This is utterly false. Even “radical islam” does not hold that everybody has to be forcibly converted or killed, and mainstream Islam doesn’t even get close to that kind of thinking. you are misinformed.
And just for the record, Christianity and Judaism also believe that their religions will someday be universal.
In any case, Saudi Arabia has fuck all to do with American Muslims. None of the 9/11 attackers were Americans. I can’t think of a single example of “homegrown” terrorism committed by Muslims in the US (maybe the Ft. Hood shooter, but that was a military target, so it technically wan’t terrorism. He also wasn’t part of any organized group, just a lone psychotic).
I can name several incidents of homegrown terrorism committed by right wingers and Christians, therefor all right wingers and Christians need to be investigated before the first Muslim.
Are you that much of a moron that you’d think such a poor reasoning as:
"Muslims in America are protesting the hearings. Radical Djihadists would be protesting the hearings. So, Muslims protesting the hearings are in truth Radical Djihadists. Therefeore hearings, surveillance and anything we can throw at them is justified. "
would not be taken for what it is by most dopers. That is faulty reasoning from a troubled mind.
I dont understand your Muslim fascination nor your efforts to constantly bring here faulty reasonings to bash them. At least, if you’re so enamored with them that you can’t let your eyes off them, try to put up an argument that cant be dismantled in less than five seconds.
P.S: While I am no fan of banning, and some of those seem to be handed out quickly by the mods sometimes, I would definitely salute your kicking out of here. If only for you giving moronic fanatical anti-Muslims a bad name.
I am not “calling” for hearings now and I did not call for hearings back then. Members of the US Congress have called for hearings now, and Janet Reno did back then. I am not an American so my “calls” to US politicians would not mean much anyhow.
I am discussing whether such hearings can fairly be accused of “demonizing” Muslims (or conservatives if you wish to discuss that) in America.
I am not even sure I was on SDMB when Janet Reno suggested such an investigation of conservatives anyhow, or I may not have been following that controversy at that time.
I also repeat that the fact that the vast majority of American conservatives and American Muslims are peaceful and law-abiding does not automatically mean they are being demonized if one looks into the possibility that these groups (conservatives and Muslims) might have criminal terrorist elements moving among them.
Sorry dude, but Christian “homegrown terrorists” haven’t racked up nearly the body count in the last couple of decades that Muslim “homegrown terrorists” have.
Now, if you go back to the 19th Century and the first half of the 20th Century when uppity black people were being murdered for asking for equal rights you might have a point, but that was before most of us were even born.
I think you guys need to define your terms. I believe that the “homegrown” terrorism they are talking about is people who were born here, or at least who are US citizens, who have been “radicalized” to the point of willingness to commit domestic acts of terrorism. None of the 9/11/01 hijackers fits this bill.
As **Diogenes **says, the closest we have is the Fort Hood shooter.
Having said that, the hearings are supposed to look at preventive measures needed, not examine whether or not a lot of terrorism has already happened. I don’t discount the threat there is, but I don’t know what the hearings will accomplish other than political posturing for a few Congresscritters.
Please explain to me how Judaism claims that it will be “universal” the way Islam and Christianity do?
Then you haven’t been paying very much attention.
The real truth is that “homegrown terrorism” whether committed by Muslims or Christians isn’t really much of a threat.
They were all legal residents. Most surveys and studies of “American Muslims” include both citizens and legal residents as they should since many of the legal residents are seeking citizenship and are happy to be in America.
It’s one of the Jewish Messianic expectations that the Messiah will cause the world to worship one God (and that God ain’t Jesus).
You should have no trouble citing some examples then.
The threat from American Muslims is non-existent. The threat from right wing Christian wackos is miniscule, but not non-existent, especially if you’re a doctor or a homo.
Irrelevant. They were not “homegrown.” They were not American Muslims. You can’t cite any examples of homegrown Muslims commiting terrirism except for arguably one mentally ill army psychiatrist.
Here’s a Rand Report listing about 100 American Muslims who were involved in terrorist incidents between 2001-2009.
I mean, the report agrees with your major point, saying:
and that fear of terrorism and especially homegrown terrorism is out of proportion and misplaced, but you don’t do your argument any favors when you start making absolutist statements like that or set such high standards.
Your personal attacks on me (e.g. "are you such a moron . . .) should be adressed by the moderator. I believe they are an infringement of the rules of the GDMB.
Your quote above is a classic example of a straw man, because I never tried to establish the syllogism you are alleging I made.
You falsely claim that I said something like this:
Major Premise: Muslims in America are protesting the hearings.
Minor premise: Radical Djihadists would be protesting the hearings.
Conclusion: Muslims protesting the hearings are in truth Radical Djihadists.
I would never make such a syllogism because it does not follow the rules of logic.
Here is what I actually said, if you will check the last para of my OP:
“Finally, a question: If you were a radicalized Muslim terrorist who is recruiting young American Muslims for terrorism and spreading radical jihadist ideas in Muslim communities in the US, would YOU be in favour of these hearings? Or would you join those opposing the hearings at today’s demo?”
I will repeat the question in another way. Imagine that you are a radical Muslim terrorist who is keeping a low profile, attending your mosque like all the peaceful Muslims, but working behind the scenes to radicalize American Muslim youth.
Would you be in favour of hearings and other forms of inquiry into what is happening in Muslim America?
I know what I would do if I were that person. I would try to get the hearings stopped in their tracks by shouting that Muslims are being demonized. I would even use the “racist” accusation if that works (and it often does, even though Islam is not a race).
I am saying that NOT holding such hearings for fear of being accused of racism and bigotry would serve the interests of such terrorists, would it not?
Oh God, you really don’t know much about this topic do you?
Off the top of my head, without even classifying attacks that failed to kill people, I.E. the recent attack in Portland, the Times Square bomber, and ignoring the DC sniper there are plenty.
There’s the first World Trade Center bombing, the Pakistani man who shot up the CIA parking lot, the Lebanese man who shot up the Jewish school bus on the Brooklyn Bridge, the guy who murdered the racist Rabbi Meir Kahane, the guy who shot up the Empire State building, the man who shot up the El Al airliner counter in LAX, the guy who shot up the Seattle Jewish coummunity center, Sergeant Akbar, the guy who shot up recruiting center in Kansas, and the Bosnian man who shot up the mall in Salt Lake City.
And that’s ignoring all the plots put together by Jihadist wannabes that were foiled and wound up with the plotters getting arrested and all the killings committed by Nation of Islam terrorists, such as the killing of Malcolm X.
Obviously, “Muslim terrorism” within the US isn’t much of a threat and people shouldn’t freak out over either it or “Christian terrorism” within the US, but claiming it doesn’t exist is asinine.
I’m sorry, but that makes little sense. The hearings are about “the Muslim community within the US” which includes both citizens and legal residents. In fact, in many cities, legal residents who are Muslim outnumber those that are citizens who are Muslim.
My father was certainly considered part of the Muslim community within America before he was naturalized.
Umm… virtually all of those people were US citizens and some were born in the US.
Just because I proved a claim you made is foolish is no reason to get snippy.
Besides the hearings aren’t about** people** born in the US who are Muslim, but **people in the US **who are Muslim of which the latter(which I am technically a part of) vastly outweighs the latter.
Heh, you really don’t know much about Judaism do you.
It most certainly isn’t a “universal religion” the way Islam or Christianity is which is why they don’t proselytize the way Muslims and Christians do.
McVeigh was a right-winger who was against taxes, government and gun control, primarily. I suppose he might have been baptised into a Christian church as a child, but to allege that he was a “Christian” terrorist motivated by Christianity in the same way that Muslim terrorists are motivated by Islamic doctrines is pure sophism. Sorry, it does not wash.
OK, but what’s a “legal resident”. To me, that’s someone with a green card, not someone on a 6 month visa. How many of the 9/11/01 terrorists had green cards?