posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 11:20 AM
Thanks very much for this post, Sky. There's been so much fear mongering about Muslim terrorists and fanatics and fundamentalists... in the media
and to a lesser degree, here on ATS, that the general public is quick to believe the propaganda that is skewed to vilification. The stats you
provide show a different, more reasonable story.
Yes, there are fanatics that account for those numbers in the stats:
- Some motivated by ideology and religious fervor.
- Some motivated by personal anger: blow up my family with a drone missile and I'll come after you too.
- Some motivated by associative anger: invade our lands, steal our resources, prop up dictators who suffocate us, and I'll support those who are
trying to change things.
- Some motivated by extreme frustration: corrupt "leaders" in cahoots w/foreign govts and corporations plunder our country and resources and keep
our general population from educating, industrializing, advancing, and I'll act on my frustration...
The point is that not all of the above can be clearly attributed to being a Muslim. In my book, much is attributed to being a Human Being.
Mess with me, my family, my friends, my people and you'll get a reaction out of me. Mess with us over time, over decades, and you'll get an
eventual eruption. Sounds Human to me. Go through history and find hundreds of examples throughout the world of people turning to acts of
"terrorism" to kick out an invader or a dictator or change their lives for the better.
Look at Hamas and Hezbollah. What has been one of their greatest appeals? They were originally tolerated by the people as counters to the corrupt
power structures that were in place. They were very clever in how they insinuated themselves into the lives of the populace. How? By providing
services - food, education, security... when these were not otherwise assured. Yes, their agenda was/is fundamentalist, but a funny thing happens on
the way to legitimacy. Go through history and find that many, if not most, of these initial "terrorist" groups become politicized along the way.
For example, Nicaragua, Ireland, Israel.... They end up with a military wing of hotheads (not much different than some hawks in this country who
love to start wars, and blow people and places up), and a diplomatic wing of more moderate elements.
Yesterday I received the SPLC Report (Southern Poverty Law Center) in the mail. Here's a headline for you:
"SPLC Exposes DHS Decision to Dismantle Domestic Terror Unit, Urges Reassessment." Why was it dismantled? Because in 2009, DHS had issued a
report titled: "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" The report was
intended for law enforcement only, but it was leaked, and conservative columnists and groups attacked it as Obama's "hit job" on conservatives,
painting them as potential domestic terrorists... This DHS unit that investigated non-Islamic domestic terrorism was gutted due to the backlash
from the onslaught of conservative criticism.
The reason I include the reference to the SPLC article is because the report above notes the "economic" and "political" climates as fuel for
radicalization. As with Islam, some religious fervor can be added to that radicalization with extreme Christian nut cases, but not having the means
of providing for your family sure does have a strong influence.
Cause and effect: when people are marginalized and in dire economic straights, they are more prone to turning to more extreme views than they
otherwise would if they were employed, able to provide for their families, able to be validated as "somebody." Add to the mix: foreign countries
and corporations propping up the bastards that allow your lands and resources to be occupied and pillaged, and you have one hell of a volatile
situation, as per the Middle East.