Radio Hoax Exposes Anti-Muslim Sentiment in U.S.

Caco

I came across this story from Reuters today on AOL and I was completely shocked.
I knew some people (especially Americans) seemed a bit edgy around people from the middle east but I never could have imagined it would get this bad.
People condemn Hitler and what happened to the Jews but this is the exact same thing...

(If this is the wrong thread please feel free to move it, thanks!)

InFront

Well it's not the exact same thing of course. Remember, this is just a newspiece about what is in fact just a small number of probably very silly Americanos who are very open to suggestion.
Sure, it's a bit like the star of David but c'mon, It isn't as though an actual administration would ever go out of its way to target Muslims and Muslim communities in an ill thought revenge based on the perceived misfortunes that religion had done to the motherland.

USA!
USA!
USA!

MrJoeSoap

A Gallup poll this summer of more than 1,000 Americans showed that 39 percent were in favor of requiring Muslims in the United States, including American citizens, to carry special identification.

Roughly a quarter of those polled said they would not want to live next door to a Muslim

...an incident on November 22 involving six Muslim clerics. They were handcuffed and taken off a US Airways flight after passengers reported "suspicious behavior" that included praying in the departure gate area.

Wow. Disturbing, depressing, etc...

Education at a young age is the key.

Caco

InFront wrote:

Well it's not the exact same thing of course. Remember, this is just a newspiece about what is in fact just a small number of probably very silly Americanos who are very open to suggestion.
Sure, it's a bit like the star of David but c'mon, It isn't as though an actual administration would ever go out of its way to target Muslims and Muslim communities in an ill thought revenge based on the perceived misfortunes that religion had done to the motherland.

USA!
USA!
USA!

Well maybe it's not as extreme as concentration camps and gassing people but it's still very extreme! Almost 40 percent isn't a small number either!

Zombrex

Nut Job Radio Caller wrote:

Not only do you tattoo them in the middle of their forehead but you ship them out of this country ... they are here to kill us.

Funny, that is what the Muslims in Iraq say about the Americans.

Hobbes

Caco wrote:

Well maybe it's not as extreme as concentration camps and gassing people but it's still very extreme! Almost 40 percent isn't a small number either!

Of course concentration camps were never the starting option. The whole Jewish thing and WWII started off small. Basically what your seeing happening now in the US. Lets hope people remember history.

kaimera

The Jews weren't responsible for terrorist attacks in WW2 now were they?

Circumstances are different.

Wibbs

kaimera wrote:

The Jews weren't responsible for terrorist attacks in WW2 now were they?

And 99% of Muslims aren't either

Circumstances are different.

A little different but this blanket attack guff has to be nipped in the bud or the outcome could be too similar for comfort.

kaimera

Wibbs wrote:

And 99% of Muslims aren't either

A little different but this blanket attack guff has to be nipped in the bud or the outcome could be too similar for comfort.

1% more than the Jews tho all the same.

lostexpectation

this winger wrote an article about the new first ever muslim congressman refused to swear-in on the bible and is going to do on the koran and how disgraceful this is he might aswelll swear in on 'mein kampf'

yet congressmen don't swear-in on the bible or any book but that hasn't stopped the story be very popular with the freepers,

and of course you're allowed swear in on torah or no book or whatever if you like.

Peteee

kaimera wrote:

The Jews weren't responsible for terrorist attacks in WW2 now were they?

Circumstances are different.

From wikipedia (Dont start on wikipedia)

Wikpedia wrote:

"On 7 November 1938, a young Polish Jew attacked and shot two German officials in the Nazi-German embassy in Paris, killing one of them. He was angry about the treatment of his parents by the Nazi-Germans. Goebbels took the opportunity to impress Hitler, and ordered retaliation. That night the SS ordered the Night of Broken Glass ("Kristallnacht"), to be carried out the night of November 9-10, in which the storefronts of Jewish shops and offices were smashed and vandalised, and many synagogues were destroyed by fire. Approximately 100 Jews were killed, and another 20,000 arrested, some of which were sent to the newly formed concentration camps. Many Germans were disgusted by this action when the full extent of the damage was discovered, so Hitler ordered it to be blamed on the Jews."

Muslims attack US, US blames muslims (I'm not for a second saying muslims weren't involved in 9/11), US goes to war with muslim nations, Everyone in America becomes fearful, and everyone blames it on the muslims (Just like Hitler blamed it on the Jews)

Its a bit of a jump, but its not 'completely different'.

Circumstances be dammned, if it ends up with muslims wearing identification, does it really matter if 'circumstances were different'?

It's a slippery slope....

kaimera

Peteee wrote:

Muslims attack US, US blames muslims (I'm not for a second saying muslims weren't involved in 9/11), US goes to war with muslim nations, Everyone in America becomes fearful, and everyone blames it on the muslims (Just like Hitler blamed it on the Jews)

No. Hitler blamed the Jews after his own damn people did the damage. You're not comparing like with like.

Peteee

kaimera wrote:

You're not comparing like with like.

Circumstances be dammned, if it ends up with muslims wearing identification, does it really matter if 'circumstances were different'?

I'm just repeating what I said above. No, I'm not comparing like with like, but tbh, the circumstances are irrelevant if it ends up with muslims having to carry 'special' identification, just like the jews had to have 'J' imprinted on thier passports

HelterSkelter

So what is your point kaimera? Do you think Muslims should have to wear special idenitifcation?

kaimera

What's wrong with the current form of ID?

rmacm

kaimera wrote:

What's wrong with the current form of ID?

What current form of ID? Do they have a form of national ID card in the US or is it left up to each state? Making a particular group of people carry a special form of ID based on their religious beliefs is just plain wrong. Would you like it if you were forced to carry ID that said you were <<insert religion of choice here>>? As Hobbes said let's hope people remember history and not repeat the mistakes that were made in the past.

Just because certain Muslims have a hatred for the US doesn't mean that they should all be required to carry some special form of ID. What exactly is your argument? Or are you just arguing for the sake of it?

Cheers
Rory

kaimera

Personally, if told I was told I was required by law to carry a form of ID, I would. I've nothing to hide.
In saying that, is it law in Ireland?

Arguement?
Like I said, I don't feel like your comparing like with like. What happened during WW2 stemmed from Hitler and his ideals.
Now is a direct result of the terror actions of a minority of extremists of which there is no way of telling who is part of that minority.

From spending a lot of time Stateside, the one thing that stood out was

Not all Muslims are terrorists...but all terrorists are Muslims

If people can put forward ideas to change that, please do.

Make all people carry a form of ID. Make it a national thing. No excuses then.

HelterSkelter

kaimera wrote:

Personally, if told I was told I was required by law to carry a form of ID, I would. I've nothing to hide.

You are dodging the question. I'll ask you again - Should Muslims be indentified with a cresent shaped tatoo or distinctive arm band or some other form of identification that makes them stand out from everyone else?

kaimera wrote:

Not all Muslims are terrorists...but all terrorists are Muslims

I didn't know the IRA terrorists were Muslim.

kaimera

HelterSkelter wrote:

You are dodging the question. I'll ask you again - Should Muslims be indentified with a cresent shaped tatoo or distinctive arm band or some other form of identification that makes them stand out from everyone else?

No.

However, when you say other form of identification, are you against an actual id card per se?

I didn't know the IRA terrorists were Muslim.

I was referring to Stateside. Unless the IRA have changed suit lately.

rmacm

kaimera wrote:

In saying that, is it law in Ireland?

Don't see what that has to do with the discussion.

kaimera wrote:

Make all people carry a form of ID. Make it a national thing. No excuses then.

Fair enough if everyone in a country is required to carry identification. But that's not what's being discussed. There isn't any reason why a persons religion should be on their ID card, so why should Muslims in the US be required to carry special ID?

Cheers
Rory

kaimera

rmacm wrote:

Don't see what that has to do with the discussion.

I wanted to know is all.

Fair enough if everyone in a country is required to carry identification. But that's not what's being discussed. There isn't any reason why a persons religion should be on their ID card, so why should Muslims in the US be required to carry special ID?

Cheers
Rory

Never said anything about their religion being on the card did I?
Stop putting words in my mouth. I am capable of doing that myself.

But now that you mention it, why would you have a problem with it being written down?

rmacm

kaimera wrote:

I wanted to know is all.

Nope I don't think there is any law here saying that you have to carry identification.

kaimera wrote:

But now that you mention it, why would you have a problem with it being written down?

Because requiring people to wear/carry some form of identifying mark as to their religion has been used to do terrible things in the past and I don't see why it's relevent to identifying a person.

Cheers
Rory

Mountjoy Mugger

kaimera wrote:

All terrorists are Muslims

I was referring to Stateside. Unless the IRA have changed suit lately.

Well, Timothy McVeigh and his friend Terry Nichols certainly weren't members of the IRA, nor were they Muslims afaik. Would you class them as terrorists?

Tabnabs

kaimera wrote:

From spending a lot of time Stateside, the one thing that stood out was

"Not all Muslims are terrorists...but all terrorists are Muslims"

If people can put forward ideas to change that, please do.

I find this remark very distasteful, I have heard plenty of this type of rubbish spouted by some British regarding all Irish being terrorists. Clearly untrue, but an easy soundbite to trot out all the same.

Don't worry, the USA have plenty of nutcases of their own to who present a much more imminent threat to US society than any Islamic bogeymen...

http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/usa-terror-regions.htm

kaimera

Mountjoy Mugger wrote:

Well, Timothy McVeigh and his friend Terry Nichols certainly weren't members of the IRA, nor were they Muslims afaik. Would you class them as terrorists?

Wasn't there some links to Islamic groups somewhat involved in that?
Can't recall if it was a red herring or not tho.

HelterSkelter

kaimera wrote:

No.

However, when you say other form of identification, are you against an actual id card per se?

I don't see the point in an ID card for anyone as I don't think it will prevent terrorist attacks. All the people who comitted the 9/11 attacks had valid ID. I am definitely against any special ID requirement based on a person's religion or nationality.

kaimera wrote:

I was referring to Stateside. Unless the IRA have changed suit lately.

Well as another poster pointed out, McVeigh.

turbot

Well...

For absolutely brilliant reading on this subject, you should go to:

http://www.rawilson.com/prethought.shtml

and search for Cocaine

and read the article "Perils of Cocaine Abuse".

Hobbes

kaimera wrote:

Wasn't there some links to Islamic groups somewhat involved in that?
Can't recall if it was a red herring or not tho.

Nope it wasn't connected.

[edit]

My memory was sketchy but there was a huge possible terrorist attack on US soil after 9/11. White supremacists where planning to let off multiple cyanide bombs all over the US. They reckon some of the group are still at large.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/terror/tyler-terror.htm

As I recall it got almost 0 news coverage.

Next time someone in the US says "All terrorists are muslims" ask them if they know who William Krar is.

Mountjoy Mugger

kaimera wrote:

Wasn't there some links to Islamic groups somewhat involved in that?
Can't recall if it was a red herring or not tho.

So, are you modifying the statement that

all terrorists are Muslims

to

all terrorists are Muslims or else there's a link saying that they might have some Muslim connection that may or may not be true?

Gimme strength!

Peteee

kaimera wrote:

But now that you mention it, why would you have a problem with it being written down?

What good could possibly come from it?

Man walks into bar
Barman: ID Please
*shows id*
Man: 2 beers please
Barman: That'll be €7

Another man walks into bar
Barman: ID Please
*shows ID*
*Barman notices he is muslim*
Man: 2 beers please
Barman: Certainly, that'll be €8

How about:
"Sorry this plane has been overbooked"
*looks up database of people*
"Hmmm we can knock the 4 muslims off the plane"
"Excellent thinking, john"

I'm not saying stuff like this could happen, but it might.

I cant think of one good reason for putting your religion on an ID card.

Sand

I cant think of one good reason for putting your religion on an ID card.

If you were in a car accident, bleeding out it would help warn doctors not to give you a blood transfusion if youre jehovahs witnessess or whatever crazy gang hate the idea of life saving medical procedures?

Theres one.

I'm just repeating what I said above. No, I'm not comparing like with like, but tbh, the circumstances are irrelevant if it ends up with muslims having to carry 'special' identification, just like the jews had to have 'J' imprinted on thier passports

Never accept jury duty if youre asked to serve - Id be worried youd treat the driver that drank 23 pints, drove home and deliberately mounted a footpath and ran down a child before backing over to make sure, the exact same as a driver who hit a child that ran out suddenly in front of them. I mean, who cares about circumstances?

InFront

Sand wrote:

Never accept jury duty if youre asked to serve - Id be worried youd treat the driver that drank 23 pints, drove home and deliberately mounted a footpath and ran down a child before backing over to make sure, the exact same as a driver who hit a child that ran out suddenly in front of them. I mean, who cares about circumstances?

That's a very strange translation of what he said...

It's not as though people could be 'accidentally' asked what their religion is for the purpose of ID cards, and then 'accidentally' given a corresponding card to indicate their religion.
There's something very sinister about asking anybody's religion for the purpose of ID cards in my opinion. If a Jehova's witness wishes not to receive a blood transfusion, perhaps it is more sensible that thise few would carry a notifying bracelet, similar to one worn by those who are allergic to certain drugs, have a pacemaker fitted, & c. (I'm sure many of them, being conscientious people, do so already), rather than wastefully label the entire population.

Sangre

Sand wrote:

I
Never accept jury duty if youre asked to serve - Id be worried youd treat the driver that drank 23 pints, drove home and deliberately mounted a footpath and ran down a child before backing over to make sure, the exact same as a driver who hit a child that ran out suddenly in front of them. I mean, who cares about circumstances?

Of course what he *actually* meant was it doesn't matter how country got to a state of religious and ethnic segregation because the final result is abhorrent no matter what. A more apt comparison would be comparing someone who killed someone with a knife or with a gun, the method of murder is immaterial.

But of course, I'm sure you knew that.

lostexpectation

abov I mentioned how he thinks the first american muslim congressmen should swear in on the bible, cos swearing in on the koran would akin to swearing in on meinkampft, but of course congressmen don't swear in on any religious book.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234237,00.html
now the anti-defemation league is pissed, he is on the holocaust memorial board and even they thought that was too much especially when he learned that the bible thing wasn't constitutional just ceremonial/photo op and he reckons jews should swear in on the bible too cos the jewish bible doesn't have the new testament in it, which is central to his type of christian beliefs

Zombrex

kaimera wrote:

Personally, if told I was told I was required by law to carry a form of ID, I would. I've nothing to hide.

You would be surprised how quickly a government agency can find something that you actually would like to hide. Your argument only works if the things you have done in your life are considered fine by the establishment. If not you have a very good reason to hide them from the public. Look at the McCarthy witch-hunts in the 50s.

kaimera wrote:

Now is a direct result of the terror actions of a minority of extremists of which there is no way of telling who is part of that minority.

And what do you do with that information? Do you stop Muslims, all Muslims, from entering your shop? Do you stop Muslims, all Muslims, from entering your down town areas, from taking a job in your factory, from dating your daughter. You would think that pretty soon being singled out as a Muslim would be something that people would want to hide.

kaimera wrote:

From spending a lot of time Stateside, the one thing that stood out was
Not all Muslims are terrorists...but all terrorists are Muslims

That is a ridiculous statement. All muslim terrorists are in fact muslim, but that is hardly shocking news now is it.

kaimera wrote:

Make all people carry a form of ID. Make it a national thing. No excuses then.

Why? What would you do with the information?

Zombrex

lostexpectation wrote:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234237,00.html

Good to see the seperation of chuch and state is going strong in America :rolleyes:

Sand

That's a very strange translation of what he said...

Nope, its an expression of the exasperation aroused by somebody comparing Nazi Germanys racial laws to a hoax radio poll, admitting the situations are not alike, hence wasting seconds of my life with a non-point.

Is the radio poll disturbing? Yes, but its disturbing on the level that 4 or 5 people actually volunteered to give their kids to radio DJs for a day in exchange for a PS 3 (hoax again). Personally Id consider it a toss up as to which is more worrying. Neither however are comparable to the Nazi regime.

There's something very sinister about asking anybody's religion for the purpose of ID cards in my opinion.

I personally wouldnt be in favour of a "religion" slot on any ID card, as I dont see its value - essentially all any ID card needs is date of birth because discrimination on practically any other grounds is not allowable. Id however blame bureacratic hunger for pointless information before final solution style ambitions. Either way, afaik there are no plans to bring in such an ID card in the US or else it would have been a news report and not a hoax.

it doesn't matter how country got to a state of religious and ethnic segregation because the final result is abhorrent no matter what.

Right, and does a Naziesque level of religious and ethnic segregation exist in the US? Nope? And the radio poll, in Petees own admission, isnt comparable because its a hoax, a radio poll, and religion isnt on ID cards? There are no incoming laws that will put religion on ID cards? So then it doesnt imply theyre following the same track? Your point caller?

Sangre

Sand wrote:

Right, and does a Naziesque level of religious and ethnic segregation exist in the US? Nope? And the radio poll, in Petees own admission, isnt comparable because its a hoax, a radio poll, and religion isnt on ID cards? There are no incoming laws that will put religion on ID cards? So then it doesnt imply theyre following the same track? Your point caller?

Well since the original comment actually said;

I'm just repeating what I said above. No, I'm not comparing like with like, but tbh, the circumstances are irrelevant if it ends up with muslims having to carry 'special' identification, just like the jews had to have 'J' imprinted on thier passports

We weren't talking about the hoax, we were talking about if the hoax was a reality. The radio show merely highlighted there is obviously a worringly (yet probably very small) minority of people who would be in favour of this, despite the obvious lessons to be learnt from history.

I know you're enjoying being clever but neither myself nor the poster you originally pointed were directly referring the radio hoax or the current reality in the US.

Peteee

Sand wrote:

Nope, its an expression of the exasperation aroused by somebody comparing Nazi Germanys racial laws to a hoax radio poll, admitting the situations are not alike, hence wasting seconds of my life with a non-point.

I was comparing it with the Nazi's because they implemented a 'if your a Jew, you've got to show that you are a Jew with a special document/Mark' that seemingly a large minority of americans would support in America with regard to Muslims.

And the radio poll, in Petees own admission, isnt comparable because its a hoax, a radio poll, and religion isnt on ID cards? There are no incoming laws that will put religion on ID cards? So then it doesnt imply theyre following the same track? Your point caller?

The point isn't about whether or not there actually is an ID card or not, its that 39% of Americans (Granted, polled...lies, damn lies and statistics) would be in favour of Muslims carrying ID, and what would happen if and ID card regime like what the Nazi's had for the Jews was implemented.

Sand

We weren't talking about the hoax, we were talking about if the hoax was a reality.

Which it isnt...hence a pointless point. Why raise something as a comparison or an end point if you admit that its not comparable and not on the same scale of things at all? The signal-noise ratio depreciates quite rapidly.

I was comparing it with the Nazi's because they implemented a 'if your a Jew, you've got to show that you are a Jew with a special document/Mark' that seemingly a large minority of americans would support in America with regard to Muslims.

The point isn't about whether or not there actually is an ID card or not, its that 39% of Americans (Granted, polled...lies, damn lies and statistics) would be in favour of Muslims carrying ID, and what would happen if and ID card regime like what the Nazi's had for the Jews was implemented.

Actually, theres little grounds to say a large minority of americans would support it - youre talking about a poll radio callers, which would imply a small sample group and an unrepresentitive one at that - i.e. the more intense your views are the more likely you are to ring up and have it out on a radio show, how many went "****ing idiot" and went about their day? We dont know.

Look at party support polls on Politics - they tell us nothing about what Irish people think because the results are hopelessly skewed towards fringe or minority parties, opposed to reality where Fianna Fail are happily facing into the next election.

Are there people with negative views towards Muslims in general? Yeah - no doubt. Theres people with negative views towards any particular minority, nationality or ethnic group you can think of. Theres even people with negative views about Americans in general, muslim or otherwise.

If you want to actually view information on US [and other western nations] attitudes to Islam, and Muslims views of the west then you might be interested in this, a Pew Research Report on that very topic.

Peteee

Sand wrote:

Actually, theres little grounds to say a large minority of americans would support it - youre talking about a poll radio callers, which would imply a small sample group and an unrepresentitive one at that

If you want to actually view information on US [and other western nations] attitudes to Islam, and Muslims views of the west then you might be interested in this, a Pew Research Report on that very topic.

Please read the article

from article wrote:

A Gallup poll this summer of more than 1,000 Americans showed that 39 percent were in favor of requiring Muslims in the United States, including American citizens, to carry special identification.

Roughly a quarter of those polled said they would not want to live next door to a Muslim and a third thought that Muslims in the United States sympathized with al Qaeda, the extremist group behind the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

The 39% statistic has nothing to do with the radio poll.

Thanks for the article

Bottle_of_Smoke

Hobbes wrote:

Nope it wasn't connected.

[edit]

My memory was sketchy but there was a huge possible terrorist attack on US soil after 9/11. White supremacists where planning to let off multiple cyanide bombs all over the US. They reckon some of the group are still at large.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/terror/tyler-terror.htm

As I recall it got almost 0 news coverage.

Next time someone in the US says "All terrorists are muslims" ask them if they know who William Krar is.

This is very interesting, I never heard about this & it would of been much more devastating attack than 9/11. I guess it would have taken too much attention away from Muslim terrorists which might have knocked support for war on Islamic nations. Pretty sick.

Sand

The 39% statistic has nothing to do with the radio poll.

Fair enough, Id consider that finding to be disturbing and self defeating - any such measure would only confirm AQ style interpretations of the world and wouldnt actually accomplish anything useful. Another good reason to keep the public a step removed from actual decision making.

Aoife-FM104

We should all be required to carry ID at all times. I have nothing to hide.

When we get used to that, I think the Gardai should do random body searches on the street, just in case. I have nothing to hide.

After that, I think our ISPs should allow the Government snoop on our Internet traffic. I have nothing to hide.

When everyone has gotten comfortable with that, I recommend we either start random searches of private property, or some kind of checkin system so the Government knows where we are/going. I have nothing to hide.

Eventually I'd like the Government to know absolutely everything we do. I have nothing to hide.

At no point will this power be abused, and at no point will we regret gradually giving away little bits of our freedom.