Crosswords3 mins ago
Are They Right Not To Trust Them?
101 Answers
http://
This survey was carried out among the young, I would think that the figures would have been much higher among the more elderly.
We all know that it is only a small minority of Muslims who commit such horrendous attacks such as 'The Twin Towers' 'The London Bus and Tube Attacks', 'The Murder of Lee Rigby' and more recently 'The Kenyan Shopping Mall Terror Attack', and 'The attack carried out on the Christian church in Pakistan'.
But are these not sufficient to instil fear and mistrust?
This survey was carried out among the young, I would think that the figures would have been much higher among the more elderly.
We all know that it is only a small minority of Muslims who commit such horrendous attacks such as 'The Twin Towers' 'The London Bus and Tube Attacks', 'The Murder of Lee Rigby' and more recently 'The Kenyan Shopping Mall Terror Attack', and 'The attack carried out on the Christian church in Pakistan'.
But are these not sufficient to instil fear and mistrust?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// If we can educate our people that our media are far less to be trusted than other faiths and cultures //
That's rather unfair on the vast majority of honest, peace loving and law abiding journalists andy. They can't be held responsible for the profession being hijacked by a few extremists with evil intent.
That's rather unfair on the vast majority of honest, peace loving and law abiding journalists andy. They can't be held responsible for the profession being hijacked by a few extremists with evil intent.
LazyGun...your points re.gay marriage, religions ect are well taken, however we are talking about violence in one particular religion ISLAM.
\\ And 2nd subsequent generations of immigrants or people from different cultural or ethnic backgrounds change as well. \\
From you paragraph above, one would think that with subsequent generations, that attitudes would change......for the BETTER or for the worse.....evidence seems to be emerging that it is for the worse. It manifests itself to an intolerance of anything other than Islam and enforced by atrocities.
From what you say,unless i have misunderstood you, you believe that it will lessen with each generation, both Christian and Islamic beliefs with the result of less intolerance.
You may be right....................the signs so far are not that inspiring.
\\ And 2nd subsequent generations of immigrants or people from different cultural or ethnic backgrounds change as well. \\
From you paragraph above, one would think that with subsequent generations, that attitudes would change......for the BETTER or for the worse.....evidence seems to be emerging that it is for the worse. It manifests itself to an intolerance of anything other than Islam and enforced by atrocities.
From what you say,unless i have misunderstood you, you believe that it will lessen with each generation, both Christian and Islamic beliefs with the result of less intolerance.
You may be right....................the signs so far are not that inspiring.
Wow, so, should I not trust my neighbours, who cut the lawn as I struggle with a disability, changed my fire alarm batteries the other week, fixed a leaking then collapsing ceiling for me etc... Should I be suspicious with all the DIY he is doing in case he is planning some radical fundamentalist attack? Should I be wary other Muslim friends and colleagues, of getting the bus or going to my doctors as there are so many Muslims about, especially those in Muslim dress, all the ones on the bus early morning on their way to cleaning jobs at the uni, hospital etc... in case they are infiltrating and planning and attack. Maybe the local primary which is predominantly, if not all, ethnic minority children is secretly schooling them to be homegrown terrorists, start them early.
Really??? To me that is all just ridiculous. This way of thinking that insinuates that anyone of a certain religion may be a terrorist in the making is dangerous and is likely to just create further divides, discourage integration and make things worse.
The EDL and their ilk aren't exactly blameless. Ok, so they aren't carrying out atrocities like those mentioned in the OP but attacking religious buildings and race hate crimes are hardly likely to help the situation.
Their marches are inflammatory and racist and are prone to offset marches against racism and fascism, inciting hatred, hence why the police tend to get more involved. I've seen plenty of demonstrations round here about Egypt, Syria, Libya etc... all of them peaceful.
Really??? To me that is all just ridiculous. This way of thinking that insinuates that anyone of a certain religion may be a terrorist in the making is dangerous and is likely to just create further divides, discourage integration and make things worse.
The EDL and their ilk aren't exactly blameless. Ok, so they aren't carrying out atrocities like those mentioned in the OP but attacking religious buildings and race hate crimes are hardly likely to help the situation.
Their marches are inflammatory and racist and are prone to offset marches against racism and fascism, inciting hatred, hence why the police tend to get more involved. I've seen plenty of demonstrations round here about Egypt, Syria, Libya etc... all of them peaceful.
@ Sqad
"From what you say,unless i have misunderstood you, you believe that it will lessen with each generation, both Christian and Islamic beliefs with the result of less intolerance."
Yes, this is what I think, and what I think the evidence shows. The problem with the terrorist outrages is that it does tend to focus peoples attention on the negative. On the other hand - anecdote alert! :) - I have known or had friends/colleagues who are essentially lip service muslims; Westernised to all intents and purposes, with the religion relegated to family/ weddings/funerals - rather like many who describe themselves as christian.
So I see the situation improving with each passing generation, despite the outrages.
I am not claiming this is going to be a quick process however, especially for a religion/culture as refractory to change as the Muslim religion. Changes in the culture are well overdue; A greater tolerance of criticism/insult would be welcomed, as would a major overhaul of their views on women etc. But I do think that these will change too over time.
Provided God does not wipe us all out in disgust first, of course! :)
"From what you say,unless i have misunderstood you, you believe that it will lessen with each generation, both Christian and Islamic beliefs with the result of less intolerance."
Yes, this is what I think, and what I think the evidence shows. The problem with the terrorist outrages is that it does tend to focus peoples attention on the negative. On the other hand - anecdote alert! :) - I have known or had friends/colleagues who are essentially lip service muslims; Westernised to all intents and purposes, with the religion relegated to family/ weddings/funerals - rather like many who describe themselves as christian.
So I see the situation improving with each passing generation, despite the outrages.
I am not claiming this is going to be a quick process however, especially for a religion/culture as refractory to change as the Muslim religion. Changes in the culture are well overdue; A greater tolerance of criticism/insult would be welcomed, as would a major overhaul of their views on women etc. But I do think that these will change too over time.
Provided God does not wipe us all out in disgust first, of course! :)
as a Roman I lived thro the I R.A campaigns
where I think little roman catholic babies were blown to smithereens along with the Godless.....
I used to object to being called an IRA sympthiser
but there again - the leaders of the English Church HAD come out strongly against it (violence) Hume especially used to wipe the floor regularly with the Irish prelate who was a waverer, s.t. de Oirish one wouldnt meet de Brutush one.
You will further recollect - well anyway I will remind you -
that the Birmingham bombs were let off because the Bish of Brum had forbidden any priest in his diocese to bury two bombers who had blown themselves up trying to blow up Coventry telephone exchange
'because when they died they did not have Christ in their hearts...'
where I think little roman catholic babies were blown to smithereens along with the Godless.....
I used to object to being called an IRA sympthiser
but there again - the leaders of the English Church HAD come out strongly against it (violence) Hume especially used to wipe the floor regularly with the Irish prelate who was a waverer, s.t. de Oirish one wouldnt meet de Brutush one.
You will further recollect - well anyway I will remind you -
that the Birmingham bombs were let off because the Bish of Brum had forbidden any priest in his diocese to bury two bombers who had blown themselves up trying to blow up Coventry telephone exchange
'because when they died they did not have Christ in their hearts...'
A few facts:
Muslims per se are not terrorists.
Muslims are no more more untrustworthy than any other established religious group or people in general. No? Prove me wrong.
This century British forces have killed more innocent muslims than vice versa.
Surveys are worthless unless one is given full details as to their population sampling method, specific questions asked etc.
The media mix facts with comment and are therefore untrustworthy as guides to opinion-forming. Indeed the opposite is probably the case.
The media use politicians in their "information" gathering - enough said there about "trustworthiness"!
The Daily Mail header and sub-headers are not survey results mere false interpretations which are not included in the subsequent "survey summary"
Comment: AOG's opinion that the figures would have been much higher among the more elderly is not supported by any argument as to why. One could argue that the figures would have been lower due to the elderly's greater wisdom.
Sorry anti-islamic rabble if the above sounds unpleasant to your predjudices....oh...no I'm not!
SIQ.
Muslims per se are not terrorists.
Muslims are no more more untrustworthy than any other established religious group or people in general. No? Prove me wrong.
This century British forces have killed more innocent muslims than vice versa.
Surveys are worthless unless one is given full details as to their population sampling method, specific questions asked etc.
The media mix facts with comment and are therefore untrustworthy as guides to opinion-forming. Indeed the opposite is probably the case.
The media use politicians in their "information" gathering - enough said there about "trustworthiness"!
The Daily Mail header and sub-headers are not survey results mere false interpretations which are not included in the subsequent "survey summary"
Comment: AOG's opinion that the figures would have been much higher among the more elderly is not supported by any argument as to why. One could argue that the figures would have been lower due to the elderly's greater wisdom.
Sorry anti-islamic rabble if the above sounds unpleasant to your predjudices....oh...no I'm not!
SIQ.
I am a Jew. Hath
not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with
the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject
to the same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as
a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge?
We're all much of a muchness.
not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs,
dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with
the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject
to the same diseases, healed by the same means,
warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as
a Christian is? If you prick us, do we not bleed?
if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison
us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not
revenge?
We're all much of a muchness.
@SIQ
"Muslims per se are not terrorists" - Agreed.
"Muslims are no more more untrustworthy than any other established religious group or people in general. No? Prove me wrong." Agreed - but what would you accept as proof,positive or negative, out of curiosity?
"This century British forces have killed more innocent muslims ( ie non-combatant civilians?) than vice versa." Well how can anyone disagree with this statement? It is most certainly true that British forces will have killed more non-combatant muslims than non-combatant muslims have killed British forces, kind of by definition. Is this what you meant to say?
Then your comments regarding the survey. What, exactly, about the survey methodology and the consequent DM report were you objecting to? The details of the survey methodology are easy enough to find - It was a survey carried out by COMRES who were commissioned to conduct said survey by the BBC's Newsbeat team and was carried out quite rigorously.(1000 respondents,sorted and weighted to be representative, conducted in June this year) You can peruse the data yourself, should you so wish.
http://
Feel free to knock yourself out perusing the 500-odd tables worth of data.
http://
And the DM article regarding the survey was actually pretty neutral and accurately and fairly reflected the survey findings, so it should not just be dismissed as being media spin. This is about perceptions of different groups of people within our society, and that is useful to know, if perhaps a bit depressing.
You said this
"The Daily Mail header and sub-headers are not survey results mere false interpretations which are not included in the subsequent "survey summary""
But the only speculation they indulged in within the header or the sub-headers, as best I can tell, was to speculate as to cause for such a large proportion of the surveyed respondents finding Muslims to be untrustworthy, attributing that perception to the association between terrorism attacks and muslims. And actually, that seems a pretty fair analysis to me as well.
As for AoG's comment about the elderly - well, that's down to the oft- repeated ( with a fair degree of justification from several surveys over the decades) assertion that younger people on the whole tend to be more tolerant of different ethnic/cultural groups and more tolerant of diversity within society than the older generations. Not all that controversial an assertion, and actually if you wade through the data that is the trend displayed here too.
So actually I do not think we can just dismiss this survey or its findings as media hype or spin.
I do wonder though which of the posters you are referring to when you mention "anti-islamic rabble" - care to enlighten us? ( and provide evidence to support that comment, of course - I know how keen you are on evidence)
"Muslims per se are not terrorists" - Agreed.
"Muslims are no more more untrustworthy than any other established religious group or people in general. No? Prove me wrong." Agreed - but what would you accept as proof,positive or negative, out of curiosity?
"This century British forces have killed more innocent muslims ( ie non-combatant civilians?) than vice versa." Well how can anyone disagree with this statement? It is most certainly true that British forces will have killed more non-combatant muslims than non-combatant muslims have killed British forces, kind of by definition. Is this what you meant to say?
Then your comments regarding the survey. What, exactly, about the survey methodology and the consequent DM report were you objecting to? The details of the survey methodology are easy enough to find - It was a survey carried out by COMRES who were commissioned to conduct said survey by the BBC's Newsbeat team and was carried out quite rigorously.(1000 respondents,sorted and weighted to be representative, conducted in June this year) You can peruse the data yourself, should you so wish.
http://
Feel free to knock yourself out perusing the 500-odd tables worth of data.
http://
And the DM article regarding the survey was actually pretty neutral and accurately and fairly reflected the survey findings, so it should not just be dismissed as being media spin. This is about perceptions of different groups of people within our society, and that is useful to know, if perhaps a bit depressing.
You said this
"The Daily Mail header and sub-headers are not survey results mere false interpretations which are not included in the subsequent "survey summary""
But the only speculation they indulged in within the header or the sub-headers, as best I can tell, was to speculate as to cause for such a large proportion of the surveyed respondents finding Muslims to be untrustworthy, attributing that perception to the association between terrorism attacks and muslims. And actually, that seems a pretty fair analysis to me as well.
As for AoG's comment about the elderly - well, that's down to the oft- repeated ( with a fair degree of justification from several surveys over the decades) assertion that younger people on the whole tend to be more tolerant of different ethnic/cultural groups and more tolerant of diversity within society than the older generations. Not all that controversial an assertion, and actually if you wade through the data that is the trend displayed here too.
So actually I do not think we can just dismiss this survey or its findings as media hype or spin.
I do wonder though which of the posters you are referring to when you mention "anti-islamic rabble" - care to enlighten us? ( and provide evidence to support that comment, of course - I know how keen you are on evidence)
solvitquick. I take exception to the british forces have killed more muslims than vice versa,they have killed more terrorists and insurgents than vice versa,and most of those terrorists and insurgents have been muslims.If you look at the worlds troubles as a whole most are and have been religious based,the rest political.I was accused of being racist a couple of months ago until I pointed out that islam is not a race,she apologised and said she didnt realise,how many more are under the same misconception.The muslims themselves admit they have sleeper cells in most countries of the world,why,because they are organising atrocities yet to come,so to all muslim lovers I say beware,you just dont know who they are.
Although a little late in getting back to my thread, I gather that most support the 'right not to trust them' argument.
But after reading all the replies the one that stuck out from the rest was the one from andy-hughes, well what can one say when he puts such things as this.?
/// The major problem thrown up by the link in the OP is the fact that most of us receive our 'education' about Muslims from the national media. ///
Well yes that is perfectly true when atrocities after atrocities are committed by Muslims around the world on an almost daily basis, where else would we receive our education about these happenings from if it wasn't from the media?
/// The media is not in the business of telling us that the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people, that is not news, it does not sell papers, or make people watch telvision. ///
Does he suggest that the media should first announce, the majority of Muslims are peace loving people but they have just slaughtered innocent women and children in a shopping mall, or perhaps they shouldn't report the nasty bits, because it instils bigotry and hatred?
/// If, as a media receiverd, I am constantly advised that the bombs and terrorism come from Muslims who want to take over the world, it is not unreasonable of me to assume that Muslims are bad people to be feared and hated. ///
Not unreasonable at all I think you have got it spot on.
/// But the media does not represent all Muslms, any more than its attempts to demostrate that entertainers and actors are abusers. ///
And at no time are they saying that, but what they are saying is the fact that very many distrust Muslims because of the record of some, as regards entertainers and actors I would suggest that a large number of people now have a different perspective on them, caused mainly by the actions of some.
/// In some cases, some are, but the hiuge majority are not - but they do not receive the media focus. ///
What does he suggest, "here is a perfectly peace loving Muslim going about his daily life, why should some be so reported when others of different faiths are not?
/// So, a large part of our fear and distrust can be laid fairly and squarely with the media we have, including rolling news, where the most insiginficant incident will be expanded to fill acres of time on a slow news day. ///
So the killing and taking hostages in a shopping mall may have been more widely reported because it might have happened to be just another slow news day?
/// If we can educate our people that our media are far less to be trusted than other faiths and cultures, maybe young people will not grow up in such fear and ignorance. ///
Picture the scene a teacher of the future standing if front of his class and preaching to his students, "don't take any notice of that multiple car bombing it is only that dreadful media reporting on it because it is a slow news day"
Surely that would certainly make the young people grow up ignorant to the fact of not accepting reality?
But after reading all the replies the one that stuck out from the rest was the one from andy-hughes, well what can one say when he puts such things as this.?
/// The major problem thrown up by the link in the OP is the fact that most of us receive our 'education' about Muslims from the national media. ///
Well yes that is perfectly true when atrocities after atrocities are committed by Muslims around the world on an almost daily basis, where else would we receive our education about these happenings from if it wasn't from the media?
/// The media is not in the business of telling us that the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people, that is not news, it does not sell papers, or make people watch telvision. ///
Does he suggest that the media should first announce, the majority of Muslims are peace loving people but they have just slaughtered innocent women and children in a shopping mall, or perhaps they shouldn't report the nasty bits, because it instils bigotry and hatred?
/// If, as a media receiverd, I am constantly advised that the bombs and terrorism come from Muslims who want to take over the world, it is not unreasonable of me to assume that Muslims are bad people to be feared and hated. ///
Not unreasonable at all I think you have got it spot on.
/// But the media does not represent all Muslms, any more than its attempts to demostrate that entertainers and actors are abusers. ///
And at no time are they saying that, but what they are saying is the fact that very many distrust Muslims because of the record of some, as regards entertainers and actors I would suggest that a large number of people now have a different perspective on them, caused mainly by the actions of some.
/// In some cases, some are, but the hiuge majority are not - but they do not receive the media focus. ///
What does he suggest, "here is a perfectly peace loving Muslim going about his daily life, why should some be so reported when others of different faiths are not?
/// So, a large part of our fear and distrust can be laid fairly and squarely with the media we have, including rolling news, where the most insiginficant incident will be expanded to fill acres of time on a slow news day. ///
So the killing and taking hostages in a shopping mall may have been more widely reported because it might have happened to be just another slow news day?
/// If we can educate our people that our media are far less to be trusted than other faiths and cultures, maybe young people will not grow up in such fear and ignorance. ///
Picture the scene a teacher of the future standing if front of his class and preaching to his students, "don't take any notice of that multiple car bombing it is only that dreadful media reporting on it because it is a slow news day"
Surely that would certainly make the young people grow up ignorant to the fact of not accepting reality?
