Muslim riots -- proof of a primitive society?

As most of you are aware of, recent reports by Newsweek (which have since been rescinded) claim that American soldiers in Guantamo flushed several Korans down the toilet as part of their “torture” treatment of Muslim prisoners. This news was received with outrage and rioting in many Islamic countries, followed by an outporing of apologies and explanations from the US – like explaining to us it’s incredibly bad because Muslims believe every single work in the Koran was written by Allah.

That’s the background, here are my questions.

  1. What on earth is the press thinking when it explains that last part? Is it meant to justify the deaths and injuries of hundreds of people in the riots? Jews believe every word in the Torah was written by God, and yet while they tend to treat their bible with respect and reverence (same as in Islam), I’m not aware of Jewish riots every time a Muslim destroys a copy of the book.

  2. As offensive as destroying a book may be to Muslims world wide – and I’m not saying it shouldn’t be – what the hell is wrong with a series of societies that riot when a book is defaced, but stand back and say NOTHING when (like, uh… NOW) an Italian aid worker is kidnapped, tortured, and threatened with beheading? This is an AID WORKER, not a solider!! How can this dichotomy between ignoring the attacks on humans and rioting over paper be tolerated by their religion?

And these same rioting societies say nothing when journalists, contractors, other aid workers, or soldiers are kidnapped and murdered. Or when planes are flown into buildings or trains blown up. Or when Iraqi civilians and policemen are bombed on a daily basis.

I mean, I’d at least expect American Muslims – who claim to hold American values and who say they are unfairly persecuted in the US – to rise up in protests every time innocent people are murdered by their religious brothers. Yet this doesn’t seem to be happening at all.

So in short, what is up with this religion that tolerates/condones the murder of civilians yet riots when books are destroyed?

It also seems that many Muslims, even Western ones, refuse to debate this and look at the other side of the issues. For instance, I asked a similar question on the Islam.org website in regards to this article:

Their response was to delete my comments.

And, anti-Islamic books at Amazon (that is, books that claim that Islam is not the religion of peace it claims to be) are frequently given bad reviews by readers claiming to be Muslims not based on the matieral in the book, but based on the threat of eternal damnation.

Links:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0879759844/104-8736552-3015935?v=glance

(Scroll down to the reviews, where the author, a former Muslim, is told his future “torment is already bad, you are making it worse,” and that he must “pray to Allah for forgiveness” for writing the book.
And before this gets moved to the Flaming Pit, I do believe these are legitimate questions about how the American press seems to be pandering to a group of religious zealots that don’t tolerate Western civilization’s freedoms in the slightest, and I’ve stuck to facts while stating my case, as touchy a subject as it may be.

PS - please don’t make this about the Iraq war. I’ve been opposed to it from day one, and I certainly believe many innocent Muslims were killed in the campaign. But that still doesn’t explain the 9/11 attacks and how they are praised by much of the Islamic world (remember, the attacks were long before the Iraq war), nor does it explain the Muslim world’s silence over the deaths of so many civilians and aid workers – as well as soldiers – at the hands of fundamentalists while they cry over mere books.

Yes I agree with you. They seem to be similar to the Christians of several centuries ago.

First, it’s worth noting that the idea that Newsweek was the catalyst for the riots is largely a myth created by the media-bashers on the right:

Secondly, my understanding is that to dismiss the Koran as “just a book” is to miss the point. IIRC, in Islam, the Koran is more than a book – it’s an actual manifestation of God’s will and presence, a direct hot line to the divine. Think of the reverence Christians have for the crucifix and multiply it by 10 to get an inkling of the notion here.

I think we understand that to many Muslims it is more than “just a book.” However we can understand that and consider their fanaticism to be to be a factor in their barbarism. Anybody willing to stone someone to death over what’s said in a centuries old book is a superstitious barbarian.

marc

I don’t know what is more amazing: the quote that say’s “not necessarily” or that you used a Military General as the source.

It’s not a myth. The riots occurred around the world, not just in Afghanistan. Newsweek screwed up big time. And they did it knowing the reaction it would have after the Miss World riots in Nigeria that killed 215 people. The Editor should have known that the “religion of peace” is currently an oxymoron. If you look at Muslim websites it is clear that they don’t believe the retraction. This was a recruiting bonanza for Islamic terrorists and it cost them nothing. I can only imagine the number of soldiers who will die because of this.

You’re absolutely right. The Qu’ran is taken dead seriously (pun intended).

I guess this general should be arrested then:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/30/AR2005053000293.html

Are you implying in your post that some soldiers will die now for that “pun”? :rolleyes:
IOW: It is not the poster nor Newsweek the ones that incite riots, don’t kill the messenger.

He could’ve used a quote from Hamid Karzai as well.

Problems with the OP:
There’s not one society being discussed here, there are many.
I’m not sure if the fact that religious and political leaders manipulated their public into violence indicates the society is primitive.

They’re doing this thing called sharing information.

I know people who’ve had enormous difficulty with this distinction, but explaining something is not the same as justifying it. It’s not an attempt to justify anything, it does go some length in explaining the violent reaction.

As someone else notes in another Quran thread (in GQ), it’s pretty much accepted by everyone that the Bible has a literary tradition and has been changed and translated over thousands of years. Judaism existed long before the Torah did. So in that sense at least, you’re wrong.

What would it accomplish? I fucking can’t stand it when people criticize other people for not holding protests and complaining loud enoug about behavior they dislike. What a waste of air.
In any case I think a lot of American Muslims don’t feel any attachment to “their religious brothers,” just as people in country A don’t often protest things happening in country B.

This is a debate topic? Seems like you’ve written a long rant with a few rhetorical questions in it.

Well, obviously. But in this case, it seems more like they are sharing information to make excuses. I’m trying to figure out why. Your comment that exlpaining it is not the same as justifying it is true, but it still smacks of Newsweek and other media sources coming really close to justifying the rioters’ actions.

Actually, the Jews believe exactly what I said. That the 5-books of Moses are literal, direct translation of God, word for word. The first part of which were dictated to Moses at Mt. Sinai, the rest of which were dictated during their travels (until Moses’ death, at which point someone else took over, sorry I can’t remember who.)

Now, just because the non-religious world has accepted that it’s been changed, “everyone” does not agree. Relgious Jews especially. And just because you and I think the Koran is purely written by humans, devout Muslins don’t. So two distinct religions, both with a common belief in the holiness of their book, only one of which kills over it. What’s the difference that causes such a vastly different response?

Well, in this case, we’ve got American Muslims barraging the press and saying they belong to a religion of peace, that they should not be targeted for discrimination just because of what others who share their religion are doing in other countries.

Now, the fundamentalists in much of the Middle East don’t give a crap about what us “infidels” think of their attacks on Westerners. But much as you hate the criticism I gave, I think it’s legitimate. I think that American Muslims, the ones that complain so publicly when Muslims are portrayed as terrorists on shows like 24, DO have an obligation to come together as a community and just-as-publicly condemn other Muslims for using their mutual religion as an excuse for terror tactics.

Actually, the questions aren’t meant as rhetorical. I’m really trying to get an understanding here of what I see as a part of the world that means Western society nothing but harm, a Western press that seems to be a bunch of apologists, and a subset of the religion living in the countries that their religious kin despise and who don’t seem to want to denounce the terror tactics in public.

True, they are very difficult questions to answer, especially in a forum setting, but I’m trying to garner any form of insight that I can.

Actually, there seem to be protests against violence by moderate Muslims living in the West all the time.
But good news doesn’t get ratings, so it doesn’t get much play.

What worries me is that corporate media giants may wake up to this, & stir up mob violence among Americans, just to get better ratings. There’s a certain network, named after a furry red animal, that I’m thinking of in particular.

I would tune in to a Wahhabi cleric getting grilled on The Factor. Sure.

I feel there is not nearly enough of this kind of point / counter-point in today’s media. The more light the better! Hell, I don’t care who hosts it. Let NPR do it, as long as there are good probing questions.

That Wahhabist debate would still only represent the mindset of a portion of the Sunni sect of Islam which included our allies in Saudi Arabia as well as our enemies elswhere.

Yes, you don’t normally kill the messenger unless they incite a riot without cause. I can’t go into a theater and yell “fire” unless there’s a fire. The resulting stampede would be my fault.

I didn’t realize CBS was an acronym for a red furry animal because that’s the only network that had to fire someone for a false newscast, during an election.

Correction: the only network that was willing to fire someone for a false newscast, during an election.

Not true, there is a certain network, named after a smart furry animal, that reports good news despite the intentions of other networks to stick to Republicans. Might be why their ratings are going up, they actually report the news that other networks deliberately withhold (as you pointed out).

Except that, as GIGObuster pointed out, there is indeed a fire in this case. I guess you’re okay with them yelling it now, correct?

OOOH! If you say so, Skipper! After all, without you, the Minnow would be lost! :smiley:

Saying it doesn’t make it so. Cite where another network produced false documents.

Yes, I say so, and I referenced what YOU said “Gilligan”. Were you having an out of body experience when you said “But good news doesn’t get ratings, so it doesn’t get much play”?

If you watched more FOX and less CNNCNBCABCNBC you might learn something other than how to hate Republicans. You’ve mastered that skill so maybe it’s time to move on. Try watching The McNeal Lehrer report for some of your news along with the Nightly Business Report for business focus. After all, you’re paying for it.

FYI, it’s not my style to call people names but I can fling verbal insults as well as the next guy. So if you don’t want to be berated in a childish manner than keep the mud pies on your side of the fence. I’ll listen to your opinion and respond to it with the same grace and thought that you put into it.

I’ll leave you to a temporary last word because I’m going out to enjoy the day.

Rioting over religion=uncivilized
Rioting over sporting events= civilized