There have been a series of posts in these comments (as well as from the lunatic pants-peeing right wingers originally quoted by Glenn) alleging in a very simplistic manner that Islam itself is an incredibly dangerous and anti-democratic force. (And not components or elements of Muslim individuals or groups such as extremists, or totalitarians, or fundamentalists, but "Islam" per se.)

I presented a summarized speech from a Muslim woman arguing about what is needed to preserve and extend democracy in her society. Which is a Muslim society. Which is currently under attack from many directions, including from Islamic rebels.

In her argument she does not suggest that any part of helping support those valued goals would be to demonize Islam as a magically anti-democratic force. Thus she suggests that forces which strengthen or weaken democracy are not the faith identification of the population, but other, more identifiable and actionable factors.

Is that confusing still?

I guess El Cid and all the rest of ourselves should just knock ourselves out trying to persuade someone who signs him/herself Totally Blase. I'm prepared to sweat blood.

http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2007/01/02/goode-grief-here-come-da-mooslims

1/2/2007
“GOODE” GRIEF! HERE COME DA MOOSLIMS
CATEGORY: Politics, IMMIGRATION REFORM

“Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit.”
(Sergeant ‘Buster’ Kilrain from the film Gettysburg)

I’ve got to hand it to Representative Virgil Goode. Not content with exposing himself as an ignorant bigot by sending a letter to his constituents warning of a Muslim invasion of America and the prospect of many more Congressmen swearing allegiance to the United States on the Koran, he has now reiterated these points on the pages of USA Today:

[...] I indicated to my constituents that I did not subscribe to the Quran in any way, and I intended to use the Bible in connection with my swearing-in. I also stated that the Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall of my office, and I have no intention of displaying the Quran in my office. [...]

[...] “If American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Quran.” [...]

Goode may not have called for a “religious test” specifically, but what the hell are we supposed to make of his warning about there “will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Quran…?” Ooooh…those “demanding” Muslims, how dare they! I didn’t hear Ellison “demanding” anything. I heard him state the fact that he would use the Koran when being sworn in. Why does Goode mischaracterize Ellison’s action in this way?

I will point out that making Ellison into a martyr was something I thought impossible. The radical liberal can be taken to task for his position on any number of issues. But his religion shouldn’t enter into the debate.

And what’s with Mr. Goode solemnly stating that he will not display a Koran in his office? And that he doesn’t “subscribe” to it in any way? That’s just bizarre. And that he assures everyone he has the Ten Commandments on the wall of his office and refuses to apologize for it? Holy Mother! If this guy set up any more strawmen to knock down, he’d be populating the universe with scarecrows.

[...] But to work toward denying the blessings of America to Muslims simply because there are extremists who would do us harm is nutty. Yes we should tighten up our screening procedures for all immigrants. But to judge an entire group by the actions of a few makes Goode a pea wit.

- - By: Rick Moran

Which Rick Moran is the real Rick Moran? The one that mocks Virgil Goode? Or the one that defends his blogging patron, Roger Simon?

The young lady's speech is fine. Actually, quite inspiring. It was your follow up, you know, the last paragraph that I quoted that I don't get. Syntax, grammar, the usual suspects. Does not compute. Unnerstand?

SomeNYguy? You criticize my pen name?? Whaddever.

http://growabrain.typepad.com/growabrain/Morans.jpg

If someone already mentioned this, I'm sorry, I went through a lot of pages and didn't see it, so I'm posting.

There really is Muslim extremism in the world today, and it really is increasing. But people who think that the damage from such extremism is something the U.S. is bearing a major share of, or something even the European community is bearing the major share of, are deluded, insensitive, and self-absorbed.

Muslim extremism hurts the most in countries that are not well off, that have significant Muslim populations or syncretic religious traditions. That would be the increasing isolation of the Muslim community in countries like India (country with the 2nd highest Muslim population in the world), the demands for Muslim purity in countries in which Islam has traditionally been only one part of the religion of most citizens, like Indonesia, or poor countries that see extremism spreading through vehicles they are unable to do without, like madrassas, in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

In addition, the increase in extremism and loud vocal minorities seeking fundamentalism is causing an increase in religious chauvinism, nationalism and "fundamentalism" even in religions which had no such previous tradition -- religions that are not "of the book" like Hinduism.

Many of these countries need to be spending their time, attention, and scarce resources on improving the lot of their people, and instead are seeing their attention diverted by the host of problems caused by Islamic or any other extremism.

The United States, probably the very last on the list of countries that are truly threatened by Islamic extremism, is nevertheless beating the drums against it and causing its increase due to anti-Americanism, or in some cases, by funding corruption or extra-judicial practices, or propping up regimes in the name of defeating Islamoterrorocommieopinkohomofasciowhatever. This country doesn't even have the ties that the Europeans have to Islamic countries and the concommittant problems as an aftermath of colonialism. It is quite amazing to see people extrapolating from countries which do have such post-colonial problems (Netherlands--Indonesia, Britain--Pakistan,...). It is equally amazing seeing people quote out of context from the Koran and tar all Muslims, as if the same people wouldn't have a problem with cherrypicking the Bible and tarring all Christians.

I wasn't going to post, since, because of my slight, on again off again Buddhist leanings I felt I should remain quiet -- after all, suicide bombing was invented by Hindus and Buddhists, not by Muslims. But it's just breathtaking how self-centered people are about who's doing the real dying in the world -- You can stuff all the deaths suffered by the Americans during September 11, and the subsequent war casualties into the death toll in one or another of the countries that are really bearing the brunt of the extremism in the world and never see it. That is, of course, unless you want to talk about the deaths we and a few other countries have caused in the name of fighting extremists.

Sorry, but I find such a laser like focus on poor little America to be just a bit selfish.