The growth of radical Islam

[Rudey]

Do you believe there is a growth?

Is your belief really the truth?

What can be done about it?

-Rudey
--I created this thread for people like _Opi_ who want to talk about it.

[_Opi_]

Actually I don't want to talk about it. But nice try anyway

[Rudey]

Originally posted by _Opi_
Actually I don't want to talk about it. But nice try anyway

Do you believe that radical Islam has not grown?

-Rudey

[moe.ron]

I don't. I just think the media is more intensed about it. Is there evidence that is growing? Haven't seen it. South East Asia, it's waning. It was cool for a while, then the ideology just quitely faded away. The JI is on the run and has very little support. And I would have SEA as a good garner of whether or not radical Islam is growing. There are more Muslim in Indonesia and Malaysia then the entire Middle East combine. Plus, arguably the largest civil Islamic organization hail from Indonesia, the NU. They claim up to 30 million members. With Muhammadiyah claiming around 18 million.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by moe.ron
I don't. I just think the media is more intensed about it. Is there evidence that is growing? Haven't seen it. South East Asia, it's waning. It was cool for a while, then the ideology just quitely faded away. The JI is on the run and has very little support. And I would have SEA as a good garner of whether or not radical Islam is growing. There are more Muslim in Indonesia and Malaysia then the entire Middle East combine. Plus, arguably the largest civil Islamic organization hail from Indonesia, the NU. They claim up to 30 million members. With Muhammadiyah claiming around 18 million.

Is it growing/has it grown within the Western hemisphere and the Arab world?

Perhaps we should look into the majority of the funding for Islamic research. Arya would you happen to know which country it comes from?

-Rudey

[moe.ron]

Originally posted by Rudey
Is it growing/has it grown within the Western hemisphere and the Arab world?

Perhaps we should look into the majority of the funding for Islamic research. Arya would you happen to know which country it comes from?

-Rudey

Saudi Arabia. I don't know much about the Arab world, so I'm not going to comment. However, you've asked about the generality of the raise of radical Islam. I've used SEA because it has the highest concetration of Muslim anywhere in the world. Another evidence we can use is the voting behaviour of the region.

In both Malaysia and indonesia, the conservatiove Muslim parties has not gained any grounds and even lost seats. In Malaysia, PAS has lot badly because they ran the Islamic state platform. They have even lost the province that they held due to the same reasons.

Indonesia saw many of the right wing Islamic parties loosing support with the exception of PKS. PKS, however, did not run with an islamic platform. Instead, they ran under the anti-corruption platform.

It has grown since the 1970-1990 era.

Has it grown since 1990? Possibly. Is the media paying more attention to the issue now than in 1980 or 1990? Yup. Do radicals worldwide feed off the media? Yup.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by moe.ron
Saudi Arabia. I don't know much about the Arab world, so I'm not going to comment. However, you've asked about the generality of the raise of radical Islam. I've used SEA because it has the highest concetration of Muslim anywhere in the world. Another evidence we can use is the voting behaviour of the region.

In both Malaysia and indonesia, the conservatiove Muslim parties has not gained any grounds and even lost seats. In Malaysia, PAS has lot badly because they ran the Islamic state platform. They have even lost the province that they held due to the same reasons.

Indonesia saw many of the right wing Islamic parties loosing support with the exception of PKS. PKS, however, did not run with an islamic platform. Instead, they ran under the anti-corruption platform.

In South East Asia: I don't know enough about the 2 countries, but wasn't there just a bit of ethnic strife between Muslims and non-Muslims?

And, has Islam itself expanded much in those countries or has it grown just a tad while radical Islam in the west boomed?

In Arab countries and Europe: Now going back to Saudi Arabia. They are the largest sponsor of Islamic research and education and have often cut funding from those that don't believe in the version of Islam they believe. Islamic institutions throughout the world have changed because of the influx of capital from them.

Now you might not know about Arab countries, and I might know less about South East Asian Muslims, but the West is somewhere we both can find middle ground in terms of knowledge I'm sure. Has radical Islam increased in the West?

-Rudey

[moe.ron]

Afraid I don't know much about the western Islamic community either. I can tell you that sub-sahara Islamic community hasn't seen a growth in radical Islam.

For ethnic tensions, the media did a pretty bad coverage of what happen. It has more to do with tribalism then religion. Then, you mix politic and corruption, bang. Disaster awaits for all that happen to be caught in the middle of it. Islam has pretty much stabilized in both country. Approximately 88% of over 230 million Indonesians are Muslim. Of the 23 million Malaysians, I would say around 60% of them are Muslims.

In both cases, Saudi Arabia has tried hard to fund their version of islam in both countries. I would say that they succeeded somewhat, however, the success has all but dissapear. As I've said, the NU and Muhammadiyah has done a great job countering the Wahabi influence.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by moe.ron
Afraid I don't know much about the western Islamic community either. I can tell you that sub-sahara Islamic community hasn't seen a growth in radical Islam.

For ethnic tensions, the media did a pretty bad coverage of what happen. It has more to do with tribalism then religion. Then, you mix politic and corruption, bang. Disaster awaits for all that happen to be caught in the middle of it. Islam has pretty much stabilized in both country. Approximately 88% of over 230 million Indonesians are Muslim. Of the 23 million Malaysians, I would say around 60% of them are Muslims.

In both cases, Saudi Arabia has tried hard to fund their version of islam in both countries. I would say that they succeeded somewhat, however, the success has all but dissapear. As I've said, the NU and Muhammadiyah has done a great job countering the Wahabi influence.

http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=article&id=425

Here's an interesting website and article. I don't have time to delve into the influence of Saudi Arabia or growth of radical Islam, let alone any type of Islam for a bit. I am stuck actually working blah.

-Rudey

[moe.ron]

I've actually read that article. As noted, it was 2 years ago. At that time, feeling was high and the different right wing extremist where pretty much given a free hand by the government. This is because Megawati feared of isolating the people. In another word, it was politicall decision. The the Bali bombing happen, then approximately a week later, the hilton bombing. Due to these two incidents, many started to call for a crack down on the different organizations that were blatantly violating the law. The pressure was intense and the Laskar Jihad disbanded after feeling the pressure. Even within the radicals, many voiced the disapproval of the bombing and started to walk away from the organizations.

[TheEpitome1920]

My mom's Ph.D is in Islamic studies. I will ask her and report back. I'm not really not sure what you mean by 'radical' Islam.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by moe.ron
I've actually read that article. As noted, it was 2 years ago. At that time, feeling was high and the different right wing extremist where pretty much given a free hand by the government. This is because Megawati feared of isolating the people. In another word, it was politicall decision. The the Bali bombing happen, then approximately a week later, the hilton bombing. Due to these two incidents, many started to call for a crack down on the different organizations that were blatantly violating the law. The pressure was intense and the Laskar Jihad disbanded after feeling the pressure. Even within the radicals, many voiced the disapproval of the bombing and started to walk away from the organizations.

Also in regards to the Western hemisphere, there is always the issue of France which countered the growth and influence of radical Islam this year through a ban on religious items.

-Rudey

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

I believe that radical Islamic fundamentalism is growing, and I believe the growth sped up as a result of the American Christian Fundamentalists like Bush and Ashcroft using the federal government to attack areas of the world concentrated with Muslims.

(Which goes back to my stance that there would be a hell of a lot less war and violence in the past and present if Abraham had just kept it in his pants)

[TheEpitome1920]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I believe that radical Islamic fundamentalism is growing, and I believe the growth sped up as a result of the American Christian Fundamentalists like Bush and Ashcroft using the federal government to attack areas of the world concentrated with Muslims.

great observation.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I believe that radical Islamic fundamentalism is growing, and I believe the growth sped up as a result of the American Christian Fundamentalists like Bush and Ashcroft using the federal government to attack areas of the world concentrated with Muslims.

Ashcroft attacked other areas of the world?

-Rudey

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by TheEpitome1920
My mom's Ph.D is in Islamic studies. I will ask her and report back. I'm not really not sure what you mean by 'radical' Islam.

Jihadists. People who believe that all women should wear burkas, and that "infidels" should be at least oppressed, if not killed.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by IowaStatePhiPsi
I believe that radical Islamic fundamentalism is growing, and I believe the growth sped up as a result of the American Christian Fundamentalists like Bush and Ashcroft using the federal government to attack areas of the world concentrated with Muslims.

(Which goes back to my stance that there would be a hell of a lot less war and violence in the past and present if Abraham had just kept it in his pants)

The growth in radical fundamentalist Islam has NOTHING to do with anything that has happened in the US.

It predates the first Republican coalition with the religious right in 1980.

[swissmiss04]

I think religious fundamentalism in general has been on the rise since the 1970s. This movement is certainly not exclusive to Islam.

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by swissmiss04
I think religious fundamentalism in general has been on the rise since the 1970s. This movement is certainly not exclusive to Islam.

Yup, and the rise of radical Islam in the 1970s was definitely not driven by John Ashcroft in the last four years.

[IowaStatePhiPsi]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
Jihadists. People who believe that all women should wear burkas, and that "infidels" should be at least oppressed, if not killed.

You mean Wahabbists?

[RACooper]

Or my favourite media-ism: "Islamists".... come on what the hell is that supposed to mean?

[moe.ron]

Originally posted by RACooper
Or my favourite media-ism: "Islamists".... come on what the hell is that supposed to mean?

A term created by those who want to simply everything. In another word, a lazy word.

[_Opi_]

I think that you've been duped by the media, rudey. Radical Islam didn't grow, because there is no such thing. The situation with Alqieda and other terrorist groups are rather complicated, and have a very long history. In this case, I would suggest in reading up on the Muslim brotherhood (Egypt 1928), Middle-eastern conflicts since the fall of the ottoman empire, the hanbali sect of Islam that Saudis practice (especially the wahhabi movement). There is just too much history for the media's short-attention span to put together for the public. So they resort to name-shortening like Islamists, "Jihadist", Islamics, fundamentalism (not even in its original form) and sensationalising the heck out of it. In restrospect, this is not about Islam but rather politics and a strong dislike for western policies and the oil trade.

So back to the original question, is "Radical Islam" on the rise? It depends, do you think that these terrorist orgs can find recruits in the middle-east whom they can easy turn towards their cause (anti-western)? Heck yeah, you can find a large base in Iraq post-war, and Afghanistan post-war. You have alot of angry displaced guys who might view american soldiers as colonizers. And trust me, these guys are doing it for nationalistic purposes than for God. However, we can speculate all day long whether its growing or not, but the truth of the matter is, these al-qieda and the like have been barking for over 3 decades, and we've only decided to hear them now. and only after they attacked american soil. So its not really a defunct sect of Islam growing, its peoples's resentment for the wars and the willingness to fight a false-jihad.

The problem with these discussions are that people don't really know a inkling about Islam, and therefore talk about the regular stereotypes of Islam (ie burkas, which are worn in generally in Afghan) and the term "infidels" (generally used by arab-speaking folks). What most people don't seem to understand is that there are variety of denominations of Islam, much like Christianity. Also, like moe.ron stated, Islam encompasses alot of countries, ie South east Asia, Africa, N. America, S America. Not all these muslims say words like "infidel" in their regular vocab like the media portrays us to be, and not all of us speak Arabic.

[enlightenment06]

Originally posted by _Opi_
I think that you've been duped by the media, rudey. Radical Islam didn't grow, because there is no such thing. The situation with Alqieda and other terrorist groups are rather complicated, and have a very long history. In this case, I would suggest in reading up on the Muslim brotherhood (Egypt 1928), Middle-eastern conflicts since the fall of the ottoman empire, the hanbali sect of Islam that Saudis practice (especially the wahhabi movement). There is just too much history for the media's short-attention span to put together for the public. So they resort to name-shortening like Islamists, "Jihadist", Islamics, fundamentalism (not even in its original form) and sensationalising the heck out of it. In restrospect, this is not about Islam but rather politics and a strong dislike for western policies and the oil trade.

So back to the original question, is "Radical Islam" on the rise? It depends, do you think that these terrorist orgs can find recruits in the middle-east whom they can easy turn towards their cause (anti-western)? Heck yeah, you can find a large base in Iraq post-war, and Afghanistan post-war. You have alot of angry displaced guys who might view american soldiers as colonizers. And trust me, these guys are doing it for nationalistic purposes than for God. However, we can speculate all day long whether its growing or not, but the truth of the matter is, these al-qieda and the like have been barking for over 3 decades, and we've only decided to hear them now. and only after they attacked american soil. So its not really a defunct sect of Islam growing, its peoples's resentment for the wars and the willingness to fight a false-jihad.

The problem with these discussions are that people don't really know a inkling about Islam, and therefore talk about the regular stereotypes of Islam (ie burkas, which are worn in generally in Afghan) and the term "infidels" (generally used by arab-speaking folks). What most people don't seem to understand is that there are variety of denominations of Islam, much like Christianity. Also, like moe.ron stated, Islam encompasses alot of countries, ie South east Asia, Africa, N. America, S America. Not all these muslims say words like "infidel" in their regular vocab like the media portrays us to be, and not all of us speak Arabic.

As an American, a Muslim, and a human being I agree 100%

[Rudey]

Originally posted by swissmiss04
I think religious fundamentalism in general has been on the rise since the 1970s. This movement is certainly not exclusive to Islam.

Well I'm sure we can create a thread on other fundamentalist movements but I'd like to concentrate on Islam for the sole reason that it will become too difficult to read this thread.

-Rudey

[Rudey]

What are you talking about? What did I say that shows I've "been duped by the media"?? What media is it that you think I subcribe to that has "duped" me? Perhaps you're confused. Who knows.

So now you are saying "radical islam didn't grow" in your first paragraph but in the second paragraph it all of a sudden becomes "it depends".

And in your last paragraph you seem to try and say there are many varieties of Islam. Nobody said there weren't. Again, in fact, the thread was discussing radical islamic movements and sects. What was your point here?

Again, I point to the Western world and the Arab world and I lay out two points for you: Saudi financing of Islamic education and research and the spread of madrasas and mosques based on these types of teachings as well as the European effort (led by France currently) to take control of such fundamentalist efforts and weaken them through the banning of religious items.

-Rudey

Originally posted by _Opi_
I think that you've been duped by the media, rudey. Radical Islam didn't grow, because there is no such thing. The situation with Alqieda and other terrorist groups are rather complicated, and have a very long history. In this case, I would suggest in reading up on the Muslim brotherhood (Egypt 1928), Middle-eastern conflicts since the fall of the ottoman empire, the hanbali sect of Islam that Saudis practice (especially the wahhabi movement). There is just too much history for the media's short-attention span to put together for the public. So they resort to name-shortening like Islamists, "Jihadist", Islamics, fundamentalism (not even in its original form) and sensationalising the heck out of it. In restrospect, this is not about Islam but rather politics and a strong dislike for western policies and the oil trade.

So back to the original question, is "Radical Islam" on the rise? It depends, do you think that these terrorist orgs can find recruits in the middle-east whom they can easy turn towards their cause (anti-western)? Heck yeah, you can find a large base in Iraq post-war, and Afghanistan post-war. You have alot of angry displaced guys who might view american soldiers as colonizers. And trust me, these guys are doing it for nationalistic purposes than for God. However, we can speculate all day long whether its growing or not, but the truth of the matter is, these al-qieda and the like have been barking for over 3 decades, and we've only decided to hear them now. and only after they attacked american soil. So its not really a defunct sect of Islam growing, its peoples's resentment for the wars and the willingness to fight a false-jihad.

The problem with these discussions are that people don't really know a inkling about Islam, and therefore talk about the regular stereotypes of Islam (ie burkas, which are worn in generally in Afghan) and the term "infidels" (generally used by arab-speaking folks). What most people don't seem to understand is that there are variety of denominations of Islam, much like Christianity. Also, like moe.ron stated, Islam encompasses alot of countries, ie South east Asia, Africa, N. America, S America. Not all these muslims say words like "infidel" in their regular vocab like the media portrays us to be, and not all of us speak Arabic.

[_Opi_]

Originally posted by Rudey

So now you are saying "radical islam didn't grow" in your first paragraph but in the second paragraph it all of a sudden becomes "it depends".

And in your last paragraph you seem to try and say there are many varieties of Islam. Nobody said there weren't. Again, in fact, the thread was discussing radical islamic movements and sects. What was your point here?

I'm using your chosen terminology. That's why they are in quotes.

Again, I point to the Western world and the Arab world and I lay out two points for you: Saudi financing of Islamic education and research and the spread of madrasas and mosques based on these types of teachings as well as the European effort (led by France currently) to take control of such fundamentalist efforts and weaken them through the banning of religious items.

-Rudey

Suadi funding efforts and France's ban are two different subject, and I hardly doubt they are related.

Suadi Arabia finances many different types of Islamic education. In the mecca/Medina area, One of the best universities that produces alot of scholars are located there. These schools (madrassas in arabic) produces many scholars with different ideologies and theological beliefs. They also have the regular education system, as well as some british schools. When you talk about madrassas, do you mean those established solely for the purpose of breeding terrorists, bootcamp-like schools? You need to be more specific.

As with the saudi royals and the bin laden family, there is no doubt that some of them might be funding alqieda efforts, for their own gains. However, it is to my understanding that alqeida is against the monarchy as a whole, bacause of their relations with America. Isn't that the reason for those terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia lately?

How can you call what France is doing an "effort". By banning headscarves and other religious items, they are not weakening terrorism at all. The only thing they've acheived was taking away people's right of choice to wear religious symbols in public places. France's only effort was to protect its own fletching heritage and wants everyone to conform to their own values and views, taking away the right of choice practice own's religion. I fail to see how that weakens terrorism in the west, though. Care to explain further, Rudey?

[Rudey]

Can Moe.ron come back on? I liked talking with Moe.ron. You can explain all your questions to him and I can answer them to him because you simply make little to no sense.

-Rudey

Originally posted by _Opi_
I'm using your chosen terminology. That's why they are in quotes.





Suadi funding efforts and France's ban are two different subject, and I hardly doubt they are related.

Suadi Arabia finances many different types of Islamic education. In the mecca/Medina area, One of the best universities that produces alot of scholars are located there. These schools (madrassas in arabic) produces many scholars with different ideologies and theological beliefs. They also have the regular education system, as well as some british schools. When you talk about madrassas, do you mean those established solely for the purpose of breeding terrorists, bootcamp-like schools? You need to be more specific.

As with the saudi royals and the bin laden family, there is no doubt that some of them might be funding alqieda efforts, for their own gains. However, it is to my understanding that alqeida is against the monarchy as a whole, bacause of their relations with America. Isn't that the reason for those terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia lately?

How can you call what France is doing an "effort". By banning headscarves and other religious items, they are not weakening terrorism at all. The only thing they've acheived was taking away people's right of choice to wear religious symbols in public places. France's only effort was to protect its own fletching heritage and wants everyone to conform to their own values and views, taking away the right of choice practice own's religion. I fail to see how that weakens terrorism in the west, though. Care to explain further, Rudey?

[Rudey]

It's sad that only after the Russian school children massacre this finally came out. First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people my friends.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/in...rint&position=

September 8, 2004
School Siege in Russia Sparks Self-Criticism in Arab World
By JOHN KIFNER

BEIRUT, Sept 8 — The brutal school siege in Russia, with hundreds of children dead and wounded, has sparked an unusual round of self-criticism and introspection in the Muslim and Arab world.

"It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims," Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of the widely watched Al-Arabiya satellite television station wrote in one of the most striking of these commentaries.

Writing in the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat, Mr. Rashed said it was "shameful and degrading" that not only were the Beslan hijackers Muslims, but also the murderers of Nepalese workers in Iraq, the attackers of residential towers in Riyadh and Khobar, Saudi Arabia, the women believed to have blown up two Russian airplanes last week and Osama bin Laden himself.

"The majority of those who manned the suicide bombings against buses, vehicles, schools, houses and buildings, all over the world, were Muslim," he wrote. "What a pathetic record. What an abominable `achievement.' Does this tell us anything about ourselves, our societies and our culture?"

Mr. Rashed, like several other commentators, singled out Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a senior Egyptian cleric living in Qatar who broadcasts an influential program on Al Jazeera television and who has issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, calling for the killing of American and foreign "occupiers" in Iraq, military and civilian.

"Let us contemplate the incident of this religious Sheikh allowing, nay even calling for, the murder of civilians," he wrote. "How can we believe him when he tells us that Islam is the religion of mercy and peace while he is turning it into a religion of blood and slaughter?"

Mr. Rashed recalled that in the past, leftists and nationalists in the Arab world were considered a "menace" for their adoption of violence, and the mosque was a "haven" of "peace and reconciliation" by contrast.

"Then came the Neo-Muslims," he said. "An innocent and benevolent religion, whose verses prohibit the felling of trees in the absence of urgent necessity, that calls murder the most heinous of crimes, that says explicitly that if you kill one person you have killed humanity as a whole, has been turned into a global message of hate and a universal war cry."

A columnist for the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Siyassa, Faisal al-Qina'I, also took aim at Sheikh Qaradawi. "It is saddening," he wrote, "to read and hear from those who are supposed to be Muslim clerics, like Yusuf al-Qaradawi and others of his kind, that instead of defending true Islam they encourage these cruel actions and permit decapitation, hostage-taking and murder."

In Jordan, a group of Muslim religious figures, meeting with the religious affairs minister, Ahmed Heleil, issued a statement today saying the seizing of the school and subsequent massacre was dedicated to distorting the pure image of Islam.

"This terrorist act contradicts the principles of our true Muslim religion and its noble values," the statement said.

Writing in the Jordanian daily Al-Dustour, a columnist, Bater Wardam, noted a propensity in the Arab world to "place responsibility for the crimes of Arabic and Muslim terrorist organizations on the Mossad, the Zionists and the American intelligence, but we all know that this is not the case."

"They came from our midst," he wrote of those who had kidnapped and murdered civilians in Iraq, blown up commuter trains in Spain, turned airliners into bombs and shot the children in Ossetia.

"They are Arabs and Muslims who pray, fast, grow beards, demand the wearing of veils and call for the defense of Islamic causes. Therefore we must all raise our voices, disown them and oppose all these crimes."

In Egypt, the semi-official newspaper Al-Ahram called the events "an ugly crime against humanity."

In Saudi Arabia, newspapers tightly controlled by the government — which finds itself under attack from Islamic fundamentalists — were even more scathing.

Under the headline "Butchers in the Name of Allah," a columnist in the government daily Okaz, Khaled Hamed al-Suleiman, wrote that "the propagandists of Jihad succeeded in the span of a few years in distorting the image of Islam.

"They turned today's Islam into something having to do with decapitations, the slashing of throats, abducting innocent civilians and exploding people. They have fixed the image of Muslims in the eyes of the world as barbarians and savages who are not good for anything except slaughtering people," he wrote, adding:

"The time has come for Muslims to be the first to come out against those interested in abducting Islam in the same way they abducted innocent children. This is the true Jihad these days and this is our obligation, as believing Muslims, towards our monotheistic religion."

The rest of the article is found at the link above.

-Rudey

[Kevin]

I find it sad that the straw that broke the camel's back was an attack on Russia, after all of the attacks on Jews and Americans.

At least the Muslim world is beginning to fight this movement. One still has to wonder how these commentators feel about the murder of Israeli children. Many might still call that justified.

[honeychile]

FYI, the current issue of Time has some interesting perspectives on the rise and occassional waning of violence in Islam.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by ktsnake
I find it sad that the straw that broke the camel's back was an attack on Russia, after all of the attacks on Jews and Americans.

At least the Muslim world is beginning to fight this movement. One still has to wonder how these commentators feel about the murder of Israeli children. Many might still call that justified.

"First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people"
-Common Arab phrase heard at many "protests"

Now is the time to change.

-Rudey

[moe.ron]

I would say that it depend on which part of the world you are talking about. I can say for Southeast Asia, despite this morning bombings, radical Islam is in yearly decline. Voting behaviour shows that radical Islamic party never had a good grasp of the Southeast Asian citizens. Malaysia saw PAS loosing votes because of its hardline Islamic platform. It even lost its strong hold province where it tried to introduce Sharia law. Then you have Indonesia where the radical Islamic parties gather no more then 13% of the total votes in the parlimentarian election. And this votes was shared between 6 parties, which made the faction a very weak faction. In fact, PPP realized that it can no longer run on the Islamic state platform and has instead changed itself. It changed from an exclusive Islamic party into an inclusive conservative party that has a nationalist platform.

So, it all depend on which locations. Some will see a rise in radical Islam, other will see a stagnation, and other a drop.

At least the Muslim world is beginning to fight this movement. One still has to wonder how these commentators feel about the murder of Israeli children. Many might still call that justified.

Just because you don't hear it in the media, it does not mean that there haven't any struggle against this movement. Just look at what the NU and Muhammadiyah has done to theologically combat radical Islam.

[_Opi_]

Originally posted by ktsnake
At least the Muslim world is beginning to fight this movement.

Uhm, they started fighting the minute they started putting "islam" along side "terrorism". Top religious leaders in this country, as well as Canada, have been speaking about this topic for ages now. No media interest I guess, maybe until now?

[Rudey]

Originally posted by _Opi_
Uhm, they started fighting the minute they started putting "islam" along side "terrorism". Top religious leaders in this country, as well as Canada, have been speaking about this topic for ages now. No media interest I guess, maybe until now?

Sure they did.

-Rudey

[Rudey]

You're talking about the government only though...but then again, I'm not sure what is going on outside of the government there.

Listen, when the heart of Islam is in the middle east (Mecca and all), it speaks a lot for Islam when that region moves towards extremism, funds radical wahabism, and so many terrorists come from there espousing those ideals.

-Rudey

Originally posted by moe.ron
I would say that it depend on which part of the world you are talking about. I can say for Southeast Asia, despite this morning bombings, radical Islam is in yearly decline. Voting behaviour shows that radical Islamic party never had a good grasp of the Southeast Asian citizens. Malaysia saw PAS loosing votes because of its hardline Islamic platform. It even lost its strong hold province where it tried to introduce Sharia law. Then you have Indonesia where the radical Islamic parties gather no more then 13% of the total votes in the parlimentarian election. And this votes was shared between 6 parties, which made the faction a very weak faction. In fact, PPP realized that it can no longer run on the Islamic state platform and has instead changed itself. It changed from an exclusive Islamic party into an inclusive conservative party that has a nationalist platform.

So, it all depend on which locations. Some will see a rise in radical Islam, other will see a stagnation, and other a drop.



Just because you don't hear it in the media, it does not mean that there haven't any struggle against this movement. Just look at what the NU and Muhammadiyah has done to theologically combat radical Islam.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by _Opi_
Uhm, they started fighting the minute they started putting "islam" along side "terrorism". Top religious leaders in this country, as well as Canada, have been speaking about this topic for ages now. No media interest I guess, maybe until now?

The thing is that these guys were only local leaders. They have no real voice in Islam. They speak only to the religious people that directly follow them. Otherwise, they're pretty worthless. It seems only recently that Arab media outlets and traditional supporters of this nonsense have come to their senses. My only concern is that they are doing it at the insistance of the West. That's what it looks like to me at least.

I know that the outrage to many Muslims is genuine. In the past, however, I don't think it has been genuine enough. The Arab world as a whole is changing -- and changing fast.

And it's unfortunate, but this anti-terrorism sentiment is not universal. Last I checked, the Palestinians were still hanging pictures of the murderers of children and women in their streets to be thought of as heroes.

[Rudey]

Originally posted by ktsnake
The thing is that these guys were only local leaders. They have no real voice in Islam. They speak only to the religious people that directly follow them. Otherwise, they're pretty worthless. It seems only recently that Arab media outlets and traditional supporters of this nonsense have come to their senses. My only concern is that they are doing it at the insistance of the West. That's what it looks like to me at least.

I know that the outrage to many Muslims is genuine. In the past, however, I don't think it has been genuine enough. The Arab world as a whole is changing -- and changing fast.

And it's unfortunate, but this anti-terrorism sentiment is not universal. Last I checked, the Palestinians were still hanging pictures of the murderers of children and women in their streets to be thought of as heroes.

She made a claim and didn't back it up. Don't just swallow it up wholesale.

-Rudey

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Rudey
She made a claim and didn't back it up. Don't just swallow it up wholesale.

-Rudey

I guess I wasn't clear in my reply. The gist of my reply was that even if everything she said were true, she was only talking about a certain group of Muslims, not the whole of Islam.

As long as there is huge public support for terrorists anywhere in Islam and those people aren't shunned by the rest of the Islamic world (I'm talking about the Palestinians), any Muslim telling me that they don't support terrorism will be baseless in my opinion. Or at least limited to the opinion of one person and not society as a whole.