Exploiting the Prophet

By Nicholas D. Kristof | The New York Times | September 22, 2012 | [Original Article]

So why do parts of the Islamic world erupt in violence over insults to the Prophet Muhammad? Should we curb the freedom to insult religions that are twitchy?

I think a few things are going on. The first is that many Muslim countries lack a tradition of free speech, and see ridicule of the prophet as part of a larger narrative of the West’s invading or humiliating the Islamic world. People in these countries sometimes also have an addled view of how the United States handles blasphemy.

Remember also that it’s not just Muslims who periodically go berserk, but everybody — particularly in societies with large numbers of poorly educated young men. Upheavals are often more about demography than about religion: the best predictor of civil conflict is the share of a population that is aged 15 to 24. In the 19th century, when the United States brimmed with poorly educated young men, Protestants rioted against Catholics.

More broadly, this is less about offensive videos than about a political war unfolding in the Muslim world. For his time, Muhammad was socially progressive, and that’s a thread that reformers want to recapture. Mahmoud Salem, the Egyptian blogger better known as Sandmonkey, wrote that violent protests were “more damaging to Islam’s reputation than a thousand so-called ‘Islam-attacking films.’ ”

But it would be a mistake to back off and censor our kooks. The freedom to be an imbecile is one of our core values.

In any case, there will always be other insults. As some leading Muslims have noted, Islam has to learn to shrug them off. My bet is that we’ll see more turbulence in the Arab world, but that countries like Egypt and Tunisia and Libya won’t fall over a cliff. A revolution isn’t an event, but a process.

10 differences between white terrorists and other terrorists

By Prof.Juan Cole

1.  White terrorists are called “gunmen.”What does that even mean? A person with a gun? Wouldn’t that be, like, everyone in the US? Other terrorists are called, like, “terrorists.” 
2. White terrorists are “troubled loners.” Other terrorists are always suspected of being part of a global plot, even when they are obviously troubled loners. 
3. Doing a study on the danger of white terrorists at the Department of Homeland Security will get you sidelined by angry white Congressmen. Doing studies on other kinds of terrorists is a guaranteed promotion. 
4. The family of a white terrorist is interviewed, weeping as they wonder where he went wrong. The families of other terrorists are almost never interviewed. 
5. White terrorists are part of a “fringe.” Other terrorists are apparently mainstream. 
6. White terrorists are random events, like tornadoes. Other terrorists are long-running conspiracies. 
7. White terrorists are never called “white.” But other terrorists are given ethnic affiliations. 
8. Nobody thinks white terrorists are typical of white people. But other terrorists are considered paragons of their societies. 
9. White terrorists are alcoholics, addicts or mentally ill. Other terrorists are apparently clean-living and perfectly sane. 
10. There is nothing you can do about white terrorists. Gun control won’t stop them. No policy you could make, no government program, could possibly have an impact on them. But hundreds of billions of dollars must be spent on police and on the Department of Defense, and on TSA, which must virtually strip search 60 million people a year, to deal with other terrorists.

A Quiet Campaign of Violence Against American Muslims

By Peter Beinart | TheDailyBeast | August 20, 2012 | [Original Article]

"When muslim extremists attacked their third American church in three days, the cable networks cut away from regular programming to cover the news. When militants vandalized a Christian school in Illinois two days later, both presidential candidates issued statements denouncing the wave of jihadist violence. When terrorists shot up another church the day after that, President Obama flew to comfort the parishioners. By the sixth attack, Rush Limbaugh was demanding that the Obama administration ditch its politically correct pussyfooting and acknowledge the Muslim fifth column in our midst. After the seventh attack, lawmakers introduced legislation giving the feds additional powers to detain American citizens suspected of extremist views. After the attack, a group of congressmen suggested that the U.S. halt immigration from Muslim countries.

None of this happened. But in recent weeks, here’s what has. On Aug. 4, teenagers pelted a mosque in Hayward, Calif., with fruit. On Aug. 5, Wade Michael Page murdered six congregants and wounded a police officer at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, quite possibly because he thought the Sikhs were Muslim. That same day, a man vandalized a mosque in North Smithfield, R.I. On Aug. 6, a mosque in Joplin, Mo., was burned to the ground. On Aug. 7, two women threw pieces of pork at the site of a proposed Islamic center in Ontario, Calif. On Aug. 10, a man allegedly shot a pellet rifle at a mosque near Chicago while people prayed inside. On Aug. 12, attackers fired paintball guns at a mosque in Oklahoma City, and a homemade bomb filled with acid was thrown at an Islamic school in Lombard, Ill. On Aug. 15, assailants threw a Molotov cocktail at the home of a Muslim family in Panama City, Fla..." [ Read More]

Why isn’t the Colorado shooter considered a Terrorist?

By Dean Obeidallah | TheDeansReport | July 22, 2012 | [Original Article]

"James Holmes is a terrorist.

You would think this would be undisputed. But it’s not. Why? Two reasons keep coming up: 1. He had no overt political agenda for his attack and/or; 2. He is not a Muslim.

I’m sure some are saying: Why does his religion matter? Let us be honest: If James Holmes had instead been named Jalal and was Muslim, the response by the media and most Americans would be different. The presumption would be that he’s a terrorist. The political reason for the attack many say is currently missing would be a given simply because of his Muslim faith

There would be calls to increase police surveillance of American-Muslims and justifications offered for racial profiling. People like Representative Michelle Bachmann would likely claim that the attack was part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s campaign to destroy America. After all, just last week Bachmann claimed that the Muslim Brotherhood was infiltrating the US government. (I personally wish that Bachmann’s brain would be infiltrated by intelligence.)... [Read More]

...While it’s painful for some, we must as a nation come to the realization that terrorism does not come from just one religion, race or ethnicity. Terrorism knows no such bounds.

However, there is, of course, still a chance that Holmes is insane. Most undoubtedly would prefer to give Holmes the benefit of the doubt on that issue. However, I doubt most would apply that same standard if Holmes were Muslim.

The True Story of Sharia in American Courts

Abed Awad | TheNation | June 13, 2012 | [Original Article] 

"On May 21 Kansas Governor Sam Brownback signed legislation prohibiting judges in the state from considering foreign law in their rulings. The law declares that any court decision will be considered void if it relies “in whole or in part on any foreign law, legal code or system that would not grant the parties affected by the…decision the same fundamental liberties, rights and privileges granted under the United States and Kansas constitutions.”

The real target of the law goes unnamed. “This [bill] doesn’t say ‘Sharia law,’” Republican State Senator Chris Steineger said in a speech that condemned the legislation for discriminating against Muslims, “but that’s how it was marketed back in January and all session long—and I have all the e-mails to prove it."

"...From a legal perspective, the wave of anti-Sharia legislation should be much ado about nothing. Sharia is as much a threat to our Constitution as Bible verses calling for the stoning of adulterers or the genocidal directive in Deuteronomy to leave “alive nothing that breathes.” Like the Old and New Testaments, Sharia has its own conflicts and tensions with modern conceptions of gender equality and citizenship. To suggest that banning Sharia or the Bible is the only way to ward off the stoning of women or the execution of apostates is clearly, maliciously false...

...However absurd, the notion that radical Muslims are trying to take over the country seems to be catching on. A 2011 poll by the Public Religion Research Institute showed that 30 percent of Americans believe Muslims want to establish Sharia in the United States. The percentage was even higher—52 percent—among those who said they most trust Fox News..." [Read More]

An alternative to spying on and profiling Muslims for law enforcement officials

By Nezar Hamze | GSNmagazine.com | June 26, 2012 | [Original Article] 

As law enforcement agencies strive to keep our nation safe from terrorists, a growing amount of controversy and distrust regarding the unconstitutional practices of religious and ethnic profiling by law enforcement is being reported from around the country.

There is a group within the NYPD that spies on and profiles Muslims, countless reports of federal agents recruiting informants and/or provocateurs into Muslim communities and Rep Peter King’s congressional hearings about the “Radicalization of the American Muslim Community.”

On the flipside, we have Muslim communities working diligently with law enforcement at all levels, such as the Muslim American Homeland Security Congress and the Florida Muslim Congress, to build safe communities and open direct lines of communications to counter terrorism. The Departments of Justice and Homeland Security have also released the BCOT program. Together, these leaders are training community members and giving them the tools to interact with law enforcement at an institutional level.

Each agency needs to ask itself about the kind of relationship it has with the Muslim community? Is its relationship built on deception and secrecy, or transparency and public awareness? Or does the agency even engage with Muslims?

If an agency wants to foster a healthy partnership with the Muslim community, whether or not it is on a local, regional or national scale, it needs to develop a strong and transparent relationship. This means developing public participation , which mutually benefits the Muslim community, creates safe environments and enhances public awareness.

Our opportunity in Florida?

I’m not going to sugar-coat the number of Muslims that have been indicted on terrorism charges in Florida since the tragedy of 9/11 -- there have been 33. Nor will I sensationalize this data and say Muslims are the only ones being indicted on terrorism charges; they aren’t. But, effective leadership goes beyond recognizing conflict; it goes beyond pointing the finger. The Muslim leadership in South Florida has created a SMART plan outlined below to work with law enforcement, which can be duplicated easily around the country.

Educate the Muslim community


Give the Muslim community all the facts, don’t sensationalize or sugar-coat the problem. Share the impact of the problem that you are facing and explain in detail how you must respond as law enforcement officials. Offer factual data and put the areas of concern into perspective, give the community some ownership. Educate the community on programs your agency has in place in which they can participate, and make the Muslim community part of the solution. Have open community meetings to accomplish this or go to the mosques for a more personal visit. Bring literature, lots of it. Muslims love to read.

Give the Muslim community the knowledge and tools to report suspicious or criminal behavior


These tools are important. The understanding of different types of behavior that indicate possible criminal activity is a good place to start educating people. Your focus on gang units can be an excellent resource, because terrorists and gangs share a lot of similar behavior patterns. Creating open lines of communication between LEO’s and the Muslim community is crucial. To accomplish this, the Muslim community must be aware of the different methods they can use to report activity. They must also have a basic level of trust with the LEO agent or agency. Giving Muslims the tools to identify a problematic behavior and then report it should not be taken for granted. Doing this may be as simple as providing “crime stopper” materials in different languages, or as complex as training sessions detailing the different FTO organizations that have known affiliates in your area.

Continuously create an atmosphere of public awareness and trust


This trust is not easily obtained. It is a process that takes effort from law enforcement and the Muslim community.
Create public awareness of the programs that your institution currently has in place, such as crime stoppers, citizens academies, community policing and youth programs. Invite all communities, including Muslims, to participate and be a part of your agency. Quarterly town hall meetings are a great tool to start the relationship.
Attend different events within the community. Believe me, you are welcome at any Muslim community activity.
Educate the Muslim communities on the problems you are facing and bring them to the table on creating SMART plans to deal with the areas of concern.
Give your community the tools to report suspicious or criminal behavior, including contact info for the FBI, crime stoppers, your contact info or SARS. Crime stoppers is a great tool because it allows the reporter to remain anonymous.
Reward your Muslim citizens for participating in your programs -- positive reinforcement goes a long way.
Treat all members of your community fairly.

Working together as partners to keep our country safe at a grassroots level will accomplish more in one year than one thousand congressional hearings. Sheriff Leroy Baca said it best: “The Muslim American community plays a vital role in protecting the people of the United States. Their participation and our continuing effort to both educate and engage community support is essential to the entire Homeland Security endeavor.”

Nezar Hamze is the Executive Director of South Florida Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR FL).

When 'studying while Muslim' is probable cause

By Dean Obeidallah | February 22, 2012 | CNN.com | [Original Article]

"...(CNN) -- First, there was "Flying While Muslim." This expression summed up the extra challenges of being an American Muslim when flying on commercial airlines..."Dress white, make your flight. Dress brown, never leave town.But now there is something new: "Studying While Muslim." And there is nothing funny about it..." [Read More]

"...The New York Police Department has been engaged in the weekly surveillance of American Muslim college groups...including New York University, Yale, Rutgers and the University of Pennsylvania..."[Read More]

"...The NYPD also sent an undercover officer on a whitewater rafting trip organized by Muslim students at the City College of New York. The NYPD report indicates the students prayed four times a day and talked a lot about the nature of Islam. No mention if Muslims were good at whitewater rafting..." [Read More]

"...Apparently, to the NYPD, being Muslim equals probable cause..." [Read More]

"...Let's be brutally honest: If the NYPD were engaged in this type of widespread spying on any other religious, ethnic or racial group, the criticism would be deafening. However, because the case involves Muslims, the silence is deafening. There is simply no public outcry and little media coverage..." [Read More]

"...whites comprise 44% of New York City residents, but they make up only 9% of those stopped by the NYPD. But blacks -- who comprise 25% of New Yorkers --- represent 59% of those stopped and questioned by the NYPD.It appears that the use of skin color, ethnicity and religion as the basis for investigations is standard NYPD policy..." [Read More]

"...NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly needs to make it clear that illegal profiling has no place in his department..." [Read More]

New York Times Article Understates How Overstated Islamic Terrorism Threat Really Is

By Danios |LoonWatch.com| Posted on 08 February 2012 | [Original Article]

The New York Times recently reported on a study that showed how exaggerated the threat of “Islamic” terrorism is–how “Radical Muslim Americans Pose Little Threat.” The article is a good one, but in fact, it doesn’t adequately convey how truly minuscule the threat is. I’ll reproduce the article below and then briefly recount why Americans (and Europeans) shouldn’t fear Islamic terrorism at all:...

...Here are some key points that the article could have included to have truly conveyed how absolutely minuscule the threat of Islamic terrorism is to Americans (and Europeans):
According to the FBI’s own database (available from 1980-2005), less than 6% of terrorist attacks in America were committed by Muslims.
Europol has been documenting terrorism for the last half decade. Their annual terrorism reports show that less than 1% of terrorism in Europe involves Muslims.
Since 9/11–which was over a decade ago–zero U.S. civilians have been killed by Islamic terrorists.
Similarly, zero European civilians have been killed by Islamic terrorists in the last half decade. In fact, the only injuries incurred from Islamic terrorism were to a security guard who “was slightly wounded.” Perhaps the “anti-jihadist” blogosphere should find this one security guard and give him a medal of honor and declare him a martyr for the cause... [Read Full Article]

[While all violence is deplorable, this image show how we have a double standard when condemning people of different race, nationality, religion, or culture]

Interview with Hassan Shibly: Our Constitution

                                         

Tampa Islamophobes: Hating "All American Muslim" for "All the Wrong Reasons"

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Kabulvision - A New Lowe
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

The Florida Family Association (FFA), David Canton's Tampa based organization has exposed itself as an anti-Muslim hate organization by calling on advertisers not to support TLC's "All American Muslim" because they claim the show "is propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda's clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values. "

See: The Daily Show (Sample Clip Above, Full Coverage Here)

The assumption of the FFA is that the majority of American Muslims are not "ordinary" but rather subscribe to an anti-American "agenda;" That belief in Islam is inherently tantamount to supporting extremism; that Islam is not compatible with American values; and that a balanced show on Muslim's should focus on extremists, terrorists, and woman-abusers.

This is clearly an affront on the entire American Muslim community and is no different than conspiracy theories promoted against Jews by Anti-Semites, or racist attacks against African Americans by white supremacists.

The FFA cites Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, both of whom have been labeled as extremist hate group leaders by the Southern Poverty Law Center. In its profile on extremism the Jewish Anti-Defamation League states that Spencer's and Geller's hate group, Stop Islamization of America, "promotes a conspiratorial anti-Muslim agenda under the guise of fighting radical Islam. The group seeks to rouse public fears by consistently vilifying the Islamic faith and asserting the existence of an Islamic conspiracy to destroy "American" values."

While such bigoted remarks by hate group leaders would not normally merit media attention, the fact that a major corporation, Lowe's, caved into pressure by the hate groups and legitimized their claims, raises the concern of the Muslim community that conspiratory anti-Muslim rhetoric is increasingly becoming acceptable in the public discourse

 

See also: Lowe's Pulls Ads from Muslim Reality Tv Show

CAIR Tampa therefore calling on the community at large to use this as an opportunity to engage in dialog and to get to know your Muslim Neighbor. Contact the CAIR Tampa office to arrange an interfaith program, mosque visit, or civic engagement collaboration. Email info@tampa.cair.or call 813-541-4321 9am-2pm.

Listen to Hassan Shibly discuss the controversy surrounding this issue on 88.5 fm by clicking here.

Updated Europol Data: Less Than 1% of Terrorist Attacks by Muslims

Taken from Islamophobia Today [Read Full Original Article Here]

The most popular article ever published on LoonWatch was released in January of 2010: that article showed that, according to the official FBI website, only 6% of terrorist attacks in the United States from 1980-2005 (the only years where data was available) were committed by Muslims.

I published a follow-up article to look at the picture across the pond: I cited official data from Europol, which releases an annual terrorism report entitled EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT). The first available such report was for the year 2006.  The data from 2006, 2007, and 2008showed that about 0.4% of terrorist attacks in the European Union were committed by Muslims–less than 1% (actually, less than half of 1%).

Today, I’d like to update our readers with new Europol data: the data for 2009 and 2010is now available.

Once again, a minuscule percentage of terrorist attacks in Europe were committed by Muslims.  In 2009 and 2010, there were a grand total of 543 terrorist attacks, of which only 4 were committed by Muslims.  This means that only 0.7% of terrorist attacks–again, less than 1%–were committed by Muslims.

In spite of this fact, all we ever hear about in the media and national discourse is the threat of “Islamist terrorism.” The data, however, does not support such fear-mongering.   Yet, it is amazing how many people will persist in the belief that “Islamist terrorism” is an existential threat to America and Europe.

...Muslims are arrested at a rate that does not correlate with the actual number of terrorist acts committed by Muslims simply because the majority of them are arrested not for actual, attempted, or even planned terrorist attacks.  Rather, they are arrested for “providing material support for terrorism”–the absolutest vaguest of charges, one that I suspect a future generation will be smart enough to prohibit by law.  Using such Gestapo style laws, Muslims can be arrested for mere suspicion of being part of an unknown terrorist organization, with little or no proof needed to levy such charges; alternatively, they can be arrested for “financing terrorism,” which often just means donating to charities that even the government hasn’t banned yet.  Other offenses for which Muslims are arrested for include producing “propaganda”, which here in the U.S. would be considered Constitutionally protected freedom of speech (but is now prosecuted due to the curtailing of freedoms of speech in the War on of Terror) or even for merely expressing unpopular political views...

We’ve all heard the oft-repeated saying of Islamophobes that “all Muslims might not be terrorists, but (almost) all terrorists are Muslims!”  Without any shadow of doubt, this mantra is patently false.  Not just that, but certainly in the case of Europe it’s completely reversed from reality: all Muslims aren’t terrorists, and almost no terrorist attacks are committed by them–less than 1%.

Non-Muslim with "Israel" tattoo fires on White House -- nothing to see here - move along

A man with a tatoo saying "Israel" fired bullets at our nation's White House, trying to kill the president.

Clearly this man represents nothing more than his own troubled self. Yet, imagine the uproar that would have ensued had his tatoo said "Palestine" or "Saudi"... Doube standard much?

Watching No News Better Than Watching Fox News?

Fox News viewers less informed about current events, poll shows

By Michael A. Memoli | LA Times

A new survey of New Jersey voters comes to a provocative conclusion: Fox News viewers tend to be less informed about current events than those who don't watch any news at all.

Fairleigh Dickinson University recently questioned 612 adults in New Jersey about how they get their news, offering as options traditional outlets like newspapers and local and national television news, or blogs, websites and even Comedy Central's "The Daily Show."

They then asked a series of factual questions about the major events of the last year, from the "Arab Spring" to the Republican race for president.

For example, respondents were first asked whether, to the best of their knowledge, opposition groups in Egypt had been successful in bringing down the Mubarak regime.

Among NPR listeners, 68% correctly said they had been; only 49% of Fox News viewers answered correctly. In fact, the survey found, Fox viewers were 18 percentage points less likely to answer correctly than those who watched no news at all.

"The results show us that there is something about watching Fox News that leads people to do worse on these questions than those who don't watch any news at all," said Dan Cassino, a political science professor at Fairleigh Dickinson.

Those who watched Sunday public affairs shows tended to be the best informed on current events, the survey found. Readers of national newspapers also were more likely to respond correctly.

And it seems Jon Stewart may be more reliable than cable news anchors. On Occupy Wall Street, the survey found viewers of "The Daily Show" were 12 percentage points more likely to say protesters were predominantly Democratic.MSNBC viewers were the most likely to say the protesters were mainly Republicans.

"Jon Stewart has not spent a lot of time on some of these issues. But the results show that when he does talk about something, his viewers pick up a lot more information than they would from other sources," Cassino said.

The overall survey, conducted from Oct. 17 to 23, had a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points. Because of the smaller sample size among those who selected a specific news source, the margin of error would be much higher.

14 Propaganda Techniques Fox “News” Uses to Brainwash Americans

by THETOTALCOLLAPSE.COM

There is nothing more sacred to the maintenance of democracy than a free press. Access to comprehensive, accurate and quality information is essential to the manifestation of Socratic citizenship – the society characterized by a civically engaged, well-informed and socially invested populace. Thus, to the degree that access to quality information is willfully or unintentionally obstructed, democracy itself is degraded.

It is ironic that in the era of 24-hour cable news networks and “reality” programming, the news-to-fluff ratio and overall veracity of information has declined precipitously. Take the fact Americans now spend on average about 50 hours a week using various forms of media, while at the same time cultural literacy levels hover just above the gutter. Not only does mainstream media now tolerate gross misrepresentations of fact and history by public figures (highlighted most recently by Sarah Palin’s ludicrous depiction of Paul Revere’s ride), but many media actually legitimize these displays. Pause for a moment and ask yourself what it means that the world’s largest, most profitable and most popular news channel passes off as fact every whim, impulse and outrageously incompetent analysis of its so-called reporters. How did we get here? Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief thatSaddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn’t real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn’t born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job. All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?

My curiosity about this question compelled me to sit down and document the most oft-used methods by which willful ignorance has been turned into dogma by Fox News and other propagandists disguised as media. The techniques I identify here also help to explain the simultaneously powerful identification the Fox media audience has with the network, as well as their ardent, reflexive defenses of it.

The good news is that the more conscious you are of these techniques, the less likely they are to work on you. The bad news is that those reading this article are probably the least in need in of it.

1. Panic Mongering. This goes one step beyond simple fear mongering. With panic mongering, there is never a break from the fear. The idea is to terrify and terrorize the audience during every waking moment. From Muslims to swine flu to recession to homosexuals to immigrants to the rapture itself, the belief over at Fox seems to be that if your fight-or-flight reflexes aren’t activated, you aren’t alive. This of course raises the question: why terrorize your own audience? Because it is the fastest way to bypasses the rational brain. In other words, when people are afraid, they don’t think rationally. And when they can’t think rationally, they’ll believe anything.

2. Character Assassination/Ad Hominem. Fox does not like to waste time debating the idea. Instead, they prefer a quicker route to dispensing with their opponents: go after the person’s credibility, motives, intelligence, character, or, if necessary, sanity. No category of character assassination is off the table and no offense is beneath them. Fox and like-minded media figures also use ad hominem attacks not just against individuals, but entire categories of people in an effort to discredit the ideas of every person who is seen to fall into that category, e.g. “liberals,” “hippies,” “progressives” etc. This form of argument – if it can be called that – leaves no room for genuine debate over ideas, so by definition, it is undemocratic. Not to mention just plain crass.

3. Projection/Flipping. This one is frustrating for the viewer who is trying to actually follow the argument. It involves taking whatever underhanded tactic you’re using and then accusing your opponent of doing it to you first... (Read the rest)