Why Do Americans Still Fear Muslims?

Um, arabguy, as a fellow muslim, I do hope you realize that we are in the presence of total non-believers here, so I do not think mere opinion matters here. All these guys here want nothing more than direct evidence.

You came from Arab, I presume? I do believe that you have more knowledge on this matter than I am, and please keep your head cool. Use whatever you know here to counter their argument. That's how discussion works.

Then just give some evidence to back your statements.


Personally I don't see the extremist as a "huge" threat, since most groups are not well funded, have less supporters...But they can still be a threat. And I don't think "most" Americans hate/fear Muslims, maybe a misunderstanding to culture differences.

Are you referring to my statements? Which one? And what kind of evidence that you want?

"All these people want are evidence" and you are right, because that's what rational people do.

You: "The moon is made of green cheese."
Rational person: "Prove it."
You: "All you want is evidence!"
Rational person: "well, duh."

This thread sure has turned into a clusterfuck.

I apologize if I sound rude in this reply. I've been sick this week, and today has been very stressful for me, so I'm not in the best mood. I'll try to be fair and temperate, but emotions tend to come out when you feel lousy.

To begin with, I said that I did not want the tenets of Islam discussed in this thread. That has been completely ignored. So I'll explain why I didn't want stuff like "Muslims want to kill non-practitioners" brought up and why it isn't conducive to a serious discussion about the wave of distrust and hostility towards Muslims in America:

As I said, quotes can be pulled up that portray Islam as violent, but that can also be done for Christianity. If we're going to argue about whether Islam is or is not a violent religion, then we should also argue about whether Christianity is a violent religion. However, while many make the claim that Islam is violent, very few people make the claim that Christianity is violent. This shows a clear disparity. It suggests to me that people have already made up their minds that Christianity is not a violent religion and thus are not willing to discuss it.

Besides, throwing quotes from holy scripture back and forth is more a job for theologians, and even when they do it, it doesn't amount to much. The standard church-goer doesn't read books about theology published by people with doctors in theology; they read the holy book and listen to the preacher (or equivalent thereof).

In this thread, I wanted to talk about the prejudice displayed towards Islam and Muslims in America, which is clear and cannot be denied. I wanted to operate under the assumption that Islam, at least as practiced by the majority of American Muslims, is not a violent religion and that its practitioners, the majority in America, at least, are not violent. I feel no need to prove that assumption; if anyone believes I do need to prove it, then I ask in turn that it be proven that Christianity, at practiced by the majority of Christians in America, is not a violent religion and that its practitioners, the majority in America, at least, are not violent. It seems to me that proving that Christianity is not a violent religion, in this day and age, would be a harder task than proving that Islam is not. After all, the IRA consists of many Catholics, the KKK is a Christian organization, and the Westboro Baptist Church ("God Hates Fags") is, obviously, a Christian church, and they are all pretty violent, albeit in different ways than Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, though one can question if their lack of firepower makes them any less dangerous, especially considering how long the KKK has been around. But that's a conversation for another day.

By the way, about the IRA, KKK, and Westboro Baptist - they are fringe groups, and most people don't consider them to represent what Christianity truly is or the way Christians truly behave. So then why do people see the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, also fringe groups, and assume that all Muslims are like them?

Yes, most Americans don't know anything about Islam, and yes, Muslims were an easy target after 9/11. But it's not 9/11 anymore, and anyone that wants to learn about Islam can easily do research online. Is there any reason, nay - excuse, for a community to be afraid of a mosque being built? Is there any excuse for a person being afraid of a Muslim, based on nothing other than the fact that he is Muslim?

How about this? What if I get mugged by a black guy? What if, from then on, whenever I see a black man, I assume that he is going to mug me? Is that acceptable behavior? If I assume that all black men commit crimes, because I got mugged by one, is that okay? If I oppose black people moving into my neighborhood, out of fear that the crime rate will rise, am I justified in doing so?

Nowadays, most people would call the above racist, no doubt about it. Yet the same sort of thing happens to Muslims, and people say, "It's different." Why is it different? Because a select group of Muslims did something bad, it's okay to judge every Muslim harshly?

Hello K-1.

I see you're playing the old card of "Just because some muslims do it, doesn't make islam bad. Look at all the good Muslims."

While, of course, as most people do, completely ignoring the counter argument of, "...Ok, then just because there are good muslims...doesn't make Islam good. Look at the bad ones."

Let's get one thing clear before I start addressing you with my view. Moderates are far better than extremists...and there is certianly a difference between them. Moderates aren't the ones flying jets into buildings or blowing themselves up in the streets.

However moderates present a different problem. The problem of forcing everyone to respect faith. Moderates have this idea that faith...is this untouchable thing, that should always be respected no matter what religion it's placed in. Muslims, Chirstians, Jews, all of these practices, under this moderate idea of what faith ought to be regarded as, are complettouchable...when it comes to criticisms. People are allowed, under this cover, to raise their children to believe themselves to be a chirstian, or a jew, or a muslim, without ever being taught to question it, and nobody is allowed to disapprove...not for any reason, because faith is to be respected.

It is under this cover that we have blurred religions. Moderates have made it incredibly difficult to tell religions apart from eachother. so hard that many people ca't tell from going to services, or listening to moderates in what they believe, what the differences are. They can't see that religions in fact DON'T teach the same things, DO teach a lot of different things, and the things they DO teach the same are not taught equally well.

Think about it. Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers? I've heard it said to me that islamic extremists are born he Israeli occupation, and of our own(the united states') mishandlings of Iraq and Afghanistan...well if that's true, then the Buddhist suicide bombers should far outnumber the Islamic ones.

The tibetian people have been through a far worse, far more cynical occupation than Israel. Some million and over Tibetans have died due to China's occupation. Yet you don't see them rushing the streets, and crowding around with signs, asking for the deaths of the chinese non combatants.

Why is this? It's because Buddhism doesn't teach what Islam teaches. Buddhism doesn't teach about infidels. It doesn't teach about the people who don't believe as they do deserving death. It doesn't teach that children who leave the religion need to be killed for Apostacy. It doesn't teach that witches should be beheaded, and give an extremely vague description of what a witch is, so that anyone who seems semi-pagan would be guilty, and thusly beheaded.

That's not to say you couldn't possibly twist buddhism to cause a death toll. Zen Buddhism played a role in the kamikaze fighters of WWII...but you REALLY have to try REALLY hard to twist buddhism to that level. You do not have to work so hard, as a muslim, to turn your religion into such an orgy of violence. And it in fact WOULD be impossible to do so as a Jain. The Jains have this respect, for ALL life...in fact the more extreme a Jain gets, the LESS likely they are to kill ANYTHING.


So you see...it's not fundamentalism, or extremism that's the problem...it's the fundamentals. You can't possibly argue that the core tenet of Islam is nonviolence. Religious moderates...have rendered noticing this kind of stuff, taboo.

It's important to reference that I'm not talking about a race here. You gave the example of "If a black guy mugs me, is it right to assume al black guys want to mug me?" Well, thats a faulty analogy. Nothing about being black...teaches people to mug people. When I speak of Islam I'm talking about guys like John Walker-Lynn...a white man who went off to fight alongside the taliban.

We are not at war with just Al-Quada..or extremist islam. We are at war with Islamic...fundamentalism. What does that mean? It means we are at war with people, who follow the fundamental tenets of their beliefs, strongly and devoutly. The mainstream idea of Islam does INDEED contain the notions of Martyrdom, and Jihad. It contains an IMPERITIVE to convert, subjigate, or kill infidels. If you don't believe this, you must simply read the Quran, or the Hadif.

Contemplate, for a moment, if you will, the biographies of the 19 men who woke up on September 10th, and decided in their minds to go onto planes, slit Stewardess throats, and fly planes into buildings. These people were college educated. Each and every one of them. Many had PhD's. Many of them educated in the West. They were middle class, or better. How many architects and engineers need to hit the wall at 400 mph for us to realize this is NOT merely a problem of extremism...that islam...is what is to blame?

these are not guys who spent a lot of time agitating, or at least publically expressing needs for regime change in the Middle East. These were men who spent a lot of time at their local mosque in Hamburg, talking about the pleasures that await martyrs in Paradise, and demonizing infidel culture.

We live in a society where it is fully possible to be intelligent enough to build a nuclear bomb, yet still think, and believe, that you'll get the 72 vrigins in paradise, if you detonate it in the right place, and die with it.

Are you getting it yet?

Edit: I have since learned that Zen Buddhism actually played NO part in WWII kamikaze bombers. They performed these acts due to a strict following of Shinto and Bushido, believing their emperor to be a living god, and the american war machine being too strong to stop without possibly dieing. volunteers were asked for by the government, and they got them.

Because it is natural for a nation-state to define itself as having an enemy, after the collapse of the Soviet-Union, (which was torn down with the help of the extremists bred using US dollars in Afghanistan - who later called themselves the Taliban) - A new enemy was needed, and naturally arose after the Taliban were done with all the Russians (This is a very dumbed down summary btw).

The 9/11 attacks themselves including all acts of "terrorism" are actually politically motivated (note the IRA) I'm not sure if you Americans celebrate Guy Fawkes night but I'm sure you've seen V for Vendetta - which is terrorism in a Nutshell - If you want to know why these people felt it was necessary to board a plane and kill thousands of civilians look no further than the United States' support for dictators in the Arab World who have likely killed many more people. (I am not sympathizing with terrorists I am simply saying that they're not on some "fundamental Islamic crusade" as the media would have you believe). In response to these attacks the United States initiated 2 wars which have resulted in the deaths of Hundreds of thousands of civilians - which has in turn created more terrorists.

A short insight into Jihad in Islam - Jihad isn't something that Muslims are ordered to do as some sort of quest for world domination, the principle of Jihad has 2 faces the first and more important one is the Internal Struggle that one constantly has in the confines of his soul, the second is the necessity to retaliate if attacked. I believe Buddhism is against violence of all sorts even if it is in response to provocation you will find that throughout history those who have allowed themselves to be conquered have not prospered or flourished - That is why Islam and Christianity are the 2 major religions on the planet at this moment in time (Not Buddhism). America's "war on terror" was in a similar vein - a response to an attack, something that the US felt it necessary to do, in order to maintain it's position as the world's superpower - important in a world where others are vying to take that title.

The Majority of Americans who "Fear Muslims" are crazy red-neck republicans who believe anybody or anything that isn't part of Christianity is under the devils influence and needs to be purged, but I am not talking about the opinions of these people I am talking about regular perceptions, which have for the most part been twisted by the incredibly biased mainstream media when it comes to it's portrayal of Muslims as gun-touting beard-grooming lunatics who like to yell a lot.

I understand there are many of you who will ignore everything I've said and simply go back to blaming Islam as a religion - which is fine, it is of course the easy way out - the more self-righteous way out, I suggest that you read the Bible or the Old Testament as well as the Quran - you will find that all major religions operate under the same principles, how these principles are interpreted depends on who is interpreting them.

Because it's not a majority religion in America, and people do not have accurate knowledge of the religion (they are exposed mostly only to news-making extremist incidents) and many make false assumptions based on this.
Most don't seek out accurate information about Islam, and are misguided by conservative media opinions.

+ Rep, Very well said.

Americans "fear" Muslims because our government tells us to.

Why? Because waging war is extremely profitable for our military complex. After all, $0.53 of every single dollar our government makes or earns is spent on it.

Compare Iran and China as threats and the latter emerges as the top dog. They have the world's largest population, an extensive manufacturing base, and nuclear capabilities. However, China happens to be a trade partner of ours, and our corporations like having cheap Chinese labor (bolstered, of course, by massive numbers of prisoners). We'd have to find some other nation of laborers to exploit if we started picking a fight with them.

Basically, our government is tapping into reservoirs of racism in order to circumvent objection to its aggression overseas. That's why the general public isn't raising as much of a fuss about it. If we were invading countries full of white Christians, you can bet that there would've been far more outrage.

I was even younger and stupider back in 2003 than I am now and didn't have much of an opinion about the invasion of Iraq, but the more I learn about the shady deals our government makes, the more I'm convinced that there's someone else pulling the strings.

Flip any military action we took within the last 10 years (i.e., invading Iraq, Afghanistan, jumping into Libya, etc) and have the United States be the recipient. You'd be pissed off, right? Why are we insane enough to question the existence of Muslim radicals when we're invading and setting up bases in sovereign countries? Especially when we would never tolerate it ourselves?

+ Rep - exactly! If you refer to my post above I've talked about how nation states need to foster the perception of an enemy, in many cases they tout the image of this enemy so much that the people see it as an existential threat to their values, when in reality they are the biggest threats to themselves.

Allow me to explain something to you that I explained in a post above.

The Tibetans have been through not only a longer, but a far more brutal occupation campaign from China than anything. Yet you don't see the tibetian people rushing the streets with signs screaming for the deaths of chinese noncombatants.

Ask yourself, why? If the muslim radicals are born of the occupation and the bumbling of the war...then why aren't the Tibetans flying planes into buildings and screaming for the death of the chinese people?

I'll tell you why, because the Buddhists who live in Tibet have a much more peaceful religion than the muslims. They don't spend their times talking about how evil infidel culture is every day, and tell eachother that killing tose who aren't Buddhists will result in being able to have 72 virgins in heaven.

Don't kid yourself. the reason there are muslim radicals is because the religion itself iencourages such behavior...not because of us.

Um wat. No.

You don't hear about it because the Western media doesn't want you to hear.

There have been several Tibetan terrorist attacks and bombings. It's just a lot of it is kept under-wraps by the Chinese/Western governments from reaching wider public audiences.

http://dalje.com/en-world/china-police-seize-9-monk-bombers-in-tibet/139898

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/04/01/china.tibet/



I love how you massively generalize things BigLundi. Muslim radicals/terrorism are a result of it's religion principles? Riiiggt...you make me laugh. Go back to your morality/philosophical incoherency and leave geopolitical issues until you actually do some research.

Ahh pseudo-intellectualism. Nobody markets it quite like you Anesthetize. :)

If you would have actualy paid attention to what I said, I said you don't see the Tibetans crowding the streets calling for the deaths of chinese noncombatants.

And if you would have read my ORIGINAL post, which was what I was referencing, you owuld have seen that I conceded it's POSSIBLE to twist Buddhism around to support such violence, but it takes a LOT of extremely hard mental acrobatics to get to that point.

Meanwhile, you didn't at all debunk my actual point, which was that Muslim extremists are not born out of an occupation, they are born out of the fundamental flaws of Islam, which DO have a mainstream belief that infidel culture deserves to die, and that martyrdom is something that is rewarded GREATLY in the afterlife.

Stick to non-informative commentary Anesthetize, it's what your good at. googling and cut and pasting wiki searches don't do anything but make you look petty. :)

Anesthetize, call us back when Tibetans send their kids to terrorist training camps.

Um yes they do. As a person of Chinese decent and have been to Tibet i can tell you.



And i was never trying to de-bunk your "main argument" nor am i ever going to try to, because ive tried that before. I was merely pointing out one of your many massive generalizations ie "Think about it. Where are the Tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers?"

And pseudo-intelligence? I'm not the one proclaiming i'm smarter/more knowledgeable than anyone or ever have. I'm certainly not making threads about it either.

Firstly, I'd like to point out that when I asked "Where are the tibetan Buddhist suicide bombers?" What I recieved from you PALES in comparison to the Muslims. Absoltuely pales, so you demonstrated my point perfectly.

And secondly, by pseudo-intelligence I meant your idea that copy and pasting a wiki search in any way detracted from what I said, when in reality all you did was demonstrate my point exactly, while at the SAME time proclaiming that I should 'stick to my incoherent morality/philosophy discussions and do some research'.

Seriously, learn to argue. I understand you have some sort of hate on for me, but you're wasting its furiousness when you attempt to make a point to demonstrate I'm wrong, and fail epically.

Um perhaps you need to stop over-thinking things because now you're putting words in my mouth.

I never was comparing Muslims with Tibetan Buddhism nor said anything at all about it. All i was doing was providing evidence against that statement. And pales in comparison? I'm not even going to start, i'll just take your word that you're somehow an expert on Tibet Buddhism and Muslims and have written a thesis on it.

Subjectivity has no place in geopolitics. You back up your statements with evidence, wikipedia article or no wikipedia article.

And to be honest, it just looks like you're projecting. I've never said i hated you or anything like the latter.

Nope, simply drawing conclusions based off of observations. It's called empiricism.
1. you jumped at the chance to attack a strawman argument of mine
2. After giving your attack, you informed me I should stay out of geopoliticks until I "do my research". And the fact of the matter is, nothing I said goes against anything you've provided, so it's a moot point.
3. You, as well as a couple others, regularly hound my topics and generalize them as "biglundi threads" without ever provideing anything of actual substance to them.
Conclusion: you have some sort of hate on for me.



Against what statement? The question of if you see Tibetan suicide bombers? Not only do you say in your post, "No you don't, because the media hides it well" but you demonstrated the point I made after that by providing a pitiful amount of Buddhists that somehow managed to justify their actions to themselves, and some of which were even disavowed by the tibetan buddhists as a whole.



Considering One of the Islamic tactics for fighting, is, quite literally, running at their opponents with bombs strapped to their bodies...I don't think I have to go into furthur details, as that's not a fundamental Buddhist tactic of battle...at all, and you'll find no Buddhistic wrightings that supports it. the most you'll find are death poems or writings of Buddhist samurai that believe Seppuku meshes perfectly with Buddhism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack#Muslim_religious_motivation

You'll read in there that muslim scholars cannot seem to agree as to whether or not these types of bombings are religiously justified...but when you have Muslims actively doing it, IN battle, it doesn't quite matter what the scholars have to say, it's still happenning, and for religious reasons, not political ones.



I can simply back up my statements in my original post by pointing to the fact that I'm allowing anyone to try and debunk what I've said. I have informed you that Inotonly have read the quran, and the Hadith, and I can say, without a shadow of a doubt, that the pure chaos muslim fundamentalists persue, is completely justified by their religious beliefs.

I ask you, right now, what were the biographies of the original 9/11 hijackers?(not our first attack from muslims, which in itself debunks the idea that it's our fault the fundamentalists are attacking us with suicide bombings, but whatever). They were college educated, and extremely inteligent. WHAT motivated their crimes? It was not an agitation for regime change, it was not an anger that the united states won't leave their holy land alone, it was a demonization of infidel culture and the promise of infinite pleasure s in the afterlife educated to them at their mosque in, of all places, Hamburg.

you don't...know...what you're talking about Anasthetize. so hush.