Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (240054)	8/28/2007 12:26:00 PM
From: Geoff Altman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The reason for the argument about islam in the first place is that in islam this perverted view has gained more traction. That has to do with backwardness, poverty, colonialism and a negative sense of self worth. The background of the Islamist radicals that have been caught doing terrorist deeds says something else, the vast majority coming from the upper middle class. IMO all you mentioned above are side issues. What we really have in the ME are the results of brain washing fundament madrass's that have been sprouting up throughout the ME for the last 20 years. IMO they also contribute to keeping the populace in it's present condition of backwardness and poverty.

To: michael97123 who wrote (240054)	9/15/2007 9:29:09 AM
From: Noel de Leon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Islam and Terrorism What is the rôle that Islam plays when one wants to understand terrorism? A working definition of terrorism could be: "Violence and armed combat directed against random civilian targets to achieve political and/or religious goals." How exclusive is militant muslim terror as compared to other acts of terror? Is Islam the only explanation for terrorists? Obviously not. Some examples: 1) Irgun, Zionist, 1938, hidden bomb in the Arab quarter, killed 39. 2) McVeigh, right wing agnostic with Catholic background, 1995, 168 killed. 3) Aum Shinrikyo, Buddhist, Hindu, and science fiction, 12 killed and 1000 wounded in a chemical terror attack in the Japanese subway. 4) Rwanda, Africa's most Catholic nation, 800,000 killed. 5) Hiroshima, Nagasaki, President Truman thanked the Christian god, 100,000 civilians killed. 6)Dresden, Christian bombers, then Dresden was generally accepted as not being a military target, 160,000 killed. 7) ETA, FARC, Real IRA, The Tamil Tigers. All non Islamic groups. 8) Secular groups in the Middle East, PFLP and PKK. In fact far greater numbers of civilians are killed by high tech weapons than by al Qaeda's attacks. Saddam's chemical attacks on civilians in Iran and Kurds and Bush's Iraq war are 2 examples. Is Islam a factor behind Muslim radicalization and terror? Of course it is. There are Islamic groups that justify terror through Islam, but they are a small but vorciferous minority. By far the large majority of Islamic religious leaders do not accept the interpretation of violence. There were no suicide bombers in Sri Lanka before Sri Lanka's military went into the Tamil Tiger's area in 1987. There were no suicide bombers in Iraq before Bush attacked in 2003. Much terrorism is motivated by war and occupation. Iraq and Palestine come to mind. Less emphasis on Islam and more emphasis on terrorism's nature and its causes would go a long way towards reducing terrorism and a general hatred against Muslims.