[Flipside]

Look at it this way, if he came over and said 'Islam is a blood-thirsty, hate-filled religion', 94% of people would just ignore him and think he was a twat, 3% would agree, and 3% would call for his death. The tragic part is that the Tabloids would pay more attention to what the 3%ers said, claiming it 'proved the case', rather than paying any attention to the other 94%.

From my perspective, the danger isn't really what he thinks, it's how it would be reported.

heh, if anything it seems that you'd be sorely wrong on those numbers.
The percentage of people in Europe that agree that islam is a threat to our way of lafe and values is pretty high, and raising.

as for being anti-islam? what's wrong with it anyways? It's no different than being anti-christianity or anti-communist or so. It's certainly not racism (unlike the anti-sri-lankan example given) as there are muslims (christians, communits, etc) of many different races.
Muslims (and other religionists) will just have to learn to accept that their believes will be mocked/critised/persiflages/etc by others. Being able to criticise and mock religion is one of the historical and essential fundaments that make up the right of free speech. Enough people were killed or imprisoned to give us that right, and we'd be damned if let some intolerant twats take it away.
In other words: it's not because muslims venerate (spilling over into worship almost) muhammed that others should, or that he's even worthy of respect.

Actually, I disagree, they are probably closer than people realise, the fact of the matter is that, as long as no-one bothers anyone else, there isn't a problem, Muslims have been part of the UK for centuries, but these problems only started post 9/11 and the reason that resentment is growing is the very thing I posted:

From my perspective, the danger isn't really what he thinks, it's how it would be reported.

The biggest danger to inter-racial tensions in this country today is biased reporting by the Media. A Vast percentage of Muslims, particularly the more western ones, couldn't be less interested in converting people by the sword, any more than Jews or Christians are insistent that everybody follow their religion. It's just that the deliberate blowing up out of all proportion has two effects, one, it makes people think it is bigger than it is and, two, it makes things bigger than they are, it's a vicious circle.

The problem is, people say 'Muslim' and people immediately get an image of a bearded man or a women dressed from head to foot in robes, the truth is that you could pass a very large percentage of Muslims on the street and not even realise that they were muslims. Yes, the radicals would also like to 'convert' all of those Muslims over to radicalism, but I'm not more inclined to judge Islam by Bin Laden than I would judge Christianity by Fred Phelps.

So yes, I would say those numbers are pretty accurate, but they are changing on both sides of the divide because of deliberate manipulation of facts by the Media. There is a growing hatred of Non-Muslims in many Islamic countries bought about by the Media, and exactly the same thing is happening here.

[Kosh]

A Vast percentage of Muslims, particularly the more western ones, couldn't be less interested in converting people by the sword, any more than Jews or Christians are insistent that everybody follow their religion.

Cite your sources.

[Flipside]

Interesting thing to say when I'm talking about Media Bias.

'If it's not in Wikipedia, it can't be true!'

It's of those situations where if I post information that claims this everyone's going to say 'It's biased!' anyway because (a) It will obviously come from a pro-group, since anti-groups don't cite information like that, and (b) goes against all the stuff they've read (which obviously isn't biased at all).

Edit: That's why sometimes it's good to open the door and look, rather than browse, it gets easy to confuse the institution with the people.

[Kosh]

Well surely there have been studies done about this kind of thing by social scientists. What you're doing instead is throwing out vague descriptions, and then dodging the issue when someone asks for sources, more specifically how much is a "vast majority"?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

It's also worth pointing out that the reason that Islam has turned on the West is due to years of meddling in the Middle East by the West. Often helping to depose democratically elected governments. The result has usually been that the Western puppet gets kicked out 4-5 years later and everyone in that country hates the West for forcing them to have to go through a revolution.

far to easy a copout by blaming the west.
Remember that they don't like hindus or non-muslim africans either, neither of which are as meddling in the region as the west supposedly is.
Also remember that whatever happens in the Mid-east, or to muslim nations in general, it's alsways -somehow- the americans or the jews that's behind it.

[karajorma]

I'm not blaming the West for violence. I'm blaming the West for violence against the West. Had they kept their nose out of it no one would have bothered them.

[Flipside]

Well surely there have been studies done about this kind of thing by social scientists. What you're doing instead is throwing out vague descriptions, and then dodging the issue when someone asks for sources, more specifically how much is a "vast majority"?

Nope what I'm saying is that nobody has ever done a report on that specific question of 'If someone started preaching anti-Islamic dogma, would you agree with them'. however, both sides have stressed time and time again that the problem people are a minority, and, being a UK resident in a Multi-Ethnic area, I can tell you from personal experience that if that wasn't the case, there would be blood on the streets every day.

No, I haven't done 'official research' on the matter, I've simply gone out and talked to my neighbours, who I trust far more than statistics, and they always, quite rightly, point out, there are parts of the Testaments that we ignore because they were written for people living thousands of years ago, same with the Quoran, this whole thing that every Muslim follows every single word to the letter is, at least from those who I've spoken to's point of view, 'Silly'. They love their God, they respect Him, but Muslims, like everyone else, are still human beings, and believe it or not, it's harder to turn an educated person into a mindless killing machine than most Newspapers would have you believe, they constantly bring up the fact that the Glasgow bombers were Educated, and yet consistently fail to mention that they were ostracised not only by their profession but by their religion as well.

For every person that cries 'Something must be done about religion X! Our religion must be supreme!', there are hundreds who are of the opinion of 'I have a mortgage to pay, and a family to feed, I will respect my God, but I will also live my life, and leave other people to live theirs.'

[NGTM-1R]

I'm not blaming the West for violence. I'm blaming the West for violence against the West. Had they kept their nose out of it no one would have bothered them.

Keeping their noses out is, of course, an impossiblity considering all that goes on there. The Iranians remember us poorly because we shattered their navy and airforce a few times during the Iran-Iraq War...but we didn't have much of a choice in the matter when they were trying to kill the flow of oil from the Gulf.

It's hardly that simple.

[karajorma]

And exactly who armed Saddam and suggested that he fight the war?

But actually I'm going way past that to the whole business with the Shah.

[Kosh]

And exactly who armed Saddam and suggested that he fight the war?

But actually I'm going way past that to the whole business with the Shah.

There was all that plus America's support of Saudi Arabia, who has been funneling billions of petro dollars into pushing islamic fundamentalism.

No, I haven't done 'official research' on the matter, I've simply gone out and talked to my neighbours,

Annecdotel evidence has a limit.

Nope what I'm saying is that nobody has ever done a report on that specific question of 'If someone started preaching anti-Islamic dogma, would you agree with them'. however, both sides have stressed time and time again that the problem people are a minority, and, being a UK resident in a Multi-Ethnic area, I can tell you from personal experience that if that wasn't the case, there would be blood on the streets every day.

And who said that there would be? Take for example the debate about introducing Sharia law in the UK. While people may support it and even desire it, they wouldn't go around slaughtering the infidels if they don't get it. That being said they would still hold a great deal of contempt for modern society.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

I'm not blaming the West for violence. I'm blaming the West for violence against the West. Had they kept their nose out of it no one would have bothered them.

nonsens of course, as you well know.
There's only 3 western countries (and 1 not so western one) that have had any real business in the mid-east and those are the US, France, the UK and Russia (USSR). Italy and Israel can be considered either minor or local. Yet these so-called fundamentalists (personally I'm more of the conviction that they are closer to the mainstream that the PC-brigade likes us to believe) hate all of the West, as well as so many other non-western non-muslims places, regardless of their involvement in the middle-east.
Islam attacking others is innate to islam I'd dare say. It's inevitable, and it has been ever since muhammed charged to war and divided the world into a house of war and a house of islam.
It has , in other words, nothing to do with us being the West (or Indians being Hindu, a.k.a. reviled polytheists) and everything with us not being muslim.

[NGTM-1R]

And exactly who armed Saddam and suggested that he fight the war?

Truth? Mostly France. They even loaned French Air Force pilots for antishipping strikes since Saddam's own pilots weren't entirely capable when handed an AM.39 Exocet.

But actually I'm going way past that to the whole business with the Shah.

We did back the Shah, but what happened to him was in a lot of ways his own fault, as he tried to accomplish too much too fast and he was warned of this.

[karajorma]

It has , in other words, nothing to do with us being the West (or Indians being Hindu, a.k.a. reviled polytheists) and everything with us not being muslim.

So why don't they hate South America then?

[Kosh]

Probably not important/rich enough.

[karajorma]

Alright then, why don't they hate Russia and China?

[Grizzly]

Because Al-Queda is located somewhere in the Middle-East?

(Secretly, they are located in my brother's appartment, but that is not the issiue. The Issiue is that "everyone" thinks that they are there, and that "everyone" here thinks that "everyone" there agrees with them)

[karajorma]

Because Al-Queda is located somewhere in the Middle-East?

Which is closer to both China and Russia than the West.

[Grizzly]

Oh wait, I am missing the point here (I messed up who hated who).

Stand-by.

The 'terrorists' are just using the Islam as an silly excuse to kill people, because they are jealous at the west's wealth and power and want a good part of it, probably everything. Which is not a good idea. Buying stock in AMD is. Why they don't aim at China or Russia? Russia and China don't really give the impression that they are wealthy though. We do, we like to.

Same goes for the crusades and Christianity. In the Middle-Ages, you passed on your castle to your oldest son. The younger sons, however, had no land at all, and had to conquer it. So they went and conquered the Middle-East, everything east of germania, raided the byzantine empire, and so on. They were using 'God wants us to' as an silly excuse, as everyone here knows that God does not like people doeing things like that. Still, it made them feel good about it.

[karajorma]

That's almost as bad an explanation as "They hate our freedom"

[BloodEagle]

In the Middle-Ages, you passed on your castle to your oldest son. The younger sons, however, had no land at all, and had to conquer it. So they went and conquered the Middle-East, everything east of germania, raided the byzantine empire, and so on.