expansionism, to the detriment of not only the Palestinians but also Jewish people who are killed in retaliation. It's all awful and could end if we did something to stop it.

David Wood wants to pat himself on the back because Muslims aren't killed state side. That's a fine thing I suppose, but the mountain of corpses of Muslims overseas matter too in my view.

Adam said...

Hey Jon

I my country (India) you muslim cant even fix proper education system and other mounting social problem, within muslim community.

I know your mullas, who always divert the mind of muslims towards Palestine. Guess what, many muslims in my country have no clue where Palestine is located in the globe.

May you Kaaba Worshipers come to Lord Jesus Christ.

Long Live Isreal

Adam

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... can you change your record? its broken... you're always playingue the same rotten music tahte won't take you anywhere because its false, unsubstantiated by facts and history... you, like many muslims (iff not all off them), live in an irreal world creatted by, like islam itself, your hate against Christianity and the West (in the time off muhammad this being the Romans)... Jon: grow upp to bee a man and a true human being...

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... can you change your record? its broken... you're always playingue the same rotten music tahte won't take you anywhere because its false, unsubstantiated by facts and history... you, like many muslims (iff not all off them), live in an irreal world creatted by, like islam itself, your hate against Christianity and the West (in the time off muhammad this being the Romans)... Jon: grow upp to bee a man and a true human being...

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Jon said:

It's all awful and could end if we did something to stop it.

I respond

Who is the we? Me and you personally? Christians ?

IMHO the only way to establish true and lasting peace is to spread the gospel both here and abroad I would hope that we would do that?

on the other hand
If you are relying on a human government to bring peace to the earth you will forever be disappointed.

Governments are made up of fallen men in need of a savior. So they will always disappoint and there will always be unintended consequences to their actions.

I suggest you put your faith in something that never fails.

peace


peace



peace

aussie christian said...

I agree with the monarchy man,

While hope is placed upon men the situation will continue to be the same: Man cannot even command the footfall of man except to the injury of all men.

When the prinsipals of the one true God are followed, all mankind prospers. When the prinsipals of men or satan are followed all that occurs is violence, death, discrimination.

Democracy, communism, socialism, islam, fascism, totalatarianism, are all under the guise of satan, for satan has convinced men into believing they have the answers without firstly going to God's holy and perfect word (the Bible)for advice.

I am amazed that muslims keep throwing up the good ole adage of "Christian countries". Lets make it nice and clear, nice and easy, lets spell it out, cause they just dont seem to understand,

THERE IS NO CHRISTIAN COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF PLANET EARTH!!!!
Lets hope that clears that misconception up.

True Christians know, because they read and understand the Bible, that our Govt is currently residing in heaven. Earth will come under Christian IE: Theological govt when and only when, the Lord Jesus Christ returns to earth to begin the resurection and judgement of all human kind.

Also, even though many call themselves Christians, the Bible tells us that very few will be accepted by Christ. Again, read the Bible before making blash statements on "Christian countries"

You will aslo note please, that even though Christians seem to congregate in European and American countries, only a small proportion of those who claim to be Christian are in fact practicing Christians.

So to our muslim posters and others (Jon for example). Lets get the facts straight on the involvment of Christians before you blow off and the wrong end.

I hope this helps clear up the muddle of confusion that seems to persist currently.

Peace and Love.

minoria said...

Hello Jon:

I agree the sanctions against Iraq were in the end bad.The idea was good at first,it has worked on other occasions(Latin America for example)but then it should have been lifted and outright military attacks on nuclear sites with UN approval (or maybe without) was a better idea.

I'm not so sure about that Israel intentionally targeted civilians in Lebanon because HAMAS often uses HUMAN SHIELDS.It has happened over and over again and if that is not enough there is the strong chance the civilians involved were NOT neutral but actively let Hamas use their homes because they were sympathisers.

PAKISTAN

BEFORE they said the US's support for DICTATOR MUSHAREF was the problem.He left and the HUSBAND of his RIVAL,the late Benazir Bhutto,is now president.He certainly can NOT be accused of being a dictator.Yet he refuses to cooperate with India in handing over those responsable for the death of 200 INNOCENT people in Bombay by Muslim terrorists.

TALIBAN

So the idea was that BEFORE the TALIBAN was attacking Pakistan and blowing themselves up there because the US supported MUSHAREF,the DICTATOR,violator of human rights.Yet yesterday some 60 were killed in Pakistan by them,and before that there were MANY other terrorist killings AFTER Musharef left.

REASON

The Taliban have a POLITICAL OBJECTIVE(just like KHOMEINI) and for them Pakistan is not Islamic enough,and they also want the nuclear arms Pakistan has.This political objective is based on the Koran and Muslim traditions.

GreekAsianPanda said...

Fernando said:
Jon: grow upp to bee a man and a true human being...

I say:
So...Jon is not a true human being because he does not agree with you?

Jon said...

That's fine if you think that we have to wait for God to make things perfect, but for now maybe God would have you do the things you're capable of doing right now rather than waiting for his future perfect world.

Jon said...

Minoria, I'm glad to hear you say you don't approve of the sanctions. I'm not sure which sanctions you think worked in Latin America, so I'm curious on that. But anyway apparently you agree that punishing Saddam's victims for Saddam's crimes doesn't make sense. I'm glad to see that some here are capable of empathy with people of a different faith.

The claim about Hamas using human shields is basically an IDF claim belied by the human rights organizations in the region. The IDF however has no qualms about using human shields, and does so openly. See here for instance. B'Tselem is a Jewish human rights organization by the way.

You're mistaken about Pakistan. Musharaaf was the U.S. backed dictator, but he was on his way out, so the U.S. demanded that he depose the judges and re-write the Constitution to permit the criminal Bhutto to run again. She couldn't re-run due to term limits, but the U.S. decided that they wanted her so they just changed the laws. Somebody that didn't want a puppet regime killed her, but it didn't matter. They just installed her husband. He's another puppet leader.

Still, even if you're right about Bhutto and you found flaws in the actions of others I say why waste your energies on these? You can't do anything about it. Sure, people here will pat you on the back because you are criticizing those that they like to demonize already. But what is actually accomplished?

Fernando said...

Hi GreekAsianPanda...

no... I meant tahte Jon is behaving like a children because he's always saying the same things ober and ober even when many have delt withe them in previous threads...

and he's not behaving like an human being because the true human beings whate to follow the path and the example off the only true Human being: Jesus thate saide himself to be the truth... Jon os obviously not interested in the truth, rather in usidng his rethorical habbility to twist factes and jumpe from one point to another when he's lossing the ground of argumentation under his feet...

one thing important is to debate ideas and convictions, butt to do so one must be hable to accept the truth vehiculated by the other in facts and historical events... Jon is teh perfect example off the hiper-ventilated person who only sayis whate the "myth" repeats on every corner of every media support... he does not eben know any documental facts and his always saying: well, thats true, butt lets ignore itt and supoise tahte I'm right... he has done this in the debate aboutt the partition off the British Palestinia; on muhammad being presented as the perfect and normative example to maulims on any time; of the fact thate palestinais where druiven out off the actual palestinian geographical territory by arabs troops; on the fact thate 90% off casualties in Irak were caused by the intra-islamic violence... and he still does so...

dear GreekAsianPanda... thats why I say Jon is not a grown peson and is not a true human being: not because he does not agree withe me, butt rather because he's continusly playing around withe his false statements tahte were, ober and ober, debated and refuted as you can cleraly see on other trheads off this blogg..

thaks dear GreekAsianPanda for this oportunity to express in a better fashion my thoughts...

may God bless you and your family...

minoria said...

In the case of the Dominican dictator TRUJILLO the gradual retirement of support by the US was one reason the opposition assasinated him.In the case of the dictator FUJIMORI of Peru,the threat of sanctions was one reason he fled the country.Or farther afield sanctions against APARTHEID South Africa had their effect.They can be governmental or individual(not buying from businesses that support those governments).

ISRAEL

The link you gave me shows one incident that is being legally sanctioned and investigated in Israel.But that is not the same thing as having an official policy of using human shields.

WHAT WE CAN DO

Well,in the case of helping discriminated non-Muslims in the Muslim world info can help.It was due to a protest campaign against the jailing of 2 Iranian women who were in danger of being executed for becoming Christian that they have been released.

What is more,one can make effective protest by not buying products from those countries.If the Egyptian government does not want stop legal discrimination against Christians then one thing to do is NOT to visit that country,also to TELL OTHERS not to for human rights reasons.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Jon said:

but for now maybe God would have you do the things you're capable of doing right now rather than waiting for his future perfect world.

I respond,


I think everyone here would agree with you in this regard.

The question is what is the right thing to do. Good folks often disagree on what the right things are politically speaking. That is because we are finite and human and none of us can see the whole picture.

On the other hand what we Christians have been expressly commissioned to do is make disciples. I would hope that everyone of us would do that in every way possible.

When the number of disciples increases in the world the amount of justice and peace increases as well.

This is just a fact. We see it all the time in places as diverse as Central America and China.

In contrast we try to increase justice and peace by carnal means our good intentions often backfire.

Even when things go as planed innocent people will be hurt unintentionally by our actions. that is the nature of the fallen world.

None of this removes our responsibility to obey and pray for our leaders and if given the chance to choose leaders that we feel will best fulfill their God given roll to carry out God’s wrath on wrong doers.

I’m only arguing that we keep in mind what our job and responsibilities are and pointing out that you will never be satisfied if you continue to look to government to provide Justice and peace.

That is something only Christ can provide. I sugest you look to him for it.

peace

minoria said...

I forgot to add that if one were to take PRACTICAL ACTIONS against human rights Muslim countries it has to MADE PUBLIC why they are being done.

EXAMPLE

Suppose a group of people say:"We will tell others NOT to visit Algeria and Egypt as tourists or buy products from those countries as protest for the discrimination against Christians and other non-Muslims."

They have to LET the ALGERIAN and EGYPTIAN ambassadors KNOW the WHY.Then if more join in for the same reason and let the embassies know the message will go to their rulers.

Not just their rulers but their own people,that the world KNOWS and is watching.

Jon said...

Minoria, there are plenty of examples of the IDF using Palestinians as human shields. You can do the google search I'm sure. Once again what we have here is another outraged description of wrongdoing that also perfectly applies to those you wish to defend. You're outraged that Hamas does it. Are you outraged that Israel does it? Why the double standard?

It seems the difference between me and the apologists for state violence here is that I condemn atrocities from Muslims AND from Americans/Israelis. Israel has killed far more civilians, far more children. The meager Palestinian reaction is all you can object to. Why is that?

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

hey Jon,

you said:

It seems the difference between me and the apologists for state violence here is that I condemn atrocities from Muslims AND from Americans/Israelis

I respond:

Can you see the difference between the groups mention

"Muslim" is a religious designation "American and Israeli" are political terms.

This is a religious forum not a political one. If we had a problem with violence perpetrated by Christians and Jews as Christians and Jews it would be hypocritical for the folks here not to comment about it.

As it is we have seem to have a violence problem with one religion Islam and since this is a forum dedicated to addressing religious issues not political ones it is entirely appropriate to point this out.

It is especially relevant given the fact that the scriptures of that faith seem to advocate violence in contrast to the commands of Christianity to love our enemies and turn the other cheek.

As I said before governments will always fall short of the ideal but governments are not the issue here. At least for us.

Our faith is in somthing else, somthing better


peace

Simon said...

JON

R U SAYING THE THE GOVERNMENT OR POLITICS R BEHIND THESE TERRORISTS ATTACKS. I DONT CARE WHO AND HOW MANY TIMES PEOPLE THINK POLITICS R BEHIND TERRORISM. THAT IS JUST BS.

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN IT.

YES JON UR RIGHT ISREAL HAVE KILLED CIVILANS AS WELL IM NOT TOO SURE IF ITS MORE OR NOT BUT THATS Y ITS CALLED A WAR. PEOPLE R KILLED DURING THE WAR. R U A MUSLIM?
DO U KNW HOW VIOLENT THE RIOTS R IN THE MIDDLEEAST BYU MUSLIMS? U HAVE NO IDEA MY FRIEND. THOUSANDS OF MUSLIMS ON THE STREETS READY TO KILL UNBELEIVERS AND LEAVE EM FOR DEAD AND THEY ARENT EVEN PART OF ANY TERRORIST GROUPS. SOUNDS LIKE UR FROM AROUND HERE IN THE WEST WHICH MAKES SENSE CAUSE U DONT KNW WUT THE REAL ISLAM IS.

NOW MY POINT IS THAT CIVILANS R KILLED DURING A WAR THATS IT FOR THAT AND SECOND WE R HERE TO EXPOSE THE TRUE ISLAM. DO U KNW HOW MANY MUSLIMS HERE R WILLING TO FIGHT THE UNBELIEVERS HERE IN CANADA? THE RIOTS HERE R NOTHING COMAPRE TO OVER IN THE EAST. LET ME SAY THIS AGAIN. MUSLIMS R CALLED TO FIGHT THE UNBELIEVERS.

Jon said...

FMM, do you think Jesus would buy off on your double standard excuses? "Yes, it's true, Jesus, I'm guilty of the exact same crimes, but I do it for different reasons, so I'm going to just ignore this beam in my eye and yell and scream about the spec in my neighbors eye."

Not that I grant that it is different reasons. The reasons are political. Islam is merely a religious tool used to motivate people to be violent for other reasons. The data prove this.

Jon said...

Simon,

Sure, Hitler killed a lot of people when he started that war, but so what? War is war.

Well war is sometimes wrong. It's usually wrong. It's wrong when there are peaceful alternatives, which there are right now for Israel. I agree that Hamas rockets being fired into Israel are a war crime, but this doesn't mean any kind of violent response that targets mainly those that are not responsible is right. You must first attempt to resolve the dispute by peaceful means. Accept the international consensus on a two state solution and see what happens. I'd predict that the violence against Israel would end.

I'm not disputing your claims about riots involving Muslims and various other immoral actions that are caused primarily by Muslims, but what I am saying is that we should take responsibility for our own immoral actions and stop engaging in them regardless of the immoral actions of others.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Hey Jon,

You say:

do you think Jesus would buy off on your double standard excuses?

I respond:

What double standard excuse ? I don’t hold individual Muslims responsible for the transgressions of their governments?

And what crimes am I guilty of that you are innocent of exactly?

Your problem is you are confusing corporate transgressions with personal ones. The actions of governments are corporate the actions of criminals and terrorists are personal.

Timothy McVeigh was not justified in blowing up the federal building because the federal government sinned at Ruby Ridge and Waco and It was not right to gun down Abortion doctor George Tiller just because the government of the US does not stop the holocaust of the unborn.

The actions of nations are in a different class than the actions of individuals. That you seem not to know this is frankly fighting.

The U.S. as a nation like all other nations will undergo corporate judgment when the time comes by the only Person qualified to weigh intentions against reality and it’s not you or me.

If you wish to discuss national sins I suggest you find a forum dedicated to such things perhaps the UN or congress.


You said:

Not that I grant that it is different reasons. The reasons are political. Islam is merely a religious tool used to motivate people to be violent for other reasons. The data prove this.

I respond:

Asserting something does not make it so. Please present your data

We are at last getting somewhere now. That is the whole point in contention.

You seem to believe that Muslims are violent because they are oppressed yet what we find is there is no relationship between the level of oppression and violence perpetrated by the adherents of this faith.

At the same time the most devote of other religions don’t seem to resort to violence even when the subject of oppression. African American Christians did not advocate violence as a rule in the south for example


peace

Fernando said...

Oh Jon, Jon...

so... according to you islamic violence is due to:

a) oppresion;
b) poverty;
c) lack off higienic facilitys;
d) lack off internet access;
e) illiteracy;
f) social unrest;
...

whate more?

Jon said...

What we see at this website is behavior that actually encourages violence like what is happening in the Middle East. The Germans feared the Jews, the colonists feared the Native Americans while they slaughtered them, and today this website promotes fear which leads to the very immoral behavior in our government that you decry in individual Muslims. You are responsible for that violence. You have a government that permits expression. You also have a government that is somewhat responsive, if slowly, to the demands of the electorate. You could stop encouraging violence against Muslims and in fact do the opposite. You should demand that your government be peaceful. Instead you say that you have no obligation to. You will only continue to fear monger and demonize the people with the boot of the U.S. government on their throats, even though the immoral actions of them you can't control, but you can control the actions of your government. This is rank hypocrisy that I don't think Jesus would be impressed with.

You seem to believe that Muslims are violent because they are oppressed yet what we find is there is no relationship between the level of oppression and violence perpetrated by the adherents of this faith.

You had just said that asserting something does not make it so. Let's see the evidence of the above claim.

My claim is backed up by years of research presented by Robert Pape in his book "Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism". Did you know that the leading suicide terrorists prior to 9/11 were the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka? This is a secular organization, though comprised primarily of Hindus, that engages in suicide terrorism in an effort to expel what they regard as an occupying military from their country.

Hezbollah enjoyed support not just from Muslims in Lebanon in their terroristic efforts to expel the Israeli occupation forces, but also Christians and Jews from Lebanon. Iran is among the most fundamentalist of Muslim nations. Virtually no suicide bombers emerge from Iran. In fact the data show that there is no correlation between fundamentalist strands of Islam and suicide terrorism. What correlates very well is that the terrorists regard their territory as occupied by an outside force that is vastly superior in terms of military might. The data show that this is the primary motivation of suicide terrorists, not their religion.

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... still playing the same key? The Tamiul Tigers were 90% muslims are you well know... your attempts to ignore thate is happalling; and then you just say others do like to rewritte history...

then Jon, showing his true muslim colours ounce again saide: «You are responsible for that violence. You have a government that permits expression»... how, relly? I do not know anyone arounde here who have illogical fear from muslims... and iff showing the true image off islam (from its true sources and the actions made in accordance to them) thate muslims and the PC west do not wantte others to know is being responsible for muslim violence is like saying thate the weather man on TV is responsable for floods, lightstorms, tornados... and it's great to see thate you are against free expression... so: youre a fan off dictatorial and fascistic governments likke those who follow islam to it's core? glad to see we are getting somewhere arounde here with you as a muslim...

oh Jon, Jonn... you also saide: «you could stop encouraging violence against muslims and in fact do the opposite»... whie are you only worried withe muslims? whie can't you express the same kind off worrie for those non-muslims tahte are treated by second class citizens in muslims countries? whie are you nott worried by those people who cannot express their non-muslim religion in some muslim countries? whie are you not worried by the violence thate is inherent to islam? oh, Jon, Jon...

Jon said...

No, I do not know that 90% of the Tamils are Muslim. Where are you getting that? Do you just make up assertions to support your claims?

I had thought I had posted a response providing you with the data on the religiosity of the Tamil Tigers but I can't find it. Here it is again.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9242/

So how this seems to work is you make false assertions and it is my obligation to provide the facts which show the opposite. Why don't you provide evidence for your assertions. That exercise may help prevent you from saying so many false things.

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... you are true aboutt thate... the number was by far exagerated bie me... the majority off tamil tigers are indeed hindu (only in the east off Sry-Lanka there were a muslim majority off Tamil tigers): I did not habe a single doubt about thate...

whate I wanted to say, as I stated in a previous thread before, butt failled to do so, was thate those suicide actions made by the Tamil tigers were made by muslim person who belive in the moral benefit off such actions... butt eben in this I can bee wrong... butt I have doubts... can you prove me wrong? I do nott see hindu believes justiffy moraly the suicide actions...

and, dear Jon, tahts whate is being stated here in this blog: these violent actions thate muslims are doing everyday are not due to any other core reason than theire religious belives...

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

You say:

The Germans feared the Jews, the colonists feared the Native Americans while they slaughtered them, and today this website promotes fear which leads to the very immoral behavior in our government that you decry in individual Muslims.

I respond:


This website does not promote fear it promotes the truth in Christ.

Telling the truth about the true nature of Islam will not result in immoral behavior it will result in freedom for those Muslims with eyes to see and condemnation for those so in love with their sin that they will not leave it at the foot of the cross.

On the other hand withholding the truth so as not to offend will result in people going to hell and more folks dying for a false god.

Nothing more nothing less.


You say:


You had just said that asserting something does not make it so. Let's see the evidence of the above claim.

I respond:

Lets see
The folks on 9/11 were well to do Saudis

The folks in who committed the London train bombings were British

The fellow who killed the soldiers at fort hood was from Virginia

The five folks who were recently arrested in Pakistan for plotting terror were from Washington DC.

These are not the poor unwashed masses languishing under the thumb of American imperialism. These are middle class kids who’s only similarity is that they are devout Muslims.

I can’t think of a single recent terrorist attack or honor killing in europe or the US that has been committed by a poor oppressed person from Palestine,Iraq or Afghanistan can you?

how's that for data?

peace

Jon said...

whate I wanted to say, as I stated in a previous thread before, butt failled to do so, was thate those suicide actions made by the Tamil tigers were made by muslim person who belive in the moral benefit off such actions

What is the basis for your claim here? Your tendency to make up things without a basis in fact is very irresponsible.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Hey Jon:

Iran is among the most fundamentalist of Muslim nations. Virtually no suicide bombers emerge from Iran.

I respond:

Three quick points:

1) Once again you are confusing a government with individuals. The fact is the people of Iran are apposed to the fundamentalist policies of their government.

2) And the government of Iran is the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world.

3) Suicide bombing is just one type of violence, religious violence and persecution are rampant in Iran.

Your observation only proves my point.


Peace

Jon said...

FMM, I did not say that Muslims engage in suicide terrorism because they themselves are oppressed. That is your summary of my view and you are now critiquing me based upon your summary, not what I actually said. I said it is more caused by people who regard their homeland as occupied by an outside force than it is by their religion. I'm not saying the affluent are less likely to engage in suicide terrorism.

Iran is the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world? How do you figure that? When is the last time Iran slaughtered 1400 civilians in a couple of weeks like Israel did a year ago? When is the last time they invaded a country? When is the last time they invaded and slaughtered 20,000 civilians in three months as Israel did in 1982? Does their support for the much smaller retaliation of Hezbollah somehow make them the "biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world"?

Fernando said...

Jon, Jon... Do you denie, Jon, thate «muslim persons elive in the moral benefit off such actions (suicide bombs)»...

just ask you friend Osama bin Laden for his opinion sonce you started postting his comments in this thread...

and were are the proofs you failled to presentt thate the Tamil Tigers' suicide bombers were not muslims? tahtes the point my friend thate you, from the start, avoied...

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... did you not see this my comment?: «so: youre a fan off dictatorial and fascistic governments likke those who follow islam to it's core? glad to see we are getting somewhere arounde here with you as a muslim...»

or do you agree withe my assessemnt of your true colours?

Fernando said...

Hi Jon... whie are you reducing "muslim violence" to "suicide bombings"? Just because you supposedely found an exemple, in the Tamil Tigers, tahte also did those actions? So foonie...

Jon said...

Fernando, I'm afraid some of your comments are not exactly making sense to me. I don't know why you say I'm against free expression. I love free expression. I am not a supporter of dictatorial and fascist regimes. There's no reason for you to take me to have said I support them. A am not obligated to prove that the majority of the Tamil suicide bombers were Muslim. It is your assertion that they are. In an argument the burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion. It would be as if I said "Jesus Christ was not really God, but a space alien that had superior technology and tricked us all. Now you have to prove that wrong or else we're justified in believing it." You just made up a claim with no basis in evidence and you think it is my burden to prove it false, but this is not true. And your past record of numerous false assertions doesn't give your other assertions credibility.

If you don't want to limit the terrorism we look at to suicide bombing that's fine. We can look at whatever you like. Muslim terrorism is still the minority. Israel kills 20,000 civilians in 3 months. The United States targeted civilians in a campaign of terrorism in Nicaragua that killed 40,000. President Kennedy in 1962 ordered napalm bombings in Vietnam that ultimately lead to the deaths of millions of civilians, though we don't know exactly how many (we don't always count our victims). I despise what Osama bin Laden did, but U.S. and Israeli terrorism make OBL's terrorism look small. Do you deny it?

It's false to accuse me of being a friend of OBL just because I cited him. I want to understand him. That's what reasonable people that want to end conflicts do. I post his words here because I want violence to end and also because people here are asking me about what he said. I do agree that his grievances are fair, but this does not mean I agree that his violent behavior is justified. His actions have lead not just to the death of Americans, but the deaths of many more Muslims as well. He has provided governments around the world with the excuse to oppress their citizens. My freedoms are being limited now as my government spies on my phone calls, restricts my movements demanding permission papers just to go to Canada now. Russia is oppressing people more as is every government with the excuse of the threat of terrorism. The best way to resolve conflicts is by peaceful means. Violence usually backfires and it has in his case. I do not support his behavior but I can't control him. Though I can't control him I can influence my own government and country for the better and this is what I try to do. Your claim that OBL is my "friend" is very unfair and wrong.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Jon,

you said:

I said it is more caused by people who regard their homeland as occupied by an outside force than it is by their religion.

I respond:

I understand what you said however my examples show you to be incorrect. That is unless the folks mentioned regard a region they were not born in to be their homeland.

Now if you want to say that the Anglo Saxon from California John Walker Mohammad’s homeland is Afghanistan you have twisted the meaning of the word beyond recognition.

The obvious fact is the reason that western Muslims commit terrorism is not due a political or racial affiliation with those they deem to be oppressed.

It’s because the oppressed are Muslims. This is a religious issue to deny that is to put your head in the sand

You say:

Iran is the greatest sponsor of terrorism in the world? How do you figure that?

I respond:

Now you are trying to twist the meaning of the word terrorism.

If you continue to sacrifice language to make debating points you will eventually make any discussion impossible.

however If we wish to redefine terrorism to civilian death in a military action I only have to point you to the Iran Iraq war to render your point mute.

As it is I am relying on the report of US Sectaries of State from both Republican and Democratic administrations as well as many (most?) other governments around the world. I assume they are better able to discern this than some internet presence named Jon

If you wish to argue that these governments are incorrect I suggest you take it up with them .

This is after not the place for such talk it is a religious forum not a political one

peace

Fernando said...

Jon, Jon... you asked: «Do you deny it?»...

Yes I do... Do you know whate's war? I know you do -- you saide: “War is war” -- Then maybe you can explain us whie islam in its expanding surge killed more than 60.000.000 people in India away from war conflicts... just an example (not to speak off other countries)...

the problem, ounce again, dear friend, is iff islam is a peacefull religion as they claim... it is not, as we habe been saying and answering in this blogg...

you want to anderstand OBL... fine... strange thate you, to proove your points (strangely like his ones), quote him... thate saies a lot from you eben iff you're nott his friend...

whate can someone think from someone who sais: «You are responsible for that violence. You have a government that permits expression»... your are accusing "us" (not "us" -- withe you -- anymore, I guess) for having a democratic governement thate allows free speach... you are acuusing "us" (not "us" -- withe you -- anymore, I guess) for the violence tahte occured in answer to muslim violence, and then you say we can't assume, from this words, tahte you are nott a fascist... well those words allows us to infer precisely thate «you (...) supportictatorial and fascist regimes»... we can't judge intentions beneath words, only words... as you saide: thates the problem with Internet... from the words you presented it seams the solution to end violence is not having a governmenet thata llows free speach thate (according to you) is the responsible off muuslim violence (a typical OBL argument), so, yes, you are a fascist, no matter whate you trie to denie...

you saide: «In an argument the burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion»... well, something in whate we agree... so:

1) you say thate suicide bombings are not limited to muslims;
2) you claimd thate Tamil Tiger made more bombings like thate...

3) so: the only way to prove thate is to prove thate the bombings thate were perpetuated by the Tamil Tigers were nott made bie muslims, because iff you do not do so, your argument crumbles...

we'll be waitting for your proofs, then... thanks...

you also saide: «And your past record of numerous false assertions doesn't give your other assertions credibility»... can you present any evidence I presented false claims? thanks...

do you want me to make a similar list off your false claims thate were not consubstanciated?

easy:

1) the number off deads in Irak is due to external forces and nott due to intra muslim vionece;

2) the Palestinia was divided in a 50%; 50% percentage and nott in a 90%-10%;

3) the Tamil Tigers made more suicide bombings that muslims (as I saide: this woulde be true ONLY iff you coulde prove thate those actions were nott made bie muslim Tamil Tigers);

4) muhammad is not considered teh perfect and moral example to bee followed by all m uslims;

5) the problems in the world are due to "Christian countries" (a notion you neber explained whate it was);

6) moral decrepitude (rapes) exists in "Christian countries"

7) IDF using Palestinians as human shields;

8) the crime rate is higher in whate you called "technically Christian nations"… really? Whate do you call whate wappened in Suda, Somalia, Apheganistan? Moral examples?...

etc, etc…

yous aide: «The best way to resolve conflicts is by peaceful means»… another thing in wich we agree… you do nott need to tell us thate to US Christians thate follow the “do not answer hate with hate, rather with love” , butt you coulde starte doing your apostolate to muslims who follw the rue off muhammad: «kill everyone who does not accept islam»

Jon said...

FMM, establishing correlation is not the same as claiming that all people conform to the correlation. If I establish a correlation between the abuse of children and those abused children as adults also being abusive, that's useful knowledge and we should work to prevent child abuse. Not just for the present victims but also future victims. It seems you would rush in and say "Don't worry about child abuse because I found an individual case where an unabused child became abusive."

John Allen Mohammad doesn't make much difference to either of us since we don't know his motives. Yes, it turned out he was a Muslim, but some serial killers are Christian too. What does that show?

In the Iran/Iraq war Saddam's massive attacks on Iranian civilians were made possible by U.S. chemical weaponry and logistics support. The U.S. also helped by shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner (Iran Air Flight 655) killing about 300. At that point Iran finally quit because they decided they couldn't deal with that. Saddam initiated that war at the behest of the United States. And let's remember that the United States also sold weaponry to Iran to fund terrorist activity in Nicaragua. So at best that's terrorism by both Christians and Muslims. And by the way Saddam was installed as the puppet leader by the United States. If China came over here and found an individual Christian willing to be murderous and installed him as our puppet dictator and he killed many I don't think that really reflects poorly on Christianity as a whole. In fact Saddam was pretty much secular for a long time until the U.S. turned on him. Then he became very religious, probably because it was politically useful for him since he now needed more popular support.

My definition of terrorism is the standard one found in U.S. law and army field manuals. You'll have to show how I've somehow changed it and what your definition is.

If a terrorist government claims that others are greater terrorists that's good enough for proof? You'd have fit right in in Nazi Germany. Most there didn't question their government either.

Jon said...

Fernando, tell me about these 60,000,000 killed in India due to Muslims. I don't know what you're referring to.

I don't know why you think it is strange to quote someone if you want to understand them. That's exactly what a person should do to understand someone rather than make up stuff.

You seem to have misunderstood me with regards to my point about freedom of expression. My point is if you have the ability to change the immoral actions of a government and you don't you are morally culpable. If however you lived in a country where you put your life at risk by criticizing the government then I'm saying I would not condemn a person for staying silent. Of course having a government that allows for freedom of expression is much better, but in my view it also carries with it certain moral obligations. We should speak out and criticize terrorism our country engages in. To ignore it and just say it's not of interest to you, whereas you focus on the terrorism of others that you can't control, that just is backwards to me.

You did not just say that it is possible that the majority of Tamil suicide bombers were Muslims. You said that 90% of the Tamils were Muslims. When I showed that this was false you said that the suicide actions of the Tamils were done by Muslims. This is a positive claim about the profile of the Tamils. Why should we believe this, especially since the majority of Tamils are Hindus?

Jon said...

Let me address what you believe are my errors.

1) the number off deads in Irak is due to external forces and nott due to intra muslim vionece;

Fernando, all you did was assert that the majority of violence in Iraq was intra Muslim. You have not even attempted to provide proof, unless you think vague reference to research you did in August is proof. I have data showing your claim of 90% has to be wrong, but I don't even have to present it because this is your claim to prove, not mine to disprove. Why would you think that your bare assertion that I'm wrong is an example of an error on my part?

On top of that my claim is about the fact that the U.S. invasion based upon completely fraudulent claims has resulted in perhaps a million dead. This is not the same as saying that U.S. forces pulled the trigger in each case. Under international law aggression is the supreme international crime because all subsequent consequences trace the initial aggression as their causal root. So even if it were true as you say that 90% of the dead were due to intra-Muslim violence, a claim I don't grant and you haven't proved, it still would show that my claim was wrong.

2) the Palestinia was divided in a 50%; 50% percentage and nott in a 90%-10%;

I have provided maps showing the partition lines from multiple sources. Commenters here then altered their comments to talk about how the majority of the terrioty alloted to the Israeli state was in the desert. I haven't denied that. My 50/50 claim was about the actual amount of territory, and it was correct. Here is the map that I've already provided. How is this a 90/10 split? You are wrong again.

3) the Tamil Tigers made more suicide bombings that muslims (as I saide: this woulde be true ONLY iff you coulde prove thate those actions were nott made bie muslim Tamil Tigers);

Do you think because you have asserted that the specific bombers might be Muslim this constitutes a refutation of my claim? My claim is documented by Robert Pape in his book "Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism." He is the expert in the field and he is the source for my claim that the majority of suicide attacks prior to 9/11 come from a non-Muslim group. I've also shown that the majority of Tamils are Hindu from a respectable source. What is the source of your assertion that the majority of Tamil suicide attackers are Muslim? This is your claim and you seem to think that because you've asserted it without a shred of evidence it must be true.

4) muhammad is not considered teh perfect and moral example to bee followed by all m uslims;

I have not denied this point. My claim was that simply because Mohammad was described as doing something this doesn't mean an individual Muslim ought to do it. Just because Abraham tried to sacrifice his son to God, does this mean you should do it as well? It depends on the circumstances. Jesus is the perfect moral example. Should we all die on a cross then?

5) the problems in the world are due to "Christian countries" (a notion you neber explained whate it was);

Some problems in the world are due to countries comprised of primarily Christian populations. Rather than being an error I'd say that's undeniable.

6) moral decrepitude (rapes) exists in "Christian countries"

Once again, that seems pretty undeniable. How is this an error on my part?

7) IDF using Palestinians as human shields;

I provided multiple sources for the claim. Is a claim an error if you don't like the sound of it?

8) the crime rate is higher in whate you called "technically Christian nations"… really? Whate do you call whate wappened in Suda, Somalia, Apheganistan? Moral examples?...

The United States has far and away the highest incarceration rates. See here.

Fifth Monarchy Man said...

Jon,

You said,

If China came over here and found an individual Christian willing to be murderous and installed him as our puppet dictator and he killed many I don't think that really reflects poorly on Christianity as a whole.

I respond,

This would be impossible because a Christian could not as a Christian be murderous because he would not be following the commands of Christ.

On the other hand one could find a Muslim willing to use violence to advance his cause because such a thing is commanded in the Muslim scriptures.

Do you see why this is a religious and not a political issue?


You said,

If a terrorist government claims that others are greater terrorists that's good enough for proof?

I respond,

Not at all but neither is it proof that an internet presence named Jon claims something. The difference is the governments in question are charged by their citizens to make such determination and are judged for their performance of this duty.

You are responsible to no one in this life and your opinion is not worth any more than any other internet avatar.

Besides I could grant your assertion entirely and my point would still be valid. Religious violence and persecution are rampant in Iran. I don’t think even you would deny this.


You say,

You'd have fit right in in Nazi Germany. Most there didn't question their government either.

I respond,


How do you know I don’t question my government? In fact I’m very politically active and am usually very critical of the actions of my government.

I just don’t talk politics on a religious forum, it’s impolite.

I am also smart enough to know that politics are not the most important motivation in most folks lives.

It is obvious that you can’t bring yourself to look beyond surface naturalistic explanations for behavior so I will simply remind you that you will never find satisfaction in such things and let you have the last word.

peace

dasize said...

I would love to see a topic on the black stone and how it is really paganism

Fernando said...

Hi Jon...

here's some links:

Muslims killed 80 million hindus in 500 years

Indian genocide - Killed 80 MILLION...

more arounde...

Fernando said...

Jon... you saide: «You did not just say that it is possible that the majority of Tamil suicide bombers were Muslims. You said that 90% of the Tamils were Muslims. When I showed that this was false you said that the suicide actions of the Tamils were done by Muslims. This is a positive claim about the profile of the Tamils. Why should we believe this, especially since the majority of Tamils are Hindus?»...


some easy things thate eben you are capable off understanding...

1) in a previous thread I clearly saide whate I saide after reallizing I amde a mistake... I recognized thate and I admited it;

2) I saide thate only muslim morality suport suicide killings so ir woulde be bery plausible thate those suicide bombings were made by the muslim memners off the Tamil Tihers;

3) iff you saide thate the Tamil were doing more suicide bombings than muslims, then, and as at least 1 in 10 Tamil are muslims, the only relevanve in this statement is iff YOU (not mee) can prove thate this bombings were made bie non muslims members off the Tamil...

so...

Fernando said...

Lest go to your errors ounce againd:

1) Fernando, all you did was assert that the majority of violence in Iraq was intra Muslim. You have not even attempted to provide proof, unless you think vague reference to research you did in August is proof...

no Jon... I gabe you to links: one withe the number off deads in Irak since the begining off the presence off external troops (butt you can use any other you wich), and other thate contabilzes the number of deads made bue the religion off peace... do you know how to make maths? do so... as I saide: I made thate exercise in August and came with a number bery near to 90%...

2) Jon... the map you provided only focuses on the actual geographic place named Palestinia, nott in the former british palestinia thate was, indeed, partioned in a 90%-10%... here are some links, again:

British Mandate for Palestine 1920-1948

British Mandate for Palestine

What Really Happened

Fernando said...

3) I habe already made my point several times:

I made an honest mistake in the number off muslim members off the Tamil: the proportion was OK (90%-10%), butt the atribution off those proportion swas twisted... I recognized thate... the point is thate you siade Tamil were doing more suicide bombings than muslims: and this statement can only be taken iff YOU (not me) can prove thate those suicide bombings made bie the Tamil were not made by the muslim memmbers off teh Tamil since, as islam's morality acceptes these actions as good actions (on the oposite off hindu morality), the more plausible was thate they were made by muslims...

4) My claim was that simply because Mohammad was described as doing something this doesn't mean an individual Muslim ought to do it...

and I proved you wrongue... his actions (like Jesus's to Chrsitians) are normative and efectively to be followed in every circunstance off muslim lifee.. I gabe you several links... here are they again:

1) from the qur'an

"You have indeed in the messenger of allah (muhammad) a beautiful pattern (of efective conduct) for any one whose hope is God and the Final Day" (33:21)... whate is in brankets is not mine (the words in darker tone are)... they are from Ali Akbar, a MAJOR muslim schoolar who also sayes:

«the great model muhammad presents all phases of life to follow»...

many other examples can be presented...

2) from the notion off muhammad as "the Perfect man" “al-insan al-kamil”, and normative model off conduct “uswa hasana” , here you have some proofs that muslims do consider muhammad as the normative role for every muslim…

a) http://www.ibnarabisociety.org/articles/weismann.html;

b) Azizoddin Nasafi - "Kitab al-Insan al-Kamil";

c) Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki - "Muhammad al-Insan al-Kamil";

d) Seyyed Hossein Nasr - "The Essential workes"... for this one I'll eben probide a page since I habe it just in front off me: 65 (this book probides more than 200 names off people callin Muhammad as such and saying he's the way muslims shoulde behave...);

e)'Abd al-Kerim Jili - "Muhammad al-Insan al-Kamil";

f) http://www.sufilive.com/Attach_Yourself_to_Prophet_Muhammad_saw_-1461-print.html

g) http://www.dartabligh.org/web/Al_Furqan/files/Al-Furqan%201-3%20Feb16.pdf

Fernando said...

5) «Some problems in the world are due to countries comprised of primarily Christian populations»...


now (not before) we habe "some" and "primarily"...

we can also say: «Some problems in the world are due to countries comprised of primarily by Shangdu populations»...

you can chande Shangdu, by any other people... that's claims thate can comport everithing...

the problem is thate there are no such thing as "Christian countries" as you stared by saying and NO problems in the worls are due to Christian morality, on the contrary to the MAJORITY off problems in the world thate are due to islamic morality...


6) «Once again, that seems pretty undeniable. How is this an error on my part?»...

its an error because there are no such thing as "Christian countries"...

its an error because I ought habe saide thate you claimes thate the major number of crimes (and you reffered to rape) are made in "Christian countries"... they are not, butt in wester countries women can denounce them withoute habing to present 2 eye witnesses so they are nott acused off being an adulterous and suffer the islamic consequence to thate...

Fernando said...

7) «I provided multiple sources for the claim»...

coulde you present those sorces again? thats because none off those sources are reliebale... butt do plese present them agains here... thanks...

8) The United States has far and away the highest incarceration rates...

really? maybe because they habe prisions to do so... how many prisions woulde be needed to putt in prision those who commit crimes in Sudan, Somalia, Apheganistan?


and here's another "error" from you:

9) thate arabic forces did not force palestinians to live theire countries... they did as I proved withe words by the pesent President off the Palestinian authority and the former Syrian external minister...

Jon... you are lost in your lies; your no more that a straw in the wind off your hate and your love to demonize those who are simply showing the true colours off a fascistic ideology (islam, since it want's to impose their point off view into all the others) thate from its start demonized all thate were not muslims...

sorry, Jon... you do not desearve any other single word...

Jon said...

Fernando, I think some of what we are saying to each other is being lost in translation. I think you are claiming errors of mine based upon things I didn't say. Perhaps if I called you I could clarify. Would you be interested?

ubiquitouserendipity said...

brother fernando:

Jon said...
Fernando, I think some of what we are saying to each other is being lost in translation. I think you are claiming errors of mine based upon things I didn't say. Perhaps if I called you I could clarify. Would you be interested?
December 14, 2009 3:15 PM

ubiquitouserendipity says: gee, sounds like a bad idea to me. G_d bless you brother fernando, and may the G_d of love and light, He Who abides in unapproachable light, bless you jon, and by His Holy Spirit bring you to the truth of G_d in Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace.

jon, your irrational hatred of israel, and your desperate twisting of history to suit your emotional needs leads me to think that you are not someone i'd trust with my i.d., if i were concerned about such matters. also, i think that actually brother fernando is too clear for the islamists. his depth of knowledge and insight is keen, his theology sound and clear. so if you are having trouble discerning his meanings, just ask him to clarify.

that's my opinion. the blessings of G_d our Savior to all who visit this website. may He open the eyes of the blind, and turn stone hearts to flesh. Peace, in His love, papajoe