Moslem threats of violence at a public meeting in London.

[Sibling DavidH]

How about this, Siblings?

Five minutes before the talk was due to start a man burst into the room holding a camera phone and for some seconds stood filming the faces of all those in the room. He shouted 'listen up all of you, I am recording this, I have your faces on film now, and I know where some of you live', at that moment he aggressively pushed the phone in someone's face and then said 'and if I hear that anything is said against the holy Prophet Muhammad, I will hunt you down.' He then left the room and two members of the audience applauded.

[Opsa]

Sounds like a dangerous person. Did anyone follow him out?

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I suspect that the overwhelming majority of Muslims in the west while probably appalled to listen any form of Islam bashing do not condone violence or threats, in the same way most Xtians don't condone the threats and acts of violence of the few fundamentalists that do. What is ironic is that those fundamentalists are the ones that create the negative stereotypes that afflict the rest of Muslims in Europe and North America.

Nevertheless I still think that Muslim leaders and followers should be condemning those kinds of outbursts as strongly and loudly as they can because by not doing it they are endorsing such behaviors, and the same applies to Xtians in the same circumstances.

[Griffin NoName]

The thought of being on a hit list for being secular is a bit much. Does anyone know any violent atheists*?

* I don't mean thugs who happen to be atheists, I mean atheists who are violent in defence of their atheism

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

To me, the principle difference between the extremist Xianists and extremist Islamists is the primary choice of weapons.

The Xianists appear to prefer guns, while capable of massacres, it does require someone holding onto, and aiming.

Whereas the Islamists appear to choose explosive devices and a "willing" human as a sort of guided human bomb.

Both are abominations, I think-- but just as clearly, we cannot put the explosive genie back into the bottle-- it's just too easy to make volatile chemicals out of simple components.

And at least in the USA, the gun-genie is too diverse to recapture.

Actually?  I had a point I was gonna make, but I have forgotten what it was... apart from the observation that either extremist group is a problem in modern societies.

[Swatopluk]

Slightly off-topic. According to the fascinating little book "Buda's Wagon" Muslims were about the last group to make use of the car bomb. It started with anarchists (I assume those were atheists too), was taken up and perfected by the terrorist founders* of Israel and then brought to all-time record numbers by Tamils (who were either Hindu or atheist depedning on faction). Where Muslims differ is that they by default blow themselves up instead of putting the bomb somewhere with time fuses and getting away to safety (although there were Tamil kamikaze runners/drivers too).
What is common is that the main instigators independent of professed belief tend to send others to do the deed. The Kristian(TM) ones also tend to deny any involvement at all after the fact (unliketheir Muslim counterparts).
---
In some way events like the one quoted in the original post also serve as a reminder that the threat of violence (if credible) often works well by itself. It's the working principle of the Mafia too. If people believe that the threat is real, it will not be necessary to actually carry out the threat. The belief has just to be strengthened from time to time. Just yesterday (iirc and referring to the podcast) Rachel Maddow had the topic of Wanted posters used by 'pro-lifers' on her show again. The pattern is always the same: 1) a Wanted poster will all the necessary info to find and identify an abortion provider is published 2) some pro-lifer murders or attempts to murder said target 3) The murderer is called misguided by the ones who set him on it (while in essence applauding the murder) 4) The abortion facility shuts down at the latest after the second event of that nature.
The number of murders is not high compared to e.g violent robbery but the effect is nationwide and lasting. Terror works.

*unfortunately that is a matter of historic fact. The founding history of modern Israel is not a pretty thing.

[Aggie]

The Xianists appear to prefer guns, while capable of massacres, it does require someone holding onto, and aiming.

From what I've seen, the Xianists prefer high-powered missiles fired from flying killer robots.

[Sibling DavidH]

What horrifies me most is that this man brazenly commits a very serious criminal offence in front of a large crowd, apparently without any attempt to avoid being identified.  Not even the IRA behaved like that.

I hope he'll be caught, convicted and imprisoned.  These days I get the impression that the police are less afraid to follow such things up.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

The Xianists appear to prefer guns, while capable of massacres, it does require someone holding onto, and aiming.

From what I've seen, the Xianists prefer high-powered missiles fired from flying killer robots.

Point. 

But, lest you forget, those are government flying killer robots..... right?  So that makes it... what? 

hmmm.... gotta think about that some.

[Opsa]

What horrifies me most is that this man brazenly commits a very serious criminal offence in front of a large crowd, apparently without any attempt to avoid being identified.  Not even the IRA behaved like that.

I hope he'll be caught, convicted and imprisoned.  These days I get the impression that the police are less afraid to follow such things up.

It also bothers me that no-one arrested him before he left the building, but I guess because it was a campus, there were no police necessarily on hand.

The important thing to do is to remember that this sort of incident does not represent the feelings of a whole sect. I agree, that plenty of Moslems are likely very upset that this guy made such a big stink and could harm their public image, which is pretty dicey in some areas, all ready.

I wonder if the guy was a student at the school. It seems like a sort of youthfully foolish threat demonstration.

[pieces o nine]

Unfortunately, Islam has yet to escape its own constraints - just as Christianity had, if you will pardon the expression, the devil of a time getting over utterly and viciously squashing dissenters within its own ranks once it achieved critical ... mass. It was successful in doing this so completely and for so long because the rank and file were active and complicit in turning on dissension in order to protect themselves from those in power.

Yet the one certain way to seriously curtail cultural protection for extremists is for moderates to refuse to cooperate in witch hunts and scapegoating, to speak out against them, and to do so fearlessly and frequently and for as long as it takes, uncowed by internal threats and reprisals, until the tide turns. This is just not happening in Islam, no matter how egregious the extremist behavior, and it bodes ill indeed where moderates (by the hundreds?  thousands?  millions?) remain conspicuously silent -- even in Western nations -- while a handful of individuals or even an individual by himself  successfully threatens large groups with the very technology that highlights the irrationalities within his beliefs.

I see individuals such as Pat Robertson being livid, bitter, jealous wrecks that Western law and the general public's democratic (<--- not in the political party sense) ideals are still keeping Christianity's more murderous impulses in check.  Barely, in some places.

[Aggie]

Yet the one certain way to seriously curtail cultural protection for extremists is for moderates to refuse to cooperate in witch hunts and scapegoating, to speak out against them, and to do so fearlessly and frequently and for as long as it takes, uncowed by internal threats and reprisals, until the tide turns. This is just not happening in Islam, no matter how egregious the extremist behavior, and it bodes ill indeed where moderates (by the hundreds?  thousands?  millions?) remain conspicuously silent -- even in Western nations -- while a handful of individuals or even an individual by himself   successfully threatens large groups with the very technology that highlights the irrationalities within his beliefs.

In terms of moderation, I think some time is required - give it a generation.  New immigrants in what has become at least semi-hostile territory feel like outsiders, and I think that some attitudes and actions are tolerated more than they should be in the interest of solidarity; in addition, I suspect that the older generation of immigrants in many places may have limited sources of information and rely heavily on the news and opinions from the 'old country' to stay connected. The Islamic diaspora is a very sensitive issue at the moment, but xenophobic and (what's the term for the opposite, i.e. hatred of a larger society by outsiders?) attitudes tend to smooth out once a generation or two has been raised in the new land.

There are a number of Islamic leaders in Canada (and I would suspect other Western nations) that speak out vocally and publicly against violent acts, so it appears that integrated moderates are willing to stand up.  For a less-integrated community, who knows what message is on the lips of moderates? I suspect it's easy to exploit resentment towards better-integrated folks and dismiss them as sell-outs that have left the "true" message behind, thus somewhat negating their opinions. Given that the last decade has seen major long-term military operations by the West in Muslim countries, newer immigrants may identify more strongly with extremist movements than their personal values would normally predict.

One might do well to recall that neither Irish nor Italian immigrants were well-treated in America during their initial migrations, and both had a reputation for violence. Some of those stereotypes persist, but I think it'd be hard to say that the descendents of these immigrant groups are not well-integrated.

[pieces o nine]

^ I've personally argued the military aggression points, amongst others that you made here. I agree that they play a significant role. I also remember my mixed feelings when H got perceptibly agitated regarding Draw Muhammad day. I understood full well that he was a minor and had been raised within a very closed community. I fully understood that he had been allowed to come here because  he was a model student within his religious upbringing. I also understood that he was grappling with a lot of experiences which conflicted with his entire worldview, and was juggling them admirably. And yet, just the thought  that someone following a foreign religion in a foreign country had 'insulted Islam'  triggered a profound reaction which he was not able to get past.

We were deeply concerned for his well-being after he returned home; he needed to *not* stand out as westernized to avoid violence (or worse) at the hands of his more nationalistic and religious countrymen. We are so proud of the work he is doing now to publicly challenge child neglect and abuse to help build a better world for the next generation (just as his predecessors within living memory struggled for political and ideological freedom for the succeeding generations). I cannot imagine him participating in actions like those described in the story. I can, however, imagine him remaining carefully silent at hearing about them, and because we love him and don't want to see him hurt, I excuse that silence completely...    Perhaps in another generation or two in his own country, that silence will not be as necessary. On the other hand, it is likely to be even more necessary, due in part to the lack of internal opposition to it today.

On the other hand, had he been able to remain in a western country at that impressionable age; had his immediate family not remained behind as 'hostages'; had he been able to marry someone like the remarkable girl from the program who valued the best of their cultural past while looking eagerly into a larger future...   How would he have responded to this story? I really don't know whether he would have been able to see the protester's behavior as inappropriate, or if his initial -- and lasting -- impulse would still have been that the conference was, indeed, a mortal insult to Islam. And that deeply saddens me, for both our sakes.

...
One might do well to recall that neither Irish nor Italian immigrants were well-treated in America during their initial migrations, and both had a reputation for violence. Some of those stereotypes persist, but I think it'd be hard to say that the descendents of these immigrant groups are not well-integrated.

More than one city I've lived in has had an Irish Catholic church within one mile of a German Catholic church. The members of the respective congregations *still* live next door to each other, go to school together, work together, play on rec league sports teams together, get along famously. Until  Sunday morning, where the descendants of each group go off to pray in different buildings -- in the same language, English -- the same words, in the same order, from the same missals, on the same Sunday in the same lectionary cycle, to the same God they are convinced sees them as superior to the fake Catholics down the street. It boggles the mind.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I've seen american(ized?) catholics look down to hispanic catholics so no surprises there, just listen to mister tainted lube Santorum's speeches against migrants. Us vs Them as usual.

[Swatopluk]

Not that The Church would not discriminate even inside an ethnic group on occasion. In fascist Italy the Communion was different for the rich landowners and the(ir) peasants. The rich got 'proper' white wheat wafers, the poor something made from 'lesser' flour. The poor also got told that their communion was thus of lower worth than that of the rich. Today there is a strict policy that only white wheat wafers without alteration (like gluten removal to allow people with allergies to participate) carry the power and anything else is 100% wortless and thus forbidden. Also no grape juice instead of wine. Bad luck and damnation for people with allergies or alcoholism problems. The reasoning is based on overdone originalism that would make Jehovah's witnesses proud. The word for bread used in the description of the Last Supper implies (according to this reasoning) wheat. Since the writers were obviously 110% fussy in such details* the use of any other type of bread (wafers are bread???) would therefore be against the expressed wishes of Our Lord. I assume that, could the type of grape be deduced from the word for wine, only wine from that special vinyard would be acceptable.

*any real expert will tell you that those NT writers were anything but. The Greek is actually quite poor in most of the gospel texts, so trying to extract meaning from the choice of one word over alternatives is ridiculous.

Sorry for getting off-topic.