So I just got through an illuminating Vox article linked here: http://www.vox.com/world/2017/2/13/14559822/trump… and I want to get some thoughts from fellow WSO members. If you can't (or won't) read the entire article here is a short summary.
1.) a group of people believe the spread of Islam through sharia law is the most pressing problem in western society, these are the counter-jihadists. They believe the groups spreading Islam through violence (ISIS etc.) are an issue but we ignore "stealth jihad" - basically the infiltration of our institutions slowly turning them into vehicles for sharia principles - which is the real issue.
2.) They believe the media and politicians ignore this threat because they are either too dumb or complicit in stealth jihad (ex. Obama is a Muslim/ Muslim sympathizer who didn't do enough against radical Islam or Huma Abedin is connected to the Muslim brotherhood)
3.) The Muslim brotherhood is directing this stealth jihad campaign to spread Sharia across the world
4.) They believe "moderate Muslim" organizations like CAIR are just conduits of the Muslim brotherhood's stealth jihad campaign and are actually extremists in disguise.
5.) Trump's foremost advisers: Bannon (who crafted the travel ban), Flynn (who has compared Islam to cancer), Sessions, and Pompeo believe, at least partly, in the previous assertions.
6.) To counter this "stealth jihad" they promote the following
- limiting or ending Muslim immigration into western countries
- extreme inspection and investigation of mosques, shutting down the ones that promote sharia (they believe 80% of Muslim mosques advocate Sharia so this would mean shutting those down)
- labeling the Muslim brotherhood a terrorist organization (even though they haven't committed an attack in like 60 years)
- shutting down Muslim organizations (like CAIR) that they perceive to be conduits of the brotherhood
- ending university programs that promote Muslim-Christian dialogue and replacing it with educating students on the threat of sharia
- using advocacy for Sharia as legal basis for deporting Muslims and stripping their citizenship (we saw a sampling of this in the "green card holders are also banned" part of the travel ban, however briefly that lasted)
Newt Gingrich and Ted Cruz have labeled these recommendations, outlined in the "Secure Freedom plan", as sound strategy. So, what are your thoughts on the movement, their recommendations, and the counter-jihadist movement's possible influence in the white house?
There's too much here to fully respond to, but the Muslim Brotherhood is designated a terrorist organization in Egypt, where it was founded, and in other majority Muslim countries around the world. The MB is ideologically tied to Hamas, which is generally globally designated a terrorist organization. Perhaps the MB doesn't meet the exact definition of "terrorist organization" by current American definitions, but in many respects it is worse than a terrorist organization--it seeks, through political stealth, to take over countries and to dominate them politically with Islam as the foundation of government. What the MB did in Egypt to take power was a masterful exercise in playing long-ball (all which blew up in its face when it went too fast to implement Sharia).
Here is the core argument (semantics aside)--in virtually every place in the world where Islam is the majority or a size-able minority, Muslims are at odds with non-Muslims (or with secular-minded Muslims) as religious Muslims seek to dominate their non-Muslim (or secular) countrymen. So long as Islam remains an extreme minority in the United States their structural threat is limited. The concern for me is the prospect of religious Muslims reaching critical mass in their population density, whether that's in the U.S. at large or simply in a few cities. If history is a guide, religious Muslims will ultimately seek to implement Sharia within any government that it influences. The threat to women's rights, gay rights, Jews, Christians, atheists, etc. is real when Muslims take power.
Ultimately, Islam is more than just a religion. Islam is a political ideology. You cannot divorce Islam, the religion, from Islam the political philosophy--not when you are talking about large concentrations of Muslims.
EDIT: I did not throw MS at you. I think this is a needed discussion in the world today.
The discussions I've had with students heavily involved with CAIR and other organizations on campuses leads me to believe that a majority percentage of these organizations lean towards extremist ways of thinking. Maybe that isn't true everywhere, but I was on the West Coast and some of the ways of thinking / addressing others was just insane.
examples would be nice BreakingRich
Dude the MB is a political party, they are a party that seeks to govern through the doctrines of Islam as socialist parties want to govern through socialism and communist parties... you get the idea. The thought that we should label them terrorists simply for propagating political theories that aren't like ours is ridiculous, if Muslim people choose to follow them and they aren't trying to bomb innocents idgaf. Honestly, almost no religion is compatible with secular society, including Christianity. It is through moderation that these religions become westernized. Islam is far behind in that process, I agree. But in what world does ceasing Muslim immigration and demonizing those that are already here lead to moderation? In my opinion, that would just have the opposite effect and fuel the new crusade that groups like ISIS crave. American Muslims are already the most integrated group of Muslims in the west. In France, where they have basically relegated that populous to 2nd class citizenry, we see the results (I think French citizens that attempt to leave and join ISIS outnumber American citizens doing the same like 10 to 1). Further, I am curious as to your opinion on the fascist recommendations of this "secure freedom" plan.
I don't agree with demonizing and ostracizing the Muslims already in the US but there is no reason at all to invite foreign Muslims into our home. As I've said on other threads, the Islamic political ideology is as totalitarian as communism and as anti-Semitic as Hitler's Nazi party. There are countless tens of millions of people who want to come to America who I would prioritize over Muslims, communists, or Nazis.
In April of last year my best friend invited me to his swearing in ceremony for his US citizenship. When everyone was asked to raise their hand and take the citizenship oath I saw a hijab-clad woman blend in to the crowd with her hand down, standing silent. My blood has never boiled the way it boiled that day. But in retrospect I understand that many practicing Muslims could never really swear allegiance to a secular constitution. When you start to understand what these barbarians believe, that woman's refusal to swear allegiance is understandable.
go to places like France... it's already too late to be honest
Oh how wrong you are about "religous muslims" being a threat. Over 99% of the Muslims you see in AMERICA are Sunni muslims like ME. Now i'm not religious so this may be slightly biased however Islam is a religion of peace and understanding. It is these nuthead radicals that go to the broken parts of these countries where there is no education. From there they tell these homeless and let me reiterate: UNEDUCATED muslims that if they do this "mission" for god that they will be able to live a good life. It is so sad that the general misunderstanding is that all muslims are dangerous and that Islamophobia even exists. Go to a mosque on a friday and you will never see such gracefulness and care for strangers. We are all brothers of the same race and skin color/geography doesn't change anything.
*Religious muslims would not ULTIMATELY seek to implement sharia law within any government it influences, you know why? Because SHIA muslims are an extreme minority within the muslim population in America. *
As a matter of fact; religious muslims are probably the most peaceful and understanding religious people you'll ever come across. Islam teaches understanding and perspective among many other important sentimental values that are good for well being. I am not religious, but the fear of non-existing threats is ridiculous.
I just saw a guy who planned to bomb Targets(the grocery store) all along the east coast so their stock would plummet on the news! He's not being called a terrorist. He's also caucasian.
So all that Islamic terrorism carried out around the world is carried out by...non-religious Muslims? Ok...
Is it? Wasn't Muhammad a warlord? Wasn't Islam spread nearly universally through violence by the early adherents? Wouldn't you say, then, that Islam is inherently--at its core--NOT a peaceful religion?
This is simply not true. There is no evidence that ignorant, impoverished people are the ones carrying out terrorist attacks. Look at the Boston Marathon bombers, Orlando, Fort Hood, 9/11, etc. These aren't impoverished, ignorant fools. You keep telling yourself that it's a bunch of uneducated nuts--it's not. Have you seen the surveys about the kinds of things that Muslims believe around the world? A size-able portion of Muslims are OK with terrorism, hate Jews, believe in Islamic law, think homosexuality should be illegal, etc. You're perpetuating myths.
Phobia: an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.
Islam was founded by a warlord, spread by the sword, and Muslims nearly conquered Europe in the name of Allah. It wasn't until the early 18th century that Muslim conquerers were finally pushed out of Europe. Today, Muslims are at war with all of their neighbors in almost every place they reside on Earth, from North America to Europe, Eurasia to Asia, Africa to Australia. The vast majority of conflicts in the world today involve Islam. The vast majority of global terrorism is carried out by Muslims.
The fact is, "phobia" is misplaced in the word "Islamophobia"--there's nothing irrational about the fear of the detestable political ideology that has been a cancer on the world for 1,400 years.
Presumably who are Muslim strangers.
Your position is demonstrably false. Look around the world and nearly every Muslim majority country's government--regardless of sect--is either officially or de facto Islamic (yes, even the "secular" governments, like Malaysia, have laws heavily weighted toward Islam).
Non-existent threats? That's not even a serious comment. Even the most self-loathing, America-hating liberals recognize that there are significant threats of violence from the Islamic community. You have entire offices within US national security agencies hyper-focused on "non-existent" threats from international and domestic Muslims.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics. For one, Islam is not a race--you can be caucasian (what you mean is white European) and a Muslim (most Middle East Muslims are caucasian). But here is the reality--there are 200 million American whites and 3 million American Muslims. Do "white Americans" commit 66 times more acts of terrorism than Muslims? Yeah, I don't think so.
You lost me at Vox...
Edit: UGK kicks ass tho
that's a shame, they put out more factual and insightful information (no matter the spin they attach to it) than 90% of news sources
I'm decidedly liberal. Vox shouldn't be where you get your news from.
I studied applied statistics and economics and no they don't... It's run by a bunch of twats under the age of around 30 with polisci & other bs degrees in LA and San Francisco
I suggest Bloomberg (everything but the trash bin that is Bloomberg View), CNBC (what the guests say, not the journalists), and the O'Reilly Factor.
Couple things:
Just because that one random graphic put Vox in the middle of the news spectrum doesn't mean that it's even remotely non-biased. Vox is as bad as CNN/MSNBC, better than HuffPo.
I have a very good friend who is a Muslim. He follows the 5 Pillars, for the most part, but interprets the Koran in ways that would be considered heretical by conservative Muslims. He hates ISIS more than anyone because it gives Islam a bad name and at the same time, he hates Trump because of some of the things that he's said. He was in an Islamic student organization while in school at a somewhat liberal university and they were all about serving the community and helping others.
I've also spent some time in a more secular country in the Middle East and certainly met and talked to some people who were less fond of the West. Suffice it to say, if those people were to ever come to the US, I would be nervous. I found that they were in the minority, but I definitely got the sense that a decent amount of the more devout Muslims I met were sympathetic to jihad. We've seen this spread into Western Europe and while there's no need to be isolationist, there also thousands and thousands of people that should be allowed to come here before we really have a good idea of exactly who would be coming here.
My experiences have been part and parcel what @Virginia Tech 4ever" has been saying.
Some of the references to gay rights in this thread seem a little unaware of the recent history in the West.
When I was a lad, gay sex was illegal in NSW, Australia (and in a lot of the West) and "gay-bashing" was a regular evening passtime for red blooded, young males, with the cops turning a blind eye. Gay people were the butt of many jokes, with the media filled with stereotypical tropes that would be shut down very quickly today. Homosexuality was frequently conflated with pedophilia and pederasty in the media.
And women's rights in the West - that's a whole other story of progress that has happened only very recently.
The liberal views of the West as we know them today are, in many ways, a relatively recent thing.
"Gay people were the butt of many jokes", solid pun here.
I don't disagree with anything you said. But I think the points people were making are in belief that the Islamic culture will not move that way, at least not any time soon. And I can't disagree with that.
You hit the nail on the head. It's not that the West has always been culturally progressive; it's that societies illiberal enough to run as a theocracy will never liberalize culturally.
Making fun of gays =/= legal policies that can subject homosexuality with the death penalty.
And I don't remember women being stoned to death for adultury before sufferage.
Let's be real. Any guess what. It's 2017. Like it is almost 2020 and basic rights and tolerance isn't shared in just about all these ME countries. Even in tolerant UAE you have women being arrested because they were raped or people being fined for kissing. The ME is anything but tolerant, accepting or liberal.
Go back to, say, 920. The Middle East was far more liberal and cosmopolitan than Christian Europe, and also much more accepting of homosexuality (see, for example, the Muslim Arab author's expressions of surprise that homosexuality is punished by death rather than an acceptable cultural practice in this book: https://www.amazon.com/Ibn-Fadlan-Land-Darkness-Travellers/dp/0140455078).
Not that this sort of long dated historical comparison is that helpful to the direct debate. But I do think it's useful for highlighting that people are making comparisons of the states of things today as if they have always been and always will be in those states.
History can also help correct some presumptions about the innate nature of religions, particularly when some presumptions about Islam are based on more extreme examples of the faith.
What you're saying is nothing but a rationalization. In the United States at least, homosexuals have never been a targeted class for persecution. Homosexuality was on the fringe of society (and not acceptable in polite society), but gays, with some outlying exceptions, were never the subject of targeted judicial prosecution and execution (heck, Abraham Lincoln may have been gay). That just never happened in the United States (heck, my father was born in 1933 Missouri and often recounted to me stories of the flamboyantly gay diner owner). The Irish were a more persecuted class than gays. Let's just be intellectually honest.
As for women's rights, the right to vote and the right to not be legally raped are on completely different levels. Women's rights in the West and in Islamic societies are not even remotely comparable.
Perhaps not (judicial) execution, but police persecution and prosecution have certainly been a long experience of the gay community in the US. Does Stonewall mean nothing to you?
Mike Flynn, we hardly knew ye... lmfao. So happy about this. Now if we could get rid of fuckin Bannon, Stephen Miller, & Jeff Sessions my faith in this administration would increase 3 fold. I guess I should amend my opening post (nah I'll leave it).
do you write for the skimm?
I can't help but say that the United States became a threat to itself with its role in spread of fundamental Islam. Why? Because of the destruction/influence the US has brought to SW Asia (Afghanistan Pre-OEF, Afghanistan OEF, Iraq) and its indirect/direct contribution to the spread of "jihadist" Muslims. We have given uneducated, impoverished, and emotional Muslims a cause to fight for (Anti-Western World or Anti-US) and they know nothing else. That hate breeds more hate the cycle continues. Ideologies are hard to kill when everyone becomes a martyr that dies in its name. Supplemented by the endless amount of financial support from countries like Saudi Arabia, Emirates, & Iran (who hate each other) and we see the feeding of the ever-lasting conflict that has engulfed that region for more than a Millennia.
While our strategic interests are keeping us heavily involved, I think it'd be better to take China's approach (like with Africa) when it comes to trade. Let whoever controls the resources do business with you without the requirement of a "democracy" being in place. Stay distant, let the focus move away from the US and back to the inner conflict between Sunni & Shia.
The myth of the impoverished jihadist, at this juncture, has been thoroughly discredited (just look at the Islamic attacks in the United States and Europe--almost none of these people were in poverty. Usama bin-Laden gave up a vast oil fortune to pursue jihad). The reality is, many Muslims are cultural supremacists and are intensely bigoted against non-Muslims. The idea that non-Muslims are in so-called Muslim lands doing business is enough for jihadists to take offense and to kill in the name of jihad. (Of course, I'm talking about the jihadists now and not necessarily the run-in-the-mill Muslim.)
I think you took my post in the wrong direction.
It's not the impoverished jihadist I'm worried about conducting attacks on western countries. It's the impoverished jihadist who lives in the Middle East who grow up without a good education or upbringing that contributes to the rinse and repeat cycle of violence and feelings of anti-western sentiment in that specific region.
With my reference to the Saudis and Emirates, I made a subtle acknowledgment towards a higher class preying on the less fortunate for their personal goals (which in this case is fundamental Islamic beliefs).
In Europe, Muslim refugees have mostly been ghettoized into small concentrated areas without much educational opportunities, job training or other social programs that would help with their integration. Far right politicians in Europe have stymied efforts to implement such social programs. The ones that do exist are far from sufficient. Ghettoization + homogeneity leads to extremism among whoever is being ghettoized. Muslims in Europe often very poor and have little interaction with the rest of society. The fact that there are now terror cells in these countries is not very surprising. They did a terrible job of integrating refugees and other Muslims into their society. The U.S., despite its problems, is arguably one of the best melting pots in the world (for a country so large).
Islamic extremism isn't a systemic problem in the United States primarily because muslims here are doing socioeconomically fine. 26% have college degrees vs 28% of the entire population. 14% report earning over 100k per year vs 16% of the total population. This lack of concentrated and isolated poverty that exists in Europe and the ME is the source of the lack of systemic Islamic extremism. It's ridiculous to think that it's merely a "critical mass of muslims" that leads to extremism.
Eradicating extremism requires eradicating concentrated poverty among homogeneous populations. Isolating Muslims to the Middle East just might be the dumbest idea if you are worried about the spread and consolidation of Islamic extremism. By bringing in, educating and integrating Muslim refugees, and other Muslims who wish to pursue a better life in America/Europe, the west can help build a global economy that muslims are a part of outside of oil. This will lead to more secular and liberal Muslim leaders who will return to their nations of origin to become politicians, help build schools/universities and generally uplift people's lives from the theocracies and extremism that currently plague the ME.
this assertion is on point. I referred to it in an earlier post. Much of Europe has relegated their Muslim population to 2nd class status whereas American Muslims are the most integrated in the western world. As a result, you have French citizens attempting to join ISIS outnumbering American citizens attempting to do the same like 10 to 1. The ostracizing and demonization espoused by these "counter-jihadists" will push our Muslim citizens to extremism and fuel terrorist recruiting like we can't imagine. I will wager that Trump's rhetoric has already helped in that regard. I mean, even if you hate these people and want to keep Muslims out, do that shit stealthily so ISIS doesn't have direct quotes from the president and his aides to recruit future suicide bombers.
"How dare he call me intolerant and backward! I oughtta kill him for saying that!"
So why didn't the American Irish or African Americans or Italian Americans or American Jews turn to terrorism? All of them, at some point, have been marginalized and ghetto-ized in the United States. Your explanation simply does not pass muster.
Again, this just doesn't pass intellectual muster. There is no evidence that jihadists in Europe (or anywhere) are suffering from particular economic plight. In many cases, jihadists are well off or part of the middle class.
So what about the other 72% that don't have college degrees? IT'S NOT ABOUT ECONOMICS!
This is not what I said, but it's nice to set up straw men just to break them down. I pointed out, correctly and factually, that virtually every place in the world where Muslims are numerically dominant, "minorities" (in the broad sense of the word) are repressed and persecuted, and at best made into second class citizens.
Yeah, that worked super well in Turkey...
Can't go back to your country with new ideas if you get stoned to death for being a heretic
BobtheBaker is a confirmed CTR shill. Nothing to see here, move on
lol wtf is a CTR?
There is way too much here to try and tackle so let me just keep it simple and hit the biggies: I think most muslims are decent people and I don't think we should ban all muslims.
Having said that, there are about 1.6B muslims out there so even if 1-2% of them are radicals, we have real big issues. A recent Pew poll seems to show that 1-2% is very conservative as it showed that high % of muslims around the world think that anyone who leaves the faith should be punished by death. That is a concerning number because that is where we get into religion as a political system vs. a personal journey. Muslims seem to take slights against their religion, real or otherwise, personally. Because of this sliver of analysis alone i think it's worth imposing some stricter criteria before we admit them here. In a society where we live by modern roles and standards, it doesn't work well to also include people who still abide by 5th century values (which is what makes them different from the mass Irish or Jewish or Polish or other refugees we have seen in the past). just my two cents.
Your first sentence is really all you needed to include. I've no issues with extra scrutiny for those seeking to migrate from the middle east. How do you feel about the reality that Trump's closest advisers (he obviously wouldn't have fired Flynn had the media not gotten hold of his interactions with Russia) being the opposite of that. If you listen to these dudes they really believe Muslims are a scourge, that Muslim immigration is just a plot to spread their "cancer" (as Mike Flynn put it) across the world, and that we should not only end Muslim immigration but also put draconian rules in place for Muslims that are already here in the form of heightened surveillance and persecution (shutting down mosques, getting rid of organizations like CAIR, stripping citizenship). These are the people (Bannon, Miller etc.) that our president is taking mid east foreign policy advice (and advice in general) from. No one has commented on this.
i think my comment speaks to how I feel about those kinds of attitudes, but let me spell it out: I don't think that we should be painting the whole population with the same brush as the extremists. most of these people are decent and trying to make a life for themselves, just like anybody else. sure they have some weird rules that belong in the 5th century and some of them are even downright inhumane (how they treat women in particular, i.e. withholding schooling, marrying them too young for property etc.) but they could be overcome over time through community engagement and just through natural evolution stemming from being part of a society that discourages those behaviors. Taking away the opportunity to evolve to those who want it seems inappropriate to me. After all, they could start with them but after that they might decide that Jews are next, or Catholics or Irish or who knows. Very slippery slope that I think we should be careful with and avoid.
Flynn got bounced because of the Logan act which really should apply to someone who is working for the incoming administration. It's meant to stop you and I from doing shit like that.
Let's see the transcripts because the press is playing this off as some shady collusion when in reality it is Flynn telling a Russia that things will be different in a month. Obama should have respected the transition and allowed Pres. Trump to "punish" Russia on these phantom hacking charges.
As for Flynn's views, so what. No one has a right to immigrate here.
Btw - Flynn is a Democrat who is pro choice.
The problem is continental Europe, they are so worried about another European war that they cling to the quickly failing EU experiment, at the heart of that is the idea that people can move freely as the choose. Ironically the schengen agreement has limited of the free movement in the EU for people who actually live there.
I said this a while ago that the European left, which is dedicated to the EU experiment, is sabotaging its own dreams of a united Europe by allowing for this unfethered Islamic immigration. A nation can take in and integrate small numbers of people from a radically different culture (see the U.S. taking in relatively small numbers of Muslim immigrants), but the EU left is demanding that Europe take in hordes of people from an alien culture. By doing so, they are swatting the hornets' nest of a public already skeptical of the EU's regulatory schemes and single currency. And the more the public pushes back, the more the EU elite dig in and even double down on their antagonistic policies. It's truly behavior that should be studied in psychology classes for centuries to come.
The Germans can't integrate the Turks that have lived in Germany for decades. Only a moron would think war torn, far more fundamental young males from Syria and the rest of the ME would fare any better.
This is a great topic of discussion
This thread is a complete waste of time. This site has a load of rednecks who can't have a reasoned discussion. They'll cherry pick facts and tar a whole group of people in one broad stroke. What's even worse is they'll see a bunch of people and jump to conclusions as to why they behave a certain way. Shit's embarrassing.
Irony.
i hate being late to the thread. Here's some perspective, from some one of half muslim background from the Caribbean. For the record i dont care what you do in IB, your opinion has no weight over others here.
Muslims from specifically the Middle East are bat shit insane. I hate to generalize but more than 60% of them hold conservative views against most western ideologies. That being said they barely make up the total population of total muslims. Imo i have no problem banning muslims from terror related countries, (Somalia,saudi,iran,yemen) because the risk is too high. sure it is unfair, but neither is life get over it. The part of my family that is muslim, is just as normal as our neighbors, (Gets drunk on weekends, watch game of thrones, go to mall to complain about the amount of people at the mall). Those women you may see in public covered in head toe, for fact are oppressed by their husbands, who live in the stone ages. Those people are the ones that need to go, not people like me. I've noticed Virginia Tech on his high horse, spouting about some shit he's read from "source material". (I bet he locks his doors when ever he sees a black guy)The only thing he's right about is islam being spread by violence, which is true. But anything you read online or about the Quran not KORAAN pretty much isnt true. There are many altered versions, specifically targeting violent factions like ISIS to encourage Jihad. I've read it in Arabic and English and its pretty much the same damn book as the bible. Im sorry to any conservative jackass with a redcap, but those "Real" news channels that "expose" islam are pretty much as true as reefer madness. Please do not link me some bull shit with an underline of some arabic that probably says something completly different to the translation.
That being said, that whole sharia law shit coming to U.S. is Bull. I dont care for it, and the only thing that pissed me off is the fact that muslims who live here don't speak out against it.
Finally for some fucking context, Im not a liberal because they can take their 40 genders and free education up their ass. Im also not a conservative, because anyone with internet access to google, shouldn't be a republican at least in theory. Final words Donald trump, is not making anything great again. he's basically getting too much deal flow and cant handle it. I mean he really thinks, because he is president the stock market "Loves" him. Stop watching Fox news, and stop reading buzz feed. Hilary Clinton lost please get over it. People are entitled to their opinion get over it. At this rate of division in politics, your just as bad as ISIS in acceptance.
I'm half eastern Indian, and growing up my family always exposed my siblings and I to different cultures. That being said, out of all of the cultures and religions I've encountered, Islam is by far the most oppressive. I honestly don't care what anyone says or thinks, Islam no matter what way you put it is based around oppression. Half of the Quran calls for war with non-muslims, women are subordinate, gays have no rights and or are executed, I mean for fucks sake who in their right mind would support a group that believes in this shit. Go behind closed doors and ask most Indian's what they think about Muslims; They will literally tell you that they are the scum of the earth. Go behind closed doors and ask Chinese and Indian Malay's what they think about the native Muslim Malay's; They will literally tell you that they are the scum of the earth. And if you don't believe me, go ask these people for yourself sometime. The reason for this sentiment among these groups is that Islam just doesn't assimilate well with other cultures and religions. So go ahead and call me a bigot, because I don't want those ideals and beliefs brought to the U.S.
The thing is, in the Western world, opposition to Islamic ideology has been branded as "racism." Just Google "Islam is not a race" and you'll see countless articles from Western leftists, using tortured logic, explaining how it's inherently "racist" to express anti-Islamic views. In the West, there is a hierarchy of "bad," and racism is the highest sin. So despite the sexism, homophobia, and overall religious bigotry of Islam, it gets a "pass" in the eyes of the Western left because Islam has been categorized as "race," which is the highest form of "minority."
CAIR is still causing problems.
1) It isn't ''the most pressing issue'', but it's related to the broadly one of immigration. It's not a problem in the US, it is certainly a problem in countries like France, the UK, Germany and Sweden, because of the season of terrorist attacks and the extreme self-segregation of Muslim communities. A few days ago, Gerard Collomb, former interior (socialist) minister of France, admitted in an interview that the French establishment is terrified at the idea of seeing the first Salafist Mayor elected in France, because at that point civil war will be inevitable.
2) Again, not in the US where there isn't this phenomenon of self-segregation, but certainly in Europe. Establishment politicians would admit in private that cohexistence with a large (say 30%) Muslim population would be improbable, but would never say it in public Others, among the left, either believe the fantasy multicultural utopia, or simply want to use Islam to ''bring down capitalism''. So it's either stupidity or cowardice.
3) Don't care about them tbh. I'm skeptical of any Gulf funded organization, but MB is funded by Qatar afaik, the worst tend to be funded by Saudi Arabia.
4) Don't care about them either.
5) Also don't care about those either. Bannon is banned from being anywhere near Trump. 6) -Limiting most third world immigration to western countries is probably necessary at this point to avoid further self-segregation and implosion of societies among ethnic lines. Again this is worse in Western Europe rather than the US. -vetting foreign funded, and I want to underline that part, mosques is necessary -see above, don't care about the MB or CAIR -depends on what part of Sharia law. Killing apostates and/or blasphemers? Yea, you get the boot.
The paranoia against Muslims in this thread is off the charts. I have many Muslim friends and coworkers in various countries, and they are all normal people. I would bet most of the posters in this thread railing against Muslims grew up around mostly conservative people who all look like them. The geographic areas where Islam is used as a weapon to oppress/attack others is where there’s tons of socioeconomic and political instability (often a legacy of Western European colonial policies, which is a conversation for another time). Hell, the most populous Muslim nation in the world is Indonesia, and you don’t hear anything about them because their relatively stable economically and politically. If you suck a nation’s resources dry, pit different tribes and kingdoms against each other, and leave a nation in economic shambles with arbitratily drawn borders when you withdraw, and then proceed to demonized them and bomb the shit out of them decades later, it’s likely some of those people will hate you to their core and do what they can to harm you.
What happens in Saudi Arabia pales in comparison to what happens in places like Afghanistan and Syria on a daily basis. The ethnic strife is ridiculous. Countless Muslims are killed at the hands of militants in those countries every day.
If you want to focus on Saudi Arabia, you can also tie back the rise of religious fundamentalism there to the Western colonial powers. During and after World War I, the western colonial powers made a concerted effort to shift the centre of the Muslim world from the more liberal Ottoman Empire to the Arab tribes. The rise of the Saudis would not have happened without British, French, and American support. Western European support for the Hashemites, which ultimately led to the House of Saud’s rise, ended the relatively benign influence of the Ottomans over global Islam. The end of the caliphate ultimately led to much darker substitutes for leadership in the Muslim world, which repercussions can still be felt today.
But I’m sure none of this matters to you because “omgz the Muslims are invading and bringing over the sharia laws!!1!!”
Suscipit quas voluptatem fugiat sequi nulla. Suscipit at accusantium odit deleniti ex. Voluptatibus eos voluptatem perspiciatis quae. Perspiciatis earum aut quaerat et et.
Deleniti nam quos exercitationem fuga adipisci. Dolor facilis ut corrupti quia ratione sint voluptas. Porro quibusdam sit in dolorum possimus modi. Sed amet minima nemo. Unde molestiae quae tempore vel deleniti. Deserunt quidem vel non corporis quae architecto.
Totam rerum ad quia. Rerum odit doloremque iure consectetur.
Eos vitae dolore dolorem iusto autem at exercitationem. Velit placeat quo fugit iste non enim distinctio.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Distinctio dolores quaerat eius quia qui ipsa suscipit. Itaque error sed consequatur quibusdam architecto minus. Voluptatum quas expedita unde saepe quod. Necessitatibus harum culpa id.
Qui aliquid deleniti impedit in. Quis vitae debitis soluta saepe voluptatem esse rerum.
Adipisci est ex sed eos modi ut cumque. Quos quibusdam pariatur quae occaecati accusamus.