Hi everyone, I'm back!
I haven't really had a computer for awhile. So checking out this forum hasn't been really possible. But now I return. Anyway.
To begin with, fie on violent protesters. It doesn't prove a religion is peaceful, if protesters are killing people.
But let's speak with honesty. The article above showed evidence that muslims want to kill us. And this forum has proven that we want to kill them. Need I really choose sides in who is the "bad one"? We're both calling for the murder of people. I really don't think that your argument is any more convincing to them as there argument is for you.
Are people being peaceful? To some extent yes, 10,000 people (I would expect at least 95% of these individuals to be muslims...there's a huge south asian population in london)...enough to qualify in the United States as a seperate city protested in London...enough to create a mass chaotic violent protest with burning shops, burning offices, and hundreds dead, raped, and injured...remained calm and peaceful. This estimate is conservative...up to 40,000 people might have been there.
Vancouver, New York, Toronto, places across the western hemisphere, asia, africa, and australia experienced similar large and peaceful protests.
The Muslim Canadian Congress even called for the end of peaceful protests as they were causing tension worldwide.
Why protest? For one, it is the right of individuals of a nation to congregate for peaceful protest against an action that is seen as immoral by the people.
Why immoral: Muslims feel it (a) offensive to create an image of the prophet and (b) to further disgrace the image by adding bombs and etc to the image.
In honesty, I send my regrets to all those who lost loved ones in the violent protests. However, I'm forced to wonder what the honest reason behind the rioting was. As a citizen of Pittsburgh, I had the glory to watch my Steelers win the Superbowl. As a student here, I watched the aftermath. Cars were overturned, people were hurt, shops were damaged. And these were college students...Obviously, Victory doesn't lend itself to violence and damage of public property...But that's what occurred.
The murder of individuals and the violent rioting, I think, has it's source also in the economic and political feeling in the region. While economically stable regions like the US and the UK had peaceful protests, economically poor regions experienced violence. Leaders are able to manipulate a group of people who are disadvantaged into believing that the source of their problems is a certain group of people. That's why the actions of the terrorists have made little sense. There were attacks on McDonalds and Churches. These american and christian targets are by far distant from the original source of the problem...the danish newspapers. Plus, the leaders do it for their own personal political power cravings.
Why attack these places? People are disadvantaged, they are angry. A leader says "Kill". They let their emotions go wild. This is what happend during the crusades. This is what happened during the India-Pakistan partition. This is what is happening now.
Let's not forget that the police that are counteracting the riots in these countries are for the most part muslim as well.
Let's not forget that the riots have also been comparatively small for the number of muslims in the area...confirmiing that most muslims don't want to hurt us.
Let's not forget that the murder of 45 people can not be washed with the blood of a billion individuals
Let's not forget that the solution to this problem isn't a billion bullets but billions of encounters between these two different cultures where both sides respect the other's wishes, dreams, and goals
If we are to decry the muslim clerics for instigating the murder of dozens of innocent individuals...let's not be the leaders that instigage the counter attack. Blood is blood. Neither runs thicker or thinner.
Peace, Shanti, Salaam