# Help me fight Ignorance - Xenophobia regarding Islam **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 7, 2010, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988 "2010-02-07T03:03:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/61 "2010-02-09T00:20:56Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You really aren’t aware of nations with Islam as the official state religion? Really? Seriously? Your list of the purported “Muslim World” nations leaves out, for instance, India, which has the third largest Muslim population of any country in the world, and which contains nearly 10% of all the world’s Muslims. Your list also omits Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, and many other African countries which together contain about another 10% of the entire global Muslim population. Not to mention all the European countries, which contain 3% of the world’s Muslims but a disproportionate share of Muslim influence and radical political movements. It simply makes no sense to apply a categorical label like “Muslim World” to a collection of nation-states that not only contains many non-Muslims but also leaves out more than 1 in 5 Muslims in the global population. It would be like lumping together Southern Europe and Latin America and deciding to call that the “Catholic World”. > [@](#): > > \*\*From Wiki: > > - Afghanistan (Islamic state) > - Algeria > - Bahrain > - Bangladesh > - Brunei > - Comoros > - Egypt > - Indonesia (Uses Islamic jurisprudence in private law[citation needed], and in Aceh special territory as a basic law. Officially also recognize Roman Catholicism, Protestantism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Confucianism as religion, but they have much less influence in government and law)[citation needed]. > - Iran (Islamic state) > - Iraq > - Jordan > - Kuwait > - Libya > - Malaysia > - Maldives > - Mauritania (Islamic state) > - Morocco > - Oman > - Pakistan (Islamic state) > - Qatar > - Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic > - Saudi Arabia (Islamic kingdom) > - Somalia (the newly established coalition government announced in March 2009 that it would implement shari’a as the nation’s official judicial system.[22]) > - Tunisia[23] > - United Arab Emirates > - Yemen (Islamic state) > > Sunni Islam > > ``` > * Algeria[citation needed] > * Comoros[citation needed] > * Malaysia > * Maldives[citation needed] > * Mauritania > * Pakistan[citation needed] (as national-sanctioned religion) > * Saudi Arabia (as state-sanctioned religion) > * Somalia > * Jordan > * Indonesia (Aceh Special Province Only) > > ``` > > Shi’a Islam > > ``` > * Iran (as state-sanctioned religion)** > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/62 "2010-02-09T00:36:27Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Your list of the purported “Muslim World” nations leaves out, for instance, India, which has the third largest Muslim population of any country in the world, and which contains nearly 10% of all the world’s Muslims. > > Your list also omits Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, and many other African countries which together contain about another 10% of the entire global Muslim population. Not to mention all the European countries, which contain 3% of the world’s Muslims but a disproportionate share of Muslim influence and radical political movements. > > It simply makes no sense to apply a categorical label like “Muslim World” to a collection of nation-states that not only contains many non-Muslims but also leaves out more than 1 in 5 Muslims in the global population. It would be like lumping together Southern Europe and Latin America and deciding to call that the “Catholic World”. I only listed nations that recognized Islam as their official religion. When a country declares a national religion it takes on a higher level of meaning within the fabric of that country’s society. To suggest that these countries do not self identify as Muslim is beyond any level of discussion. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Bith\_Shuffle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce73a5/32.png) [@The\_Bith\_Shuffle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Bith_Shuffle)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/63 "2010-02-09T00:52:43Z")
> [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Your post proves how irrational it is to be xenophobic. Your sentence only proves that you do not feel the need to use language reasonably. There is not a hint of xenophobia in my post, unless your definition of “xenophobia” is so loose as to be useless. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Those are some really super-intelligent facts you’ve posted there. Can you please point, on a map, maybe make a link to it, where we can find the “Muslim World”? If you can help me find it then maybe I can accept fact #1 as true. **Magiver** already took care of most of this for me. The term “Muslim World”, like any term referring to an enormous group of people living in a complex world, can have multiple meanings, but no reasonable interpretation of the phrase will invalidate my first two claims. If you want to know more about the Muslim World you could start at [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_World) or just Google the phrase. Generalizations of some kind are inevitable in conversations about millions or billions of people. Focus should be kept not on avoiding generalizations completely but on understanding where they apply and where they don’t, and to what extent they really describe what they purport to. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Shit, I’ll accept fact #2 as being rational if you can find this Muslim World for me because my geography lessons never taught me this stuff. You don’t have to just take my word for it. Consider the awful way that homosexuals tend to be treated in [most majority-Muslim countries](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#Middle_Africa). Look at [abortion laws throughout the world](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law). You could also read about the state of [general human rights](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_rights_articles_by_country) through the world. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > Fact #3, Muslims like to fuck. Are they fucking at a more terrifying rate than Chinese or Indians? Do you fear the Kung-fuication of the West? Of _course_ Muslims like to have sex; _people_ like to have sex. Whether or not Muslims are _reproducing_ at a rate faster than the Chinese or Indians (I assume you refer to the citizens of China and India, not those who have emigrated) depends on what countries you look at, but the numbers for some Muslims countries [are astounding](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate). Some are not so astounding, and others are even kind of low. But this is not quite important, since I do not believe that Muslim birth rates globally or in Western societies are a problem _in and of themselves_. **RickJay** pointed out that Muslim countries tend to grow, population-wise, at the rate you’d expect given their economy. But that just brings forth the question “how do the economies of Muslim countries tend to perform?” > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > And only a rational thinker would distinguish between the West being sullied by the presence of Muslims versus just hating Muslims. How am I supposed to respond non-sarcastically to this sarcastic statement? It frankly _is_ rational to make that sort of distinction. You are obviously Hell-bent on portraying me as a bigot because you just can’t believe that there could be other reasons for why I hold the beliefs that I do. > [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](#): > > It’s only rational to fear a group of people if you start at hating them or thinking they are fundamentally different from yourself, of course, because if you didn’t think that you wouldn’t give a shit. It’s never rational to assume that a group of people is fundamentally different from oneself or one’s own group or to hate them blindly. It certainly _is_ irrational to assume that other people think this way, however. Your blind, blasé multiculturalism is leading you to see hatred where none exists. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/64 "2010-02-09T01:21:00Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Do you mean people like Scott Roeder here, or Islamic terrorists? > I am not sure what this is meant to convey. Could you expand? > > Regards, > Shodan Although it should be obvious to anyone that Scott Roeder and Islamic terrorists should be locked up, what I was responding to is the first article’s basic thrust: Wilders see a problem with extremist Muslims. He goes on to blame an entire group of people, utilizing logic such as there being no moderate Muslims. So Wilders is blaming Muslims for a subset of the West’s/Holland’s problems. While doing this, he puts himself in the position to be violating the law of his country. The result: he’s on trial, but according to the logic of the article he is not on trial for his behavior, he’s on trial to appease the Muslims. So once again its the Muslim’s fault. I view that as some twisted screwed up logic with an origin in xenophobia. As for your second question: **The Bith Shuffle** makes a distinction between Islamic terrorists and the general degradation of our culture if we just allow Muslims in. He acts as though the latter is rational, which it isn’t and has never been the case in any country where individuals who happen to be Muslim are immigrating to. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/65 "2010-02-09T01:23:54Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > I only listed nations that recognized Islam as their official religion. When a country declares a national religion it takes on a higher level of meaning within the fabric of that country’s society. To suggest that these countries do not self identify as Muslim is beyond any level of discussion. But that’s a strawman argument. Nobody’s disputing that certain countries “self identify as Muslim”. What’s disputed is whether it’s meaningful to speak of a “Muslim World”: > [@Inbred Mm](#): > > Can you please point, on a map, maybe make a link to it, where we can find the “Muslim World”? If you can help me find it then maybe I can accept fact #1 as true. Shit, I’ll accept fact #2 as being rational if you can find this Muslim World for me because my geography lessons never taught me this stuff. A list of countries that have adopted Islam as their official religion is not a meaningful answer to the question “Where is the ‘Muslim World’?” In fact, the inadequacy of your list in accounting for the varieties of Islamic experience only illustrates **Inbred Mm** ’s point that there IS no “Muslim World”. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/66 "2010-02-09T01:36:42Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > But that’s a strawman argument. Nobody’s disputing that certain countries “self identify as Muslim”. What’s disputed is whether it’s meaningful to speak of a “Muslim World” If you could explain that to the Islamic extremists who think in terms of a “Muslim World” that would be great. You can start with [Al Queda](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.8c9ddfb0847e0b0a20aad5f334c07ca8.591&show_article=1) and work your way down the line. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/67 "2010-02-09T01:40:48Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > But that’s a strawman argument. Nobody’s disputing that certain countries “self identify as Muslim”. What’s disputed is whether it’s meaningful to speak of a “Muslim World”: > **[Islamic world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world)** > > The terms Islamic world and Muslim world commonly refer to the Islamic community, which is also known as the Ummah. This consists of all those who adhere to the religious beliefs, politics, and laws of Islam or to societies in which Islam is practiced. In a modern geopolitical sense, these terms refer to countries in which Islam is widespread, although there are no agreed criteria for inclusion. The term Muslim-majority countries is an alternative often used for the latter sense.\[5 The history... Someone on Wikipedia seems to think it’s meaningful. Of course we all know that Wikipedia is the end all be all source of all knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/68 "2010-02-09T01:45:25Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > [Islamic world - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world) > > Someone on Wikipedia seems to think it’s meaningful. Of course we all know that Wikipedia is the end all be all source of all knowledge. Well, I would say that it is a mistake to analyze the threats emanating from the Islamic world under any sort of uber-Islamic rubric, mainly because every attempt at pan-Islamic political ideology has fallen apart in the past (see, e.g., pan-Arabism or East & West Pakistan). There’s no reason to assume that cultural, political or economic differences, or simple resource fighting is any less potent now than in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/69 "2010-02-09T01:49:12Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > If you could explain that to the Islamic extremists who think in terms of a “Muslim World” that would be great. Yeah, but there’s so much ignorance to fight here at home… ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/70 "2010-02-09T02:22:53Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Yeah, but there’s so much ignorance to fight here at home… Yes, there was an ignorant group of Islamic terrorists arrested in my home state for a plot to blow up a mall. And there was an ignorant Islamic terrorist who tried to blow up an airplane in the state next to me. And there was an ignorant Islamic terrorist who tried to smuggle a car full of explosives across the Canadian border. I could fill this page with examples of ignorance that needs to be fought starting with the all the Muslims who support Bin Laden and the 9/11 attack. ---
**Author:** ![Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/aca169/32.png) [@Inbred\_Mm\_domesticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inbred_Mm_domesticus)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/71 "2010-02-09T02:29:02Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Are you trying to imply that Muslims don’t see regions of the world as distinctly Muslim? Are you so full of political correctness that you can’t acknowledge this? Are you really willing to say that there isn’t a problem with Islamic extremism as a distinct anti-Western condition? As we speak the Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is threatening some kind of event this week against Western powers. > > For discussion purposes what country would that be because I’m willing to bet there was open celebration of 9/11 in the streets by extremists. Do you not understand the term Muslim extremists? It’s a term that accurately describes the fanatical side of the religion. It does not represent the entire religion but it’s an acknowledgment of fact that the fringe element exists and is actively promoting random acts of violence. No, I am not trying to imply anything like what’s in your first question. Political correctness? What’s next? Multiculturalist? I’ve said absolutely nothing that is politically correct. Islamic extremism isn’t a problem to me at all. Islamic extremist terrorists are a distinct problem and may our drones blacken the skies above Pakistan/Afghanistan until the worst of those threats gives up their terrorism. I really don’t like militant fundamentalists and although funadamentalists tend to make me uncomfortable, they are often quite nice. For example, this one guy from the Muslim World was so nice to me and showed me his Hajj video and everything the last time I was in the Muslim World. I don’t believe Iran is a threat to a vast majority of Western powers. Iran is weak. As far as the rest of what you had to say, the subject of the thread is xenophobia toward Muslim immigrants, not militants. This thread would be a non-debate if that were the case. > [@magellan01](#): > > The people committing the acts of terror are Muslim extremists. They all belong to a larger group called Muslims. Yes, they are a minority. But given the sheer numbers, there are many, many millions who believe that violence against innocents is justified. > > [Here is an excellent post by George Kaplin from another thread that sheds some light.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9323153&postcount=18) I only worry about people who turn their words into action, our legal system is also fully equipped to handle these individuals, as well as the legal system of every country on the planet except for maybe 1 or 2. > [@Napier](#): > > OK, I gotta ask - wherever were you??? > > I got curious about the frequently repeated statement that the Muslims who wanted to harm us were an extreme minority analogous to the most extreme Christians who did things like bomb abortion clinics, and so I started hunting opinion polls taken in the Muslim world (or in countries that were primarily religiously and culturally Muslim if you prefer). While there are not many polls taken in those places, there are a few, and generally there were a few tens of percent who responded yes to questions like “Do you support the attack of September 11?” and “Do you agree with the terrorist methods of Osama bin Ladin?” and “Do you think Americans deserve to die?”. Sometimes only 10% or 20% or so supported terrorism against Americans, sometimes 60% or 80% or even 90%. It varied depending on the country and on the question. But it was clear that either a majority or a large minority of the respondents in various places wanted us dead. > > You probably also remember some news videos of people dancing in the streets (mentioned above) or about the popularity of Osama bin Laden tee-shirts. These things are less quantitative than polls, but certainly contribute to an overall picture of many people in this category. > > I don’t want to sound alarmist about this. I myself always thought it was dumb to get so worked up over the terrorist attacks on the US. Unguarded swimming pools claim more American lives every year than terrorism did in 2001, and preferentially kill little children. Automobile accidents and suicide each claim more lives in a typical month than terrorism did in September 2001. And, on September 10, 11 and 12, 2001, cigarette smoking killed about as many people as terrorism, for a few thousand dollars a head of profit to the tobacco companies. Yet for some reason trying to cast terrorism into some kind of reasonable perspective is like farting in church. So, in regard to terrorism in general, Americans are causing much more trouble than Muslims from overseas. But to be accurate, at least based on the information I could turn up, there are very many Muslims who would support or endorse violent harm to Americans. I think it is hard to tell accurately, but I think it is pretty implausible that fewer than 100,000,000 of them do, and my best guess is that there are roughly as many Muslims who endorse violent harm to Americans as there are Americans (in other words roughly 35% who would answer “yes” to questions like those above, out of 1 billion Muslims). I don’t care about calculations made from opinion polls. You did happen to notice that there is a huge amount of variation in opinion concerning Americans in the vague, illusory Muslim World. Also, I will give you a hint as to where I was: I was in the Muslim World!! > [@The\_Bith\_Shuffle](#): > > Your sentence only proves that you do not feel the need to use language reasonably. There is not a hint of xenophobia in my post, unless your definition of “xenophobia” is so loose as to be useless. > > **Magiver** already took care of most of this for me. The term “Muslim World”, like any term referring to an enormous group of people living in a complex world, can have multiple meanings, but no reasonable interpretation of the phrase will invalidate my first two claims. If you want to know more about the Muslim World you could start at [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_World) or just Google the phrase. > > Generalizations of some kind are inevitable in conversations about millions or billions of people. Focus should be kept not on avoiding generalizations completely but on understanding where they apply and where they don’t, and to what extent they really describe what they purport to. > > You don’t have to just take my word for it. Consider the awful way that homosexuals tend to be treated in [most majority-Muslim countries](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#Middle_Africa). Look at [abortion laws throughout the world](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_law). You could also read about the state of [general human rights](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_rights_articles_by_country) through the world. > > Of _course_ Muslims like to have sex; _people_ like to have sex. Whether or not Muslims are _reproducing_ at a rate faster than the Chinese or Indians (I assume you refer to the citizens of China and India, not those who have emigrated) depends on what countries you look at, but the numbers for some Muslims countries [are astounding](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate). Some are not so astounding, and others are even kind of low. But this is not quite important, since I do not believe that Muslim birth rates globally or in Western societies are a problem _in and of themselves_. > > **RickJay** pointed out that Muslim countries tend to grow, population-wise, at the rate you’d expect given their economy. But that just brings forth the question “how do the economies of Muslim countries tend to perform?” > > How am I supposed to respond non-sarcastically to this sarcastic statement? It frankly _is_ rational to make that sort of distinction. You are obviously Hell-bent on portraying me as a bigot because you just can’t believe that there could be other reasons for why I hold the beliefs that I do. > > It’s never rational to assume that a group of people is fundamentally different from oneself or one’s own group or to hate them blindly. It certainly _is_ irrational to assume that other people think this way, however. Your blind, blasé multiculturalism is leading you to see hatred where none exists. Oh thank-you, I’m a multiculturalist. That’s as meaningful as the Muslim World. Also, please don’t put words in my mouth, I didn’t say you were xenophobic. I know nothing about you. I do know that your baseless assertions are the types of terms and concerns expressed by those who are xenophobic or xeno-anxious (for lack of a better term off the top of my head). Unless I was mistaken, this was the subject of the thread. Your statement that really bothered me, the idea that our culture will be degraded by taking on Islamic values is something I at first misread, and I apologize for my reaction to it. Of course, it is mind-numbingly obvious that if we take on the values of a different culture then our culture will change. Its silly to ponder whether the USA or any European country will just up and adopt Islamic values. I would not argue that attitudes towards women and homosexuals are deplorable throughout much of the world. The fact that people are breeding at various rates throughout the world has little to do with the future demographics in the USA or EU, or anywhere else but where the babies are being born. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/72 "2010-02-09T02:35:45Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Yes, there was an ignorant group of Islamic terrorists arrested in my home state for a plot to blow up a mall. And there was an ignorant Islamic terrorist who tried to blow up an airplane in the state next to me. And there was an ignorant Islamic terrorist who tried to smuggle a car full of explosives across the Canadian border. I could fill this page with examples of ignorance that needs to be fought starting with the all the Muslims who support Bin Laden and the 9/11 attack. All of these things are definitely much worse than your own ignorance, or perhaps it was simply confusion, about conflating certain nations that have Islam as their official religion with a generic entity labeled “the Muslim World”. However, your ignorance happened to be here at hand in the thread I was reading, so that’s what I fought. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/73 "2010-02-09T02:38:11Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > You seem to have no problem assigning religious motivations when it suits you (and given that you have so little understanding of Islamic history that you are unable to identify secular movements in them, I wonder where you get off asserting what constitutes Islamic terrorism. He is not assigning the motivation, the terrorists are themselves. On 9/11 we were attacked in the name if Islam. McVeigh didn’t do anything in the name of Christianity. (You yourself posted a quote showing that he was NOT religious, though he was a Christian). The Muslim terrorists advertise their motivation. Does “Allah akbar” ring a bell? This is a gaping blind spot in your thesis. > [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Right. You get to apply one definition of religious extremist to McVeigh and another to Muslims. You get to ignore something that happened 15 years ago, while citing something that happened 14. And you get to claim the number “3” simply by ignoring all sorts of other domestic terrorism. Again, McVeigh and Muslim Terrorist X are similar in that they both are terrorists. But they differ in a few important ways: - McVeigh was pretty much a lone nut (excepting his one accomplice), without a cadre of people hoping to duplicate or surpass his actions. The Muslim extremists who were involved in 9/11 have hordes hoping to duplicate their efforts. - (Forgive me for repeating this) The Muslim extremists invoke the Islam in their attacks. McVeigh did NOT do this. Based on this, I think you need to simplify your research. First I’d ask what specific group you are trying to compare to Muslim Extremists. Is it white guys? Or is it Christian extremists. If it’s the former, McVeigh is game. If it’s the latter, he’s not. But even if it is white guys, I think you have to demonstrate some correlation between being white and being a terrorist. No? > [@BrightNShiny](#): > > magellan01, are you okay with the research project, or do you want to alter the definitions? I don’t think the Ruby Ridge Waco stuff goes to your thesis about terrorists. Those people were isolationists. I’m not saying that it not a bad thing, just that they do not pose the same threat as terrorists. And this discussion is about terrorism. Also, if you’re really trying to assess the respective levels of threats, I don’t think you can ignore attacks overseas. I think you have to include all attacks by Muslim terrorists on Americans. I think it’s fair, for purposes of this discussion, to leave out attacks like those in London, Spain, and Bali. In the interest of us understanding each other, can you answer these question I posed to you earlier? I know you want to do research to answer more accurately, but surely you have an idea. What would be your best guess? 1. how would you apportion the threat coming from the two groups we are discussing? (50-50?) 2. what do you base your apportionment on? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/74 "2010-02-09T02:57:23Z")
> [@The\_Bith\_Shuffle](#): > > **RickJay** pointed out that Muslim countries tend to grow, population-wise, at the rate you’d expect given their economy. But that just brings forth the question “how do the economies of Muslim countries tend to perform?” Some are rich, some are poor, and some are in between. There is no evidence that their birth rates are “extraordinary,” as per your claim. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/75 "2010-02-09T03:00:02Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Stop lying. [Do not accuse other posters of lying in great Debates.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448632) [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/76 "2010-02-09T03:05:46Z")
Yes, the Muslim extremists invoke Islam in their attacks. That should not reflect on the great majority of Muslims/Islamists who are peaceful and do not wish to terrorize anyone. It is good to remember too that not all people from the countries listed are Islamists. Why don’t some of you find out what some of the individuals are like before you form your opinions? How would you like to be judged as if you were a [Tony Alamo?](http://www.rickross.com/groups/alamo.html) This man lived not very far from my neighborhood too. He had a business in downtown Nashville. He was a terrorist, but he wasn’t Islamic. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/77 "2010-02-09T03:09:56Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > He is not assigning the motivation, the terrorists are themselves. On 9/11 we were attacked in the name if Islam. McVeigh didn’t do anything in the name of Christianity. (You yourself posted a quote showing that he was NOT religious, though he was a Christian). The Muslim terrorists advertise their motivation. Does “Allah akbar” ring a bell? This is a gaping blind spot in your thesis. Nope. Shodan explicitly refused to acknowledge that some of the terrorism emanating from Muslims is politically based rather than religious based. While some Muslim terrorists do use, such as al-Queda, do use religious ideology, some don’t and some use religious language but cease their terrorism when political objectives are reached. If you don’t know this, how can you claim to have any expertise on the subject of Muslim terrorism? For example, since you want to include overseas attacks, the Sunnis were attacking Americans in Iraq. Then the so-called “Anbar awakening” happened in which we negotiated with the Sunnis and made payments to them (and, IIRC, you and Shodan trumpeted this as evidence of US success in Iraq). If the motivation behind Sunni attacks were solely religious based, then how can payments and political negotiation have ameliorated them? Obviously the attacks were either not religiously based or were some combination of religion and political motivations. > [@](#): > > Again, McVeigh and Muslim Terrorist X are similar in that they both are terrorists. But they differ in a few important ways: > > - McVeigh was pretty much a lone nut (excepting his one accomplice), without a cadre of people hoping to duplicate or surpass his actions. The Muslim extremists who were involved in 9/11 have hordes hoping to duplicate their efforts. > > - (Forgive me for repeating this) The Muslim extremists invoke the Islam in their attacks. McVeigh did NOT do this. McVeigh was a lone nut–except his one accomplice. Seriously, you can’t even be non-contradictory in simple factual statements. But whether or not you want to believe it, there is a loosely affiliated domestic terrorist threat, much in the way that various Islamic extremists are loosely affiliated. Which is why the FBI put out that report last year (until the Republicans screamed and made them retract it). > [@](#): > > Based on this, I think you need to simplify your research. First I’d ask what specific group you are trying to compare to Muslim Extremists. Is it white guys? Or is it Christian extremists. If it’s the former, McVeigh is game. If it’s the latter, he’s not. But even if it is white guys, I think you have to demonstrate some correlation between being white and being a terrorist. No? Ok, let’s break it into 2 categories – non-religious white guys and religious white guys. But I didn’t claim that whiteness is some condition which causes terrorism. All I am claiming is that white guys are responsible for a lot of domestic terrorism, and that for some reason, they get a pass when they commit terrorism. > [@](#): > > I don’t think the Ruby Ridge Waco stuff goes to your thesis about terrorists. Those people were isolationists. I’m not saying that it not a bad thing, just that they do not pose the same threat as terrorists. And this discussion is about terrorism. So, killing LEOs based on political or religious ideology doesn’t constitute terrorism anymore? Perhaps you should put out a definition of terrorism that excludes them, because I don’t see it. > [@](#): > > Also, if you’re really trying to assess the respective levels of threats, I don’t think you can ignore attacks overseas. I think you have to include all attacks by Muslim terrorists on Americans. I think it’s fair, for purposes of this discussion, to leave out attacks like those in London, Spain, and Bali. If we include overseas attacks, do I get to include Latin America? How do you want to define communist terrorists such as FARC? Am I supposed to include attacks on the military carried out during war as well, or only attacks on civilian infrastructure? Do I include things such as kidnappings? > [@](#): > > In the interest of us understanding each other, can you answer these question I posed to you earlier? I know you want to do research to answer more accurately, but surely you have an idea. What would be your best guess? > > 1. how would you apportion the threat coming from the two groups we are discussing? (50-50?) > > 2. what do you base your apportionment on? I already answer this upthread. I’ve offered to research the issue if we can agree to definitions. Why won’t you put out a definition of your own, so that we can narrow it down? ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/78 "2010-02-09T03:16:44Z")
I’m out for the rest of today. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/79 "2010-02-09T08:50:02Z")
Islamists are by definition part of political movements (Islamism), and in such cases it is extremely hard to distinguish between religious and political terrorism, so it is disingenuous to split hairs over this. More than disingenuous, it is also dangerous, its goal usually being the alarmist manufacture of Islamophobia. This simplistic need to focus on Muslim terrorists alienates mainstream muslims and hinders the formation of common ground. Muslim does not equal Islamist. Muslim does not equal terrorist. Islamist does not equal terrorist. That’s right: the fact that Islamism is utterly distasteful does not mean Islamists have to be terrorists. If you are anti-abortion, are you necessarily going to kill people who work at an abortion clinic? However, most terrorists of a Muslim background _are_ Islamists. To them, politics and religion are one and the same thing. Whether it is because of ignorance or legitimate conviction, they are committed to political philosophies and strategies that necessarily incorporate religion. Terrorism is typically an expression of political grievances (legitimate or not) and stems from political causes. Religion simply makes a convenient conduit for recruitment, motivation, and justification. Take the wars of any given period, add up the dead. Who killed the most people? What does it mean? Does the heinousness of the number 1 spot somehow make number 2 on the list any better? Of course not. Both are tragic. Trying to establish that terrorism of a muslim nature is somehow worse than other forms of terrorism is a cover used to spread fear of muslims and those tired old generalizations that damage inter-cultural relations. Terrorists are the ones who provide simple answers to those who crave simple answers; on this board you would expect some more depth. By the way, to all the people who still bring up this point: the reason you saw scenes of some Palestinians dancing in the streets after 9/11 is that these were the most dramatic images available and it is the nature of news to report such. You saw short clips of people who were happy and assumed this was the overall opinion of the “Muslim world” regarding the 9/11 tragedy. That’s even worse than forming an opinion of all Americans based on the anti-abortion terrorism perpetrated by a few and the disgusting psychos who excuse such crimes (without actually committing them). It may lead you to self-satisfying moments of righteousness, but nothing of substance, and very little that approximates fact. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988/80 "2010-02-09T13:38:33Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Right. You get to apply one definition of religious extremist to McVeigh and another to Muslims. No, actually it’s the same definition - if someone commits terrorism in the name of a religion, he or she is a religious terrorist. Muslim extremists act in the name of Islam. They are therefore Islamic terrorists. McVeigh did not act in the name of Christianity. Therefore, he is not a Christian terrorist. > [@](#): > > But thanks for amply proving my point about how you aren’t interested in determining what the actual threat to the US is. This is as silly as it was the last time you posted it. People die in the US from [cancer](http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1926392720080220), and from [bee stings](http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec24/ch298/ch298g.html). But everybody seems to give those bumblebees a pass. I wonder why they aren’t worried about the actual threat. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-me-fight-ignorance-xenophobia-regarding-islam/527988.md?page=5)