Radical Islamic Terrorism's days are numbered

[arkirk]

And the joooos are behind the funding of all this "islamophobia" ?!! Get a grip.


A load of codswallop is what it is.

I'm sure I haven't said anywhere that any religion or even "joooos", as you mockingly use the term, are behind the funding of Islamophobia. However, I have researched the matter of who's funding Islamophobia extensively and I have come to the conclusion that conservatives and Zionists together are funding Islamophobia for their own purposes and the proof is contained in the articles I have posited. A person can be a Zionist and at the same time be of any religion or no religion, meaning, a person can be either a Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, atheist and still be a Zionist. And in case you should wonder, I don't have anything against any person of any religion. For example, Center for American Progress has also researched the issue of funding of Islamophobia, and the research group comprised of both Muslims and non-Muslims. And you can read their own findings on their research site here or you can read the report directly to which I'm linking you. Facts do not care or are born from a person's affiliation with religion but are independent, or am I incorrect in this assumption? If you don't like what you're reading, then that's up to you; but facts will remain facts whether you like them or not.

Peace.

Night Sky: You and the Guardian are right. Swizzle is just doing what he always does...lash out at anything he doesn't understand. You know, in England there are a lot of Islamophobes. Also among the new atheists...guys like Harris stir the hatred up every chance they get.

 

[NightSky]

Night Sky: You and the Guardian are right. Swizzle is just doing what he always does...lash out at anything he doesn't understand. You know, in England there are a lot of Islamophobes. Also among the new atheists...guys like Harris stir the hatred up every chance they get.

Well, as a former atheist, I understand Sam Harris better than I do perhaps other Islamophobes. And I respect Sam Harris even if I don't agree with him on issues specific to Islam. However, it's conservatives who I don't really understand to be honest, but I'm trying to learn their point of view and understand from where they're coming. And that's perhaps because I have always been of liberal bent.

And as a Muslim, I, perhaps more than anyone, understand, what it is like to be broadbrushed due to identifying with the Muslim community and therefore would never advocate that kind of broadbrushing of any community whether that's the Jewish community or the atheist community or Christian community or any other community.

Peace.

 

[TSwizzle]

I'm sure I haven't said anywhere that any religion or even "joooos", as you mockingly use the term, are behind the funding of Islamophobia.

No but you link the conspiracy theory claptrap that does.

However, I have researched the matter of who's funding Islamophobia extensively and I have come to the conclusion that conservatives and Zionists together are funding Islamophobia for their own purposes and the proof is contained in the articles I have posited.

"islamophobia" is funded by Israel and them pesky joos according to the garbage you linked to. It's disgusting.

A person can be a Zionist and at the same time be of any religion or no religion, meaning, a person can be either a Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, atheist and still be a Zionist.

And people that think islam is a crock of shit and say so out loud are not necessarily "islamophobes".

 

[TSwizzle]

Night Sky: You and the Guardian are right.

The only thing The Grauniad gets right is the date.

 

[NightSky]

No but you link the conspiracy theory claptrap that does.

Do you understand what a conspiracy theory is? It's unsubstantiated and unverifiable belief in a plot. However, once facts come in, something can no longer be said to be in the realm of theory but after facts becomes evidence and truths. These distinctions are very important, and it is also why fair-minded people have a hard time taking claims about climate change being a conspiracy theory seriously because enough facts and evidence are in that a person who doesn't believe in climate change can validly be said to just be living in denialism.

"islamophobia" is funded by Israel and them pesky joos according to the garbage you linked to. It's disgusting.

For the record, I advocate a two-state solution with Israel and Palestine and also believe that a peaceable solution is far preferable to the current apartheid and in the interests of justice and all avenues to peace should be explored.

As far as Islamophobia is concerned, a person shouldn't care for what facts implicate whom whether they are certain segments or individuals because truth shouldn't have a "flavor" and doesn't need one. So, if certain individuals implicated are Jewish and Israelis, so what? That certainly doesn't mean that everyone from the Jewish community or Israel is complicit in spreading Islamophobia. For example, there are Muslims who are terrorists and extremists - so, what? That certainly doesn't implicate all Muslims or the Muslim world in the terrorists' guilt. For example, if a person in your family does a crime, do you suddenly and automatically become guilty by association? So, then, I don't consider what you're writing here anything but a jaundiced view because you're literally turning away from facts because you don't perceive them as convenient. I don't like any terrorism done in the name of Islam because I don't perceive the acts as Islamic, but you won't see me living in denialism of the fact that Muslim terrorists and extremists exist. Because I don't think that's a healthy approach. And I think you're missing the bigger picture here: Islamophobia is not only harming Muslims on the global stage but also non-Muslims. We in the U.S. are and have been fighting wars in the Middle East and the people who are losing their lives are not only innocent civilians in the foreign countries but our own military and that's not including the modern terrorism that we see some deranged Muslims engaging in as a means to make a political point which has ensued in a further loss of innocent lives on our soil and elsewhere. I think you need to let go of your fear and disgust and deal with the facts as they are, because you finger-pointing or laughing at facts as absurd just makes your points seem not genuine. Conservatives and Zionists have been funding Islamophobia and that's dangerous. Full stop. Period.

And people that think islam is a crock of shit and say so out loud are not necessarily "islamophobes".

That depends.

Islamophobia is defined, according to Wikipedia, simply as "prejudice, hatred, or bigotry directed against Islam or Muslims. . ." I'd say that's a fairly accurate and inclusive definition in terms of the everyday forms it takes, though of course we know Islamophobia can and has also taken the form of discrimination and political force in foreign countries.

For example, Islamophobia has been defined by University of California, Berkeley, for purposes of anchoring their research and research project as "a contrived fear or prejudice fomented by the existing Eurocentric and Orientalist global power structure. It is directed at a perceived or real Muslim threat through the maintenance and extension of existing disparities in economic, political, social and cultural relations, while rationalizing the necessity to deploy violence as a tool to achieve 'civilizational rehab' of the target communities (Muslim or otherwise). Islamophobia reintroduces and reaffirms a global racial structure through which resource distribution disparities are maintained and extended."

Now that we know the definitions of Islamophobia, let's define what it is not. Georgetown University, for example, says something on this topic with which I agree: "Rational criticism of Islam or Muslims based on factual evidence is not intrinsically Islamophobia. . ."

Peace.

 

[untermensche]

These "terrorist" are a US creation.

Only an ignoramus thinks the US can get rid of them.

All the US will do is kill more innocents and we will end up with more "terrorists" in the end.

So you are buying into the Trump analysis? Obama created ISIS?

The US terrorist attack of Iraq in 2003 is what led to ISIS.

Obama was not involved in that.

 

[TSwizzle]

Do you understand what a conspiracy theory is?

Yes I do.

For the record, I advocate a two-state solution with Israel and Palestine and also believe that a peaceable solution is far preferable to the current apartheid and in the interests of justice and all avenues to peace should be explored.

And I can smell your anti-Israel, Jew baiting bullshit a mile off.


"ilsamophobia" ? How quaint you still give this nonsense a second thought.

 

[NightSky]

And I can smell your anti-Israel, Jew baiting bullshit a mile off.

You can "smell" things over the Internet? That's news to me, and I must say that I'd like your superpowers.

However, on the more serious side, I can honestly say that you have failed to respond to any of my valid points and instead come out with another disingenuous comment, which I should like to tell you informs me more of your character and you than it says anything to you about me.

"ilsamophobia" ? How quaint you still give this nonsense a second thought.

And should you like to resume discussions based on facts and research instead of baiting, I'd welcome your input. Otherwise, with my most sincere welcome, you're welcome to blind yourself to facts whenever they don't suit you and maintaining your opinion because you don't like truth to come in the way of your worldview.

Peace.

 

[TSwizzle]

I can honestly say that you have failed to respond to any of my valid points

Obviously I'm not going to waste time and bandwidth on conspiracy theory claptrap.

And should you like to resume discussions based on facts and research instead of baiting, I'd welcome your input. Otherwise, with my most sincere welcome, you're welcome to blind yourself to facts whenever they don't suit you and maintaining your opinion because you don't like truth to come in the way of your worldview.

You're a religious nut, you wouldn't know the truth if it pissed in your cornflakes.

"Islamophobia", a meaningless construct if ever there was one. I'm surprised to see it used these days.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't know that terrorism will die even if Daesh is annihilated because U.S.'s current war tactics comprise in of not only droning terrorists but also civilians which in turn creates more political instability and chaos which give impetus to terrorism.

Those civilians are human shields deliberately used by Daesh (and other terrorist organizations--it's a very common tactic over there.)

The terrorism will die down when the governments over there quit pouring billions into stirring up trouble. The violence over there basically falls into three categories:

Islam vs everyone else, fed by Islamist governments.

Violence against the Shia, fed by Sunni governments.

Violence against the Sunni, fed by Shia governments.

Remove the government money and the movements will wither. Terrorism needs a source of funding. Occasionally a terrorist movement manages to become self-funding after a while but that does not last.

 

[NightSky]

Obviously I'm not going to waste time and bandwidth on conspiracy theory claptrap.

Yes, I can see how data and reports and news articles are a waste of time for people. But since this type of opinion that you assume is not only foreign but in the realm of twilight zone for me, I'm afraid you'll have to count me out on following down the same path.

You're a religious nut, you wouldn't know the truth if it pissed in your cornflakes.

"Islamophobia", a meaningless construct if ever there was one. I'm surprised to see it used these days.

And I cannot take you seriously on this assertion because you assume that I'm a "religious nut" based on no evidence. Having been a former atheist, I think I can spot a religious nut fairly well, and I know enough about myself to know that I can never be so characterized by anyone who knows me in either real life or even on the Internet. Have you bothered to even read your posts? If you comb through your posts without bias, you'll realize the entire substance of your responses so far have comprised of ad hominem and baseless assumptions based in some preconceived notions of who you think I'm supposed to be.

Also, while it is not in my nature to make the types of assumptions you've made, I don't think I'd be out of bounds to infer that you have let your mind and heart become hostage to hatred against Islam and Muslims so much so that you are incapable of extending me even the most basic of courtesies as a fellow member of this board that is based in sincere effort to learn about what I truly think rather than make rude and false and slanderous insinuations based on your own prejudice. That's frankly not only small-minded of you but also your own loss.

Sure, Islamophobia is a "meaningless construct" probably to individuals like you, I assume, because you live in a safe bubble of ignorance and are not part of the community that is being discriminated against; however, I assure you it's very real to people who have been discriminated against or been subjected to prejudice or seen as inferior to someone because of their specific religious identity. It's nice for you to be in a position of privilege that others like me are now not automatically afforded because I chose Islam. Perhaps "ignorance is bliss" as people say, but to be honest, I don't envy you your ignorance.

And just because you can't see past your own hatred and claptrap, please don't assume that others are like you or that I should be on your wavelength. I judge people based on who they are and how they present themselves on a personal basis, and it is therefore neither my nature nor my habit to cast aspersions based on a person's religious identity or have biases against whole segments of communities based on the actions of specific offenders that claim adherence to a specific ethnic or religious identity.

Peace.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Also, it's not a coincidence that we have so much anti-Muslim sentiment thriving in the United States because Islamophobia is a multimillion dollar business, and University of Berkeley and Council of American-Islamic Relations released a report that estimated that 74 organizations are promoting Islamophobia and of them 33 is especially vitriolic and even paring the 33 to only the some that can be called "the core group" funding Islamophobia had access to $206 million dollars of funding between 2008 and 2013. I completely believe in the aphorism, "When in doubt, follow the money." And a 2013 article, relatively old considering it's 2017 now, even names specific elite individuals that for very specific reasons are funding Islamophobia which I found personally quite informative. The truth is that while we can blame ignorance of people, if we refuse to educate them, then we can't blame just simply their ignorance but we also have to at some point own up to our own arrogance in not giving them the knowledge that would enable them to draw saner conclusions.

Peace.

Yeah, follow the money--the billions/year being poured into terrorism. That's far in excess to the "Islamophobia" money. And while there is some genuine Islamophobia, most of it really is simply calling attention to the threat posed by radical Islam. It's the Muslim equivalent of playing the race card.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The Guardian, CAIR, Juan Cole ? Absolute garbage.

I don't understand. Are you saying that my use of The Guardian newspaper is flawed? But why - it's a reputable newspaper of U.K. Instead, what I've heard and observed is that The Daily Mail and The Sun are the tabloid newspapers in U.K. that peddle ignorance. So, I don't understand your implication. And what about CAIR? And what about Juan Cole? I seriously don't understand what you're trying to say and how you reach the conclusion that any of what I've shared is "[a]bsolute garbage." It would be helpful if you elaborated more on your point of view so I can understand precisely your objections and your position

Peace.

The Guardian is more interested in bashing the right than in telling the truth.

And CAIR is little more than a terrorist front. Anything from them should be assumed false.

 

[NightSky]

Yeah, follow the money--the billions/year being poured into terrorism. That's far in excess to the "Islamophobia" money. And while there is some genuine Islamophobia, most of it really is simply calling attention to the threat posed by radical Islam. It's the Muslim equivalent of playing the race card.

Funding of terrorism for whatever reason is quite concerning as well. I don't doubt that. Nor do I refute that. And I think all sources or means of funding terrorism should be eradicated or at least investigated until their harms can be traced and suffocated out of existence.

Having said that, Islamophobia is real and equally concerning. And I don't appreciate anyone saying that Islamophobia is not real or only negligible. France wanted to ban burkinis and made strenuous efforts to do that though the discriminatory decision was overturned by courts - that wasn't based in Islamophobia? Switzerland imposed a ban on minarets - that wasn't Islamophobia? President Trump in his campaign trail had talked about a Muslim registry and possibility of internment camps - that wasn't Islamophobia? British Muslims are facing the worst job discrimination of any minority group - that's not Islamophobia? I think the real question is why sane people would want to deny the existence of Islamophobia. Denying Islamophobia's existence doesn't bolster arguments or fights against radical Islam or Islamism, rather penalizes moderate Muslims who are all subjected to the same denialism that is unhelpful and unfruitful. I doubt that Muslims are trying to bring attention to the existence of Islamophobia as a means to play a "card", because that card if any has currently little if any value because of ongoing negative media coverage which has over time led to distrust of Muslims and Islam so much so that people are becoming radicalized with rabid anti-Muslim sentiments.

In every Yahoo! article I happen to read and then check the comments' section in which there happens to be either negative or positive coverage about Muslim identity, I read vitriolic and abusive language against both Muslims and Islam. A case in point is a news story about Nur Afia of having beauty secrets as the CoverGirl beauty ambassador which I'd read only three days ago in which comments ranged from "What's her beauty secrets? How to hide sticks of dynamite in your clothing while still remaining fashionable" to ""I let my husband pound schitt out of me". She said "It softens the skin and gives it a certain hue!"." And you're telling me Islamophobia is only calling attention "to the threat posed by radical Islam." Nur Afia is about as far as radical Islam she can get, and the article is still receiving these types of comments. This is not Islamophobia?

I myself have been the recipient of Islamophobia in real life - so, I don't even need to get out of the world to see that Islamophobia exists because "seeing is believing" as someone once said. And what about TSwizzle's constant ad hominem and assumptions here on this thread without any proof except his preconceived notions of who and what I'm supposed to be? That's not Islamophobia? Without proof, he's called me here a "religious nut" and said that he can smell "my anti-Israel, Jew baiting bullshit" when I have neither said anything against Israel or Jews to the best of my knowledge anywhere on this thread or the Internet or in real life. While I'm sure you'd like to support TSwizzle, it's neither commendable nor senisble to support someone's bigotry by attempting to refute his bigotry by irrelevant and censorious points to myself as the poster who's only courteously and patiently responded to all his posts.

I don't understand. Are you saying that my use of The Guardian newspaper is flawed? But why - it's a reputable newspaper of U.K. Instead, what I've heard and observed is that The Daily Mail and The Sun are the tabloid newspapers in U.K. that peddle ignorance. So, I don't understand your implication. And what about CAIR? And what about Juan Cole? I seriously don't understand what you're trying to say and how you reach the conclusion that any of what I've shared is "[a]bsolute garbage." It would be helpful if you elaborated more on your point of view so I can understand precisely your objections and your position

Peace.

The Guardian is more interested in bashing the right than in telling the truth.

And CAIR is little more than a terrorist front. Anything from them should be assumed false.

Yes, The Guardian is a liberal and left-wing newspaper, I do know that much. However, from what I've read, it's considered a reputable newspaper in U.K. And moreover, even if I take your assertion about The Guardian at face value about being more concerned with bashing the right, it still doesn't detract anything from the truth of the article that I'd posited in the thread earlier.

And CAIR is not a terrorist front. Even our own American government refutes this baseless allegation and continues to recognize CAIR as a legitimate civil rights organization. While I do know that there was a controversy that had erupted with potential links to Hamas that was investigated, FBI has continued to work with CAIR and and investigative report in 2013 by the U.S. Department of Justice proves just that despite the official policy being far more conservative in terms of the interactions.

Peace.

 

[NightSky]

Yeah, follow the money--the billions/year being poured into terrorism. That's far in excess to the "Islamophobia" money. And while there is some genuine Islamophobia, most of it really is simply calling attention to the threat posed by radical Islam. It's the Muslim equivalent of playing the race card.

Also, as a follow-up question, I'd like to ask how do you figure "billions" is being poured into funding terrorism? I'd like an article, journal, or something proving or substantiating the allegation. Generally, I like evidence/proof. Otherwise, I keep to the policy of adopting a healthy skepticism.

Having said that, I myself do estimate the figure at millions as so far I've only read estimates of up to many millions and not billions.

Peace.

 

[Jayjay]

"ilsamophobia" ? How quaint you still give this nonsense a second thought.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Funding of terrorism for whatever reason is quite concerning as well. I don't doubt that. Nor do I refute that. And I think all sources or means of funding terrorism should be eradicated or at least investigated until their harms can be traced and suffocated out of existence.

Having said that, Islamophobia is real and equally concerning. And I don't appreciate anyone saying that Islamophobia is not real or only negligible. France wanted to ban burkinis and made strenuous efforts to do that though the discriminatory decision was overturned by courts - that wasn't based in Islamophobia? Switzerland imposed a ban on minarets - that wasn't Islamophobia? President Trump in his campaign trail had talked about a Muslim registry and possibility of internment camps - that wasn't Islamophobia? British Muslims are facing the worst job discrimination of any minority group - that's not Islamophobia? I think the real question is why sane people would want to deny the existence of Islamophobia. Denying Islamophobia's existence doesn't bolster arguments or fights against radical Islam or Islamism, rather penalizes moderate Muslims who are all subjected to the same denialism that is unhelpful and unfruitful. I doubt that Muslims are trying to bring attention to the existence of Islamophobia as a means to play a "card", because that card if any has currently little if any value because of ongoing negative media coverage which has over time led to distrust of Muslims and Islam so much so that people are becoming radicalized with rabid anti-Muslim sentiments.

In every Yahoo! article I happen to read and then check the comments' section in which there happens to be either negative or positive coverage about Muslim identity, I read vitriolic and abusive language against both Muslims and Islam. A case in point is a news story about Nur Afia of having beauty secrets as the CoverGirl beauty ambassador which I'd read only three days ago in which comments ranged from "What's her beauty secrets? How to hide sticks of dynamite in your clothing while still remaining fashionable" to ""I let my husband pound schitt out of me". She said "It softens the skin and gives it a certain hue!"." And you're telling me Islamophobia is only calling attention "to the threat posed by radical Islam." Nur Afia is about as far as radical Islam she can get, and the article is still receiving these types of comments. This is not Islamophobia?

I myself have been the recipient of Islamophobia in real life - so, I don't even need to get out of the world to see that Islamophobia exists because "seeing is believing" as someone once said. And what about TSwizzle's constant ad hominem and assumptions here on this thread without any proof except his preconceived notions of who and what I'm supposed to be? That's not Islamophobia? Without proof, he's called me here a "religious nut" and said that he can smell "my anti-Israel, Jew baiting bullshit" when I have neither said anything against Israel or Jews to the best of my knowledge anywhere on this thread or the Internet or in real life. While I'm sure you'd like to support TSwizzle, it's neither commendable nor senisble to support someone's bigotry by attempting to refute his bigotry by irrelevant and censorious points to myself as the poster who's only courteously and patiently responded to all his posts.

I don't understand. Are you saying that my use of The Guardian newspaper is flawed? But why - it's a reputable newspaper of U.K. Instead, what I've heard and observed is that The Daily Mail and The Sun are the tabloid newspapers in U.K. that peddle ignorance. So, I don't understand your implication. And what about CAIR? And what about Juan Cole? I seriously don't understand what you're trying to say and how you reach the conclusion that any of what I've shared is "[a]bsolute garbage." It would be helpful if you elaborated more on your point of view so I can understand precisely your objections and your position

Peace.

The Guardian is more interested in bashing the right than in telling the truth.

And CAIR is little more than a terrorist front. Anything from them should be assumed false.

Yes, The Guardian is a liberal and left-wing newspaper, I do know that much. However, from what I've read, it's considered a reputable newspaper in U.K. And moreover, even if I take your assertion about The Guardian at face value about being more concerned with bashing the right, it still doesn't detract anything from the truth of the article that I'd posited in the thread earlier.

And CAIR is not a terrorist front. Even our own American government refutes this baseless allegation and continues to recognize CAIR as a legitimate civil rights organization. While I do know that there was a controversy that had erupted with potential links to Hamas that was investigated, FBI has continued to work with CAIR and and investigative report in 2013 by the U.S. Department of Justice proves just that despite the official policy being far more conservative in terms of the interactions.

Peace.

When you find a reputable newspaper in the UK, let me know. Many of these print the same articles unedited and some add a few embellishments. We have to try to analyse the articles as best we can which can be difficult at times. It is tempting to regard a paper as reliable simply because it agrees with own opinions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And I cannot take you seriously on this assertion because you assume that I'm a "religious nut" based on no evidence. Having been a former atheist, I think I can spot a religious nut fairly well, and I know enough about myself to know that I can never be so characterized by anyone who knows me in either real life or even on the Internet. Have you bothered to even read your posts? If you comb through your posts without bias, you'll realize the entire substance of your responses so far have comprised of ad hominem and baseless assumptions based in some preconceived notions of who you think I'm supposed to be.

It's the converts that are more likely to end up religious nuts than those born to the faith.

Sure, Islamophobia is a "meaningless construct" probably to individuals like you, I assume, because you live in a safe bubble of ignorance and are not part of the community that is being discriminated against; however, I assure you it's very real to people who have been discriminated against or been subjected to prejudice or seen as inferior to someone because of their specific religious identity. It's nice for you to be in a position of privilege that others like me are now not automatically afforded because I chose Islam. Perhaps "ignorance is bliss" as people say, but to be honest, I don't envy you your ignorance.

Blame that discrimination on the radicals. One of their objectives is to drive a wedge between Muslims and everyone else. To some extent they are succeeding.

And just because you can't see past your own hatred and claptrap, please don't assume that others are like you or that I should be on your wavelength. I judge people based on who they are and how they present themselves on a personal basis, and it is therefore neither my nature nor my habit to cast aspersions based on a person's religious identity or have biases against whole segments of communities based on the actions of specific offenders that claim adherence to a specific ethnic or religious identity.

Peace.

It's not hatred. It's fear.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Funding of terrorism for whatever reason is quite concerning as well. I don't doubt that. Nor do I refute that. And I think all sources or means of funding terrorism should be eradicated or at least investigated until their harms can be traced and suffocated out of existence.

But you're talking about the money for Islamophobia which is small potatoes compared to the money for terrorism. You're focusing on the pebble instead of the boulder.

Having said that, Islamophobia is real and equally concerning. And I don't appreciate anyone saying that Islamophobia is not real or only negligible. France wanted to ban burkinis and made strenuous efforts to do that though the discriminatory decision was overturned by courts - that wasn't based in Islamophobia?

That's not Islamophobia. It's based on the fact that the burkini is mostly a tool of oppression.

Switzerland imposed a ban on minarets - that wasn't Islamophobia?

Yes, that is.

President Trump in his campaign trail had talked about a Muslim registry and possibility of internment camps - that wasn't Islamophobia?

Actually, I wouldn't call it that--because Trump doesn't know what truth is. He says what he thinks his audience wants to hear. If Trump were sane I would agree it's Islamophobia.

British Muslims are facing the worst job discrimination of any minority group - that's not Islamophobia?

You're assuming it's unrelated to actual actions. Without more evidence I don't want to decide one way or the other.

I think the real question is why sane people would want to deny the existence of Islamophobia. Denying Islamophobia's existence doesn't bolster arguments or fights against radical Islam or Islamism, rather penalizes moderate Muslims who are all subjected to the same denialism that is unhelpful and unfruitful. I doubt that Muslims are trying to bring attention to the existence of Islamophobia as a means to play a "card", because that card if any has currently little if any value because of ongoing negative media coverage which has over time led to distrust of Muslims and Islam so much so that people are becoming radicalized with rabid anti-Muslim sentiments.

I don't see anyone denying it's existence. What I see is that it's constantly invoked any time something comes up that's negative to a Muslim. It's the same thing as blacks playing the race card any time they are accused of wrongdoing.

In every Yahoo! article I happen to read and then check the comments' section in which there happens to be either negative or positive coverage about Muslim identity, I read vitriolic and abusive language against both Muslims and Islam.

You'll find plenty of nutters in newspaper comments. That doesn't reflect the population.

I don't understand. Are you saying that my use of The Guardian newspaper is flawed? But why - it's a reputable newspaper of U.K. Instead, what I've heard and observed is that The Daily Mail and The Sun are the tabloid newspapers in U.K. that peddle ignorance. So, I don't understand your implication. And what about CAIR? And what about Juan Cole? I seriously don't understand what you're trying to say and how you reach the conclusion that any of what I've shared is "[a]bsolute garbage." It would be helpful if you elaborated more on your point of view so I can understand precisely your objections and your position

Peace.

The Guardian is more interested in bashing the right than in telling the truth.

And CAIR is little more than a terrorist front. Anything from them should be assumed false.

Yes, The Guardian is a liberal and left-wing newspaper, I do know that much. However, from what I've read, it's considered a reputable newspaper in U.K. And moreover, even if I take your assertion about The Guardian at face value about being more concerned with bashing the right, it still doesn't detract anything from the truth of the article that I'd posited in the thread earlier.

The point is that when the Guardian publishes something on the left they can't be trusted to be telling the truth.

And CAIR is not a terrorist front. Even our own American government refutes this baseless allegation and continues to recognize CAIR as a legitimate civil rights organization. While I do know that there was a controversy that had erupted with potential links to Hamas that was investigated, FBI has continued to work with CAIR and and investigative report in 2013 by the U.S. Department of Justice proves just that despite the official policy being far more conservative in terms of the interactions.

Peace.

Because we bend over backwards to avoid Islamophobia to the point of ignoring very real problems.

And CAIR has close ties with Hamas. A legitimate civil rights organization would avoid anything resembling such ties.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yeah, follow the money--the billions/year being poured into terrorism. That's far in excess to the "Islamophobia" money. And while there is some genuine Islamophobia, most of it really is simply calling attention to the threat posed by radical Islam. It's the Muslim equivalent of playing the race card.

Also, as a follow-up question, I'd like to ask how do you figure "billions" is being poured into funding terrorism? I'd like an article, journal, or something proving or substantiating the allegation. Generally, I like evidence/proof. Otherwise, I keep to the policy of adopting a healthy skepticism.

Having said that, I myself do estimate the figure at millions as so far I've only read estimates of up to many millions and not billions.

Peace.

If anyone has exact numbers it's somebody's intelligence organization and they're not going to talk.

Consider just Hamas, though. We can see roughly what their income is and what their expenses are. The latter is far in excess of the former--and the only place it could have come from is various governments.