Not being from London I can't say I was familiar with the reputation of the Daily Mail (and I'm certainly in no position to question that point) but I guess my counterpoint would be that the issue to me is whether the story is fundamentally true (even if presented in a somewhat sensational manner) and my guess is that it is.

I agree that the stories papers choose to run and the way they run those stories can make quite a bit of difference but my position isn't that all Muslims (or even most) would participate in (or necessarily agree with) these kinds of things --- but I would argue vigorously that there are far too many Muslims who do think that extreme "Islamist" ideology has merit and would like to see Islamic states established where they live -- including many living in the west.

Even more disturbing to me is the significant number of Muslims that are willing to commit acts of terrorism in their adopted (or in some cases countries of their birth) homes in the west. There are a significant number of terror related plots (successful and not) -- not to mention the large numbers of honor killings etc. that have occurred and are occurring in the west. My problem is that too many westerners in their quest to be perceived as tolerant have turned a blind eye to the threat posed by radical Islam even as it happens in their midst.

The impression I got from many Muslims regarding public statement was that they feared reprisals (from the white community). I'm quite familiar with having abuse thrown at me in the street for being seen with a Muslim, and I can fully understand moderate-Islam's fear of reprisal if they gathered. It's these kind of things that create extremism in the first place. You get outrage from more extreme elements of Islam when they're 'aggrieved' because they're ready and willing to engage in a fight.

I don't recall too clearly so could be wrong, but I do seem to remember widespread condemnation of 9/11 from Muslims throughout my country.

Stuart

Quoting DariusKyrak:

Quote:
The impression I got from many Muslims regarding public statement was that they feared reprisals (from the white community). I'm quite familiar with having abuse thrown at me in the street for being seen with a Muslim, and I can fully understand moderate-Islam's fear of reprisal if they gathered. It's these kind of things that create extremism in the first place. You get outrage from more extreme elements of Islam when they're 'aggrieved' because they're ready and willing to engage in a fight.

I don't recall too clearly so could be wrong, but I do seem to remember widespread condemnation of 9/11 from Muslims throughout my country.

Stuart

I seriously doubt there would have been any reprisal from the white community if the Muslims protested AGAINST the actions of the terrorists.  The resounding silence from the Muslim community is what made gave the impression that they agreed with the actions of the terrorists.  It's seems strange to think that Muslims would be afraid to group together to protest against the terrorist, when other Muslims were more than willing to group together in support OF THE TERRORISTS.

I can't believe how close minded some of you are.  Of course the vast majority of Muslims rejected the actions of those behind the 9/11 attacks.  Extremists are exactly what the word connotes, a few with extreme ideas.  If one wanted to, it would be very easy to find extremist Christians, wouldn't it?

Spend some time actually doing some research into the good rather than just looking for negative results.

The following is just one indication of how some Muslims feel:

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

I am not sure I can add anything to what Brian has said. I have not recently read anything anywhere about any Christian extremist anywhere beheading any civilian or military personnel. Or planting IEDs to blow up both civilian and miltary personnel. Or worse yet teaching people that becoming a suicide bomber (even CHILDREN, for God's sake) is a good thing.

We have an appeasement wing in this country. To those people and others worldwide, I say simply appeasement gets NOTHING. Appeasement got ther Euro community a long war with Hitler.One thing that can be said for people such as Sodamn Insane , UBL, Adolph Hitler and most of the other despots through out history, they are among the world's most honest people. They can and will tell you exactly what their intent is and nobody willever hear them because the choose NOT to hear it. I wish I were 20 years younger I would be in Iraq fighting for my countrymen and to free the Iraqi people. Instead, I am relegated to stay home and saying if UBL ever dares to again darken the shores of the US, I will happily show exactly what we Americans are made of... WOLVERINES!!!!!!!!!!!!

Skip

Stuart,
It's sad that you can equate the dealings of the terrorists groups who demand "Sharia Law" to many of those "Christian Groups". There is an immense gulf between the crimes committed by those "Christian groups" and the genocide and government takeovers committed by Al Qaeda and the like. Now, had you compared your "Sharia Law" groups to Hitler and the Nazi party, it might be a more fair comparison.

Don't misunderstand me! The acts of each of these are unconscionable. I will even agree that they are all cut from the same cloth and their desires are very similar but your claim that they are equal  is misplaced. I have to agree with bbursiek, in that, when you compare them, the "Christian" groups seem like misguided amateurs.

Since you like to quote Wikipedia, check out this list and compare again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations

P.S. The individuals within the KKK can claim what they like but to say they are a "Christian group" is a blatant attempt at subterfuge on their part and yours.

I find some of the posts on here bordering on the offensive.
As someone who had to live through the IRA bombing campaigns, I find it insulting to have them described as "misguided amateurs".
I also wonder why some users believe the wearing of the burqua is "degrading". Many muslin women wear this out of choice as a display of their faith, not because they are forced. Would you describe the dress of Orthodox Jews degrading?
You may find laws that involve the beheading of people "odious", but others may find the condemning of people to death then keeping them locked up for years waiting for death equally inhumane. You also have to remember that this is also part of the law in Saudi Arabia - are you saying they are extremists now?
And how come the Taliban weren't a terrorist organisation until after 2001 - the US were perfectly happy dealing with them as a government organisation in Afghanistan during the 80s and 90s.

The impression I get from the reaction of US people (and not just from these forums), and it may be a totally inaccurate impression, is that they weren't overly concerned about international terrorism until it happened on their soil. The US government weren't particularly proactive on doing anything about the funding of the IRA by US citizens, and the UK are meant to be their closest allies!
And yet, because an Islamic group dared to commit an act of terrorism on their soil, suddenly all Islamists are evil and their customs barbaric.
I think people need to learn that progress is not made through labelling other culture's customs "evil" and "degrading", but through dialogue and education.

Some points that deserve a response:

The notion that the US didn't care about international terrorism before 9/11 is not accurate. The fact that are MAJOR act of terrorism occurred on our soil was a wake up call for us to do more but the reality is that the US was the subject of numerous terror attacks on our citizens and our servicemen many times before 9/11 including the mostly failed attack on the world trade center in 1993. The US before 9/11 certainly cared about terrorism and even bombed Quadadi and struck Afghanistan before 9/11 over terrorism. I would agree that the issue became a pressing one in the United States after 9/11 but the notion that we didn't care is nonsense.

Suggesting that the US supported or dealt with the Taliban before 9/11 is equally specious -- they were not recognized by US and we took steps to isolate them. We also supported their rivals - the Northern Alliance before and after the 9/11 attacks. The fact that they harbored a group that launched a devastating terror attack on our own soil should change our urgency in dealing with them shouldn't it?

In regards to the comments about the IRA I will state catregorically that they were clearly terrorists and I in no way meant to diminish them as very bad actors during their reign of terror in Britain and Northern Ireland. What they did was awful and inexcusable. I think the comment about Christian terrorists  as "amateurs" was not about the IRA specifically because I think the list on Wikepedia centered on small fringe groups. However the distinction between the IRA and Al Qaeda is a large one. The IRA were Catholics but their terrorist activity had little to do with Catholicism and everything to do with geography or politics. The IRA were terrorists that happen to be Christian -- they would have done the same if they were Buddhists. Their goal was also limited in scope (the "return" of Northern Ireland) -- they were not determined to create a worldwide caliphate of Ireland. Nor were they interested in imposing their culture and will across the world. I'll admit my memory of the details on these is fuzzy but I also don't recall IRA attacks as being designed to kill as many people as possible but rather were designed to cause terror rather than mass death. As an addition I was disgusted that numerous Americans chose to support the IRA in any way.

I also agree that terrorist of any stripe are worthy of condemnation and I do just that. I think the issue here is about the level of the threat being posed. As an example I follow the news reasonably well and I had barely heard of any of the groups on the list of "Christian" terrorists. That says to me that while they technically exist they are a "pathetic sideshow" compared to Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.

The comment about the Burqua is the most troubling to me. I called the "burqua" degrading because in my opinion it's exactly that. Muslim women do in some cases "choose" to wear the Burqua but it is clearly not a practical garment and is designed primarily to conceal the women's face and figure from men. I would ask this question to those who defend the burqua -- why don't Muslim men wear it if it's a "display of their faith". The answer is quite simple the burqua is part of a series of things designed to highlight the subordinate position of women in Islamic society. In general I think women in Islamic societies are treated poorly and Islam is used as the excuse to do so in most cases.

As for the comment about the death penalty and beheading I think the comments by northbloke are a bizarre defense of the indefensible. It is true that in the US people sentenced to death often wait many years before the sentence is carried out. This is not the result of a desire to be inhumane but rather that the lengthy court appeals in these cases drag the process out. If a defendant doesn't pursue those appeals he will be executed for his crimes in a more timely fashion. If the defendant chooses to pursue his legal appeals it will necessarily delay the death sentence. If the US failed to provide a robust appeal process in death cases I can assume that we would then be criticized fro moving too quickly.

The notion that the beheading or other gruesome executions are somehow comparable to the delay I can only express my disbelief that someone would try to excuse or equate this gruesome practice. In the US death sentences are carried out in a way designed to minimize the suffering of the prisoner. The brutality of punishment in the Middle East is completely unacceptable.

As to the comment about whether I believe Saudi Arabia is extremist I will anwer with a strong YES to that. The bulk of their educational system teaches the virulently ant-western Wahhabi version of Islam and their are many awful legal pronouncements in the country. It is my understanding that the possession of a Bible is illegal. Furthermore they have a religious police that brutally suppresses people who don't live the Islamic life. In one notable incident the religious police caused the death of a number of young girls trapped in a burning building by preventing them from leaving due to their inadquate religious clothing.

Enough said,

Brian