Are Muslims the new blacks (African Americans)?

[native]

...Mohammed was not the messenger of god. He was a murderous, illiterate pedophile...

This...

...NPR should be doing what is in the public interest. It is in the public interest to expose Islam for what it is.

...and this.

[travelinman67]

By the way........this "liberal" stopped listening to NPR after it became MPR (Muslim Public Radio). Seriously.......it got to the point where every other story was about some Middle Eastern/Muslim thing. Our Federal government should drop ALL funding to this outfit ASAP! It is very obvious that they have become a mouthpiece for Muslim interests in this country.

Jeff,
I think you're wrong for not listening any more. NPR's goal in all this "Muslim talk" is to educate Americans. It's either a respectable media outlet like them or it's Hannity and Limbork. Think about it. We need to learn the truth about Muslims and what's coming from the Right ain't it. It's incendiary and will cause more terror.

CS.Com's Minister of Truth...Cap'n Cat.

So, Cap, all this "jihad" is just rightist hype?

Tell that to the 1000's of innocent citizens slaughtered each year...



...or are these bombings all just rightist propoganda?

[Grizalltheway]

By the way........this "liberal" stopped listening to NPR after it became MPR (Muslim Public Radio). Seriously.......it got to the point where every other story was about some Middle Eastern/Muslim thing. Our Federal government should drop ALL funding to this outfit ASAP! It is very obvious that they have become a mouthpiece for Muslim interests in this country.

Well Jeffie, if you're that rabidly xenophobic, perhaps you should have been watching Faux news all along.

[kalm]

So, Cap, all this "jihad" is just rightist hype?

Tell that to the 1000's of innocent citizens slaughtered each year...

...or are these bombings all just rightist propoganda?

Of course not, but overblowing the threat and overinflating the number of muslims that support terrorism isn't productive either.

You can't militarily win a war against a billion people.

[LeadBolt]

Jeff,
I think you're wrong for not listening any more. NPR's goal in all this "Muslim talk" is to educate Americans. It's either a respectable media outlet like them or it's Hannity and Limbork. Think about it. We need to learn the truth about Muslims and what's coming from the Right ain't it. It's incendiary and will cause more terror.

At the same time you can't just bury your head in the sand and either protest/fire those who express human concerns (The View/Williams' firing) or refuse to acknowledge it's impact in terror attacks (Holder's congressional testimony). Extremist Muslims are aggressively marketing a strategy of spreading death and destruction, and moderate Muslims are virtually silent in pushing back. This whole stupid Mohammed cartoon issue is a clear example. The TSA overreaction at the airport is another. You can't pretend the issues don't exist simply because it doesn't dovetail nicely with one's politics...

+1000

Rob,

Great point. Discrimination against blacks was based upon appearance. Re-action to Muslims is based upon their behavior.

The argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful is correct, but immaterial. The majority of Germans were peaceful and not Nazis 75 years ago...

Why the minority of militant Muslims can't be controlled by the majority of peaceful Muslims is that the militant Muslims are the ones that are faithful to their scriptures and the example of Mohammed. I don't listen to NPR anymore as they (imo) have given up on truth and tolerance to preach their viewpoint and acceptance of their causes and are not tolerant of those who disagree, such as Juan Williams, even though he is a fellow liberal.

[native]

...You can't militarily win a war against a billion people.

If we continue to stick our heads in the sand, you are correct, kalm!

...especially if 50% of the "peaceful" enemy actively or overtly support the Islamofascist terrorists through words or deeds and an additional 45% of them tacilty support the Islamofascist terrorists though their silence.

We can win this war without becoming fascists ourselves if we try hard enough but we cannot possibly win the war and protect our families by appeasement.

[native]

At the same time you can't just bury your head in the sand and either protest/fire those who express human concerns (The View/Williams' firing) or refuse to acknowledge it's impact in terror attacks (Holder's congressional testimony). Extremist Muslims are aggressively marketing a strategy of spreading death and destruction, and moderate Muslims are virtually silent in pushing back. This whole stupid Mohammed cartoon issue is a clear example. The TSA overreaction at the airport is another. You can't pretend the issues don't exist simply because it doesn't dovetail nicely with one's politics...

+1000

Rob,

Great point. Discrimination against blacks was based upon appearance. Re-action to Muslims is based upon their behavior.

The argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful is correct, but immaterial. The majority of Germans were peaceful and not Nazis 75 years ago...

Why the minority of militant Muslims can't be controlled by the majority of peaceful Muslims is that the militant Muslims are the ones that are faithful to their scriptures and the example of Mohammed. I don't listen to NPR anymore as they (imo) have given up on truth and tolerance to preach their viewpoint and acceptance of their causes and are not tolerant of those who disagree, such as Juan Williams, even though he is a fellow liberal.

[kalm]

...You can't militarily win a war against a billion people.

If we continue to stick our heads in the sand, you are correct, kalm!

...especially if 50% of the "peaceful" enemy actively or overtly support the Islamofascist terrorists through words or deeds and an additional 45% of them tacilty support the Islamofascist terrorists though their silence.

We can win this war without becoming fascists ourselves if we try hard enough but we cannot possibly win the war and protect our families by appeasement.

90% of the "peaceful" enemy are not as well versed in international politics as you Nate. They're more concerned with putting food on the table than who they're supporting.

[native]

If we continue to stick our heads in the sand, you are correct, kalm!

...especially if 50% of the "peaceful" enemy actively or overtly support the Islamofascist terrorists through words or deeds and an additional 45% of them tacilty support the Islamofascist terrorists though their silence.

We can win this war without becoming fascists ourselves if we try hard enough but we cannot possibly win the war and protect our families by appeasement.

90% of the "peaceful" enemy are not as well versed in international politics as you Nate. They're more concerned with putting food on the table than who they're supporting.

If only that were the simple and whole truth, kalm.

Sadly, it is not.

[Skjellyfetti]

Even Juan Williams knows what he said is bigoted:

Neither black nor white store owners are in business to display the virtues of admitting people of all colors, creeds, and fashions to their stores. They are in business to make money. I would want to take precautions to prevent robbery; I would look closely at people entering the store. The race of a potential customer would be one factor among many to be considered as I girded myself against thieves.

But in Washington and almost all other major cities, blacks do patronize jewelry stores. A jeweler in Beverly Hills who closed his door to heavily bejeweled Mr. T would be foolishly closing his cash register. Unless I am a racist, race and age cannot be the sole deciding factors in calculating whom I will and will not let into my store. And I certainly would not close my door to, say, all young black men - not even to those who are casually dressed and behaving nervously. I would act cautiously in dealing with them, as I would with an antic, strangely dressed white man.

As a cabdriver I would apply the same considerations. Discrimination can be used judiciously. I would certainly exclude one class of people: those who struck me as dangerous. Nervous-looking people with bulges under their jackets would not be picked up; nor would those who looked obviously drunk or stoned. It all comes down to a subjective judgment of what dangerous people look like. This does not necessarily entail a racial judgment. Cabdrivers who don't pick up young black men as a rule are making a poorly informed decision. Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment.

The elevator question is disingenuous. I suspect you are suggesting that i am a white woman getting into an apartment building elevator with a strange black man. Of course, black women have just as much to fear as white women. Nevertheless, black women living in black neighborhoods ride elevators with black men frequently, and do so without being raped. In this situation and all others, common sense in my constant guard. Common sense becomes racism when skin color becomes a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me.

https://www.msu.edu/course/psy/442/cialec4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[native]

Even Juan Williams knows what he said is bigoted:

Neither black nor white store owners are in business to display the virtues of admitting people of all colors, creeds, and fashions to their stores. They are in business to make money. I would want to take precautions to prevent robbery; I would look closely at people entering the store. The race of a potential customer would be one factor among many to be considered as I girded myself against thieves.

But in Washington and almost all other major cities, blacks do patronize jewelry stores. A jeweler in Beverly Hills who closed his door to heavily bejeweled Mr. T would be foolishly closing his cash register. Unless I am a racist, race and age cannot be the sole deciding factors in calculating whom I will and will not let into my store. And I certainly would not close my door to, say, all young black men - not even to those who are casually dressed and behaving nervously. I would act cautiously in dealing with them, as I would with an antic, strangely dressed white man.

As a cabdriver I would apply the same considerations. Discrimination can be used judiciously. I would certainly exclude one class of people: those who struck me as dangerous. Nervous-looking people with bulges under their jackets would not be picked up; nor would those who looked obviously drunk or stoned. It all comes down to a subjective judgment of what dangerous people look like. This does not necessarily entail a racial judgment. Cabdrivers who don't pick up young black men as a rule are making a poorly informed decision. Racism is a lazy man's substitute for using good judgment.

The elevator question is disingenuous. I suspect you are suggesting that i am a white woman getting into an apartment building elevator with a strange black man. Of course, black women have just as much to fear as white women. Nevertheless, black women living in black neighborhoods ride elevators with black men frequently, and do so without being raped. In this situation and all others, common sense in my constant guard. Common sense becomes racism when skin color becomes a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me.

https://www.msu.edu/course/psy/442/cialec4.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why are you changing the subject? In this discussion nobody is saying that "skin color is a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me."

[Skjellyfetti]

Great point. Discrimination against blacks was based upon appearance. Re-action to Muslims is based upon their behavior.

No. Juan Williams quote that he got in trouble for... says he feels uncomfortable and afraid when he sees a muslim on his plane. That's a reaction based upon APPEARANCE.

[JohnStOnge]

I think most would say we want people to be honest but one aspect of our culture is that there can be a penalty for doing that. Juan Williams was just being honest about what his own visceral tendency is in terms of feelings he has when he sees Muslims boarding planes. There was no indication of malice on his part at all.

[JohnStOnge]

The argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful is correct

And how do we know that? Seriously. To me this is a variation of the argument that the problem is just with a "small minority" of Muslims. I have yet to see any real basis for such statements. They are just made as though they are self evident. And they're not.

Let's take this statement:

"If someone insults the Prophet Muhammed, they should be killed."

What percentage of Muslims worldwide agree with that Statement? I'd say we don't know. I'd also say I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of Muslims worldwide would say they agree with that statement.

What about the idea that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary? Do we know how the majority of Muslims worldwide feel about that?

Again, I suspect that the majority of Muslims worldwide DO believe that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary.

I don't have the polling data to confirm my belief. But I don't think those who believe otherwise have the polling data to cnfirm their belief either.

[native]

Great point. Discrimination against blacks was based upon appearance. Re-action to Muslims is based upon their behavior.

No. Juan Williams quote that he got in trouble for... says he feels uncomfortable and afraid when he sees a muslim on his plane. That's a reaction based upon APPEARANCE.

Changing your tune again, skelly? "APPEARANCE" is not "RACE" or "SKIN COLOR." The quote is "...muslim garb...."

This is sad, skelly. Tilting at Juan Williams exposes the desperate moral and intellectual bankruptcy of your politics. Liberalism will not die, but your misguided attitude on this particular issue is destined for the dustbin of history.

[Skjellyfetti]

The argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful is correct

And how do we know that? Seriously. To me this is a variation of the argument that the problem is just with a "small minority" of Muslims. I have yet to see any real basis for such statements. They are just made as though they are self evident. And they're not.

Let's take this statement:

"If someone insults the Prophet Muhammed, they should be killed."

What percentage of Muslims worldwide agree with that Statement? I'd say we don't know. I'd also say I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of Muslims worldwide would say they agree with that statement.

What about the idea that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary? Do we know how the majority of Muslims worldwide feel about that?

Again, I suspect that the majority of Muslims worldwide DO believe that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary.

I don't have the polling data to confirm my belief. But I don't think those who believe otherwise have the polling data to cnfirm their belief either.

I disagree that the majority of muslims are militant jihadist types.

But, let's assume what you say is true. Should we allow muslims in the military? Should we grant visas to foreign muslims? Should we expel or inter muslims living in this country?

[native]

And how do we know that? Seriously. To me this is a variation of the argument that the problem is just with a "small minority" of Muslims. I have yet to see any real basis for such statements. They are just made as though they are self evident. And they're not.

Let's take this statement:

"If someone insults the Prophet Muhammed, they should be killed."

What percentage of Muslims worldwide agree with that Statement? I'd say we don't know. I'd also say I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of Muslims worldwide would say they agree with that statement.

What about the idea that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary? Do we know how the majority of Muslims worldwide feel about that?

Again, I suspect that the majority of Muslims worldwide DO believe that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary.

I don't have the polling data to confirm my belief. But I don't think those who believe otherwise have the polling data to cnfirm their belief either.

I disagree that the majority of muslims are militant jihadist types.

But, let's assume what you say is true. Should we allow muslims in the military? Should we grant visas to foreign muslims? Should we expel or inter muslims living in this country?

I don't think that the majority of muslims are militant jihadist types, either. I think the hands-on Islamofascist terrorists are a tiny minority. I do think the majority of mulsims worldwide - but not a majority in the U.S. - at least tacitly support violent jihad.

Of course we should allow muslims in the military and grant visas where appropriate, but we must be thoughtful and careful in doing so.

We should not waste time with expulsion and simply execute any genuine traitors, whether muslim or not.

We should treat all legal visitors with the utmost respect and courtesy, but inter them on a case-by-case basis if they are illegal aliens.

[kalm]

The argument that the majority of Muslims are peaceful is correct

And how do we know that? Seriously. To me this is a variation of the argument that the problem is just with a "small minority" of Muslims. I have yet to see any real basis for such statements. They are just made as though they are self evident. And they're not.

Let's take this statement:

"If someone insults the Prophet Muhammed, they should be killed."

What percentage of Muslims worldwide agree with that Statement? I'd say we don't know. I'd also say I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of Muslims worldwide would say they agree with that statement.

What about the idea that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary? Do we know how the majority of Muslims worldwide feel about that?

Again, I suspect that the majority of Muslims worldwide DO believe that the entire world should be converted to Islam by violent force if necessary.

I don't have the polling data to confirm my belief. But I don't think those who believe otherwise have the polling data to cnfirm their belief either.

The majority of muslims have not taken a poll.

[clenz]

On the flip side I bet Joe thinks the majority of Christians are peaceful people

[kalm]

On the flip side I bet Joe thinks the majority of Christians are peaceful people

This.

And if a majority of "christians" were hell bent on destroying terrorists instead of muslim terrorists one might actually take what they are saying seriously.