In U.S., 44 Percent Say Restrict Muslims

We ought to fight the extremists of all religions, they are out to destroy the world for the majority who are not. Education, social justice, and economic prosperity are key to combat stereotypes/prejudice and religious fanaticism.

I agree.
 
This racial profiling again. One of the most sensitive issues in the political forum mostly because people are stick of being offended, or thinking that they are being offended. The fact of the matter is that most of the terrorist attacks occur on the hands of people who are in fact Muslim. It is the greatest bit of irony when you go through an airport security check in America and the grand mother in front of you gets her bag and computer checked for weapons and bombs yet the suspecious gentleman behind you is not checked because he is Muslim and the politically correct people in this country get sensitive when we target people just because of their religion or race. However mean or cruel it might sound, it is life and we have to accept the fact that nearly 80-85 percent of terror attacks occur by people who are Muslim. Its just a fact accept it.
 
It is the greatest bit of irony when you go through an airport security check in America and the grand mother in front of you gets her bag and computer checked for weapons and bombs yet the suspecious gentleman behind you is not checked because he is Muslim and the politically correct people in this country get sensitive when we target people just because of their religion or race. However mean or cruel it might sound, it is life and we have to accept the fact that nearly 80-85 percent of terror attacks occur by people who are Muslim. Its just a fact accept it.

The exact reason why the elephant is pissing on the Liberals. They just dont get it. Racial profiling works, random checks dont because like MPower said, grandma could be just ahead of some arab in line at an airport but because grandma was the 4th randomly checked the terrorist suspect goes scott free.
 
justin syder said:
It is the greatest bit of irony when you go through an airport security check in America and the grand mother in front of you gets her bag and computer checked for weapons and bombs yet the suspecious gentleman behind you is not checked because he is Muslim and the politically correct people in this country get sensitive when we target people just because of their religion or race. However mean or cruel it might sound, it is life and we have to accept the fact that nearly 80-85 percent of terror attacks occur by people who are Muslim. Its just a fact accept it.

The exact reason why the elephant is pissing on the Liberals. They just dont get it. Racial profiling works, random checks dont because like MPower said, grandma could be just ahead of some arab in line at an airport but because grandma was the 4th randomly checked the terrorist suspect goes scott free.

Exactly. Its just not accepting that racial profiling is necessary. Random checks are good for those who just want to be politically correct and not tick someone off for being checked. The fact of the matter is that we need to take in account much more aspects when inspecting people than we do today. Random checks just give the terrorists more outs than he deserves.
 
Although it's obvious that muslims are more likely to be terrorist you have to consider that this type of thinking leads to the Holocaust.

Black people are more likely to commit a violent crime in the US, but does this mean they should be monitered more strictly? -> have separate schools -> separate communities -> be kept away from the public -> locked up -> killed.

This type of thinking is progressive. :thumbsdown:
 
MPower said:
justin syder said:
It is the greatest bit of irony when you go through an airport security check in America and the grand mother in front of you gets her bag and computer checked for weapons and bombs yet the suspecious gentleman behind you is not checked because he is Muslim and the politically correct people in this country get sensitive when we target people just because of their religion or race. However mean or cruel it might sound, it is life and we have to accept the fact that nearly 80-85 percent of terror attacks occur by people who are Muslim. Its just a fact accept it.

The exact reason why the elephant is pissing on the Liberals. They just dont get it. Racial profiling works, random checks dont because like MPower said, grandma could be just ahead of some arab in line at an airport but because grandma was the 4th randomly checked the terrorist suspect goes scott free.

Exactly. Its just not accepting that racial profiling is necessary. Random checks are good for those who just want to be politically correct and not tick someone off for being checked. The fact of the matter is that we need to take in account much more aspects when inspecting people than we do today. Random checks just give the terrorists more outs than he deserves.
:thumbsdown:

I don't remember white people being profiled after what Timothy McVeigh did, and I'd like to know where your "80-85%" figure comes from.
 
Ultra_Kool_Dude said:
Although it's obvious that muslims are more likely to be terrorist you have to consider that this type of thinking leads to the Holocaust.

Black people are more likely to commit a violent crime in the US, but does this mean they should be monitered more strictly? -> have separate schools -> separate communities -> be kept away from the public -> locked up -> killed.

This type of thinking is progressive. :thumbsdown:
You got it.
 
chaos386 said:
MPower said:
justin syder said:
It is the greatest bit of irony when you go through an airport security check in America and the grand mother in front of you gets her bag and computer checked for weapons and bombs yet the suspecious gentleman behind you is not checked because he is Muslim and the politically correct people in this country get sensitive when we target people just because of their religion or race. However mean or cruel it might sound, it is life and we have to accept the fact that nearly 80-85 percent of terror attacks occur by people who are Muslim. Its just a fact accept it.

The exact reason why the elephant is pissing on the Liberals. They just dont get it. Racial profiling works, random checks dont because like MPower said, grandma could be just ahead of some arab in line at an airport but because grandma was the 4th randomly checked the terrorist suspect goes scott free.

Exactly. Its just not accepting that racial profiling is necessary. Random checks are good for those who just want to be politically correct and not tick someone off for being checked. The fact of the matter is that we need to take in account much more aspects when inspecting people than we do today. Random checks just give the terrorists more outs than he deserves.
:thumbsdown:

I don't remember white people being profiled after what Timothy McVeigh did, and I'd like to know where your "80-85%" figure comes from.
Recalling a fact I heard during a speech by the CIA when I went to Washington DC.
 
Ultra_Kool_Dude said:
Although it's obvious that muslims are more likely to be terrorist you have to consider that this type of thinking leads to the Holocaust.

Black people are more likely to commit a violent crime in the US, but does this mean they should be monitered more strictly? -> have separate schools -> separate communities -> be kept away from the public -> locked up -> killed.

This type of thinking is progressive. :thumbsdown:
That is a ridiculous strech of the mind, im sorry. Trying to take racial profiling and take into the mind of Holocaust is madness. The idea of it is just as bad as the person who says it.

How about this? Stop stretching statements. No one mentioned seperate schools are whatever ridiculous idea you came up with.

Even you admitted it, Muslims are more likely to commit a terrorist attack than others. So why deny that and have grandma Joans in front of you checked but the Muslim guy wearing a long black trench coat and bulches in his coat not checked? You have to much, MUCH more than just randomly searching people. You have to think it out choose people to search that would have the highest possiblity to be a terrorist themselves. I am not saying anything against Muslims, but I want to keep my country safe and the best way to that is NOT by randomly searching.
 
Random check is not that random In all the flights I have flown or any of my relatives have flown, be they teen age girls, they were all checked thoroughly, only because they are muslims, or looked arab. On a flight to Boston, I and another elderly arab lady were the only ones who had to go through thorough checks.
Who the f*ck are you kidding with, just go and ask any arab(BTW 70% of the arabs in North America are not even muslims) and see whether these checks were ever truly random or not. Just because someone fits the profile you are going to lock them up and torture them and send them to their country of birth for further more tortures; is this American Democracy?
As for racial profiling goes, you will see most of the mass murdering sickos have been whites. :thumbsdown:
 
MPower said:
Ultra_Kool_Dude said:
Although it's obvious that muslims are more likely to be terrorist you have to consider that this type of thinking leads to the Holocaust.

Black people are more likely to commit a violent crime in the US, but does this mean they should be monitered more strictly? -> have separate schools -> separate communities -> be kept away from the public -> locked up -> killed.

This type of thinking is progressive. :thumbsdown:
That is a ridiculous strech of the mind, im sorry. Trying to take racial profiling and take into the mind of Holocaust is madness. The idea of it is just as bad as the person who says it.

How about this? Stop stretching statements. No one mentioned seperate schools are whatever ridiculous idea you came up with.

Even you admitted it, Muslims are more likely to commit a terrorist attack than others. So why deny that and have grandma Joans in front of you checked but the Muslim guy wearing a long black trench coat and bulches in his coat not checked? You have to much, MUCH more than just randomly searching people. You have to think it out choose people to search that would have the highest possiblity to be a terrorist themselves. I am not saying anything against Muslims, but I want to keep my country safe and the best way to that is NOT by randomly searching.
Okay, this is another thing I have a beef with. Just because current terrorists are likely to claim to be Muslim, does not mean that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists. :thumbsdown:

You give a nice loaded example there with the grandma and the Muslim with the bulging trenchcoat. What if it's two old ladies? Are you going to check only the Muslim one because you think she's more likely to be a terrorist than the white one? What if you have two guys, one white Christian and one Arab Christian, and the white one is smuggling drugs? Racial profiling says that if you can only check one person, it's the one who looks Arab or has a "funny sounding name" (unless all law enforcement officers are given a list of Arab surnames).

I use the drug example because we don't live in a vacuum: just because terrorism is a hot-topic currently doesn't mean that's the only thing someone can do wrong. Criminals won't stop doing illegal stuff just because terrorism is a threat, so you can't forget about other crimes.
 
chaos386 said:
MPower said:
Ultra_Kool_Dude said:
Although it's obvious that muslims are more likely to be terrorist you have to consider that this type of thinking leads to the Holocaust.

Black people are more likely to commit a violent crime in the US, but does this mean they should be monitered more strictly? -> have separate schools -> separate communities -> be kept away from the public -> locked up -> killed.

This type of thinking is progressive. :thumbsdown:
That is a ridiculous strech of the mind, im sorry. Trying to take racial profiling and take into the mind of Holocaust is madness. The idea of it is just as bad as the person who says it.

How about this? Stop stretching statements. No one mentioned seperate schools are whatever ridiculous idea you came up with.

Even you admitted it, Muslims are more likely to commit a terrorist attack than others. So why deny that and have grandma Joans in front of you checked but the Muslim guy wearing a long black trench coat and bulches in his coat not checked? You have to much, MUCH more than just randomly searching people. You have to think it out choose people to search that would have the highest possiblity to be a terrorist themselves. I am not saying anything against Muslims, but I want to keep my country safe and the best way to that is NOT by randomly searching.
Okay, this is another thing I have a beef with. Just because current terrorists are likely to claim to be Muslim, does not mean that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists. :thumbsdown:

You give a nice loaded example there with the grandma and the Muslim with the bulging trenchcoat. What if it's two old ladies? Are you going to check only the Muslim one because you think she's more likely to be a terrorist than the white one? What if you have two guys, one white Christian and one Arab Christian, and the white one is smuggling drugs? Racial profiling says that if you can only check one person, it's the one who looks Arab or has a "funny sounding name" (unless all law enforcement officers are given a list of Arab surnames).

I use the drug example because we don't live in a vacuum: just because terrorism is a hot-topic currently doesn't mean that's the only thing someone can do wrong. Criminals won't stop doing illegal stuff just because terrorism is a threat, so you can't forget about other crimes.
But how randomly searching passengers ensure that we check all that should be checked, and all that need to be checked? It doesnt. The reason that is there is because people take it unto themselves that they got checked because the "US hates arabs". Its politically correctness that got us into this random check debackle and it makes me sick.
 
MPower said:
But how randomly searching passengers ensure that we check all that should be checked, and all that need to be checked? It doesnt. The reason that is there is because people take it unto themselves that they got checked because the "US hates arabs". Its politically correctness that got us into this random check debackle and it makes me sick.

I'm going to assume we're talking about airports here. I'm going to say first off that it doesn't help anybody to search Arabs less than others, just so it seems more politically correct. I think everyone who goes on a plane needs to be checked.

Methods like x-ray imaging and metal detectors are good ways to check every passenger and their luggage while keeping things moving relatively quickly (and since everyone is already checked this way in airports, what exactly are we talking about here with "random checks"?). Quick, efficient methods like this are acceptable and don't inconvenience people. I don't mind opening my luggage for more thorough searches, because even if I was the only one checked, I wasn't held up for more than a minute. I'm not watching them 24/7 either, so I won't know if I was selected just because I'm Muslim. All I care about is my flight.

It only becomes a problem when people are detained for long periods of time, or it just becomes a hassle every time they want to travel. Some methods also feel more extreme, like fingerprinting, which make you feel guilty before proven innocent. Opening up your luggage is just a one time thing: they aren't saying you're definitely a bad person, just that they can't trust anyone. Fingerprinting makes it seem like the government doesn't trust YOU specifically, and thus they want to keep tabs on you and monitor your activities.
 
America is specifically anti-Islam and anti-muslim, there is no denying to that. Just as muslim fanatics support Osama, Christian right supports Bush, and by many Christians he is even seen as a prophet. Christian churches not only talk against terrorism but also against Islam. Many Christian websites seems obsessed over muslims and Islam, and Christians at churches, and students in religious studies classes in universities, are filled with hatred against muslims and Islam. If God is about love, what kind of love is this? I condemn those muslims who are involved in terrorism, but America is not merely fighting against terrorists, America has an agenda of a fourth crusade. I believe, God is not on the side of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, or Buddhists, God is on the side of GOOD, and what both America or AlQaeda are doing for surely is not GOOD.
 
Bitko said:
America is specifically anti-Islam and anti-muslim
Certainly there are some ignorant jackasses in America (just like in any other country), but by and large I believe that the overwhelming majority of Americans is NOT anti-islam or anti-muslim.
Bitko said:
, there is no denying to that. Just as muslim fanatics support Osama, Christian right supports Bush, and by many Christians he is even seen as a prophet.
A prophet? Only very few head-cases will go that far.
Bitko said:
Christian churches not only talk against terrorism but also against Islam.
Sounds plausible that this happens, I very much doubt that this is widespread.
Bitko said:
Many Christian websites seems obsessed over muslims and Islam,
I haven't visited any, but you'll always find idiots on the internet.
Bitko said:
and Christians at churches, and students in religious studies classes in universities, are filled with hatred against muslims and Islam.
Now I haven't been to a church or a university in a while, but I find this extremely, extremely, extremely hard to believe.
In certain Muslim countries however, the reverse (preaching of hatred against non-muslims in schools) appears to happen (how common, I don't really know).
Bitko said:
If God is about love, what kind of love is this? I condemn those muslims who are involved in terrorism,
I believe that the overwhelming majority of muslims feel the same about it.
Bitko said:
but America is not merely fighting against terrorists, America has an agenda of a fourth crusade.
This is utter bullshit.
What isn't though is a concern by more than a few westeners about the belief of certain muslims that any non-muslim is an infidel.
Especially the concern is about what agenda might be tied to that belief.
Again this is something that I don't know how widespread this is.
Bitko said:
I believe, God is not on the side of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, or Buddhists, God is on the side of GOOD
I mostly don't believe in a God, but if there is one I certainly hope so.
Bitko said:
, and what both America or AlQaeda are doing for surely is not GOOD.
AlQaeda, certainly not, as for America perhaps there are and were aspects that are less than ideal, but personally I think it's rediculous to put them on the same level.
 
What you call it other than anti-muslim, when muslims are being detained and tortured for no reason, solely based on suspicion.
Christianitytoday.com a very prominent Christian website; just go there and type "muslim" or "islam" under search, and see how many aticles come up.
There are hundreds of universities in US teaching Islam as a social science course, just give me names of five schools where the professors are muslims or the books in the curriculum are written by muslims.
I have not been to any church, but have spoken to many church goers, and number of times been asked many strange questions about my faith. And when I asked them where they heard such thing they replied, "at the chruch."
"Crusade," the word slipped out of Mr. Bush, Freudian slip?
What you call attacking Iraq, not anti-muslim?
Under international law, under no circustance, can a country invade another, until and unless its own security is in question. So how was Iraq a threat to the US? WMD is pure BS we all know it.
 
Bitko said:
What you call it other than anti-muslim, when muslims are being detained and tortured for no reason, solely based on suspicion.
If that is what happens then I certainly oppose that and the overwhelming majority of Americans do too.

Bitko said:
Christianitytoday.com a very prominent Christian website; just go there and type "muslim" or "islam" under search, and see how many aticles come up.
OK, I typed in muslim, and here are the first few that came up:
- The Muslim Next Door - Women
The Muslim Next Door How to better understand and befriend women who follow Allah.

- Muslim Phobic No More - Christianity Today Magazine
Muslim Phobic No More Verbal attacks on Islam sabotage evangelism.

- Jesus Through Muslim Eyes - Books & Culture - ChristianityTodayLibrary
Jesus Through Muslim Eyes Sayings and stories Gabriel Said Reynolds In the crash course in Islam offered by the media over the last six months, many Christians will have heard it said that Muslims regard Jesus as a great prophet

- Evangelicals Advise on Muslim Dialogue - Christianity Today Magazine
Evangelicals Advise on Muslim Dialogue But hastily called meeting fails to include Franklin Graham, Falwell, and Robertson.

- Muslim Class Prayer - Christianity Today Magazine
Muslim Class Prayer Parents allege kids 'forced' to simulate Islam.
Seems mostly positive to me.

Bitko said:
There are hundreds of universities in US teaching Islam as a social science course, just give me names of five schools where the professors are muslims or the books in the curriculum are written by muslims.
How does this relate to the "hatred against muslims and islam" argument you were trying to make in your previous post?
I mean just because a muslim isn't teaching the course or a muslim didn't write the book doesn't mean it's purposely and blatantly trying to spread hatred.
I mean my English teacher in high-school wasn't English or American, but he still knew how to teach English, why wouldn't a non-muslim be able to teach about islam?
Bitko said:
I have not been to any church, but have spoken to many church goers, and number of times been asked many strange questions about my faith. And when I asked them where they heard such thing they replied, "at the chruch."
What kind of questions?
Where they misguided or just curious?
Like I said, I don't deny that it isn't a possibility, but I doubt it's widespread.

Bitko said:
"Crusade," the word slipped out of Mr. Bush, Freudian slip?
Crusade to most westerners does NOT mean a fight againts muslims, instead it means more something like "a prolonged and difficult fight".
As such it's not a Freudian slip, but a poorly chosen word because Bush didn't think quickly enough when he was saying it that it could easily be misinterpreted by muslims.
Certainly it is a mistake that most people could have made under the same circumstances.

Bitko said:
What you call attacking Iraq, not anti-muslim?
Well Saddam Hussain was enforcing non-secularism quite effectively, so if America had an anti-muslim agenda, the proper action would have been NOT to attack Iraq.
Bitko said:
Under international law, under no circustance, can a country invade another, until and unless its own security is in question. So how was Iraq a threat to the US? WMD is pure BS we all know it.
Yes no question that WMD claim turned out to me a huge mistake (not exclusively made by the US), however I don't see how this has anything to do with an anti-muslim sentiment.
If the US really was trying to wage a war against Muslims, wouldn't you think it would have mosks and religious leaders as targets instead of terrorists?
And wouldn't Iran have been a better target than Iraq?


I would just like to clarify that I in no way hate or discriminate (at least not consciously) against people because of their religious beliefs.
I do however, hate terrorists.
 
What I am really trying to say is that in MOST mosques, and in most of our religious discussions we rarely discuss about Christianity or Chrisitians. And even the most fanatic anti-American Muslims also rarely talk negatively about Christians, and I would not deny that some sheikhs in some mosques, even in Toronto, have taken the opportunity on Friday prayers to lambaste the American government, but I never heard them talking negatively/positively about Christianity or Christians.
I have heard from relatives and friends that it is no longer safe to go to mosques in the US, cause mosque goers come under FBI watch list, and hence you risk losing your privacy.
If US really wants to get rid of terrorism and not just the terrorists, they have to look through the eyes of the muslims. You can't get red of terrorism without taking care of the reason why young men join Al Qaeda or such organisations. Most muslims can't understand why there are americans soldiers in Saudi Arabia, which has one of the biggest defence budget in the world, and there are many other dubious American foreign policies.
Yes, I know that most terrorist attacks in the world today are by muslims, but I also know that far more muslims are dying in reprisals; and I have seen it hundreds of times on news that a lot of Americans consider War in Iraq as a reprisal to 9/11. What truly would solve this problem, is when we start to think that all lives are equal; and that there are no chosen people, or no one group is superior to the other. Before we are anything we ought to think we are ALL humans.
 
Bitko said:
Most muslims can't understand why there are americans soldiers in Saudi Arabia, which has one of the biggest defence budget in the world, and there are many other dubious American foreign policies.
Certainly, this is a source of friction, but to be honest, resorting to terrorism over this is completely over the top.
This seems so preposterous that this is a source of terrorism to most westeners.
I think that (at least to westeners), this argument (the soldiers in Saudi Arabia) is an excuse that masks the real reasons for terrorism.

Bitko said:
What truly would solve this problem, is when we start to think that all lives are equal; and that there are no chosen people, or no one group is superior to the other. Before we are anything we ought to think we are ALL humans.
Well said, I completely agree.
I guess this is one of the reasons why I dislike just about any religion, since (at least to me) they seem to be used as a vehicle by some misguided people to justify horrible deeds, especially since some of the religious texts can be misinterpreted so that you can consider any "non-believer" as evil, non-human, etc...
 
I wouldn't blame religion for my own wrong doing. Religion or religious text are one of many things we manipulate for our gains. I for one being a muslim don't buy it when some other muslim uses Islam to commit suicide and blow up innocent people. I belive in freedom of faith, and would not want to insult or get insulted for what i believe. To be frank with you blaming US squarely on these issues is wrong, I blame muslim rulers and leaders, who are motivated by greed and allow US in the first place to get involved in domestic matters like the defence issue in Saudi Arabia or mosque sermon issue in Egypt.
 
Top