Muslims can't possible do anything wrong of their own accord - they are hollow shells, to be filled by white Americans. No will, no moral powers of choice - they can only respond to American prodding. The patronizing attitude displayed in this article is little different from the "noble savage" view of darkies needing civilizing by their betters. When the author tries to relieve American Muslims from responsibilty for their actions, he just infantilizes them and denies them their standing as moral actors. Nice.

...mostly just another strawman from an apparently rather whiny poster.

To suggest that this piece displays a 'noble savage' viewpoint is beyond laughable. You don't even appear to have READ it.

That's what the article said; police surveilance and legal prosecutions result in alienation, resulting in more bomb attacks. The reverse implication would be that if security forces just ignored Muslims, Muslims would start being nice to the societies they have emigrated to. And the criminals who, remember, were tried in front of a jury of their peers, with access to every tool in the defense bar, were simply reacting to their social catagory and station in life.

To Horus; not only did JonFrum read the article, we hafve, collectively, read this apologetic crap many many times before.

Exactly.

It is the standard brushback technique from Muslim apologists.

While I didn't have as passionate a response to this article as JonFrum, I have to agree the author was a bit too narrow-minded. We shouldn't be inviting Muslims to become residents or citizens of our country any more than we should be inviting Christian, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs or any other religious sect. We should be inviting people of good character who will respect our laws and abide by our pluralistic ideals, no matter the color, creed or faith. I don't think that covers anyone beyond the age of 4, no matter what faith or education level, who has to check with their mother to determine whether it's all right to plant a bomb.

We should be inviting people of good character who will respect our laws and abide by our pluralistic ideals, no matter the color, creed or faith.

******************************­******************************­**

Hmmm, just wondering could we start packing of current US citizens who don't meet that definition to -- oh I don't know, somewhere humid and full f biting insects?

Christ people, are you so eager to get into a nitpicking arguement? I can't believe I actually need to say this....

Its glaringly obvious that the article is not trying to pose a simple math equation in which American police action (stimulus) = Muslim resentment (response). Everyone knows its more complicated than that. Everyone also knows that American police action (or whatever action, for that matter) has some effect on people's opinions. Given the complex and varied nature of "America's actions", we should expect complex and varied responses, within the framework of a complex and varied sociopolitical relationship.

Don't try to play cool and argue that the article is saying anything less than "we need to think about the consequences of our actions." Stop the apologizing for us\them\whatever and start thinking.

"start thinking"

Amen! You said a mouthful. Now more than ever, dumbness is on the march worldwide.

"Its glaringly obvious that the article is not trying to pose a simple math equation in which American police action (stimulus) = Muslim resentment (response)."

But that's exactly what the article was saying. The gist, as I got it, was that Europeans law enforcement used surveillance and informants to gain intelligence on the Muslim community and that caused Muslim resentment and that if we use the same methods we'll get the same results.

But how else are we to garner this intelligence? The courts regulate what methods are acceptable in the US and acceptable methods should be applied where ever they are appropriate. There is a portion of the Muslim community that wish harm to America. What methods do you propose we use to find that portion and prevent that harm?

...if you didn't crowd the plate with all of that 'Islamofascist' BS, dude. It's your own fault...

Again, you are smarter than that. The gist of the article is not that the mean ole' MI6 invaded the poor widdle innocent muslims community for no reason and thats when the whole terrorist thing started. Its that governments need to consider the practical consequences of their actions. Blowback from the islamic community is going to be a fact given France and Britain's situation.

As I clearly indicated above, this is not a one-sided issue, and anyone who tries to say it is is just jumping on a soapbox to spew their opinion that its all our fault\its all their fault. Who said I was against monitoring suspected terrorists or the people suspected of harboring them? Of course we should, when necessary.

As for my solutions, I think that smaller communities, towns, and cities will do a better job of creating opportunities to integrate muslim and non-muslim communities than the federal government will. Let the feds worry about terrorism and international policy, and make more amorphous and complicated issues like community building to the communities.

tam:

"Its glaringly obvious that the article is not trying to pose a simple math equation in which American police action (stimulus) = Muslim resentment (response)."

But that's exactly what the article was saying. The gist, as I got it, was that Europeans law enforcement used surveillance and informants to gain intelligence on the Muslim community and that caused Muslim resentment and that if we use the same methods we'll get the same results.

But how else are we to garner this intelligence? The courts regulate what methods are acceptable in the US and acceptable methods should be applied where ever they are appropriate. There is a portion of the Muslim community that wish harm to America. What methods do you propose we use to find that portion and prevent that harm?

I propose that we send your whiney ass over there to annoy them to death.