Powered by WebAds

Thursday, December 04, 2008

The truth about Muslim attitudes towards terrorism

Using a Tom Friedman article in Tuesday's New York Times that asked why there are no protests from the Muslim world against what happened in Mumbai last week, Captain Ed hits the nail on the head:

Has Friedman seen massive protests in the streets against radical Islamist terrorists in these Muslim countries, ever? Did any of them protest the 9/11 attacks, or the Madrid attack, or any of the large-scale attacks on Western civilians or previous attacks in India at all? Either we heard ululating or deafening silence, punctuated with a few diplomatic missives about solidarity and the occasional criticism on the effect the attacks have on Muslims.

In other words, we can either expect delight or a collective yawn from the Muslim world. It’s been a week since the attacks commenced. Thus far, all we’ve gotten is the latter. Why would this surprise Friedman, given the history?

And what does that tell us about the attitude towards the terrorists among the Muslim nations? They may not endorse terrorist attacks, but they certainly don’t strenuously object to them, either. While we’re wringing our hands over interrogation techniques, and not for bad reasons, they’re indifferent to mass murder. At some point, the world — or in Friedman’s tiresome terminology, the “village” — will have to come to terms with that reality.

Muslims will not care about terrorist attacks until the cost becomes too high for them. The risk-to-reward ratio hasn’t reached that level yet, and probably hasn’t come near it. Mewling about the “village” and asking for a little outrage won’t do it, either.

We see those distorted reactions here in Israel all the time. For example, Muslim howling about the 'occupation' and how Gaza is a 'concentration camp' versus 'Palestinian' terror attacks on Israeli civilians and suicide bombers on our buses. Yasser Arafat's and Mahmoud Abbas' inability to condemn murderous 'Palestinian' terrorism unambiguously and with a straight face versus the complaints about 'pogroms' in Gaza when Israel cuts off supplies of fuel because it's being used to make rockets. I could go on and on, but if you read this blog regularly, you probably get it. Not all Muslims are terrorists but nearly all terrorists are Muslims and nearly all Muslims sympathize with terrorism or are at least incapable of unambiguously and wholeheartedly condemning it.

But I wouldn't bet on it being a question of cost as Ed does. Sympathizing with terror against Jews and other 'infidels' is part of Islam. And religious observance is almost never a question of cost-benefit analysis. Don't expect anything to change.


At 3:24 PM, Blogger Unknown said...

The cost here is not simply money. It is economic, or more correctly, socio-economic.

The over-simpified view is, if muslims were made to pay for the terror they at least tacitly approve of, if there were consequences to the terror that they approve of, then they might rethink allowing the terror to proceed, and certainly change their views on approving of it.

This cost can be seen as a destruction of terrorist homes, resources, removal of basic supplies from their economy.

These costs force the terrorists to make hard choices. When they are forced to make hard choices, they scream.

This is exactly what we collectively must due to terrorists. Make them scream in inchoate frustration over their inability to attack due to lack of resources to execute their plans.

The world recoils when gaza is isolated, but gaza is forced to choose between guns and butter, and the world is forcibly if needed prevented from giving them either, then you will see terrorists scream and people in gaza demand butter.

This is economics 101. This is also why, until the UNRWA goes away, and the UN and the rest of the interlopers go away, who collectively prevent the 'palis' from ever getting to the point where they actually have to choose guns or butter, the terrorists will always choose guns.

This is also why any peace treaty with such 'people' is a waste of time and effort. They haven't had the hard choices forced upon them. The world is actively seeking to prevent this from happening.

This is what has to change.

The cost isn't financial that the 'palis' have to pay. The cost to the muslims who support terror, which is likely in the high 90% region, isn't financial. They have to face the loss of what they value. That is cost. Failure means they have no choice but to give up that which they love.

That is cost.

At 8:27 PM, Blogger Gail said...


Ummm...in fact, Muslims are being rewarded with special treatment everywhere and protected from "Islamophobia", which is worse than terrorism. Of course Islamophobia is non-existent, and is really part of the Islamist propaganda machine. What does exist is not "fear" of Islam, but contempt for it and all adherents.

About 52% of the Koran openly endorses or demands terrorist type activity: raping, pillaging, enslaving and killing infidels. The remaining 48% that does not was all "borrowed" from the Torah and the Christian bible. Everything good in the Koran was written earlier, more eloquently and, how should I say, more educatedly in those two books. All that Mohammed added to the religios chain was endorsement of murder and other crimes against humanity. That is his sole contribution to religious philosophy.

This is why it is apostasy to read the predecessors to the Koran (and apostasy is punishable by death). Both are far greater literary achievements, and any Muslim reading them would immediately recognize that, plus the fact that everything worthwhile in the Koran was plagarized from these two vastly superior scriptures.

I hope more people catch on.

Best regards,
Gail S

At 2:13 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

I guess what you are saying is that there is a net negative cost, or a gain, for them to behave like miscreants.

This must be corrected.

The cost for misbehavior has to be made very large. Grossly disproportionate with their behavior. Until they learn to behave.

At 12:50 PM, Blogger Belltown Flood Relief Dessert Mixer said...

Umm.... seriously? Why don't you try doing just a little bit of research before making accusations like that.



This is the result of two very quick google searches. I was in Pakistan at the time of 9/11. All schools had a special assembly in the morning, with all students praying for the victims of 9/11. Many students wore black to mourn the day and condemn the attacks. These are things I personally saw, so I'm not depending on any form of media, or biased coverage in case you might be tempted to think in that direction.

It would be much better if instead of just trying to propagate more hate, you tried and found common ground and resolve issues.

At 12:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think this is a great blog, and I would like to Post a Comment

There has been some recent news you might like to hear.Obama is making it better for us already! There has been an increase of money availability to everyone. Due to recession there is increased funding for all types of grants. Even lenders are bending over backwards to bail you out too. Regardless of statistics, there is people getting tons of cheap money for personal use, investments,start businesses, buy homes, pay off debt, and more. Bailout is for YOU


Post a Comment

<< Home