posted
Why are the Muslims so angry? They threaten to kill all responsible for insulting Mahomet. Do you see yourselves threatening to kill an author of a drawing? Because he drew something? Do any Muslims among you think that this is a over reaction? I mean, it seems like they are extremely insecure. I mean, I think I understand Jews for being a little paranoic, because they are surrounded by mortal enemies. But Muslims? They're not endangered.
I think that it is deeply disturbing that there's a large group of people, whose understanding of their religion renders them willing to kill because of a drawing. It's medieval. Disgusting.
I do not judge all Muslims, only those who are responsible, but they seem to be vast in numbers nevertheless.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: Why are the Muslims so angry? They threaten to kill all responsible for insulting Mahomet. Do you see yourselves threatening to kill an author of a drawing? Because he drew something? Do any Muslims among you think that this is a over reaction? I mean, it seems like they are extremely insecure. I mean, I think I understand Jews for being a little paranoic, because they are surrounded by mortal enemies. But Muslims? They're not endangered.
I think that it is deeply disturbing that there's a large group of people, whose understanding of their religion renders them willing to kill because of a drawing. It's medieval. Disgusting.
I do not judge all Muslims, only those who are responsible, but they seem to be vast in numbers nevertheless.
It's not that I'm not aware that humans tend to be douche bags. But they're like children. Seriously.
posted
Ssymon: You're painting all Islam with a broad brush. You need to limit the scope of your post, and tread more carefully.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: It's not that I'm not aware that humans tend to be douche bags. But they're like children. Seriously.
Dude, I don't know what they were angry about before, but I've got a pretty good idea why they'd be angry now.
Posts: 1528 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Spoiler alert: It has so much less to do with islam as it has to do with toxic regional cultures, much to the chagrin of the muslims in the other countries that don't represent muslim-dom right now because they're not rioting and this doesn't tend to get the news.
It is very similar to how some gypsy tribes are just rotten and dysfunctional as is humanly possible (they're seriously terrible), and are so noxious and toxic a presence as to make a name for all roma-kind, whether or not your own roma band is even remotely like the ones that create YOUR stereotype.
But it is easier to freak out about "islam" as a single unifying violent element so people will do that so hey
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I got what you were implying the first time, but I don't see why it ought to follow.
I think Syzmon's statement was stupid for several reasons, but I see absolutely no reason to get angry about it. Muslim or not.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I sort of was. Why would that statement be justification for getting angry?
I mean, he broadly insults everyone, but that's not sufficient reason to get angry. That's just a sort of unconscious deep pessimism about humanity. Not offensive, just dumb.
And then he betrays his own contempt for children by acting as though A) Children aren't human enough to be unique individuals and B) Being a children is such a horrible shameful thing that it's insulting for someone to be compared to one.
Both of those sentiments are deeply stupid, but again, neither one is an affront to Muslims. So, no reason to get angry.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: Why are the Muslims so angry? They threaten to kill all responsible for insulting Mahomet. Do you see yourselves threatening to kill an author of a drawing? Because he drew something? Do any Muslims among you think that this is a over reaction? I mean, it seems like they are extremely insecure. I mean, I think I understand Jews for being a little paranoic, because they are surrounded by mortal enemies. But Muslims? They're not endangered.
I think that it is deeply disturbing that there's a large group of people, whose understanding of their religion renders them willing to kill because of a drawing. It's medieval. Disgusting.
I do not judge all Muslims, only those who are responsible, but they seem to be vast in numbers nevertheless.
Because change is scary, and the fundamental underlying nature of their societies is being radically altered on a daily basis. Combine that with a siege mentality that's probably similar to what Israel feels, massive unemployment, increasing overpopulation and many other issues, and you can see why religion might be one of the few steadying forces in life, and why an assault on that religion would be taken especially unkindly.
Frankly, it's not surprising at all, and if I lived over there, I'd probably be pissed most of the time as well.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is that Blayne's way of saying that 52 people isn't really that big a deal compared to the thousands who die in accidents?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
It is NOT Muslims who are to blame for the violence, it is -extremists- (of any denomination).
Muslim (extremists) make up 6% of terrorist attack on US soil from 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database. Source.
I'd say that your average Muslim feels about those who have done terrorist attacks in the name of Islam as Christians feel about the Klu Klux Klan.Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
because lumping all Muslims together and assuming their emotions are the same and that they are all angry is about as stupid as a screen door on a submarine or a reality TV show about Italian-American young people in New Jersey.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: I think that it is deeply disturbing that there's a large group of people, whose understanding of their religion renders them willing to kill because of a drawing.
If it makes you feel any better, I'd bet that those saying that they're willing to kill you over a drawing would also say that they're willing to kill you for a whole lot of other reasons.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Is that Blayne's way of saying that 52 people isn't really that big a deal compared to the thousands who die in accidents?
posted
Ok, I know it sounded stupid. Let me say it this way- why are there SO MANY fundamentalists? And no matter what you say, it is them who act. They commit crimes. So it doesn't matter if they are a majority or a minority, because they're causing a lot of trouble. Why aren't they in prison? I saw a man on a TV who was shouting- "let's kill the man". This is a serious crime, shouting like that, why isn't he in jail?
And I said clearly, that I know that this is not all Muslims! I don't know what they're called, fundamentlists or whoever,5,10 or 15%. I never heard of buddhist or taoist fundamentalists wanting to kill anyone.
Why so angry?
And my source is wikipedia, you can probably find further links there.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Islamic culture in the Middle East was actually far more progressive than many other countries in the world up and until the fundamentalist resurgence in the 50's and 60's. When (on the whole) Christianity was getting vaguely more progressive, a large portion of middle eastern Islam was going the opposite direction.
It's not really the Islamic religion that's at issue, it's how some choose to use it. Same with Christianity. Westboro Baptist Church, sees and uses the Bible in a more literal sense, while most (American, and other) Christians look at it in a more abstract sense, and they ignore the Old Testament (When it's convenient.)
As an atheist, I personally don't really like any religion, but if they don't try to change my life (sadly that's not usually the case) I don't care which god/gods/prophet etc. they choose to believe in.
Let us not forget that this isn't anything new, many talking heads are blaming "current US foreign policy", saying it's weak, etc. This being their reasoning that we are having flare ups and anger directed at the US.
For anyone over the age of 30, who can at least remember the 80's should remember an author by the name of Salman Rushdie (Who just published a new book about his life, fyi) that caused outrage in the Middle East, and caused then President Reagan to release statements almost identical to current President Obama. Stating that Rushdie knew what he was getting into when publishing his 'despicable' works, and he (Reagan) does not approve of the violence related to it.
Also Anti-American hate isn't anything new.
I've talked with London Muslims on other forums that hate the United States, granted they're not out protesting. Although I have a feeling if there was an influential leader or a protest that started up in London, they'd probably join in.
Posts: 164 | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: I think that it is deeply disturbing that there's a large group of people, whose understanding of their religion renders them willing to kill because of a drawing.
If it makes you feel any better, I'd bet that those saying that they're willing to kill you over a drawing would also say that they're willing to kill you for a whole lot of other reasons.
This is more or less my point- people willing to kill for trivial things. And why some, however quite a lot of, that is to say, enough to kill tens of people Muslims tend to overreact like this.
On 9/11, this year, I watched a documentary on WTC. Two Americans, upper middle class judging by their clothes and briefcases and watches and stuff, were standing below two burning towers. And they said: we should attack and kill those responsible asap, today, now. I can understand incitement and hatred in this situation. In the topic title I ask why so angry, because it's so extremly irrational and yet widespread over something much... ah, whatever.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's the sign of cultural extremism and an uneducated populace. Period. If they were educated and had access to the internet, they'd be as passive as the rest of us. Or if they were third world and starving. Being ignorant and in the middle is dangerous.
Posts: 1204 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Szymon, the anger isn't just about the film. You have to understand the context and that is deep and complicated and not "trivial". The film was one particular spark in a smoldering pile of hot, gasoline-soaked embers.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: ... On 9/11, this year, I watched a documentary on WTC. Two Americans, upper middle class judging by their clothes and briefcases and watches and stuff, were standing below two burning towers. And they said: we should attack and kill those responsible asap, today, now.
?
I'm not sure how one can simultaneously acknowledge that the US launched into wars after 9/11 that killed many people and are still on-going and also go "Oh noes! Why are people so angry at us?"
Reasonable people can disagree about whether civilians are reasonable targets, whether diplomats are reasonable targets, what level of retaliation the US should expect, etc. but to be completely "what gives?" I don't get that.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus, I am ashamed to admit, but I don't quite understand your post Sorry. If I understand correctly, though, you say that you're not sure how can a person acknowledge that the US launched into wars after 9/11 and ask a question why they are angry at us at the same time?
Well, the first part is a fact. The second has nothing to do with it. They weren't that angry when Americans killed Osama bin Laden. This outrage, I think, has little to do with these wars.
On the other hand though, kmbboots may be right, and it has everything to do with it. Maybe those fundamentalists hate America so much that any pretext is good enough to kill Americans. Really I never thought of that, and in fact am stupid. I know little about Islam. But I am not going to justify their actions.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: It's the sign of cultural extremism and an uneducated populace. Period. If they were educated and had access to the internet, they'd be as passive as the rest of us. Or if they were third world and starving. Being ignorant and in the middle is dangerous.
I like this thought, I agree. This part about being passive has two sides, though. Maybe we're so blase that we care so little about stuff. They too much, we too little.
Posts: 723 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
On the other hand though, kmbboots may be right, and it has everything to do with it. Maybe those fundamentalists hate America so much that any pretext is good enough to kill Americans. Really I never thought of that, and in fact am stupid. I know little about Islam. But I am not going to justify their actions.
Yeah. You are kind of missing the point. The reasons that some extremist Muslims "hate America" are also deep and complex and non-trivial.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
What you seem to be failing to understand is that whether or not extremist Muslims or those Muslims who are sympathetic to extremist Muslims are right to hate us (and for the record, I don't believe they are) trivializing those reasons or pretending that their anger is arbitrary ("They hate us for our freedom") is, at the very least, counter-productive.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Islam is a young religion, only 1400 years old! Look at what Christianity was doing at that age!
IP: Logged |
posted
Making a picture of Mohammed is strictly forbidden in Sunni Islam, and historically was frowned upon in Shia Islam.
It's a big deal because it is the teaching of their religion, much like the graven idols/writing the name of God prohibitions in Judaism (and to a lesser extent in some denominations of Christianity). See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depictions_of_Muhammad
And not only was this case a visual depiction of Mohammed, is was an extremely hostile depiction of Mohammed.
Add to that, as others have noted, mass unemployment and lack of education.
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: Mucus, I am ashamed to admit, but I don't quite understand your post Sorry. If I understand correctly, though, you say that you're not sure how can a person acknowledge that the US launched into wars after 9/11 and ask a question why they are angry at us at the same time?
Well, the first part is a fact. The second has nothing to do with it. They weren't that angry when Americans killed Osama bin Laden. This outrage, I think, has little to do with these wars.
On the other hand though, kmbboots may be right, and it has everything to do with it. Maybe those fundamentalists hate America so much that any pretext is good enough to kill Americans. Really I never thought of that, and in fact am stupid. I know little about Islam. But I am not going to justify their actions.
quote:Originally posted by Aros: It's the sign of cultural extremism and an uneducated populace. Period. If they were educated and had access to the internet, they'd be as passive as the rest of us. Or if they were third world and starving. Being ignorant and in the middle is dangerous.
I like this thought, I agree. This part about being passive has two sides, though. Maybe we're so blase that we care so little about stuff. They too much, we too little.
Man, you really have no idea what you are talking about, do you?
Do you honestly think having your country invaded, homes searched, your friends and family killed as "collateral damage", your religion insulted and mocked, your buildings destroyed....all of that is no cause for anger?
I am NOT saying their violence is justified. But to say they aren't angry about the wars still is beyond ignorant.
Imagine if they did to us what we did to them, even if they were justified in doing it. I bet we would be pissed, and we would call the roadside bombs and snipers The Resistance rather than terrorism.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
What if Chinese and Russian troops occupied Texas while burning down Churches?
quote:Originally posted by Szymon: ... This outrage, I think, has little to do with these wars.
Meanwhile, Al Qaeda flags being waved around and on top of burning American embassies were just the result of pressing the wrong button on ebay.com when ordering the flags from their supplier. You protest with the flags that you have, not the flags that you want or may want to have.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Silly Muslims. You don't violently protest when someone makes a movie that is bent on humiliating and denigrating Mohammed.
You save violent protests for when someone says "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".
On the other hand.
When a private citizen makes a terrible fake movie about Mohammed, the Islamic world riots against countries that had nothing to do with making, supporting, or agreeing with the movie. They even go so far as to demand that the world makes it an international crime to insult Mohammed.
When Muslim extremists working for the Taliban destroys 2000+ year old giant statues of Buddha, Buddhists complain peacefully and get the UN to condemn the act.
World says--Buddhist Win.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah I really don't think christians were out burning tires and killing people over the 'war on christmas' kerfluffle
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Yeah I really don't think christians were out burning tires and killing people over the 'war on christmas' kerfluffle
Not all, just Bill O'Reilly.
Posts: 3134 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, Szymon may not appreciate this but before taking him to task for his diction it might be useful to remember that he's not a native English speaker and what you are reacting to might be primarily linguistic artifact. Or not, but I'd say some restraint in deconstructing his posts is warranted.
A couple of points:
- The anger was there before the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and it'll be there after. I think the wars act more as evidence within a broader narrative about US efforts to thwart regional self-determination in order to serve US interests, including protection of Israel. My sense is that the wars aren't so much direct causes of anger as they are seen as additional points in a moral calculus that stretches from the U.S.'s installation of the Shah, to its decades of support to Mubarak, to its drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan.
- I also think it's very difficult for those of us raised in a secularized Western culture to understand how much moral value is placed on respecting the sacredness of objects or leaders in most of the rest of the world. Jonathan Haidt talked compellingly about this in his book "The Righteous Mind", about how upon immersing himself in a particular culture (in his case rural India) he began seeing the sacred dimension to morality in a way that he had been blind to before. In Haidt's research, he found that in those cultures with a respect for these sacred rules and taboos, there was no ability to differentiate between harm done through physical violence and harm done by violation of sacred taboo. They felt, morally, just the same. He found further that educated, wealthy Americans are the extreme outliers in this case, and that we have a globally unique inability to understand harm done by violation of social standards based on reverence or sacralization.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Yeah I really don't think christians were out burning tires and killing people over the 'war on christmas' kerfluffle
Joking responses aside, this is seriously right.
Not even Bill O'Reilly. Not even Ann Coulter. And it's not "not yet..." it's "not any more."
The inability or unwillingness of some people to recognize these simple, substantive differences between Christianity (as it is largely practiced today) and Islam (as it is largely practiced today) has always baffled me. It's not a trivial thing.
Posts: 3580 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Cuz they don't have a decent basketball team. The percentage of Muslims rioting about "disrespect toward Mohammed" is miniscule compared to the Detroiters who rioted when the Pistons won.
quote:I also think it's very difficult for those of us raised in a secularized Western culture to understand how much moral value is placed on respecting the sacredness of objects or leaders in most of the rest of the world. Jonathan Haidt talked compellingly about this in his book "The Righteous Mind", about how upon immersing himself in a particular culture (in his case rural India) he began seeing the sacred dimension to morality in a way that he had been blind to before. In Haidt's research, he found that in those cultures with a respect for these sacred rules and taboos, there was no ability to differentiate between harm done through physical violence and harm done by violation of sacred taboo. They felt, morally, just the same. He found further that educated, wealthy Americans are the extreme outliers in this case, and that we have a globally unique inability to understand harm done by violation of social standards based on reverence or sacralization.
Outliers or not, we're the ones whose values actually make sense.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |