• We should now be fully online following an overnight outage. Apologies for any inconvenience, we do not expect there to be any further issues.

The Core of Muslim Rage ***A Must Read***

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,387
19,687
146
I usually don't agree with this guy, but he makes some damn good points here...

The Core of Muslim Rage
Commentary by Thomas L. Friedman
for The New York Times

The latest death toll in the Indian violence between Hindus and Muslims is 544 people, many of them Muslims. Why is it that when Hindus kill hundreds of Muslims it elicits an emotionally muted headline in the Arab media, but when Israel kills a dozen Muslims, in a war in which Muslims are also killing Jews, it inflames the entire Muslim world?

I raise this point not to make some idiot press critique or engage in cheap Arab-bashing. This is a serious issue. In recent weeks, whenever Arab Muslims told me of their pain at seeing Palestinians brutalized by Israelis on their TV screens every night, I asked back: Why are you so pained about Israelis brutalizing Palestinians, but don't say a word about the brutality with which Saddam Hussein has snuffed out two generations of Iraqis using murder, fear and poison gas? I got no good answers.

Because the real answer is rooted in something very deep. It has to do with the contrast between Islam's self-perception as the most ideal and complete expression of the three great monotheistic religions ? Judaism, Christianity and Islam ? and the conditions of poverty, repression and underdevelopment in which most Muslims live today.

As a U.S. diplomat in the Middle East said to me, Israel ? not Iraq, not India ? is "a constant reminder to Muslims of their own powerlessness." How could a tiny Jewish state amass so much military and economic power if the Islamic way of life ? not Christianity or Judaism ? is God's most ideal religious path?

When Hindus kill Muslims it's not a story, because there are a billion Hindus and they aren't part of the Muslim narrative. When Saddam murders his own people it's not a story, because it's in the Arab-Muslim family. But when a small band of Israeli Jews kills Muslims it sparks rage ? a rage that must come from Muslims having to confront the gap between their self-perception as Muslims and the reality of the Muslim world.

I have long believed that it is this poverty of dignity, not a poverty of money, that is behind a lot of Muslim rage today and the reason this rage is sharpest among educated, but frustrated, Muslim youth. It is they who perpetrated 9/11 and who slit the throat of the Wall Street Journal reporter Danny Pearl ? after reportedly forcing him to declare on film, "I am a Jew and my mother is a Jew."

This is not to say that U.S. policy is blameless. We do bad things sometimes. But why is it that only Muslims react to our bad policies with suicidal terrorism, not Mexicans or Chinese? Is it because Arab-Muslim conspiracy theories state that Jews could not be so strong on their own ? therefore the only reason Israel could be strong, and Muslims weak, is because the U.S. created and supports Israel?

The Muslim world needs to take an honest look at this rage. Look what it has done to Palestinian society ? where the flower of Palestinian youth now celebrate suicide against Jews as a source of dignity. That is so bad. Yes, there is an Israeli occupation, and that occupation has been hugely distorting of Palestinian life. But the fact is this: If Palestinians had said, "We are going to oppose the Israeli occupation, with nonviolent resistance, as if we had no other options, and we are going to build a Palestinian society, schools and economy, as if we had no occupation" ? they would have had a quality state a long time ago. Instead they have let the occupation define their whole movement and become Yasir Arafat's excuse for not building jobs and democracy.

Only Muslims can heal their own rage. But the West, and particularly the Jewish world, should help. Because this rage poses an existential threat to Israel. Three broad trends are now converging: (1) The worst killing ever between Israelis and Palestinians; (2) a baby boom in the Arab-Muslim world, where about half the population is under 20; (3) an explosion of Arab satellite TV and Internet, which are taking the horrific images from the intifada and beaming them directly to the new Arab- Muslim generation. If 100 million Arab-Muslims are brought up with these images, Israel won't survive.

Some of this hatred will remain no matter what Israel does. But to think that Israel's exiting the occupied territories ? and abandoning its insane settlement land grab there ? wouldn't reduce this problem is absurd.

Israel cannot do it alone. But it has to do all it can to get this show off the air. It would take away an important card from the worst Muslim anti- Semites and it would help strengthen those Muslims, and there are many of them, who know that the suicidal rage of their fanatics is dragging down their whole civilization.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,387
19,687
146


<< Interesting read. :) Is that in tomorrows edition? >>



Not sure. I yanked it off of AOL (shut up).
 

Texmaster

Banned
Jun 5, 2001
5,445
0
0
*takes deep breath*.....oh *keeps reading*

*takes deep breath* Yeah but.....oh *keeps reading*

*takes deep breath*Wait a minute why.....oh *keeps reading*


Damn. This guy is good :D
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
The Muslim world needs to take an honest look at this rage.

Actually, should this rage remain unchecked, will a most terrible world war result.
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
i'm not muslim....but what kind of crap is this?!?!?!?

How come we can get away with calling nearly one billion muslims angry terrorists...but as soon as we hint suspicion towards israel, we are anti-semites...

You anandtechers are funny.... You take pride in not being part of the hopeless masses. Yet, you take the new york times as gospel.
Oh well...let this propaganda shape your minds... Don't you dare do your own research on what is actually going on in the mid-east.
Instead....learn from the new york times. LOL!
give me a break!
 

Texmaster

Banned
Jun 5, 2001
5,445
0
0


<< i'm not muslim....but what kind of crap is this?!?!?!?

How come we can get away with calling nearly one billion muslims angry terrorists...but as soon as we hint suspicion towards israel, we are anti-semites...

You anandtechers are funny.... You take pride in not being part of the hopeless masses. Yet, you take the new york times as gospel.
Oh well...let this propaganda shape your minds... Don't you dare do your own research on what is actually going on in the mid-east.
Instead....learn from the new york times. LOL!
give me a break!
>>



Hey Pers, if you are going to be a moron, at least give us your reasons.

Now here's the trickey part, back them up with factual evidence ;)
 

db

Lifer
Dec 6, 1999
10,575
292
126
Notice how people characterize and entire group by the actions of a few.
And the beat goes on...
 

xyyz

Diamond Member
Sep 3, 2000
4,331
0
0
it must be snowing in hell..... cause that's is the only way i'd ever ever be on the side as texmaster and amusedone on this...

this has been a major argument in alot of muslim circles...

it's a commonly known fact in the muslim community, that although muslims are all to be treated equal.... arab's treats non-arab muslims as second class citizens.

i'm shocked to hear that no arab muslim has made a public declaration condemning militant hindu groups for destroying mosques.
 

Texmaster

Banned
Jun 5, 2001
5,445
0
0


<< it must be snowing in hell..... cause that's is the only way i'd ever ever be on the side as texmaster and amusedone on this... >>




You have taken the first step towards the dark side young Padawin. In time you will take another... *evil laugh* :D



<< this has been a major argument in alot of muslim circles...

it's a commonly known fact in the muslim community, that although muslims are all to be treated equal.... arab's treats non-arab muslims as second class citizens.

i'm shocked to hear that no arab muslim has made a public declaration condemning militant hindu groups for destroying mosques.
>>



Great points. And I'm sorry to say I'm not surprised.
 

Pers

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,603
1
0
Hey texmaster...keep your immature comments to yourself.

If you want to discuss this further...you can talk appropriately....otherwise...it will be pointless.

Ok...what this dude is saying is somewhat true....BUT a lot of it is NOT.

the Hindu/Muslim conflict has only been for 4 years. and it has only gotton intesne the past few weeks

but the Israeli situation is the past 80 years.

the India situation is a bit more complex. its just a religious warfare, that the muslism want to seperate from india

and its not that big of a deal. the problem with israel is that they didn't exist 80 years ago. and they are expanding

while India always existed.


 

db

Lifer
Dec 6, 1999
10,575
292
126
Everyone wants to be treated equally and with respect. Everyone.
But when you are unhappy, you often look outward for blame.
It's much easier for me to blame you than myself for my circumstances.
If you don't think this is common human nature, just look around.
 

Texmaster

Banned
Jun 5, 2001
5,445
0
0


<< Hey texmaster...keep your immature comments to yourself.

If you want to discuss this further...you can talk appropriately....otherwise...it will be pointless.
>>



Thats what I thought :)

And what do you call your comments? I quote:

You anandtechers are funny.... You take pride in not being part of the hopeless masses. Yet, you take the new york times as gospel.
Oh well...let this propaganda shape your minds... Don't you dare do your own research on what is actually going on in the mid-east.
Instead....learn from the new york times. LOL!
give me a break!


What is this Constructive Criticism? LOL!! What a hypocrite!




<< Ok...what this dude is saying is somewhat true....BUT a lot of it is NOT.

the Hindu/Muslim conflict has only been for 4 years. and it has only gotton intesne the past few weeks
>>



OHFG Where have you been? This conflict has been going on since long before Ghandi was alive. Read some more History dude.

The very first Muslim attack on India had taken place nearly 500 years earlier in Sindh in the year 715 C.E. These Muslim invaders were Arabs led by Mohammad Bin Qasim


Please do us all a favor and read more.




<< but the Israeli situation is the past 80 years. >>



Makes this point mute.



<< the India situation is a bit more complex. its just a religious warfare, that the muslism want to seperate from india

and its not that big of a deal. the problem with israel is that they didn't exist 80 years ago. and they are expanding

while India always existed.
>>



Israel is not expanding. Israel won those lands after being attacked by neighboring Arab countries. That is simply spoils of war.

 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,387
19,687
146


<< Hey texmaster...keep your immature comments to yourself.

If you want to discuss this further...you can talk appropriately....otherwise...it will be pointless.

Ok...what this dude is saying is somewhat true....BUT a lot of it is NOT.

the Hindu/Muslim conflict has only been for 4 years. and it has only gotton intesne the past few weeks
>>



WHAT???

Boy, this is what is called "selective" history.

HINT: Guess why Ghandi went on a hunger strike?
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
the Hindu/Muslim conflict has only been for 4 years. and it has only gotton intesne the past few weeks

BEEP!!!!! **I'm sorry but that answer is incorrect**

In August 1947, Pakistan was faced with a number of problems, some immediate but others long term. The most important of these concerns was the role played by Islam........ and so on ........... and so forth.....

Source - Library of Congress

<edit>What does Pakistan have to do with this? Pakistan was once part of India :Q </edit>
 

Martin

Lifer
Jan 15, 2000
29,178
1
81


<<

<< it must be snowing in hell..... cause that's is the only way i'd ever ever be on the side as texmaster and amusedone on this... >>


You have taken the first step towards the dark side young Padawin. In time you will take another... *evil laugh* :D
>>




Wait, I agreed with you yesterday over AA, and now we seem to agree on this issue.


Surely the world is going insane!
 

xyyz

Diamond Member
Sep 3, 2000
4,331
0
0


<< Hey texmaster...keep your immature comments to yourself.

If you want to discuss this further...you can talk appropriately....otherwise...it will be pointless.

Ok...what this dude is saying is somewhat true....BUT a lot of it is NOT.

the Hindu/Muslim conflict has only been for 4 years. and it has only gotton intesne the past few weeks

but the Israeli situation is the past 80 years.

the India situation is a bit more complex. its just a religious warfare, that the muslism want to seperate from india

and its not that big of a deal. the problem with israel is that they didn't exist 80 years ago. and they are expanding

while India always existed.
>>



while i'm dying for an oppurtunity to disagree with texmaster... he's right and well... you aren't.

there have been muslim/hindu conflicts from way back in the day. only one mugal emperor, Akbar, was able to bring harmony between these groups... there are many factors that resulted in his peaceful and properous rule. he abolished the tax levied against hindus (jizya) as well as making a hindu, Todar Mal, the second in command of the empire (my ex is a direct decendant of this guy) .... oh yeah the fact he married a hindu rajput princess also...

however, there are some points that require clarity... Sudheer Birodkar, is a known biggot and his views are not all too respected in academia. I recommend reading the UCLA professor, Stanley Wolpert's "A New History of India." Wolpert is one of the foremost scholars on the region. he is also much more balanced and presents an unbiased view of SA history.

i'm going to quote from pages 105-106 of Wolpert's book:

"India remained blissfully oblivious to Islam's existance during the frist two decades of that new faith's vigrous growth. Arab merchants, however, brought home enough South Asian wealth to wht the appetites of Muslim warrior, soon to be infuriated as well by Sindhi attacks upon Muslim shipping. The Arab commander of the first Islamic force to reach India reported from Sind to his caliph in 644 that "water is scarece, teh fruits are poor, and the robbers are bold; if a few troops are send tey will be slain, if many, they will starve." Tis pessimitic assessment postponed further attempted Muslim conquest until AD 711, when the piratic pludering of a richly laden Arab ship as it passed the mouth of the Indus so enraged the Ummayad govenor of Iraq that he launged an expidition of six thousand syriyan hourses and an equal numner of Iraqui camels against the rajas of Sind."

Wolpert also explains how the muslim conquests didn't come from the Arab incursion of Sindh, but from the the Afghan border.

"What is suprising, however, was how long it took Islam to spread nbeyond the narrow confies of Sind to other regions of the subcontenient. Nor should we think of Sind as the stating groups for Islam's expansion across South Asia, sicne it was not from that Arabian sea backwater, but rather from the Afghan high border of the Kyber Pass that Islam's major invasions would be launched, and then not before the end of the tenth century.




 

Nemesis77

Diamond Member
Jun 21, 2001
7,329
0
0
That IS interesting stuff to read, no question about it! He does raise many good points.