Islamofascism: How dare you say that

Why is it to speak against radical Islam, you are labeled racist,Muslim hater,ect. This is nothing more than avoiding the issue,used to place the messenger in a position to defend themselves. Then we have the offended by Islamofacist term,another avoidance issue. It's like saying more offended by the word than the actions. Maybe Muslims should be more visible against what is going on,but that's not happening. Maybe because they are afraid to speak out? Maybe they too are afraid of them. Fear

Originally posted by rdang
Why is it to speak against radical Islam, you are labeled racist,Muslim hater,ect.

when people "speak out against radical islam" they tend to group ALL of islam with the radicals

Then we have the offended by Islamofacist term,another avoidance issue.
the term islamofascist is a problem not because you are speaking out against radical islam, but because you are placing a diverse and complex group into a single category, as if radical islam were some unified world threat

there is no single worldwide united islamic extremist threat, that's why islamoFASCIST makes no sense
fascists tend to be a united movement

Maybe Muslims should be more visible against what is going on,but that's not happening. Maybe because they are afraid to speak out? Maybe they too are afraid of them.

or maybe they're afraid to speak out because people are ignorant and will group them into the same category
i was in school when 9/11 happened
the next day, 5 muslim kids were beaten up
why? because the parents of the aggressors blamed ALL of islam for the attacks

just a little bit of ignorance can ruin it for a lot of people

Fear

ok
wow, i watched the video
glenn beck is A $&#@%#% IDIOT
he isn't talking about RADICAL islam, he's talking about ISLAM, just ISLAM
he actually says "the guy that has to keep the muslims happy"

he's blaming POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
the french police aren't in a conflict with radical islam, the issue isn't religion
IT IS ABOUT POVERTY AND PREJIDUCE
france has huge problems with immigrants because of colonialism, poverty, and racism


england doesn't even have a lot of problems with it's muslim population
the english have a problem with the same people that planned 9/11, people that don't live there

and, beck's "global religious civil war" seems to much like the "global race civil war" that the white supremacists talk about for my comfort

ol' crazy (that's my name for the head of iran), may WANT to be at the head of a radical muslim empire, but there is no unity in radical muslim movements

remember, this is the same guy that asked Keith Ellison to prove he's not working with our enemies, simply because he's a muslim

[edit on 12/25/06 by madnessinmysoul]

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
there is no single worldwide united islamic extremist threat, that's why islamoFASCIST makes no sense
fascists tend to be a united movement
[edit on 12/25/06 by madnessinmysoul]

What rock have you been living under?

Originally posted by rdang
Fear

WOW. I can't belive they let that video on American TV.

I live in Europe and i can't tell

He say's :
"In England where soon 20% of the population will be Muslims"

What alot of crap. We have less then 2.5% muslim population in England. To be 20% it would take massive immigration to be even close to that.

Also he makes random statements which have nothing to do with muslims. Like honer killings which also happen in India(with non-muslims), Middle east and even africa with non-muslims.

Also some of his claims are way off especially about France.

"Europe is finding itself surrounded by a dealy enemy" lol

muslims make less then 2.5% of the European population.

Why is this racist/bigot on TV.

The term Facist was first used by Mussolini to describe his political ideologies he defined the word as follows;

"a right-wing collectivistic ideology in opposition to socialism, liberalism, democracy and individualism"

Facists believe in direct authorative control and state intervention, which may make it sound like the perfect word to use for this particular propaganda purpose, until you realise that the real facists of WW2, that being the cheief protagnosists of the Nazi movement Mussolini, Hitler, Himmler etc regarded anything other than the "traditional" Arayan bloodline as being sub-human.

So while the use of the word is clever the people that actually invented it - coined the phrase, so to speak - would actually argue that you cannot apply their idealogy to the muslim faith, because their way was better, stronger and the people to which you try and apply it to are little more than animals (in thier eyes).

And while some elements of extreme Islam may be as totalitarion as the term suggests, not all of it is. In the same way that not all Germans were Nazi's, not all those of the Islamic faith are extremists.

By tying the two terms together the implication of the term Islamo-facist makes out all people of that faith see things from the extreme point of view, and clearly, they do not. That is why the term is objectionable. It shows ignorance, fear and - oddly - could be compared to the term Judeo -Bolshevik , which was used by the Nazis to describe what they believed to be Jewish Led Communism.

Labels make great fear and control tools when used by propagandists to try and put forward their own ideologies. Paul Joseph Goebbels is as good example of someone who used them to good effect.

Oh. I must add. The idiot on this video refers to the fact that "soon 20% of the British population will be muslim"

Newsflash. Approximately 3% of the UK population is Muslim. Wheres the other 17%?

I mean, I'm only English. I'm sure I know a damn site more about my country than this fool.

The moron featured here is a hate spewing propagandist. If he gets a slot on US TV, I would suggest that the US sinking fast, because the last time the kind of rhetoric this jackass is using was heard, over 5 million Jews were exterminated, and if this is the kind of thing thats filling the mind of impressionable Americans, how long before its "Heil Bush" ?



[edit on 25/1206/06 by neformore]

He say's :
"In England where soon 20% of the population will be Muslims"

Who said that? The BNP?

Even on Christmas day, some still like to post misleading statements about Muslims and Islam. The reason why numerous people on this board are called "racists" is because they tend to label everyone the same, all muslims are terrorists and all jews are zionists type of thinking...which is just stupid.

Its this type of thinking that is giving ATS a bad name.

[edit on 25-12-2006 by infinite]

Originally posted by infinite

He say's :
"In England where soon 20% of the population will be Muslims"

Who said that? The BNP?

Even on Christmas day, some still like to post misleading statements about Muslims and Islam. The reason why numerous people on this board are called "racists" is because they tend to label everyone the same, all muslims are terrorists and all jews are zionists type of thinking...which is just stupid.

Its this type of thinking that is giving ATS a bad name.







Thank you for proving my point. Still,not one comment denouncing radical Islam. I'm sorry you feel comments on RADICAL Islam means all Muslims,I'll post more later after I get through defending myself.

[edit on 25-12-2006 by infinite]

Thank you for proving my point. Still,not one comment denouncing radical Islam. I'm sorry you feel comments on RADICAL Islam means all Muslims,I'll post more later after I get through defending myself.

excuse me?

we have just stated that not all muslims are radical, yet you have twisted words .

Did i make a DIRECT reference to you in my posts?ermm...no. please don't play the victim.

[edit on 25-12-2006 by infinite]

Originally posted by rdang
Thank you for proving my point. Still,not one comment denouncing radical Islam. I'm sorry you feel comments on RADICAL Islam means all Muslims,I'll post more later after I get through defending myself.
[edit on 25-12-2006 by infinite]

You asked a question about the term "islamofacist", you didn't ask for comments denouncing radical Islam, and then you linked to a piece of crap journalism broadcast on US national TV that doesn't even have its facts right.

ALL terrorists are idiots. But then, so are sheep who blindly follow what they see/hear on TV, because its "fashionable", and because they are afraid.

Rdang, your argument is highly suspect. "The fact that I make offensive sweeping generalizations of all Muslims is no defense against the fact that those sweeping generalizations are accurate".

You broadly suggest that all Muslims fail to repudiate terrorism and you label them islamofascists, even though if you knew the first thing about fascism it would be readily apparent to you that it is largely incompatible with Islam. You attempt to support this with the actions of a vocal few who are seen on the news.

"They should be more visible against what's happening". You mean to say that they should be on the news, because you don't probe deeply enough into the world around you and you need to be spoon-fed the facts in 30-second generalities from huge media corporations with political agendas. The news doesn't report on normal things. That's boring.

When was the last time you saw a news story about an expecting father who chose not to kill his pregnant wife? Never happened. There was never a story with that lead. Therefore, by your logic, the majority of American men kill their pregnant wives, or at least support it, because they aren't very visible against it.

Someone who prejudicially makes illogical judgements against a large group of people based on stereotypes and a few odd examples is infact a racist. I don't think you are a hardcore racial supremecist, but I do believe that you have fallen into a common racist vice to which we are all occasionally subject, and you need to take it upon yourself to probe the issues more deeply before you make broad judgements on people you've never met. The West has the ability to interact with Muslims in a positive way which will encourage moderation and allow us to outlast the more radical ideologies. We've outlasted radicalism before and kept friends who saw our enemy's point in more moderate terms. The cold war and America's ability to maintain positive relationships with European socialists is a good example. If we isolate the moderates however, they will be subverted by the radicals, and then things become more difficult.

We want a policy of live and let live- don't come after us and we won't come after you.

We need a Marshall Plan for Africa and Asia- not a rebuilding handout quite in the style of post WWII, but incentives for equitable trade that will raise their standard of living and cause them to associate us with positive changes in their world. By doing this not only will we prevent war with them, but we'll make the allies that America so desperately needs in this changing world.

Ensure our domestic muslim population's security and treat them with dignity- this will require a level of sensitivity we are not accustomed to and will be frustrating, but it makes sense. They come from a very different paradigm- when their religious leaders ramp up the rhetoric they mean to fight- so what do they make of it when our leaders ramp up the rhetoric against them? They'll get used to the way we do business and mellow out if we take care to make them comfortable that we recognize their rights the same as anyone else in our society.

Rdang, the paradigm of conflict that you're operating out of is a big problem for us. If we replace it with what I have alluded to above, in a couple of generations we're gonna have economic and cultural ties to a reinvigorated Muslim world which has historically proven very lucrative not only economically but intellectually, and on top of that we'll have very good friends in very important strategic places who won't want anything bad to happen to us.

Originally posted by rdang
Why is it to speak against radical Islam, you are labeled racist,Muslim hater,ect.

You aren't -- when you speak against radical Islam. It's only when you speak against Islam as a whole that you might garner these labels. And they would be well deserved. I think we can all agree that the radical extremes of any movement are potentially dangerous.

Maybe Muslims should be more visible against what is going on,but that's not happening.

You speak of Muslims, not Radical Islam. They have nothing to do with each other. Muslims aren't responsible for the radicals among them any more than I am responsible for Timothy McVey.

Are you as willing to use the term Christiofascists and then turn around and speak of Christians with the same venom?

The term "Islamofacist" doesn't allow for distinction between regular, wonderful Muslims and the radicals who use the word Muslim as a blind behind which to hide their insanity and terroristic behavior. Instead, "Islamofascist" labels people who follow Islam as fascist. And that is incorrect, misleading and feeds the negative stereotype that exists in the world today, thank you very much George Bush.

Look, the point I'm trying to make is if you speak out on whats going on in the world,you are labled. I'm saying is that Muslims themselves are afraid to speak out,and any non Muslim who does is labled. Here I'll use your words "Someone who prejudicially makes illogical judgements against a large group of people based on stereotypes and a few odd examples is infact a racist. I don't think you are a hardcore racial supremecist, but I do believe that you have fallen into a common racist vice to which we are all occasionally subject, and you need to take it upon yourself to probe the issues more deeply before you make broad judgements on people you've never met." The only ones I make sound judgement against is radical Islam,based on what they themselves state. Odd examples,stereotypes, are you kidding? The stated goal if these people is world control,conversion,by force. No I don't need to be spoon fed facts every thirty seconds, but if Muslims would protest against the radicals with the same fevor as when they feel they have been slighted,maybe the problem would'nt be as bad. As far as the news not reporting such things,please, you get a couple of hundred Muslims protesting in the street against whats happening,it's news.I believe they too are scared of the consequences,thats why you don't see much of it. To say maybe they're afraid to speak out because people are ignorant and will group them into the same category,well only an idiot would think that. No,I did'nt ask for comments denouncing terrorists,but instead get comments like misleading statements about Islam and Muslims.

Originally posted by rdang
I'm saying is that Muslims themselves are afraid to speak out,

Where do you get this idea? Have you seen or heard of Muslims shaking in their boots, afraid to speak out? Where? Got a link?

Googling "Muslims against terrorism" brings up 2.7 million hits.

Free Muslims Coalition

Islam for Today

Muslims Against Terrorism

Islam Prohibits Terrorism

We Stand, as Muslims, Against Terrorism

Islamic Statements Against Terror

We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms.
...
"[It is] necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and [punished] appropriately. ... [It is] a duty of Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means.”
...
“[We] strongly condemn such activities that are against all humanist and Islamic morals. ... [We] condemn and oppose all aggression on human life, freedom and dignity anywhere in the world.”

Now, what can you bring to the table that supports your assertion that "Muslims themselves are afraid to speak out"???

They're speaking out! They're not coming up and knocking on your door and personally assuring you that they're against terrorism, but they're speaking out in a big way. You're just not listening.

Because to listen to them would ruin your perception of them...

Originally posted by rdangOdd examples,stereotypes, are you kidding? The stated goal if these people is world control,conversion,by force.

if Muslims would protest against the radicals with the same fevor as when they feel they have been slighted,maybe the problem would'nt be as bad.

As far as the news not reporting such things,please, you get a couple of hundred Muslims protesting in the street against whats happening,it's news.

There you go again. How do they react when they feel that they have been slighted? Are you suggesting that ALL 1.4 BILLION MUSLIMS were rioting in the streets when the Pope made his controversial comments? You are making unsupported generalizations and using them to cast judgement on the moral courage and/or true motives of Muslims in general.

There are MILLIONS of Muslims doing exactly what we should like, which is quietly going about their lives and not wanting to fight about anything. I don't want them to have great big demonstrations or riots when other Muslims do something wrong, just like I don't normally demonstrate when an American says something stupid. I just want them to shake their heads and ignore the demagogues and not be part of the problem. They do that, but that doesn't make the news.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Are you as willing to use the term Christiofascists and then turn around and speak of Christians with the same venom?

Seriously ... I would be very willing AND EAGER to use the term Christofascists about radical extremist 'Christians' who want to use violence and/or death to further their 'cause'. No problem. Actually, I LIKE this idea! I'm glad you came up with it. Mind if I use it in the future? I seem to remember one christian extremist group who wanted to go bomb Israel to start the apocolypse so that Christ would quicken his 2nd coming and Christians could take over the world. THEY are definately Christofascists! Great term BH!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
when people "speak out against radical islam" they tend to group ALL of islam with the radicals

Actually, I have seen just the opposite. Most folks I have seen take great care to say 'radical islam' and not Islam in general. However, even those who lump all of Islamics together have a right to their opinion - even if we do not agree with them.

there is no single worldwide united islamic extremist threat, that's why islamoFASCIST makes no sense fascists tend to be a united movement

Why does it have to be a single united front? There are many groups within Islam and each of those groups have radical elements who believe the entire world should convert or die. Each of those radical groups have people who believe it is their duty to make the world muslim. Each of these groups don't have to be united to the other. However, do not forget, that in the radical Islamic world they are willing to pull together to kill infidels.

Look at 'christofacists' (OHHHH I LIKE THAT TERM!!) You have the Skin-heads and the KKK. They are not united, but they want some of the same things. They work for some of the same ends even though they are different groups.

maybe they're afraid to speak out because people are ignorant and will group them into the same category

I don't think so. There are plenty of avenues for Islamics who wish to fight terrorism. As BH pointed out, there are groups that do this. Every mosque in America COULD issue statements and speak out if they wished. They would be WELCOMED with OPEN ARMS and adored by the media if they did. You are welcome to your opinion on why you don't hear of many Muslims speaking out against terror. My opinion is different. I think that many of the peaceful muslims are just as terrified of the terrorists as us 'infidels' are. They know that if they speak out then radical Islamic whacks will go after them. The terrorists end up terrifying muslims as well as 'infidels'.

the issue isn't religion IT IS ABOUT POVERTY AND PREJIDUCE
france has huge problems with immigrants because of colonialism, poverty, and racism

Well, it's about religion AND it's about poverty. But honestly, if you look at the behavior of the muslim immigrants in France and the UK, most do NOT want to integrate into those western societies. They want to 'stick to their own'. I can understand this to some degree. They are religious people and they do not want to take a chance on a loss of faith by engaging in a culture that runs contrary to their religion. However, I also can see that if they feel that way then perhaps they shouldn't have immigrated out of majority-muslim countries.

Originally posted by iqonx
We have less then 2.5% muslim population in England. To be 20% it would take massive immigration to be even close to that.

Non-muslim Europe and the UK populations have a low birth rate. There is a very high muslim immigration rate along with very high birth rates. It is entirely foreseeable that France will be a muslim country in one generation. As for England .. I don't know when it will hit 20%, but if given enough time, it isn't out of the question demographically.

Originally posted by neformore
By tying the two terms together the implication of the term Islamo-facist makes out all people of that faith see things from the extreme point of view,

Again - I see the total opposite. By saying Islamo-facist it means that you are NOT talking about all Islamics, but just a segment of them. I guess it's a matter of perspective. I LIKE the term. It says exactly what that segment wants and it is clear (at least to me) that it's a segment of the Islamic population and not the whole population. I guess we are looking at it from two different angles.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Are you suggesting that ALL 1.4 BILLION MUSLIMS were rioting in the streets ... There are MILLIONS of Muslims doing exactly what we should like,

Vagabond. If there are 1.4 billion muslims and only 'millions' are doing exactly what we should like, then, according to your stats, it would be safe to say that the majority of muslims are NOT doing what we want. Millions, out of billions, being well behaved would NOT be good odds.

( just mess'n with ya' vagabond !! )


[edit on 12/26/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan
THEY are definately Christofascists! Great term BH!

I'm glad you like it.

Now, in the vein of the original post, why don't Christians speak out against these groups?

They do, you say?

Of course they do. We just have to look for it, and be willing to accept it when we hear it.



[edit on 26-12-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
why don't Christians speak out against these groups?

How much support amongst 'regular' Christians those Christofascist groups have depends a lot on where you live in the USA.

Skin-heads, neo-nazis, KKK .... MOST Christians speak out against them all on a regular basis. Most of the media and most Christians hate those groups. There is a lot of support for those who are against those groups.

HOWEVER ... sad to say .... there are pockets of people in this country that support those groups. Even though they aren't a part of them, they support them and do not speak against them. When I was stuck living in Alabama a lot of the native folks that I spoke with saw the KKK as part of their Southern heritage and stood up for them while ignoring the evils that the group engaged in, both in the past and present.

And when dealing with these people in Alabama, once I saw where their brains were on these things I told them straight out what I thought and then didn't deal with them again. I was careful though. I made sure they didn't know where I lived and that they didn't see my liscense plates or anything like that, first. I was definately AFRAID of those 'christians' - Christofacists as your term says! (excellent term!)

That's why I say that I'm not surprised that there aren't more Islamics speaking out against terrorism. There are between 1-7 million muslims in this country (that's what I heard on TV this morning) and I'm sure that many of the ones that aren't terrorists or terrorist sympathizers are AFRAID of those that are.

Hey .... living in Alabama for me was a little bit like that. I was a northern (mostly) Catholic girl living in the fundamentalist Christian deep south. Seriously .. a lot of those folks where WHACKED and I am VERY glad not to live there anymore.

I think there are more terrorists and terrorist sympathizers than the left wants to admit. But I also think that there are more muslims AFRAID of the radical islamics then the right wants to admit.


[edit on 12/26/2006 by FlyersFan]

I have no problem with the term Islamofascist.

With things like this Death of Religious Tolerance in Malaysia

happening in Islamic nations, I cannot think of any better way to describe it.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Well, it's about religion AND it's about poverty. But honestly, if you look at the behavior of the muslim immigrants in France and the UK, most do NOT want to integrate into those western societies.

Hi Flyers,

Just to clarify, you are not French or English are you?

Its just that I'm English you see, and I only see this kind of behaviour in very very small quantities. And - I must point out - I've seen it from Chinese people, Afro-Carribean People, Sihks, Jews, Catholics and even Americans.

Am I supposed to live in perpetual fear of a takeover by those people as well?

I could start social commentry on what I see in the US, but its not my country and to do so would be wrong. Based on what I read on ATS from some sections the US is in one hell of a mess. But I don't judge internal US politics or population make ups because I don't live there, so I'm wondering what gives you any kind of right to comment on - or makes you any kind of expert - on what goes on in my country?

Or is it that you just want to stick to the rhetoric spoted by the moron on the video that was put forward, and aren't interested in the views of the people that actually live in the countries to which you refer?