Moslem Group Celebrates 9/11

Also, like to feel free to say I'm mad about something.
Also, wanted to question why others seemed to defend them.

What makes the idiocy of a few an issue? The idiocy of the few wreck this world for the rest of us.

I think one of the ways they wreck it for us is rooted in our reactions to their idiocy.

The general reaction from people like me is saying what we think, and changing out our flags.

No danger in that.

Hobitbob--
It really made me feel even worse after 911, when attacks against Arabs (or Arab-'looking' people) were publicised. There is a sludge-level mentality, that almost seems to look for excuses to beat on other people. I can't explain them, because I don't understand them-- But that doesn't change how I feel about celebrating 911.

CB--
You said
No one can tell me why I fly the American flag, and I can't presume to know what they actually support. It seems to me, any other reading besides "USA" is wishful thinking based on ones own agenda.
---------
Seems a little unfair. You say no one can tell you why you fly the flag, and then tell me if my reasoning is anything other than yours, it is wishful thinking, based on my own agenda.

Sure, it meant different things to different people. To me, it communicated sympathy, empathy and solidarity with the people in my country.

I'm not saying you should change how you feel, I'm just asking you to consider all sides of the issue. The London group doesn't sicken me, it merely makes me shake my head in disgust at the gullibility of humanity. the same with the folks here in the US who applaud Iraqi, or Palestinian, or anyone's death.

Sofia,

I'm not too worried about people liek you. But in the same post you referenced the type that I worry about.

IMO, the use of happenings such as this is often for the purpose of incitement.

Au's intent here is clearly to disparage Arabs. He posted this story then another completely unrelated one trying to get Americans to feel anger at Palestinians for their perceived spitefulness.

I am not suggesting that we not care that people celebrate calamity. It's grossly untoward and elicits a base reaction.

But yes, these reactions can be dangerous. Like I said, extremism is contagious and there are many who would use these happenings to incite anger. This is a vicious cycle of stupidity.

I feel like I'm pushing a bit, but I hope you'll consider this.
I almost brought this article in. I thought it was a point of interest that should be discussed. It is news.

The picking and choosing of what is acceptable news, and what is an agenda of incitement may bear more scrutiny. You aren't the only one, who dismissed it. Almost everyone else has said--don't worry so much about this--or they've tried to change the subject off of this group, and on to another... I fail to see why we couldn't have talked about these people, this group, their actions, history, words... Why are they beyond scrutiny and criticism?

It makes me sad that the one who brought the article bears the brunt of the criticism. He may have brought the two, because no one else here will. Isn't it fair for him to be able to discuss these issues, without his motives being instantly suspect?

I haven't seen the other article, but doesn't this one merit a viewing and discussion?

<Tired. Off to bed. But, sincerely want to know if anyone can address my questions.>

Sofia,

Are we not (at least you and I) discussing it? When I dissmiss, in this particular case, I speak of the import we place on these happenings in regard to our opinions.

Exploring the group's motivations and trying to understand what makes them make the brainfart that would lead one to such an insipid display would be interesting.

I think what you are referencing is the trepidation many feel when these topics are brought up.

I don't think Au hates all Arabs or anything but there is no doubt in my mind that these articles were posted with political themes in mind. They are only very loosely associated in that they are articles that would inflame the average American opinion.

I think if you sense an avoidance of the topic here you are sensing the trepidation some feel due to some of the baser instincts this type of article elicits.

I have no problem discussing it, I have spent a good 10 minutes reading over 20 articles on this subject.

What I think is a problem is when this isn't put in perspective. I am still researching exact figures and numbers but do you think this is a large and newsworthy group?

I ask because it may well be a case of few idiots getting inordinate attention to the chagrin of their community soley due to the current political climate?

I'd feel the same way if this were an article about 5 farmers who are racist celebrating slavery with the headline "Whites celebrate slavery".

That was an exaggeration but my intent is to illustrate that at some point these events are anecdotal insofar as their relevance to the greater picture is concerned. I don't seek to stifle discussion of the subject at all. That is somewhat of a paradox but I won't digress.

This type of event is something that in another day I might have seized on to whip up a righteous fury. These people are simply acting in a disgusting manner. Understanding their motivations and perspective are much touted ideals but the instinctual reaction is revolt.

Revolt at their base and vulgar display (would be called unhuman oxymoronically). What causes trepidation is the more exreme manefestations of emotional extremism that some of the baser instincts in us.

To avoid sentiments that are expressed with, say, the words nuke, rag, Arabs, all etc I think perspective is, indeed, important.

First of all this event did not happen. There were, indeed, a group of idiots called al Muhajiroun that had planned to celebrate but the intense backlash against them forced them to cancel ( UK Al Qaeda Sympathizers Cancel Pro-9/11 Events ).



And furthermore perspectinve in that they are indeed a fringe lunatic group is needed. Many times i hear people ask "Why don;t their peers speak out". Well many times they do, but the lunatic fringe gets inordinate attention.

Some perspective:



Incidentally I do not "suddenly suspect" Au. It's not a single article that creates such a perception.

Is it not fair to consider that, say, frolic, might have a slight bias against Israel? Or that Au might have a slight bias against Arabs?

Is not bias and the way it colors current events an important element to discuss when evaluating the news we read? I try my best to confront my own because I know how far astray a bias can lead me.

I think it's not just ok, but necessary to address bias.

I use too many words sometimes ...
I just meant that it's unfair to assume people fly the flag for a certain reason, until I hear from them what their reason is.
Until they explain their motives it's just a flag.

I've seen it represent all kinds of crazy things to other people, but I really like what it communicated to you.

Ditto.

Good morning
Surprised to see that many responses to the posting. The article only pointed out the Muslim worlds attitude regarding terrorism and the killing being a time for celebration. Are those the actions of a civilized society?

What evidence is there of any society today being civilised?

Wilso
Probably none. Although some are worse than others and have no compunction in displaying it.

Au,

Are you trying to assert that that small group is indicative of the entire Muslim society being uncivilized?

I quoted an article in which British Muslims condemn them more harshly than persons here.

I think my suspicions were founded. I believe what you are trying to assert through this article is that Muslims "are worse than others and have no compunction in displaying it".

Craven
Look around. I keep hearing that fringe groups are perpetrating these acts of terror throughout the world. But I ask is it only fringe groups who support and cheer them?

edit

This self-serving synopsis of "what the article pointed out" is the very point of so many of the comments against your position.

People on both sides of many contentious issues "celebrate" many disgusting things.

But the fact that there are boors is no reason to suggest that their actions indicate what "their world" is like.

You are so strident -- I cannot help but wonder what kind of Arab you would have been I fate had made you an Arab instead of a Jew.

My guess is that many of the most militant Arabs are people like you who happened to be born Arabs -- and are indulging in what they have available to them to vent their rage.

Frank
Actions prove the point. Where else have acts of terror been triggers for celebration? And who commits the preponderance of these acts?

Au,

Israelis routinely chant for Arab blood. After suicide bombings their disgust at the muders perpetrated by the terrorists often leads to a group chanting "death to Arabs".

This is the immediate reaction of a small group of Israelis and it doesn't reflect on them all.

As I have posted (and as you continue to ignore) the Muslim community in Britain condemned this group harshly and condemned the British government for not cracking down on them,

But you prefer to ignore the actions of the community to focus on the actions of a small group. And you then proceed to try to paint the whole community as uncivilized and inferior.

Sofia,

This is why the trepidation.

HobitBob, sorry to hear about your incident, must have been awful.

Au, I guess we are trying to redefine your concept of terrorism by pointing out that civilian casualties are all the same. Those in the towers, those on the Baghdadi streets, those in the busses in Isreal and those in the Gaza - all innocent victims. Why is it different when our military kills civilians?

littlek
Those actions which deliberately target innocent civilians defines for me terrorism. Those casualties which occur as a result of an act of war are not.
I know the next statement will be something about the loss of life in Iraq. For that you will have to query Bush and CO.
I should add that the question regarding what is and what is not terrorism has been disputed and remains in the eye of the beholder.