Do conservatives who say there is no dissent within Islam live in caves?

Question

Every Muslim I've talked to or seen on TV or read about does nothing but condemn 911 and Al Qaeda. Yet some conservatives (I'll admit it was Ruth's comment in the "Why do people think Muslims are terrorists?" question earlier) refuse to recognize that greater Islam stands against terrorism.

And where is the dissent against Bush within the conservative community (and I mean logical dissent not foaming at the mouth maniacs like Michael Savage nee Wiener)

Answer 1

Starting out with such a broad generalization does not give you a lot of credibility, but I'll try to answer the intent of the question anyway.

Most conservatives...not the foaming-at-the-mouth kind...recognize that the broad Muslim community does not support radical Islamic terrorists. What upsets and concerns us is the lack of public outcry from their community. It's fine to say they don't support terrorism to you privately, but where are the marches in the street, the Muslim leaders taking every opportunity to speak out against the attrocities, the notifying of authorities of cells within their midst, etc.? THAT is what upsets us.

Conservative spokespeople criticize the Muslim community for being silent on the subject. The risk they take by being quiet about it is that there is an understandable assumption that "if you aren't for us...you must be against us." And when (notice I didn't say "if") a terrorist attack returns to our soil, the tendency to look at ALL Muslims as being a risk will be very high if they haven't positioned themselves firmly on our side.

Answer 2

The conservatives know that there are two segments within Islam. The mainstream Islam and the fundies that want to kill everyone. This division is not even along the lines of the SHia and Sunni. Terrorism is found within some 15% of the entire religion. Granted in a religion that claims membership of 2 Billion people the terrorist supporters range in the numbers of 300 million. But not ALL Muslims are Terrorists: Just like NOT all liberals are idiots.

There is a question on where is the vocal objection to the terrorism from the mainstream Islam community?

Answer 3

I think you're wrong if you think there aren't many parts of the Muslim community that refuse to condemn 9/11. One in three British Muslims see Western society as "immoral and should be brought to an end" (Daily Telegraph poll),
Extremism in the Middle East is many times stronger.

Answer 4

I've seen ONE man talk poorly about the radical Muslims... Only one man talk bad about the actions of 9/11, Al-Qaeda, etc.

I saw 1,000s dancing at the news of the 9/11 attacks!!!

Why should there be any dissent against Bush? Logically it makes sense. Hussein never fully accounted for the chemical and biological weapons that he was harboring. We know he had them because he used some on the Iranians, Kuwaitis, and his own people. The UN inspectors didn't find them, Hussein didn't account for them. "Uh, suuuure you disposed of them properly... You've always been an upstanding man..."

What would you do? Wait until they show up on your shores after you were already attacked by another radical group that you are unsure of if they have ties with this guy who threatened attack if you went after your attackers?

FDR was criticized for not taking action sooner with Hitler. It was thought that he could have saved 1,000,000s of lives if he hadn't waited and did a pre-emptive strike.

You can ALWAYS second guess someone after the fact. It's when it is presented to you and you have to make a decision based on what you know at the time.

I don't know that Bush knew all the facts. Maybe he was presented with false intelligence. I don't know. AT the time, he knew we had been attacked by radical Muslims, we had intelligence that Hussein had chemical and biological weapons. We also had intelligence that said he was attempting to buy uranium. Hussein had attempted to build Nuclear Plants, Israel sent jets in and destroyed them. Yet he had MORE OIL than he knew what to do with, he had hydro plants...

The logical question would be, "Why does he need Nuclear Power?" Especially when you have an abundance of two other forms of energy. You realize that there are four HUGE rivers with Hydroelectrical plants on two of them (maybe were is the operative word, now)...

He could increase production of Hydro Power or Oil Production at any time he wanted.

As a person responsible for millions of lives, do you go with what you know to be true or you suspect to be reliable intelligence or do you wait to see if the intelligence is false?

Now to put it in perspective, you might have a nuclear bomb, a chemical, or biological bomb show up on your shores. Your intelligence sources tell you, "It's possible..." You never expected 9/11 to happen.

You can no longer say, "that'll never happen..." They never thought that private passenger airlines would be used as weapons against us. They thought it possible. They didn't think it could happen on US soil.

Welcome to the NEW world. You now have to make a decision based on possibly faulty intelligence, YET you don't know how accurate. It's 9/12 and you're told that more attacks are on the way. Before 9/11, you thought no one would use a highjacked airliner as a weapon. Everyone poo pooed the idea.

Now, you're looking at a nation looking to you for answers to numerous questions. Congress is no help. They're auditioning for American Idol singing "God Bless America." One chorus very poorly.

What do you do? So, you attack Iraq... You overthrow the dictator. Do you leave the nation in shambles? Do you make it so weak that another extremist group could come in and say, "see this is what America does." It puts you in the poor house. It takes what it wants and leaves you unable to protect yourself.

Now has Iraq's government dragged it's feet in getting set up for NEW leadership. I think it has. What about the military? You want to send it up against the terrorists without training and testing?

It's really easy to arm chair quarterback with hindsight. It's more difficult to have foresight. In a perfect world, I guess Bush would have known that Hussein was just misunderstood. He wasn't out to conquer, he merely wanted to increase his borders.

Answer 5

of course we don't live in caves and you would be wise to open your mind a bit and heed what Michael Savage has to say. There is sectarian dissent among the shi ites and sunnis who both hold very differing objectives. the sooner you libs get this, the better off everyone will be.

Answer 6

There may be three or four out there but most understand that it's not every Muslim. The thing that mystifies most is, where was the Muslim outrage over 9/11?

Answer 7

OK lets say for fun their is dissent.
Why are they not vocal about it?
Case in point the Imams who after 3 independent investigations all came to the same point the airline acted properly. But CAIR still cares them around like victims.
Or how about that Muslims who wrote an editoral in Tusla, OK saying Muslims should speak out on terrrorism. What did his fellow believers do? Kick him out told him not to come back tell he apologizes. His crime? He spoke bad about other Muslims in front of on "non-believers".

They scream we should be tolerant of them but we are not allow to even carry a Bible into their countries. A British Airways flight attentant was told she couldn't have a Bible on the flights she was on into Saudia Arabia.

Or how about the land down under a Muslim took a Bible piss on it and burn it. The father's reaction? He wanted more protection for his son. Do you remember what their reaction was when the fake story about flushing the Qran and how they rioted?

Lets put the Numbers in Perspective about the Muslims attacks.

More people are killed by Islamists each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.
http://www.crisismagazine.com/october2003/madden.htm

Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/shipp/lynchingyear.html

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/violence/death95w.htm

19 Muslim hijackers killed more innocents in two hours on September 11th than the number of American criminals executed in the last 65 years.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/ESPYdate.pdf

Sorry bud but I can't hear the Muslims anymore because there actions speak so loud I can't hear what they are saying.

Answer 8

I think it's because the Liberal Media won't show us any of that. They want to only show people the Muslim's that are against us and not the ones that support us and condemn 911 and Al Qaeda.