October 01, 2003

You mean, like Sheikh Timothy McVeigh?

Any idea what the count of people with the honorific 'Sheikh" is?

Have you ever noticed that it's often men who do this plotting, too?

Frank,
Maybe you could offer your services to the Sheik's legal defense team. And there's another noble wise man-Sheik Ahmed Yassin who could make use of your cultural insights, when he's not otherwise occupied dodging missiles.

No thanks, Stephen, I'm not that sort. But if you want to sound me out in advance of your posting, to make sure you're thinking is sufficiently rigorous, I'd be more than happy to help!

Frank,

What's your point(s) exactly?

Marek, that Stephen unnecessarily (and inaccurately) slurs the broader group of people who call themselves Sheikhs.

Aw, c'mon, Frank, it wouldn't be Horsefeathers without the unnecessary slurs. Why stop with valid complaints about terrorists?

Well Frank, sheikh is hardly like "Mr." now is it? The statistical relevance in Stephen's point still stands.

Or have you never lumped a group of people together behind a term that a statistically large number of the scummier amongst them have also used?

Really? How very noble of you.

Deb, no, I don't believe I've ever done the slurring that Stephen has done here with his flippant opening. (Would you have reacted differently to someone making an anti-semitic joke? I hope so -- I'm sorry Stephen did this post the way he did.)

I don't think Stephen's statistics are reliable. If he wants to present them, fine. But how many suicide bombers have borne the title Sheikh, or have actually been traced back to someone bearing that name?

And whether or not "Mr." has the same implications that "Sheikh" has, there is this strong tendency (so far) for terrorists, suicide bombers, and mass murderers to be men. Would I slur men? No.

A 10th grader could have made the same point without the slur. An opening like, "Have terrorist Sheiks read the definition of 'sheik' lately?"

Sheik, imam, ayatollah, caliph, whatever. Islam is found behind all of these titles, and others as well -- and where Islam is dominant, there is racism, sexism, savagery, brutality, slavery, medievalism, and lust for the blood of the "infidel."

Until "moderate" Muslims marshal the courage to detoxify their sacred texts, renounce the sword, and condemn those who would impose Islam and shari'a on the whole world by force, you will turn your back on a Muslim at the risk of your life.

Francis offers painful truths. Where are the moderate sheiks? Sheik Omar—murderer of Danny Pearl? Sheik Yassim, planner of the murders of hundreds of innocent Israelis? Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, in prison for the first attack on the WTC.? and on and on. The passion shown by some against imaginary "slurs" is in sharp contrast to the absence of passion in defense of the real lives lost by innocent victims of these savages.

Asking where the moderates are is kind of like asking why there aren't stories about dogs biting men. It's the immoderates that make the news these days. Think about the Roman Catholic priests who have been written up in the past year, for instance: do you see ink being given to their poverty outreach programs or their visits to the sick and dying? No, of course not: you read about the molesters.

Stephen,
Those moderate sheikhs you ask about, they are waiting for Frank and Hired to send their contributions in to their "chairty" so they can fly first class to Saudi Arabia, and learn how to build bombs to kill 4 year olds.

Oh I get it now Frank, "moderates" are the equivalent of "dogs biting men". I hate to think of what the immoderates must be like.

Stephen, what I meant, of course, is that moderates are not news. The news focuses on the negative, just as with progress in the rebuilding of Iraq.

Frank
So why aren't your moderates standing up and being counted? You would think if they truly disagreed with what was being portrayed someone would show up and say so.

logicop,
I don't know. Why were there so many more marching against the war in the US than marched for it?

Frank
Zero knowledge on moderates, didn't sound like you were uninformed in your previous posts. Regarding marchers, I saw 2500+ in my home town, oh plus the 200,000 plus dressed in OD green.

I don't know what your home town is, maybe 2,500 is a lot. Across the country as a whole, far more marched against the war than for it (something like a factor of ten). Either the instensity of feeling for the war was not as strong, or visual displays is no way to measure it... Same as looking for the moderate mosque leaders. The newspapers just don't print that stuff, like dog bites man.

Frank
So if the report is "all dogs are rabid" you don't think the dog owners should contradict that report? Right now the perception is very much that all those dogs may bite.

The poroblem with Islam is that unlike Christianity in the 16th century it never underwent a Reformatin/Counter Reformation.

Joel
I know next to nothing about religious history but didn't the reformation split Christianity into hundreds of subset sects. Considering the vast number of sects in Islam is there a possibility they are just now going through their reformation? (Maybe not for the better)

Concerning the matter of public perception and faith, it does seem there is rather a paucity of Islamic condemnation of those who would cloak their murderous deeds with a turban of virtue. And I have a hard time buying the line that such a reaction wouldn't be newsworthy--especially given the current environment, in which (I am sure) the majority of Americans are eager to hear an authoritative Islamic voice speak out against the violence being done in the name of Islam. Sure, the outrageous act or pronouncement is always newsworthy, but the counter-reaction is too. Can you imagine the outcry and condemnation if, say, a Jerry Falwell presumed to speak for Christianity by offering the opinion that Jews were going to Hell because they didn't believe in Jesus? I'm sure that would get a reaction from unlike-minded believers, just as I'm sure the press would cover it.

Time to revise the dictionary: Sheikh - an individual of confused sexual orientation typically found fellating a camel.

M. Murcek, while we're at it, let's put your picture under the definition of "idiot."

Tooo Funny, HC! You really got him with that one. Here, have some more Alpo.

Heh.

Wow - another insightful rebutal from Hired. It must take seconds to formulate those responses.

You all just don't understand: when you speak in such primitive terms, you isolate yourselves. Don't you know you're making yourselves extremists?

Idiots.

Ouch!

(And here I was, trying my best to remain calm and rational.)

Hired
When your logic fails;
Ad Hominem
Ad Hominem
Ad Hominem

Logiccop, I guess you can't see it. This blog is full of anger, and cannot see good in anyone. Not just where it's really difficult (like terrorists), but in all with whom they disagree.

Hired
To assure my own objectivity I re-read every post in this comments section, I didn't find a single post that countered Stephen's original statement. I did find many questioning why the Muslim community in general and their leaders specifically didn't see the need to condemn the killing of innocents, other than Frank's -Dog Bites Man I didn't find any rationale for the silence in the Muslim community. In rereading your posts, I again don't find any rebutal to Stephen's original statement nor any real insight on the silence by Muslims, I did find -slurs, 10th grader and idiot. If you perceive anger in others posts provide the facts that counterpoint that anger, idiot usually isn't a good counterpoint.

Gratitude is born in hearts that take time to count up past mercies.

For every action there is an equal and opposite government program.