US view of Islam declining

[BigSqwert]

It's the subconscious coming through.

[tonyho7476]

I took an Islam class in college. I somehow got an A. I took it as an elective. Anyway, this is what I got out of it. Using violence against non-muslims, is ok, as long as it is to preserve and spread the religion. And I think some of these terrorists really take this to the extreme, and use it to play on people. What I always laugh at is how many of these people are violent against their own, which is a big no-no. That being said, the majority of people who practice Islam are peaceful people.

 

How do I personally feel about the middle east? I wouldn't have any problems if the region was wiped from the planet. I just wish we had nothing to do with any of them. Too bad all the oil is there.

[whitesoxfan101]

Pretty sad that the media and extremists have caused this. I have a few muslim friends, and they are great people. To be honest, I approve of any religion that teaches sound morals, and Islam does. But the problem is, the extremists, just like in politics, RUIN EVERYTHING.

[Rex Kickass]

Here's my thinking on this.  The media shows violence in Iraq to push their liberal agenda and undermine Bush.  After so many hours of watching violence in the name of Allah, the American public naturally starts to get a jaded view of Islam.

 

YAS,

 

I'm going to disagree here. I don't think that showcasing violence in Iraq - of which there is plenty - is done to push a liberal agenda. The fact is that when people get killed, its news. When people are attacked, its news. Especially when it happens as often as it does in a place where we are supposed to control the security of this country.

 

That makes it news. No agenda necessary.

[WCSox]

YAS,

 

I'm going to disagree here. I don't think that showcasing violence in Iraq - of which there is plenty - is done to push a liberal agenda. The fact is that when people get killed, its news. When people are attacked, its news. Especially when it happens as often as it does in a place where we are supposed to control the security of this country.

 

That makes it news. No agenda necessary.

 

When people are attacked and killed in a war, it's not news. Unfortunately, it's expected.

[whitesoxfan101]

I think we will see that news from now on is always going to have a negative spin, regardless of if the government is republican or democrat majority. People don't want feel good stories, they want s*** and sometimes lies that is sad and will freak them out. It's sad, but true.

[Balance]

The "liberal media" mantra is a Republican cop-out. Don't blame the media for reporting things that actually happen. That's their job. Blaming this on the media implies that people hearing about events, and then using their knowledge of events to form opinions is a bad thing.

 

Lots of negative things are happening in the world. Don't blame the so-called "liberal media" for letting people know that they're going on.

[BigSqwert]

When people are attacked and killed in a war, it's not news.  Unfortunately, it's expected.

War? What war. Didn't you hear? Mission Accomplished!! The war is over.

 

Edit: Sorry...I'm the needler.

Edited March 9, 2006 by BigSqwert

[WCSox]

The "liberal media" mantra is a Republican cop-out.  Don't blame the media for reporting things that actually happen.

 

Like when Walter Cronkite reported that the Americans lost the Tet Offensive? Or when Dan Rather reported that Bush didn't fulfill his military service requirement with the Texas Air National Guard? :rolly

[Balta1701]

Well, since thus far the only opinion that's been raised here regarding the media is that it's the liberal media covering things like bombings and riots which has led to this decline of trust in Islam...let me just say that there are others out there who might have had a hand in causing people to dislike Islam through their words.

 

Radio Host Jay Severin: "I think the only meaningful gesture we might make to them in that regard would be to cut off our own heads right now as a gesture of good faith. Maybe, they would regard that as an act of friendship."

 

Ann Coulter: "If you don't want to get shot by the police, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then don't point a toy gun at them. Or, as I believe our motto should be after 9/11: Jihad monkey talks tough; jihad monkey takes the consequences. Sorry, I realize that's offensive. How about "camel jockey"? What? Now what'd I say? Boy, you tent merchants sure are touchy. Grow up, would you?....Or is NATO -- like the conventions of civilized behavior, personal hygiene and grooming -- inapplicable when Muslims are involved?"

 

Catholic League President W. Donahue on Scarborough Country: " Now, in this country, we are civilized. We don't appreciate it when somebody sticks it to you in the name of freedom of speech, sir. We condemn it. But over there, they take the uncivilized approach. And then they wonder why so many people don't trust the Muslims when it comes to liberty, because they will abuse it. In this country, we prize freedom of religion. They abhor it."

 

Coulter again: "But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document," capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it. [...] Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing around other people like this. "

 

Oliver North: "And it shows that the words 'Islamic moderates' are -- that's an oxymoron. There is no such thing as an 'Islamic moderate,' or they would be out ordering calm and talking about the consequences of government censorship, which, of course, is what you're going to have under the caliphate if the so-called extremists have their way."

 

Pat Robertson: "Don't you feel it rather interesting that every time you have a story about terrorism, it is linked to Muslim extremists? You don't hear somebody, "Christian extremist killing film producers, Christian extremists blowing up trains." It just doesn't happen. But it's Muslim extremists and, ladies and gentlemen, Islam, at least at its core, teaches violence. It's there in the Quran in clear, bold statements. Well over 100 verses dealing with violence against infidels, and that is what they're taught. "

 

Franklin Graham: "In Islam, there is a lot that I have serious questions about, but the god that I worship doesn't require me to strap a bomb on myself and go blow up innocent people to prove to God that I love him and that is the way I can have salvation. Jesus Christ died for me. I don't have to die for him. God gave his son for me. I don't have to go give my life or take other people's lives to please God."

 

And those are just a small selection from the last year. There are many more statements flying through the media like those, calling Islam violent, evil, bashing them for the cartoons, bombings, etc. Now whether or not you agree with those sentiments is not the point...the point I want to make is that there's many reasons from the "Conservative media" that would also make this country more suspicious of Islam in general.

[WCSox]

Well, since thus far the only opinion that's been raised here regarding the media is that it's the liberal media covering things like bombings and riots which has led to this decline of trust in Islam...let me just say that there are others out there who might have had a hand in causing people to dislike Islam through their words.

 

Radio Host Jay Severin:  "I think the only meaningful gesture we might make to them in that regard would be to cut off our own heads right now as a gesture of good faith. Maybe, they would regard that as an act of friendship."

 

Ann Coulter:  "If you don't want to get shot by the police, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, then don't point a toy gun at them. Or, as I believe our motto should be after 9/11: Jihad monkey talks tough; jihad monkey takes the consequences. Sorry, I realize that's offensive. How about "camel jockey"? What? Now what'd I say? Boy, you tent merchants sure are touchy. Grow up, would you?....Or is NATO -- like the conventions of civilized behavior, personal hygiene and grooming -- inapplicable when Muslims are involved?"

 

Catholic League President W. Donahue on Scarborough Country:  " Now, in this country, we are civilized. We don't appreciate it when somebody sticks it to you in the name of freedom of speech, sir. We condemn it. But over there, they take the uncivilized approach. And then they wonder why so many people don't trust the Muslims when it comes to liberty, because they will abuse it. In this country, we prize freedom of religion. They abhor it."

 

Coulter again:  "But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It's a "living document," capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it. [...] Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can't go bossing around other people like this. "

 

Oliver North:   "And it shows that the words 'Islamic moderates' are -- that's an oxymoron. There is no such thing as an 'Islamic moderate,' or they would be out ordering calm and talking about the consequences of government censorship, which, of course, is what you're going to have under the caliphate if the so-called extremists have their way."

 

Pat Robertson:  "Don't you feel it rather interesting that every time you have a story about terrorism, it is linked to Muslim extremists? You don't hear somebody, "Christian extremist killing film producers, Christian extremists blowing up trains." It just doesn't happen. But it's Muslim extremists and, ladies and gentlemen, Islam, at least at its core, teaches violence. It's there in the Quran in clear, bold statements. Well over 100 verses dealing with violence against infidels, and that is what they're taught. "

 

Franklin Graham: "In Islam, there is a lot that I have serious questions about, but the god that I worship doesn't require me to strap a bomb on myself and go blow up innocent people to prove to God that I love him and that is the way I can have salvation. Jesus Christ died for me. I don't have to die for him. God gave his son for me. I don't have to go give my life or take other people's lives to please God."

 

And those are just a small selection from the last year.  There are many more statements flying through the media like those, calling Islam violent, evil, bashing them for the cartoons, bombings, etc.  Now whether or not you agree with those sentiments is not the point...the point I want to make is that there's many reasons from the "Conservative media" that would also make this country more suspicious of Islam in general.

 

Interestingly, those articles didn't appear until 19 "Muslims" hijacked three planes and killed almost 3,000 innocent Americans in September of 2001. I wonder how Israeli journalists approach this subject?

 

BTW, the "jihad monkey" comment is classic.

[BigSqwert]

Interestingly, those articles didn't appear until 19 "Muslims" hijacked three planes and killed almost 3,000 innocent Americans in September of 2001.  I wonder how Israeli journalists approach this subject?

 

So liberal media has been bashing Islam forever. Conservatives started after 9/11?

[Balta1701]

So liberal media has been bashing Islam forever.  Conservatives started after 9/11?

Personally, I read that one more as saying that the Liberal Media shouldn't have reported on 9/11 because it was a war and the media shouldn't care about casualties in a war, but I guess it's open for interpretation.

[WCSox]

So liberal media has been bashing Islam forever.  Conservatives started after 9/11?

 

When did I ever say that?

 

My feeling is that conservatives have been (justifiably) bashing Islamic extremists since the '70s.

[WCSox]

Personally, I read that one more as saying that the Liberal Media shouldn't have reported on 9/11 because it was a war and the media shouldn't care about casualties in a war, but I guess it's open for interpretation.

 

Funny, I don't recall the hijackers wearing military uniforms. :rolly

 

After all that's happened, it's mind-boggling that some people still can't distinguish between soldiers and terrorists.

[southsider2k5]

This is going to fillibuster now for obvious reasons... enjoy.

[Balta1701]

Funny, I don't recall the hijackers wearing military uniforms.  :rolly

 

After all that's happened, it's mind-boggling that some people still can't distinguish between soldiers and terrorists.

I don't recall many of the suicide bombers in Iraq wearing uniforms either...and you just said/agreed with statements that the liberal media is only reporting on suicide bombings in Iraq because they want to hurt Bush, and then said specifically that you feel the media shouldn't be reporting on those things because they're a war.

 

So which is it...should the media not report things going on in Iraq because it's a war, or should they report on them because they're not wearing uniforms when their cars explode?

[Balta1701]

This is going to fillibuster now for obvious reasons... enjoy.

I was surprised it didn't end up here sooner. Thanks.

[YASNY]

The "liberal media" mantra is a Republican cop-out.  Don't blame the media for reporting things that actually happen.  That's their job.  Blaming this on the media implies that people hearing about events, and then using their knowledge of events to form opinions is a bad thing. 

 

Lots of negative things are happening in the world.  Don't blame the so-called "liberal media" for letting people know that they're going on.

 

The media is very selective about what they choose to report. In my opinion, they choose to report what they believe will support their agenda. It's not a copout. I started really paying attention to politics during the 1976 presidential campaign as that was the first election I was old enough in which I was old enough to vote. I had also been exposed to 8 years of Nixon through my politically 'formative' years. I registered as a Democrat and voted for Carter. The was the last time I ever made the mistake of voting for a Democrat for president. However, since that time, I've been watching the media push a liberal agenda. No ifs, ands or buts about it in my opinion.

[WCSox]

I don't recall many of the suicide bombers in Iraq wearing uniforms either...and you just said/agreed with statements that the liberal media is only reporting on suicide bombings in Iraq because they want to hurt Bush, and then said specifically that you feel the media shouldn't be reporting on those things because they're a war.

 

So which is it...should the media not report things going on in Iraq because it's a war, or should they report on them because they're not wearing uniforms when their cars explode?

 

When someone gets on a plane, nobody expects terrorists to take over the cockpit and fly it into a skyscraper. That's news.

 

When American soldiers invade another country, one expects that they'll meet resistance in one form or another and that they'll incur casualties. Daily front-page news stories that include a tally of soldiers lost mainly serves political purpose. You mean that soldiers are being killed in a war? No way!

 

Is that clear enough?

Edited March 9, 2006 by WCSox

[Balta1701]

When someone gets on a plane, nobody expects terrorists to take over the cockpit and fly it into a skyscraper.  That's news.

 

When American soldiers invade another country, one expects that they'll meet resistance in one form or another and that they'll incur casualties.

 

Is that clear enough?

So let's see, thus far in this thread, you've said that the reason the media should have reported on 9/11 was that the hijackers weren't wearing military uniforms, but that it's ok to not report on things in Iraq because despite the fact that they aren't wearing military uniforms, the war in Iraq is a war while the war against Al Qaeda is not.

 

You've also told me that the articles by Conservatives bashing muslim extremists didn't appear until after 9/11, but that articles by Conservatives have been bashing muslim extremists since the 1970's.

 

I'm so dizzy I'm going to step out of this thread and let someone else try to piece this together.

[NorthSideSox72]

When someone gets on a plane, nobody expects terrorists to take over the cockpit and fly it into a skyscraper.  That's news.

 

When American soldiers invade another country, one expects that they'll meet resistance in one form or another and that they'll incur casualties.  Daily front-page news stories that include a tally of soldiers lost mainly serves political purpose.  You mean that soldiers are being killed in a war?  No way! 

 

Is that clear enough?

Showing a toll of losses in a war is not new, nor is it political. It is news in the US when our soldiers die, even if it is every day (and so it should be). This was done for the last few wars, and will be for any future ones. It has nothing to do with politics.

[Mplssoxfan]

When someone gets on a plane, nobody expects terrorists to take over the cockpit and fly it into a skyscraper.  That's news.

 

When American soldiers invade another country, one expects that they'll meet resistance in one form or another and that they'll incur casualties.  Daily front-page news stories that include a tally of soldiers lost mainly serves political purpose.  You mean that soldiers are being killed in a war?  No way! 

 

Is that clear enough?

Sorry for the piling on, but, what you would like to see reported from Iraq?

 

How is it not news whan US Servicemen and Servicewomen die in a military action?

[FlaSoxxJim]

After all that's happened, it's mind-boggling that some people still can't distinguish between soldiers and terrorists.

 

Not so mind-boggling, since we get to torture 'em if we call 'em terrorists. :rolly

[WCSox]

So let's see, thus far in this thread, you've said that the reason the media should have reported on 9/11 was that the hijackers weren't wearing military uniforms, but that it's ok to not report on things in Iraq because despite the fact that they aren't wearing military uniforms, the war in Iraq is a war while the war against Al Qaeda is not.

 

Again, you're missing my point. When American soldiers invaded Iraq, one had to assume that there would be at least some casualties. Said soldiers were wearing American military uniforms (i.e., the invasion was an act of war, rather than an act of terrorism. When passengers at Logan boarded their planes and people went to work at the WTC on the morning of September 11, 2001, there was no reason to expect that almost 3,000 people would be killed.

 

Not so mind-boggling, since we get to torture 'em if we call 'em terrorists. :rolly

 

But we can only torture them if they operate outside of the guidelines of war. :rolly