News Quran Burning Cancelled: Publicity Stunt From The Start?

[nismaratwork]

First, while I can't dictate terms for any given thread, I'd just ask that this one stick to the topic: given the cancellation of the Pastor in Florida's "burn a quran" event, was this whole thing a publicity stunt from the start? Was it about publicity, with the intent to follow-through, but at some point it became a default that it would be canceled... and why not wait for maximum coverage? Was this a matter of pressure from all corners stopping a book-burning that was in fact, just about burning qurans?

I personally think that this was mostly a publicity stunt, but one that was meant to be of a smaller scale than this. I think they did intend to go through with this, but I don't believe the magnitude of the negative response was anticipated. That being said, once everyone up to the president of the USA spoke up, why not milk the publicity? That's my view, what are yours?

Again, for the sake of civil discourse and keeping the thread alive, please stick to the original question posed here, or shadings of it and not a fresh debate about Islam, or any other religion.

 

[Andy]

I think someone got abit intimidated by the black panthers, they don't look like they **** about.

 

[nismaratwork]

I think someone got abit intimidated by the black panthers, they don't look like they **** about.

I don't know, what was the final straw for intimidation? I'm not so proud that I'll claim a sitting general, sec. state, and former president (never mind current) wouldn't intimidate the hell out of me. Was it fear of violence, or just bad press?

 

[Proton Soup]

these sorts of events where they destroy various types of music and literature they find offensive were fairly common in fundamentalist churches before all this koran stuff.

 

[Andy]

Fear of violence, the pastor is obviously a raving loon so couldn't care less about bad press but he obviously apreciates the use of his limbs.

 

[nismaratwork]

Fear of violence, the pastor is obviously a raving loon so couldn't care less about bad press but he obviously apreciates the use of his limbs.

Hmmm, I wonder, but to me it seems like that was the one piece of pressure that was ALWAYS there.

these sorts of events where they destroy various types of music and literature they find offensive were fairly common in fundamentalist churches before all this koran stuff.

True, too true... so why back down now?

 

[waht]

I find it disturbing that all of the condemnations from the US General, Speaker of the House, Hillary, Obama, and even Angelina Jolie was directed at some lunatic with 20 followers, and not on mass media which catapulted him to a celebrity status over night.

 

[cronxeh]

Hmmm, I wonder, but to me it seems like that was the one piece of pressure that was ALWAYS there.

Perhaps if we had a crazy guy broadcasting from a bunker somewhere, armed with AK-47s, AR-15s, M249s and displaying C-4 explosives on the wall behind him, meanwhile holding a lighter next to a koran and burning the book down on a YouTube stream..

Perhaps then it would be a display of 'here is my move, yeah I'm crazy and I don't care, what are you going to do about it?'

Judging by replies alone it seems there are a lot of cowards 'out there' and if you think about it, people not afraid to die for their religion are the winners here. They have scared you without even making a statement or bombing from over 8000 miles away.

So what if he wants to burn a bible or koran or old testament or torah or that jehova's witness pamphlet. The Atheists been doing it for years! Nobody is messing with us just the same

 

[rootX]

I find it disturbing that all of the condemnations from the US General, Speaker of the House, Hillary, Obama, and even Angelina Jolie was directed at some lunatic with 20 followers, and not on mass media which catapulted him to a celebrity status over night.

It helped them demonstrate what Americans believe in i.e. respect for other cultures. I believe one of the goals of Obama was to raise the American confidence among others and this was one of the excellent opportunities to prove that. We just need few of more wackos like. I liked that there was at least one thing every one (middle east and western governments ) shared.

However, not condemning his idea could have damage American interests in the middle east. If you don't condemn it is easy to believe that you are approving.

 

[leroyjenkens]

He chickened out. I was hoping he would do it. I wanted to watch the repercussions, if there were any. I doubt anything would have come of it, though.
What were the Muslims going to do, attack American soldiers? They're already doing that.

 

[Jack21222]

He chickened out. I was hoping he would do it. I wanted to watch the repercussions, if there were any. I doubt anything would have come of it, though.
What were the Muslims going to do, attack American soldiers? They're already doing that.

There you go again, assuming Muslims are a homogeneous group who act in unison. You don't think there are any borderline cases in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Imagine this scenario. You're an 18 year old Iraqi, who has seen America take out your plumbing and electricity a couple times in the past 7 years. You've watched your parents humiliated and searched at traffic blockades by American troops. You've been approached by Al Qaeda recruiters, but so far you haven't taken them up on their offer because you believe these troops don't mean you any harm specifically. As angry as you are with them, you can't bring yourself to actually attack them, because you believe what they say, this is not a war against Islam.

The troops just wanted to get rid of Saddam, not kill Muslims, you believe. Your whole family is religious, and you'd hate to believe these troops were doing all of this destruction because they hated you and everyone you love. So, you tolerate it.

Now, the news comes to you that Americans are burning Qurans. Half the country seems to support this. Furthermore, an Islamic community center is being protested and rallied against, just because it is Islamic.

Do you continue believing that the American soldiers you barely tolerate still have your best interests in mind? Or does doubt creep into your mind? Maybe these soldiers actually enjoy making you miserable... maybe those rumors you've heard about soldiers attacking civilians unprovoked are true...

An Al Qaeda recruiter approaches you again. What do you do?

 

[turbo]

Good post, Jack.

 

[lisab]

First, while I can't dictate terms for any given thread, I'd just ask that this one stick to the topic: given the cancellation of the Pastor in Florida's "burn a quran" event, was this whole thing a publicity stunt from the start? Was it about publicity, with the intent to follow-through, but at some point it became a default that it would be canceled... and why not wait for maximum coverage? Was this a matter of pressure from all corners stopping a book-burning that was in fact, just about burning qurans?

I personally think that this was mostly a publicity stunt, but one that was meant to be of a smaller scale than this. I think they did intend to go through with this, but I don't believe the magnitude of the negative response was anticipated. That being said, once everyone up to the president of the USA spoke up, why not milk the publicity? That's my view, what are yours?

Again, for the sake of civil discourse and keeping the thread alive, please stick to the original question posed here, or shadings of it and not a fresh debate about Islam, or any other religion.

Yes that's what I thought too. I had the futile thought that the media should boycott the burning, so that pictures of it didn't end up circulating forever on the internet like the Abu Ghraib pictures. Of course that would be like asking the media to not film a train wreck .

 

[lisab]

OK now the wacko pastor says the Quran burning may be back on...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39074573/ns/us_news-security/

And if that's not enough to put your eyes in a permanent state of roll, Donald Trump has offered to buy the property near Ground Zero where the Islamic center plan is...

http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2010/09/09/donald-trump-inserts-himself-into-mosque-controversy/

What a freakin' circus.

Makes me soooo happy to be an atheist.

 

[Proton Soup]

I find it disturbing that all of the condemnations from the US General, Speaker of the House, Hillary, Obama, and even Angelina Jolie was directed at some lunatic with 20 followers, and not on mass media which catapulted him to a celebrity status over night.

because, it's what the media wants to portray as the stereotype of someone opposed to Barack Obama.

that, plus they love a train wreck. even if that means throwing the switch yourself.

 

[turbo]

because, it's what the media wants to portray as the stereotype of someone opposed to Barack Obama.

that, plus they love a train wreck. even if that means throwing the switch yourself.

Ah, the myth of the "left-wing media" is exposed yet another time. Manufacturing political controversies is a lot cheaper and more profitable (and a lot safer for producers, reporters, and their staffs) than actually investigating and reporting on current affairs.

 

[lisab]

because, it's what the media wants to portray as the stereotype of someone opposed to Barack Obama.

OK let me get this straight...a guy is threatening to do something that could very well get our service members killed, and you think the only reason he makes the news is that he's a hick?

 

[drankin]

It looks like the burn might be back on!

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hKWWJdTrfALpbYfWB6fM58p6u-pwD9I4OS980

 

[edward]

The guy sounds like a potential Kool aid mixer.

'Climate of Fear and Control'

In the United States, Jones has already attracted attention on several occasions as an Islamophobic provocateur. What is less well known is that the pastor led a charismatic evangelical church, the Christian Community of Cologne, in the western German city up until 2009. Last year, however, the members of the congregation kicked founder Jones out, because of his radicalism. One of the church's current leaders, Stephan Baar, also told the German news agency DPA that there had been suspicions of financial irregularities in the church surrounding Jones.

A "climate of fear and control" had previously prevailed in the congregation, says one former member of the church who does not want to be named. Instead of free expression, "blind obedience" was demanded, he says.

Various witnesses gave SPIEGEL ONLINE consistent accounts of the Jones' behavior. The pastor and his wife apparently regarded themselves as having been appointed by God, meaning opposition was a crime against the Lord. Terry and Sylvia Jones allegedly used these methods to ask for money in an increasingly insistent manner, as well as making members of the congregation carry out work.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,716409,00.html

 

[Proton Soup]

OK let me get this straight...a guy is threatening to do something that could very well get our service members killed, and you think the only reason he makes the news is that he's a hick?

no, not exactly. first of all, i gave two reasons. and second, it is news (at least at a local level), but it takes a certain amount of dedication to elevate it to the level that the Sec State is having to address it publicly.

and do you really think it isn't obvious that the press likes to portray right wing people as stupid hicks?

 

[edward]

no, not exactly. first of all, i gave two reasons. and second, it is news (at least at a local level), but it takes a certain amount of dedication to elevate it to the level that the Sec State is having to address it publicly.

and do you really think it isn't obvious that the press likes to portray right wing people as stupid hicks?

Right wing and radical religious right wing are two different things. Although I would imagine that guilt by association would drag all of the right wing into it to some degree.

 

[lisab]

no, not exactly. first of all, i gave two reasons. and second, it is news (at least at a local level), but it takes a certain amount of dedication to elevate it to the level that the Sec State is having to address it publicly.

It takes a certain amount of dedication to prevent something from happening that will, with almost 100% certainty, endanger the lives of our troops.

and do you really think it isn't obvious that the press likes to portray right wing people as stupid hicks?

...don't...say...it...must...bite...tongue...

 

[BrandB]

It was my thought to go there and burn holy books from every denomination - just to make a point. I'm not anti-religious, but I'm not anti-cartoon either. Anyway soon I'll start my own church and then they can burn me!

 

[BrandB]

GOD is DEAD! and I killed HIM!

 

[BrandB]

sorry i just had to say it.

 

[Proton Soup]

It takes a certain amount of dedication to prevent something from happening that will, with almost 100% certainty, endanger the lives of our troops.

i thought they were there to attract the radicals, no? bring the fight to them and all that? i would prefer we bring them home, myself.

the thing is, tho, as offensive as this pastor is, it almost has to be done. because the result we want to see is one that doesn't include violence.

...don't...say...it...must...bite...tongue...

go ahead, you'll feel better

 

[lisab]

i thought they were there to attract the radicals, no? bring the fight to them and all that? i would prefer we bring them home, myself.

Yes, I too wish we could structure our energy policy to a point where we can totally ignore what happens in the ME, if we choose to do so. And I think after the last several decades, that's just what we'd choose to do!

the thing is, tho, as offensive as this pastor is, it almost has to be done. because the result we want to see is one that doesn't include violence.

Sorry, I'm dense tonight, I don't follow...what has to be done?

go ahead, you'll feel better

 

[Proton Soup]

Yes, I too wish we could structure our energy policy to a point where we can totally ignore what happens in the ME, if we choose to do so. And I think after the last several decades, that's just what we'd choose to do!

yeah, i tend to think it's all about energy/economy myself, but i tend not to bring it up anymore because i get censured for it.

Sorry, I'm dense tonight, I don't follow...what has to be done?

i know it may sound a little strange, but i think the "best" outcome to this situation is for the korans to be burned, followed by a lack of violent protest from muslims. at least here in america. because, fair or not, people are afraid. if radicals track him down and behead him, then people will simply assume that it's not safe to have muslims in our country AT ALL.

and personally, i think it's a bit like flag burning. once people have permission to do it without ill consequence, they kind of lose interest. when desecrating korans fails to provoke, people will lose interest.

 

[Hurkyl]

I wonder which is more harmful:

• One backwater group of people demonizing Muslims, or
• much of the world dehumanizing Muslims to the point that they can assign blame to the backwater group for any Muslims that react violently.

 

[nismaratwork]

Has anyone made the simple connection that for a "church" like this, the personal power and wealth of the leader is related to the size of their "congregation"? If he gets 50 more followers out of this, it's a win, and seeing this debate I'm sure he'll get more. Maybe he's just the usual greedy megalomaniac who hit on a clever idea to get some more scratch and more people to preach to.

 

[ThomasT]

Regarding the OP's question, I think that the pastor genuinely hates Islam. But then how can I really know? He said he wants to burn Islamic 'bibles'. So what? If he burns some Korans then are Muslims going to hate Americans more than they do now? They already hate us, and with good reason, quite a lot. We've killed their families, ruined their lives, taken their homes, and occupied their countries. Are they going to hate us even more because this guy burns a few Korans?

But the media makes a big deal about this guy and his book burning. This is called scapegoating. It's propaganda. The idea is to obscure the fact that we've killed hundreds of thousands of Islamic families, ruined millions of Islamic lives and occupy Islamic countries. I think that this works, generally, and, personally, I'm not opposed to this.

We are at war with Islam. Why? It's not just because they have lots of oil. It's also because the Islamic way of life is contrary to the American way of life. The Islamic way of life would be, in my view, a terrible way to live. It would be like going back to the middle ages -- denying the 'enlightenment'.

The proposed bookburning was suppressed because we must defeat Islam while maintaining the moral superiority of the American ideals of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

I think that we can discuss, on a scientific forum, how our government is going about this without having to pretend that the goal is anything other than the subjugation, or even the total elimination, of the Islamic way of life.

 

[DanP]

I find it disturbing that all of the condemnations from the US General, Speaker of the House, Hillary, Obama, and even Angelina Jolie was directed at some lunatic with 20 followers, and not on mass media which catapulted him to a celebrity status over night.

Press is free to publish whatever they want.

 

[mugaliens]

Press is free to publish whatever they want.

True, but unless it has some degree of credibility, neither the information nor the publication will be taken very seriously, at least not by those who matter. Thus, economics is the check against publishing nonsense.

 

[DanP]

True, but unless it has some degree of credibility, neither the information nor the publication will be taken very seriously, at least not by those who matter. Thus, economics is the check against publishing nonsense.

Indeed it is so. But a politician should never criticize the press for what it publishes.

 

[D H]

The proposed bookburning was suppressed because we must defeat Islam while maintaining the moral superiority of the American ideals of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Whoa! Are you truly claiming that defeating Islam is one of the US's foreign policy goals? Are you truly advocating the suppression of expression of freedom of religion and freedom of speech to further the cause of those freedoms? The irony is quite delicious.

Freedom of religion in the US isn't about the people who want the whole world to sing kumbaya. Freedom of religion exists to protect idiots like this pastor and his flock. Freedom of speech isn't about the protecting the speech of people with whom you happen to agree. It exists to protect idiots like this pastor -- and the idiots in the press who have blown what rightly should have been a non-event into a foreign policy mess.

 

[nismaratwork]

Indeed it is so. But a politician should never criticize the press for what it publishes.

Why not? They have freedom of expression too, even if sometimes I would prefer they were muzzles.

 

[lisab]

Regarding the OP's question, I think that the pastor genuinely hates Islam. But then how can I really know? He said he wants to burn Islamic 'bibles'. So what? If he burns some Korans then are Muslims going to hate Americans more than they do now? They already hate us, and with good reason, quite a lot. We've killed their families, ruined their lives, taken their homes, and occupied their countries. Are they going to hate us even more because this guy burns a few Korans?

But the media makes a big deal about this guy and his book burning. This is called scapegoating. It's propaganda. The idea is to obscure the fact that we've killed hundreds of thousands of Islamic families, ruined millions of Islamic lives and occupy Islamic countries. I think that this works, generally, and, personally, I'm not opposed to this.

We are at war with Islam. Why? It's not just because they have lots of oil. It's also because the Islamic way of life is contrary to the American way of life. The Islamic way of life would be, in my view, a terrible way to live. It would be like going back to the middle ages -- denying the 'enlightenment'.

The proposed bookburning was suppressed because we must defeat Islam while maintaining the moral superiority of the American ideals of freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

I think that we can discuss, on a scientific forum, how our government is going about this without having to pretend that the goal is anything other than the subjugation, or even the total elimination, of the Islamic way of life.

While I have my doubts about how miscible a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam is with a fundementalist interpretation of Christianity, I have to take exception to your statement: We are most certainly *not* at war with Islam. We are in a battle with people who are using Islam to fan the flames of their own ambition and quest for power. We must be smart enough to realize that if we have any hope of winning.

 

[nismaratwork]

While I have my doubts about how miscible a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam is with a fundementalist interpretation of Christianity, I have to take exception to your statement: We are most certainly *not* at war with Islam. We are in a battle with people who are using Islam to fan the flames of their own ambition and quest for power. We must be smart enough to realize that if we have any hope of winning.

Well said.

 

[Q_Goest]

It was my thought to go there and burn holy books from every denomination - just to make a point.

I wonder which is more harmful:

• One backwater group of people demonizing Muslims, or
• much of the world dehumanizing Muslims to the point that they can assign blame to the backwater group for any Muslims that react violently.

Cheers! Seems like a double standard. Muslims are expected to react violently to burning their bible, so governments the world over make appeals to Mr. Gainsville concerned about innocent people being injured and killed by radical Muslims. These Muslims are expected to take the lives of innocent people for the actions of one Gainsville man, but for the rest of the world, people that do that are held accountable.



I'm sure this is just a tiny inkling of what's going on but...

In Afghanistan, at least 11 people were injured Friday in protests.

Police in the northern province of Badakhshan said several hundred demonstrators ran toward a NATO compound where four attackers and five police were injured in clashes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100910/ap_on_re_us/quran_burning

Islam is Gerin Oil on steroids!

 

[nismaratwork]

Cheers! Seems like a double standard. Muslims are expected to react violently to burning their bible, so governments the world over make appeals to Mr. Gainsville concerned about innocent people being injured and killed by radical Muslims. These Muslims are expected to take the lives of innocent people for the actions of one Gainsville man, but for the rest of the world, people that do that are held accountable.

If someone kills another because of a book burning, they'd be held individually accountable, since it's a crime! You don't hold Islam responsible, you hold the killer and their compatriots (if there are any) responsible. Simple. Everything else is just the reality of politics and attempts at prevention.

 

[alt]

If someone kills another because of a book burning, they'd be held individually accountable, since it's a crime! You don't hold Islam responsible, you hold the killer and their compatriots (if there are any) responsible. Simple. Everything else is just the reality of politics and attempts at prevention.

It's more than the individual in this case though, isn't it ? It goes to the ethos of the culture or religion.

Most Muslims WOULD be opposed to a burning of their holy book, or to a depiction of their prophet - and many WOULD take violent action and think it perfectly justifiable.

On the other hand, the burn other nations flags (Americas for instance) and think that perfetly justifiable too.

 

[nismaratwork]

It's more than the individual in this case though, isn't it ? It goes to the ethos of the culture or religion.

Most Muslims WOULD be opposed to a burning of their holy book, or to a depiction of their prophet - and many WOULD take violent action and think it perfectly justifiable.

On the other hand, the burn other nations flags (Americas for instance) and think that perfetly justifiable too.

I don't know about many, but I agree that Muslims believe the quran is special in a way that others don't believe their 'holy books' are. Remember, that Muslims believe that every quran contains the literal words of their god... so burning it isn't just symbolic in the way that burning a flag or even a bible or vedic scripture would be.

I don't see that as justification for violence, but that "literal word of god" issue is at the center of a LOT of these issues between other religions and Islam in my opinion.

When it comes down to it, most Christians would be pissed if you burned bibles, but their attitude would generally be, "I can get one in any hotel room". There are also many version of the christian bible, so what's special to one may not be to all. I think this is a pretty complex issue, even at this relatively microscopic level.

 

[alt]

I don't know about many, but I agree that Muslims believe the quran is special in a way that others don't believe their 'holy books' are. Remember, that Muslims believe that every quran contains the literal words of their god... so burning it isn't just symbolic in the way that burning a flag or even a bible or vedic scripture would be.

I don't see that as justification for violence, but that "literal word of god" issue is at the center of a LOT of these issues between other religions and Islam in my opinion.

When it comes down to it, most Christians would be pissed if you burned bibles, but their attitude would generally be, "I can get one in any hotel room". There are also many version of the christian bible, so what's special to one may not be to all. I think this is a pretty complex issue, even at this relatively microscopic level.

Except that it isn't just at this microscopic level.

It's at the macroscopic, and there's no point in denying it.

Some years ago, there was an artist twit who came up with some great artwork - a picture of Christ immersed in urine - 'piss christ' he called it. Sure, there was much indignation, head shaking and breast beating amongst Christians, but I don't recall any issuing a death 'fatwa' against the artist, the gallery, or the artistic world.

My point is, that if this happened to a Muslim religious icon, the great body of the Muslim world would have risen up in loud defense - many would have been seething, and, OK, some would have been driven to violent action and murder, and thought it appropriate, and JUST ! You can't skate around this and call it microscopic - it's definitley macroscopic.

Nor do I accept the premise that they should believe that their holy books or icons should be more sacrosanct to them, than a Christian Bible should be to a Christain, or a Jewish Torah should be to a Jew. In fact, many of the two latter groups DO believe their holy book is the literal word of their God / prophets.

Yet we are somehow prepared to acquiesce, softly softly .. to the Muslim standard. Weird, that ! But why ?

 

[nismaratwork]

Except that it isn't just at this microscopic level.

It's at the macroscopic, and there's no point in denying it.

Some years ago, there was an artist twit who came up with some great artwork - a picture of Christ immersed in urine - 'piss christ' he called it. Sure, there was much indignation, head shaking and breast beating amongst Christians, but I don't recall any issuing a death 'fatwa' against the artist, the gallery, or the artistic world.

My point is, that if this happened to a Muslim religious icon, the great body of the Muslim world would have risen up in loud defense - many would have been seething, and, OK, some would have been driven to violent action and murder, and thought it appropriate, and JUST ! You can't skate around this and call it microscopic - it's definitley macroscopic.

Nor do I accept the premise that they should believe that their holy books or icons should be more sacrosanct to them, than a Christian Bible should be to a Christain, or a Jewish Torah should be to a Jew. In fact, many of the two latter groups DO believe their holy book is the literal word of their God / prophets.

Yet we are somehow prepared to acquiesce, softly softly .. to the Muslim standard. Weird, that ! But why ?

An Imam issuing a fatwah of the kind you're talking about is a cultural issue cloaked as religion for one thing. The issue here is the state of countries which are predominantly muslim in my view. If "piss christ" were in Uganda, I think the artist would be chopped to bits!

 

[drankin]

An Imam issuing a fatwah of the kind you're talking about is a cultural issue cloaked as religion for one thing. The issue here is the state of countries which are predominantly muslim in my view. If "piss christ" were in Uganda, I think the artist would be chopped to bits!

But, it wasn't in Uganda. Noone in Uganda did anything.

The quran burning is not in the ME. Hasn't even happened. Yet there have already been riots.

A simple experiment would be to burn an equal amount of every holy book and see who freaks out the most.

 

[alt]

An Imam issuing a fatwah of the kind you're talking about is a cultural issue cloaked as religion for one thing. The issue here is the state of countries which are predominantly muslim in my view. If "piss christ" were in Uganda, I think the artist would be chopped to bits!

Cultural or religious .. same, same .. It stills compels them to act in murderous ways.

Uganda .. chopped to bits .. then broiled and eaten I suppose. Point ?

The state of countries that are predominantly Muslim ? What of it ? Some special license not afforded to other states ?

 

[nismaratwork]

But, it wasn't in Uganda. Noone in Uganda did anything.

The quran burning is not in the ME. Hasn't even happened. Yet there have already been riots.

A simple experiment would be to burn an equal amount of every holy book and see who freaks out the most.

What DOESN'T cause a riot in the ME? If the standard of living weren't crap, and people hadn't been jerked around by their governments to believe some truly ridiculous things under the cover of religion, this wouldn't be an issue.

 

[nismaratwork]

Cultural or religious .. same, same .. It stills compels them to act in murderous ways.

Uganda .. chopped to bits .. then broiled and eaten I suppose. Point ?

The state of countries that are predominantly Muslim ? What of it ? Some special license not afforded to other states ?

I don't believe Uganda has ever been home to cannibals AFAIK, but it is home to chrisitan extremists that make anyone in the USA look like kittens. My point is that when you have a piss-poor country where any given religion is being used as a means of control, you get the same result. In fact, you get the same result when religion is being persecuted (Early Communist Russia for instance).

 

[alt]

I don't believe Uganda has ever been home to cannibals AFAIK, but it is home to chrisitan extremists that make anyone in the USA look like kittens. My point is that when you have a piss-poor country where any given religion is being used as a means of control, you get the same result. In fact, you get the same result when religion is being persecuted (Early Communist Russia for instance).

Let's put Uganda aside. It was garnish, at best.

The ethos that prevails with Muslims is the same - rich or poor.

Some of the more infamous acts have been perpetrated not by poverty sticken arabs, but by rich, well connected, highly intellignet ones.

 

[nismaratwork]

Let's put Uganda aside. It was garnish, at best.

The ethos that prevails with Muslims is the same - rich or poor.

Some of the more infamous acts have been perpetrated not by poverty sticken arabs, but by rich, well connected, highly intellignet ones.

Not even close in my view. If that's what you believe, it's going to take some HEAVY evidence. In my personal experience, muslims who are well-off and live in a stable environment drink and do other "little sins", with the belief that as long as you die accepting allah, you "win"... kind of like last rights and confession.

Your second stipulation that rich connected arabs organize and launch attacks is sophistry... poor and isolated ones won't have the MEANS! I don't see the ranks of terrorists filled with rich and clever muslims, just a minority that run 'em. In the case of the Taliban, that's not the case at all, because they're backed by Pakistan for strategic reasons. Sorry alt, you can't just reduce this to basics that don't exist.