• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Don't criticise Islam, says UN

Tony said:
Its a visual hyperbole, but in comparison the the KKK version, I think its a more accurate representation.
Click to expand...
Yes, I said that it was not so comparable to day, but what about 50 to 100 years ago? The KKK used to be a very major player in American politics.
 
JoeEllison said:
Interesting, though, that you'd report me for criticizing you that way(which I'm not)... maybe you should call the UN, see if they can help you out? I can just see the headline: "Don't criticize danielk, says UN" :p
Click to expand...
Reported for repeated unwarranted personal attacks.
 
Upchurch said:
Yes, I said that it was not so comparable to day, but what about 50 to 100 years ago? The KKK used to be a very major player in American politics.
Click to expand...

So? It was barely a proton in Christianity, which was how the analogy was presented.
 
Upchurch said:
And the vast majority of Muslims are terrorists? Care to back that one up?
Click to expand...

Ummm, dude, I already told you it wasn't literal:

Its a visual hyperbole, but in comparison the the KKK version, I think its a more accurate representation.
Click to expand...

You seemed to understand that earlier. If you want me to spell it out for you, I can.
 
Last edited:
Tony said:
Ummm, dude, I already told you it wasn't literal:

You seemed to understand that earlier.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but then you focused on the accuracy of the proportion.

Let me rephrase: Are you suggesting that percentage of the KKK to US Christians 50-100 years ago is significantly less than the percentage of Islamic Terrorists to Islam, thus invalidating my analogy?
 
danielk said:
I would agree, if it weren't for the problem that the UN resolution seems to use a different definition. According to the text, the Western media has defamed Islam after 9/11. However, in my book it wasn't so much defamation but criticism. Not to mention that Western politicians have since then bend over backwards in their public statements, and excused Islam in advance as much as possible. Even George W. Bush himself!

I'm not even saying that this was necessarily wrong -- it's certainly a good idea to caution against overreaction and violence. But in that light, the accusation that the Western media defamed Islam is utterly laughable.


It definitely says that the depiction of Islam in the Western media after 9/11 was defamatory.
Click to expand...

Um, this seems to be leading towards anecdotes about the media viewpoints after 911, which I don't really like but...

In the news I saw (WGN Chicago), I personally remember a particularly biased story about the fight over the building of a new mosque, along with many other problems.

But then, those are just my anecdotes, but I still don't think it is "laughable".
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
In the news I saw (WGN Chicago), I personally remember a particularly biased story about the fight over the building of a new mosque, along with many other problems.
Click to expand...
Does that amount to defamation? Do you think that, on the whole, the depiction of Islam in the Western media after 9/11 was defamatory?
 
The KKK were Christians, so were their strongest enemies, and most of their victims.

And it was within one country only.

Had the KKK not been suppressed when the USA entered the Second World War, it might have been different. The suppression was due to a fear that they might be an effective Fascist "fifth column".

When the KKK revived in the 1950s as a terrorist force opposing the civil rights movement, the federal government suppressed it again.

There was not the dithering and "sensitivity" we now see about Muslim terrorism.
 
danielk said:
Does that amount to defamation? Do you think that, on the whole, the depiction of Islam in the Western media after 9/11 was defamatory?
Click to expand...

Well, it conflated the War on Terrorism with a War on Islam and labelled Muslims as non-Americans...

On the whole... I dunno, I was 12 at the time :) . I honestly don't remember the overall tone.
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Well, it conflated the War on Terrorism with a War on Islam and labelled Muslims as non-Americans...
Click to expand...
Really? Beyond some jerkwater tabloids? (ETA: OK, I missed that you were talking specifically about the WGN Chicago story.)

Tsukasa Buddha said:
On the whole... I dunno, I was 12 at the time :) . I honestly don't remember the overall tone.
Click to expand...
Well, at least for the German media, I can personally attest with confidence that there was no defamation of Islam.
 
Last edited:
Praktik said:
The article in the OP imagines that "criticism of Islam" is somehow "under threat" by the "PC police" over at the UN.
Click to expand...
It's not under threat because it's all just words and the UN doesn't have power over that kind of thing anyway. What it does show, however, is the kind of denial politics a hypothetical strong UN could be expected to pursue. Which is a shame, really. The UN wasn't such a bad idea in principle. It's tough if you have to give equal voice to thugs who murder their own peoples, and the solution called security council is almost worse than the problem.
 
Tony said:
I made a chart of my own showing how the KKK analogy is overly simplistic and inadequate.
Click to expand...
Tony, did you notice that the outer circle made for a backward crescent, the symbol of Islam?

Nice job, intentional or otherwise. :D

DR
 
Upchurch said:
Yes, I said that it was not so comparable to day, but what about 50 to 100 years ago? The KKK used to be a very major player in American politics.
Click to expand...
Not quite, Uppie.

Used to be a major player in Southern Politics. Its part in politics outside of Dixie was either muted or non existent.

For those who cotton onto fusing KKK and Christian: your imprecision betrays an agenda, and what appears to be a lack of knowledge. (the graph with KKK on the left is actually hilarious. :D ) Earthborn, your effort at illustration is sincerely appreciated. :)

The Christian influence behind the KKK tended toward Southern forms of Protestantism. Catholics and Papists were specific enemies of the Klan, as were, well, damned near everyone else too. :p

A few questions:

1. Who besides me read the whole UN piece?

Joe E, please read the whole thing. Read it for content and message, with a critical eye, the way you would a piece of GOP political utterance.

My apologies to you, in advance, for the bloated and bureaucratic style of UN proclamations. If we ever meet, I owe you at least a beer in recompense, or two.

2. A Firegarden: your attempt at a semantic nitpick misses the forest for the trees. Sometimes it is useful to apply the concept of theme, tone, and "the whole thing" when reading something. Abdul's summary is not far fetched. (A bit overstated? I'll buy that.)

3. For T Buddha:
From my POV, the commie that I am, I read it as being against discrimination against Muslims such as believing them all to be terrorists/supportive of terrorists.
Click to expand...
Looks like you were the target, a friendly audience. What you got was obviously part of the message, that non-terrorist Muslims the world over are not happy to be lumped in with the dickheads. (Can't say I blame them. Can anyone? )

Was it another silly non-binding resolution type bill? Sure.
Click to expand...
Yep, per my sarcastic comments above.
Is it this "OMG, UN says we can't speak ill of Islam!!!" bull? No.
Click to expand...
The UN can "resolve" and "propose" and "proclaim" a great deal, none of which amounts to more than an addition to global warming when it comes from the General Assembly.

This draft, however, is an element of information warfare. Sure, it's a 9mm bullet rather than a 5,000 pound bomb, but it's nature is unmistakable.

Who do you think is the target audience?

If I were the President of Pakistan, and most of my nation were Muslims of the varying stripes there -- and it varies -- I might also be moved to get such a draft on the street, and very publicly.

Getting tarred by association is aggrivating as hell, eh?

DR
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
This may be overly simple of me, but I like analogies. I find they are a good way to look at a situation with a different perspective. This quote got me to thinking about something a little closer to home: the KKK.

To the very best of my knowledge, the KKK is/was predominately, if not entirely, made up of Christians. They used Christian symbols and the Christian Bible certainly advocates things like slavery. In the Venn Diagram that I'm not going to take the time to draw and post, the big circle of Christianity would have a small circle of KKK entirely in it.

Now, when I hear descriptions of the KKK, I hear words like "racist", "extremist", "violent", and even "evil". I don't often hear the word "Christian". Likewise, when I hear descriptions of Christianity, I can't remember the KKK ever being raised. In that regard, I would say that the two would be wrongly associated with one another.

If we now go back to Islam and the terrorists, the terrorist circle would certainly be bigger than the KKK circle is today, but it wouldn't have been such a big difference 50 to 100 years ago. So, why do we associate Islam with terrorists but not Christianity with the KKK?
Click to expand...

The disparity in coverage might have something to do with the fact that the KKK has been all but run out of existence, while Islamic fascism is a very real and very large problem that arguable threatens the stability of the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom