The Anti-Muslim predjudice on A2K is wrong.

Can you reread what you just said, Lash, and tell me you really did mean it. Because I have a hard time believing that you can rationaly think that way.

Is cracker an ethnic slur?

How about we save that for the "What constitutes an ethnic slur" thread.

EB - I think you are one of the best-spoken A2Kers here. Level-headed, thoughful, knowledgable and fair. I've told you that in person. I wish we were a bigger audience for you. Maybe you should consider running for public office.

I certainly agree that no innocent person should be held responsible for the acts of other people of the same religion in any way, shape, or form.

However, having said that, I have a question for ebrown.

1. During the past 50 years, that is, modern times
2. Considering only acts of terrorism, that is, acts directed specifically against non-combatants on purpose
3. Considering only acts motivated by religion
4. Considering only acts where the intention is bodily harm

how does Islam stack up to other religions, e.g. Christianity? If you dare, give me a straight answer to this question without raising a thousand side issues.

Lash, yes, cracker is a slur. Call it ethnic, call it racial, call it regional - whatever, it's not a helpful descriptor for rational discussion.

How are we to judge the motivation behind an act? Especially when the actors are dead?

My point is--cracker, spic, dego, honky, skirt, broad, Hymie, redneck, Bible-thumper...and others all have their own charm.

Most of them are sloughed off. Towelhead is one of them. If I'd been referring to an entire race of people, that would be different.

There is zero charm in any of those terms for me. None. Zip. Nada.

They're great for drunken bar talk with your fellow bigots, but they aren't very handy in rational argument.

Another form of what I see as overt racism, not here at A2K, but in the western media generally, is the blitz of personal details on the victims of "acts of terrorism" in say, London, New York & Bali, but we know almost nothing about the devastation of the lives of ordinary Iraqi citizens following the invasion. We are told so much about so many innocent western individuals who had the terrible misfortune to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Yet the many thousands of innocent Iraqis who have been killed, maimed, traumatized & have had their lives permanently affected by the invasion by the US it's allies are just numbers, statistics ... What do we know of their individual lives, their pain & grief?

I agree that anti Muslim prejudice is wrong anywhere. However I haven't seen much of it here on A2K. That is as long as you don't count observation that certain rather radical and zealous strains of Islam are associated with either terrorist movements or theocratic states that have in effect declared a cultural war on Western values - as prejudice. Such observations are factual, and not at all prejudicial. - at least in themselves.

The attitudes of Islamist zealots towards Western Civilization, however, are prejudicial in the extreme.

I agree geogeob1. It's to be expected that extremism and radical religious movements go hand in hand. In the cases where it might not have been an established religion, you could certainly observe certain religious characteristics.

ebrown : thanks for your thoughts ! you are right on.
unfortunately, there will always be bigots - and they come from all walks of life, all nations and races and all religions - still, it's a good idea to let them know that we are NOT on their side ! hbg

Muslims and Christians unite against bomb attacks -07/07/05
Muslims and Christians unite against bomb attacks -07/07/05

The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), which works on behalf of many UK Muslims, and the official ecumenical body, Churches Together in Britain and Ireland (CTBI), have joined together to issue a statement denouncing today's terrorist bomb attacks in London and calling for cooperation between the faiths.

After expressing "deep sympathy" to the victims of the blasts, now known to be numbered in their hundreds, MCB and CTBI declare: "This criminal attack is condemned in the strongest possible terms. No good purpose can be achieved by such an indiscriminate and cruel use of terror."

The Christian and Muslim umbrella organisations point out that "the scriptures and the traditions of both … communities repudiate the use of such violence. Religious precepts cannot be used to justify such crimes, which are completely contrary to our teaching and practice."

They go on: "We continue to resist all attempts to associate our communities with the hateful acts of any minority who claim falsely to represent us. In the present uncertainties, we look to all community leaders to give an example of wisdom, tolerance and compassion."

Today Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, also made it clear that any attempt by bombers to say that they act "in the name of Islam" is to be rejected. The Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, added that such "cowardly attacks" against civilians were condemned by Muslims, Christians, Jews and Hindus alike.

Similar points were made by Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, the Bishop of London, the Rt Rev Richard Chartres, and the head of the Commission for Racial Equality, Mr Trevor Philips.

Concerns have been expressed about a misplaced backlash against British Muslims because of claims, as yet unproven, that the bombings were the work of a cell associated with Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden.

"The events of recent years have challenged Muslims and Christians to work together in order to acknowledge our differences, to affirm our common humanity, and to seek ways to share life together," say the Muslim Council of Britain and Churches Together in Britain and Ireland.

"Much has already been achieved," they declare, "and nothing must undermine the progress that we have made. These attacks strengthen our determination to live together in peace, and to grow together in mutual understanding."

MCB head Sir Iqbal Sacranie and CTBI general secretary Dr David Goodbourn today jointly endorsed the view that "[t]his crime must inspire us to work unceasingly together in pursuit of peace, justice and respect for difference."

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) also added its condemnation. It said: "We join Americans of all faiths, and all people of conscience worldwide, in condemning these barbaric crimes that can never be justified or excused. American Muslims offer their sincere condolences to the loved ones of those who were killed or injured in today's attacks and call for the swift apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators."

Meanwhile the Rev Dr Bob Edgar, general secretary of the National Council of Churches USA, wrote to CTBI: "We join in prayer for those who were injured and offer our sympathy to those who lost loved ones in the mass transit bombings in London today. Such violence never serves to advance a cause or a viewpoint, but merely strengthens the resolve of those who are attacked. Even as we heighten our vigilance and seek to bring the perpetrators to justice, we must also continue to pursue peace in a thousand ways. May God grant us peace! "

The Rev Judith Maizel Long, CTBI's assistant general secretary, has written a prayer following the explosions across London. It reads:

God and Creator of all,
In the compassion of Jesus Christ,
And in the tender mercy of the Holy Spirit,

We pray for all who have suffered and died in these atrocities;
Bind up the physical and mental injuries
Send your peace upon the bereaved.

Bless the emergency services and hospital staff,
The police and all those whose vigilance defends us,
Transport workers and officials who clear up the debris.

Protect our Muslim neighbours from revenge attacks.
Help us to build communities of good will.

We pray that you will bring the perpetrators to repentance and justice.
Amen

Brandon,

You are raising side issues, not me.

In my opinion one of the worst acts of brutality in the past 50 years was Rwanda. This was directed specifically against non-combatants on purpose and the intention was bodily harm.

Do you think "motivated by religion" is an issue that matters? If this was not "motivated by religion" does it lessen the barbarism. Are the Christians who commited this crime somehow absolved because they weren't "motivated by religion".

Talk about side issues!

One primary technique used to justify bigotry is to define terms and then use them selectively to defame one ethnic groups while ignoring others. The "motivated by religion" theme is a perfect example (and you brought it up, not me).

Muslim-Jewish Strife started when there was a conflict over land between the Palestinians and the new state of Israel. Before this, Muslims and Jews lived pretty peacefully for centuries-- while Christians were killing Jews in pogroms and Inquisitions and such.

So which attacks are part of a bloody political battle for land, and which are "motivated by religion". Remember that from the Civil war to George W. Bush people have used deeply religious rhetoric to justify and support political ends.

I don't think it much matters, the result is the same.

Christians slaughtering innocent men, women and children for "non-religious" reasons is just as bad as Muslims slaughtering innocents for whatever reaon you would ascribe.

I will condemn both. I will not defame a religion, or resort to ethnic slurs.

No side issues here.

Yeppers - I agree - except I am not sure if that is simply racism - I think all media, wherever they are, tend to focus much more personal attention on places either close or familiar. Though I think there is an element of racism in it in this case.

When at war, we all tend not to want to humanise the enemy - or civilian casualties we deem necessary to our project - very much the opposite of how we wish to view our own casualties.

Msolga, beautifully said.

Terms such as towel head, cracker, spic are all insulting and often lead to heated discusions and quite often, mistaken and unecessary hostility.

Some members of ethnic groups use those terms teasingly, but the terms are never considered appropriate when used by someone not included in the particular group.

Thoughtless language has caused all sorts of misunderstanding, sometimes with tragic results. I'm surpuised at you Lash. You are one of the most intelligent posters on the conservative side of A2K. That you can defend using such language is beyond my understanding.

Please look at those words and decide if you would use them in pulic, in describing people around you, within hearing. Then think about using them here on a2k, where there are many, many different ethnic groups represented. Do you still think there is nothing wrong with your language?

I like the public office idea.

Brandon, what do you know of Bosnia and Croatia?