The world must say no to extremism

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
The world must say no to extremism
The Nation

Those who kill in the name of religion are betraying their faith

BANGKOK: -- The estimated two million people who joined the "march of unity" in Paris on Sunday delivered a strong message against extremism. Joined by the leaders of more than 40 nations, they took to the streets of the French capital in solidarity with the victims of last week's terror attacks in France. Another two million attended simultaneous rallies elsewhere in France.

The rallies were in response to three days of attacks that left 17 people dead. The violence began last Wednesday with a massacre at the Paris offices of satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo in which 12 people were killed. The next day a policewoman was shot dead in the Paris suburbs. Then on Friday a double hostage-taking led to four more deaths.

The gunmen responsible for the Paris attacks were described as Islamist militants with a history of extremism. Charlie Hebdo had published a slew of cartoons lampooning religions and spiritual leaders, including the Prophet Muhammad.

The millions who came out onto the streets in France demonstrated to the world that we do not need to respond to violence with violence. The demonstrators were adamant that they would never give in to fear or threats of violence. And they are convinced that extremism cannot hold sway in this world.

No one should kill or be killed in the name of religious or political ideology. But, sadly, it is often religious leaders themselves, using narrow-minded interpretations of their faith's teachings, who incite their followers to use force against "unbelievers".

Violence in the name of religious or political belief, however, only breeds more hatred and offers bigots an excuse to use further violence in seeking retribution. Mosques in France were targeted in suspected retaliatory attacks following the Charlie Hebdo killings.

Those who are confident in their beliefs should have no reason to resort to violence in response to criticism aimed at their faith.

Yes, there are plenty of people whose comments on symbols of religion or objects of worship are deemed disrespectful or worse by believers. But do they deserve to die for their criticism? Non-violent responses to "religious insult" abound, including rational debate, protest and boycott.

Ajahn Brahm, a senior British-born Buddhist monk in Australia with a large following throughout Asia, suggests that we make a distinction between religious teachings and religious symbols. He sees the former as "content" and the latter "container". "When the Taleban destroyed the Bamiyan Buddha statues [in Afghanistan], Buddhists did not allow themselves to seek revenge, because that would, in fact, mean the Taleban had succeeded not only in destroying the containers, but also the contents," the monk said.

In 2005 a report that American interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp flushed a copy of the Quran down the toilet caused uproar in the Islamic world. Afterward an Australian journalist asked Ajahn Brahm what he would do if someone flushed a Buddhist holy book down the toilet. His answer: "Call the plumber." For the monk, holy books are merely the wrapper, not the content.

Tolerance is the key to preventing more violence akin to that we saw in Paris last week, in which the perpetrators cited religious reasons for taking lives. To root out the scourge of militant ideologies, worshippers of all religions must unite with non-believers to condemn extremism.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/The-world-must-say-no-to-extremism-30251933.html


-- The Nation 2015-01-15

[canuckamuck]

Yep no bad guys in Buddhism. It's the foreigners that have all the problems.

[NeilSA1]

Its a pity there were not more people like Ajahn Brahm. The world needs many more.

[Briggsy]

Would that include extremism where even the mention of certain subjects is taboo?

[SiSePuede419]

"The world must say no to extremism"

Damn straight!

I say no to girls with full back tattoos.

[gabruce]

There is everything right with extremism. What everyone should be focusing on is intolerance and violence. Extremism is just a belief that isn't the same as the majority belief, and that's fine and probably even necessary for change and advancement.

[H1w4yR1da]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

[joepublic]

Fine words, but pointless - the world needs to say no to many things, but when it comes to 'terror, the world specifically needs to demand equivalence for the drone deaths of wedding revelers in Afganistan, the Satirists in Paris and the children of Gaza.

Lets dispense with pointless platitudes and hand wringing only when death visits our doors, yet feign amnesia when it happens to others - then, and only then, will the word "World" be appropriate,

Edited January 15, 2015 by joepublic

[joepublic]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

[Friendly Stranger]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

"White Supremists and Zionist Israelis" Not a good pairing for your argument.

To answer your question, what happens more frequently and is threatening our way of life?

[Ulysses G.]

"White Supremists and Zionist Israelis" Not a good pairing for your argument.

Agreed. The stupid rhetoric defeats his argument. White Supremists - although fools - are very little threat to the world and Zionists simply want their own country, which they have accomplished and it is flourishing.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[H1w4yR1da]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

Am I an Islamophobe? Of course I am! What a silly question!

Though I'd say there's nothing irrational in having a fear of Islam. It's perfectly natural in my opinion.

I prefer the term 'infidel'.

And strange as it may seem, neither White Supremists, Zionist Israelis, the IRA, the Baader Meinhoff gang nor Timothy Mcveigh have recently bombed Bali nightclubs, London Underground trains and buses, killed unarmed soldiers on the streets of western cities, drove explosive-laded cars into airports, attempted to destroy jet liners with exposives hidden in their clothing, raped hundreds of children in northern British towns or murdered Journalists in their offices.

Did I make my point?

[luk AJ]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

[joepublic]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

Am I an Islamophobe? Of course I am! What a silly question!

Though I'd say there's nothing irrational in having a fear of Islam. It's perfectly natural in my opinion.

I prefer the term 'infidel'.

And strange as it may seem, neither White Supremists, Zionist Israelis, the IRA, the Baader Meinhoff gang nor Timothy Mcveigh have recently bombed Bali nightclubs, London Underground trains and buses, killed unarmed soldiers on the streets of western cities, drove explosive-laded cars into airports, attempted to destroy jet liners with exposives hidden in their clothing, raped hundreds of children in northern British towns or murdered Journalists in their offices.

Did I make my point?

You made you point and you also made mine.

You thinks its ok to hate people because of their religion - I don't.

You think its ok for one group of people to maim and kill, but not another - I don't

Your honesty is either refreshing, or depressing, but in any case, these views are the reasons we have extremism in the first place.

[joepublic]

The world is a twisted place - we rightly demand free speech for Islamaphobes.

Yet, its a crime to question the Holocaust - how is this possible, and why should anyone respect any laws relating to restriction of free speech?

[MilesofSmiles]

The world already does.

[H1w4yR1da]

But shouldn't the headline read "The world must say no to Islamic extremism"?

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

Am I an Islamophobe? Of course I am! What a silly question!

Though I'd say there's nothing irrational in having a fear of Islam. It's perfectly natural in my opinion.

I prefer the term 'infidel'.

And strange as it may seem, neither White Supremists, Zionist Israelis, the IRA, the Baader Meinhoff gang nor Timothy Mcveigh have recently bombed Bali nightclubs, London Underground trains and buses, killed unarmed soldiers on the streets of western cities, drove explosive-laded cars into airports, attempted to destroy jet liners with exposives hidden in their clothing, raped hundreds of children in northern British towns or murdered Journalists in their offices.

Did I make my point?

You made you point and you also made mine.

You thinks its ok to hate people because of their religion - I don't.

You think its ok for one group of people to maim and kill, but not another - I don't

Your honesty is either refreshing, or depressing, but in any case, these views are the reasons we have extremism in the first place.

Usual apologist crap!

Nowhere in my post did I say either I "think its ok to hate people because of their religion" or I "think it's ok for one group of people to maim and kill, but not another".

Let me expand. I hate what Islam stands for. I hate what some Muslims do in the name of their religion and I'm disgusted at the silent complicity by the majority or the pathetic lip-service paid by Islamic leaders when an atrocity does occur.

I hate the Islamic terrorist because they kill in the name of their book. And then liberal, left-wing PC middle-class whites on a guilt trip excuse it as the religion of peace, or it was a lone wolf attack or a mentally-unstable attacker and not connected to Islam. So many apologies!

And which group of people did I say it was ok for them to 'maim and kill' exactly? You're either making things up or have serious reading comprehension issues.

My views are merely a response to Islamic extremism, not it's cause. Deniers like yourself allow this kind of extremism to flourish and grow as the perps know they won't be held to account. See Rotherham for an example of this.

[joepublic]

Why so? Are you ok with White Supremists and Zionist Israelis . Did you agree with the IRA or Baader Meinhor or Timothy Mcveigh? Are you saying yes to these extremists or or you simply an Islamaphobe trying to make a point?

Am I an Islamophobe? Of course I am! What a silly question!

Though I'd say there's nothing irrational in having a fear of Islam. It's perfectly natural in my opinion.

I prefer the term 'infidel'.

And strange as it may seem, neither White Supremists, Zionist Israelis, the IRA, the Baader Meinhoff gang nor Timothy Mcveigh have recently bombed Bali nightclubs, London Underground trains and buses, killed unarmed soldiers on the streets of western cities, drove explosive-laded cars into airports, attempted to destroy jet liners with exposives hidden in their clothing, raped hundreds of children in northern British towns or murdered Journalists in their offices.

Did I make my point?

Nowhere in my post did I say either I "think its ok to hate people because of their religion" or I "think it's ok for one group of people to maim and kill, but not another".

"'Am I an Islamophobe? Of course I am! What a silly question!"

"And strange as it may seem, neither..xxx "

[Saladin]

The World at large has already said no to extremism but seems incapable of doing much about it. It is time for the Moslem communities worldwide to face reality and acknowledge that the biggest insult to Allah and their Prophet are the murderous jihadist psychopaths in their midst. For every Moslem killed by 'The West' there must be a thousand killed by other Moslems 'in the name of Allah'. Moslem communities must identify these evil bastards and actively cooperate with civil authorities to take them out of the picture by every means.

[MrTee]

Is it an irony that the same extremists that push their hatred on all the other threads turn up on this thread and do the same.

Say no to extremism - its not difficult concept to understand.

[Morch]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

You find it unacceptable, but do not grab your assault rifle and storm their offices.

You apply an acceptable reaction to what you find unacceptable.

Edited January 15, 2015 by Morch

[Johpa]

Again people are missing the point that it is not "extremism" here but an orthodox interpretation of Islam. One can have Jewish and Christian and even Buddhist extremists who advocate violence, but in this situation it is not extremists but an orthodox interpretation of Islam, an interpretation adhered to by many, that advocates such violence and intolerance.

[luk AJ]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

You find it unacceptable, but do not grab your assault rifle and storm their offices.

You apply an acceptable reaction to what you find unacceptable.

correct but if you take 1000.000 men randomly, tell them their wife is a hooker and their children are a joke, how many would grab their gun and shoot without hesitation? Some will react with an acceptable reaction but a few will shoot.

[Morch]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

You find it unacceptable, but do not grab your assault rifle and storm their offices.

You apply an acceptable reaction to what you find unacceptable.

correct but if you take 1000.000 men randomly, tell them their wife is a hooker and their children are a joke, how many would grab their gun and shoot without hesitation? Some will react with an acceptable reaction but a few will shoot.

Indeed.

But the relative number of people reacting violently will probably have a thing or two to do with their culture, upbringing, education and social norms. Religion touches on all of these things.

[mania]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

You find it unacceptable, but do not grab your assault rifle and storm their offices.

You apply an acceptable reaction to what you find unacceptable.

It is true luk in his post finds it unacceptable but accepts their right to draw what they want.

Not everyone is as tolerant or has suffered as little as luk

But for folks to focus solely on the murder of the cartoonist work as the cause is short sighted too.

Every article that delves into these brothers past show they were initially turned by seeing things reported

of wrongful deeds done by others like in Abu Ghraib Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq etc

So were the cartoonist a last straw? Or more likely an achievable target ?

What ever.... but I doubt any can understand an inability to tolerate unless you or yours are on the side that eats crap everyday

in various forms of oppression, drone attacks, wrongful imprisonment etc etc

Looking at the outrage of many over the 12 deaths of innocents should give an idea of how those who

have suffered thousands of innocent deaths might also be enraged by now.

Yes before the useful tools state the usual BS like ...."well that is what they get for living near a terrorist"

Please consider some day your neighbor or your kids neighbor may have a so called terrorist in their midst

unbeknown to them. I hope they equally feel it is ok when they or theirs are vaporized by a hellfire missile due to their proximity

to a "suspected terrorist"

Indeed.

But the relative number of people reacting violently will probably have a thing or two to do with their culture, upbringing, education and social norms. Religion touches on all of these things.

In some ways what I just said.............But religion or not if your social norm is constantly being attacked & oppression I would hope you would eventually react too.

Edited January 15, 2015 by mania

[ravip]

"Yep no bad guys in Buddhism. It's the foreigners that have all the problems."

This is the type of attitude that's responsible for a lot of trouble in this world.

We still will have to live with extremism for a long time.

[wabothai]

It is OK to have extreme ideas. Killing people or having the intention to do so is not one of them. Those who do have to answer to the courts of law. I know reality is not that simple.

[iReason]

There is everything right with extremism. What everyone should be focusing on is intolerance and violence. Extremism is just a belief that isn't the same as the majority belief, and that's fine and probably even necessary for change and advancement.

extremism |ikˈstrēˌmizəm|noun the holding of extreme political or religious views; fanaticism: the dangers of religious extremism.

fanatic |fəˈnatik|noun a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, esp. for an extreme religious or political cause.

zealot |ˈzelət|noun a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in pursuit of their religious, political, or other ideals.

uncompromising |ˌənˈkämprəˌmīziNG|adjective showing an unwillingness to make concessions to others, esp. by changing one's ways or opinions.

• harsh or relentless

Edited January 15, 2015 by iReason

[Morch]

People should not kill or being killed for their believes. Extremism is the vomit of hate and cannot be tolerated. We should embrace our freedom and our freedom of speech. But personally, I think it is a bad idea to use the right on freedom of speech to insult a religion or people.

I am Belgian and I don't feel really patriotic, but when I see a cartoon with the words "Le Roi des cons est mort" after our King died is for me not acceptable and neither is it acceptable for Moslims when their God is insulted. .. "je suis Charlie"? ..not me.

You find it unacceptable, but do not grab your assault rifle and storm their offices.

You apply an acceptable reaction to what you find unacceptable.

It is true luk in his post finds it unacceptable but accepts their right to draw what they want.

Not everyone is as tolerant or has suffered as little as luk

But for folks to focus solely on the murder of the cartoonist work as the cause is short sighted too.

Every article that delves into these brothers past show they were initially turned by seeing things reported

of wrongful deeds done by others like in Abu Ghraib Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq etc

So were the cartoonist a last straw? Or more likely an achievable target ?

What ever.... but I doubt any can understand an inability to tolerate unless you or yours are on the side that eats crap everyday

in various forms of oppression, drone attacks, wrongful imprisonment etc etc

Looking at the outrage of many over the 12 deaths of innocents should give an idea of how those who

have suffered thousands of innocent deaths might also be enraged by now.

Yes before the useful tools state the usual BS like ...."well that is what they get for living near a terrorist"

Please consider some day your neighbor or your kids neighbor may have a so called terrorist in their midst

unbeknown to them. I hope they equally feel it is ok when they or theirs are vaporized by a hellfire missile due to their proximity

to a "suspected terrorist"

Indeed.

But the relative number of people reacting violently will probably have a thing or two to do with their culture, upbringing, education and social norms. Religion touches on all of these things.

In some ways what I just said.............But religion or not if your social norm is constantly being attacked & oppression I would hope you would eventually react too.

According to this, we should be witnessing a fair amount of international Christian-related terrorist attacks, following the way some of them are treated in other countries. Was there a whole lot of Vietnamese international terrorism at the time? Are Nigerian Christian immigrants attacking Muslims in Europe?

Understanding the roots for terrorism, the factors that lead to extremism, is fine. Even recognizing some responsibilities. It still does not absolve or condone terrorist attacks.

[mania]

It still does not absolve or condone terrorist attacks.

100% agree..........We probably disagree a bit on who all the terrorist are. I tend to see more than one group regardless of

being able to say .....yeah the xxx people never fought back they just took it so why doesn't everyone? In which case

what is the complaint? Take it quietly

Many want to confine or define justifiable/excusable terrorism or at least pretend they know nothing of it.

No problem...till xxx group says enough & grabs what ever small form of payback they can find.

No different in places like Palestine where they shoot those silly ineffective pipe rockets knowing full

well they are ineffective.

But you know even if they run out of those silly ineffective pipe rockets I tend to think they will then stand at the fences of what

use to be their lands & throw stones knowing full well they will be shot dead by the well armed via military aided

terrorist...in their view "Terrorists"

Same will happen elsewhere like the places drones go.

But when they cannot reach those with stones or silly pipe rockets they will look for something attainable to attack.

That of course too will be terrorism.

Edited January 15, 2015 by mania