Well, I pretty much agree with what Tina has to say, in a large sense anyway.

But there is another factor at work here: it is one thing to expect a majority/powerful group to denounce violent acts; it is a bit different when you expect if of a group that feels like an oppressed minority. The Shahids do indeed actually have a point.

Most Muslim countries are oppressive corrupt despotisms, and most of those despotisms are in fact propped up by the West in general and the US in particular. Muslims living as minorities in other countries are in fact oppressed: the biggest single muslim population in the world is in India, where of late they have been subjected to pogroms, mosque destruction, and officially sanctioned discrimination and hate.

Here in North America, there is a continuous stream of invective directed at them, vilifying their culture, religion, and personality, that verges on outright racism. And there have been numerous flagrant human rights abuses directed at North American Muslims, to say nothing of Gitmo.

I can remember back in the 60s, when the black community took a lot of heat for being insufficiently forceful in condemning various radicals, including the Black Panthers for instance.

Given the circumstances, it is actually rather amazing how forceful they have been in condemning terrorism, domestic violence, and hatred. And as an Imam pointed out to me the other day, its not like the US leadership has been out there condemning and renouncing Gitmo, extraordinary renditions, cluster bombing, and all the rest (I may have missed it, but I can't recall either Clinton or Obama taking much of a direct position on that stuff themselves). Plenty of hypocrisy to go around, really.

In fact the violent extremists do indeed direct most of their violence at their immediate oppressors and not the West; the rather high level of terrorism in Saudi, Egypt, Algeria, etc may not get much coverage in the US media, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It most assuredly does.

Finally, a word on Jihad. Yes indeed, Islam is in fact a different religion than Christianity, sometimes we seem to think that for a religion to be respectable, it has to be congruent with our own. There is no doctrine of turning the other cheek in Islam: Muslims are supposed to live in peace and brotherhood with each other, and Muslims are supposed to respect and protect other peoples of the book (Christians and Jews), but if Muslims are attacked, they not only have the right to defend themselves, they have the obligation to do so. So yes, not Christian, but not exactly bloodthirsty on the face of it either, more along the lines of Aquinas' "Just War" type thinking.

Oh, and finally finally, on FGM and honour killings: it can be demonstrated that these practises are not Islamic, simply by pointing out that they are also practiced by Christians, for instance in southern Sudan for FGM, and in Lebanon and Palestine for honour killings. And elsewhere for both.

(And someone earlier on the thread criticized Muslims for "having fatwas," which is just plain stupid and plumb ignorant. The US has fatwas too: they are called "Judicial Rulings" which is exactly what fatwa translates as.)

Obsess much? That practically verges on stalking.

You'd have a little more credibility my obnoxious friend if you actually knew a little more about a subject before you started making pronouncements. For example, there is no priesthood in Islam (which is kinda the point of Islam actually), but there are judges. And judges sentence people to death in the US too, last I heard.

"There is a strong school of thought in Islam which does teach honor killings..."

Really? I was unaware of that. Could you share some pointers, which university or council or whoever representing a 'strong school of thought' (ie not corrupt tribal bozos in Pakistan) who are teaching that? And where in the Koran/Sharia/Hadith they are drawing it from? I would be most interested.