Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

[Jack_Sparrow]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Med911

Thats why its such a loaded question. Do you sympathize with the motive can easily be misconstrued as you sympathize with terrorists. Most Muslims sympathize with the motive, even if they don't support violence. No practicing Muslim will ever tell you that they are perfectly fine with cartoons that insult their faith...

The author doesn't stop there. Its not enough that you don't support violence, but you also have to believe a particular thing, otherwise you are an extremist.

Bottom line... I believe cartoons that insult Muslims are wrong for many reasonS. And I understand that this can motivate people to commit acts of violence. I don't however support such violence. The author concludes that because i am against the cartoons, I am an extremist, even if I don't commit acts of violence as a result. Thats not fair.

The question isn't formulated properly... it doesn't offer much insight. It only serves to create a false impression of muslims and promotes paranoia. Your an extremist even if you don't support violence? What ?!?!

Motive is the *"reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious." *If you sympathize with the motive aren't you by default sympathizing with that "something" which in this case happens to be killing the journalists/cartoonists ?

I see your point that its a loaded question - I am also pleasantly surprised that 62% of the people said that they don't sympathize with the motive.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Jack_Sparrow

Motive is the *"reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious." *If you sympathize with the motive aren't you by default sympathizing with that "something" which in this case happens to be killing the journalists/cartoonists ?

I see your point that its a loaded question - I am also pleasantly surprised that 62% of the people said that they don't sympathize with the motive.

Yes I know what a "motive" is thank you.

The motive in this case are the cartoons. The cartoons were disrespectful, and the perpetrators of the murders felt that they should not be printing them.

Most Muslims, will agree that those Cartoons are disrespectful and should not be printed (if for no other reason then just out of decency in respect of others). So most Muslims will understand and agree with such a sentiment.

What they dont agree with is the action that were elicited by that motive.

So you can understand or sympathize with a certain motive or "reason for doing something," and yet not support that something that is done.

So for example. I hate that the Pakistani cricket team is playing nothing but garbage cricket. That is my motive for going to meet them at the airport and hurling eggs at them. Now most cricket fans would sympathize with the motive, but very few would support my subsequent actions as a result.

So no, sympathizing with a cause or a "motive" doesnt mean you support the actions that are elicited by that motive.

And i think with the 62 percent who dont agree with the motive, a number of things have to be considered. It depends on how they ask the question, who is asking the question (many desis will be reticent over such issues, not wanting to rock the boat so to speak), many arent sure what the motive is exactly (are they being asked their views on whether such cartoons should be permissible or are they being asked whether people should react to such provocative cartoons..). I mean its a confusing question. And then there is so much variance in terms of oppinion and beliefs. To say that this poll is a definitive reflection on UK Muslims forgets that Muslims are individuals and religious understanding and interpretation is a spectrum and not monolithic.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Southie

Religious folks are sensitive to insults wrt their faith. Sometimes this leads to violent response which never is ok By the same token, religious folks should not insult other belief systems or lifestyles. For those folks may be equally sensitive about their belief systems.

True, religious people have their own bag of worms.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@psyah

Peace Med911

I agree with you that that is the intent of the article ... But linguistically why is it bad for Muslims to "sympathise with the motives"?

"Sympathize with the motive" just sounds horrible doesn't it ? But really, there are countless examples of motives we can at least empathize with.

Motives are often just, even if they result in the worst of atrocities.

[Jack_Sparrow]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Med911

Yes I know what a “motive” is thank you.

The motive in this case are the cartoons. The cartoons were disrespectful, and the perpetrators of the murders felt that they should not be printing them.

Most Muslims, will agree that those Cartoons are disrespectful and should not be printed (if for no other reason then just out of decency in respect of others). So most Muslims will understand and agree with such a sentiment.

What they dont agree with is the action that were elicited by that motive.

So you can understand or sympathize with a certain motive or “reason for doing something,” and yet not support that something that is done.

So for example. I hate that the Pakistani cricket team is playing nothing but garbage cricket. That is my motive for going to meet them at the airport and hurling eggs at them. Now most cricket fans would sympathize with the motive, but very few would support my subsequent actions as a result.

So no, sympathizing with a cause or a “motive” doesnt mean you support the actions that are elicited by that motive.

And i think with the 62 percent who dont agree with the motive, a number of things have to be considered. It depends on how they ask the question, who is asking the question (many desis will be reticent over such issues, not wanting to rock the boat so to speak), many arent sure what the motive is exactly (are they being asked their views on whether such cartoons should be permissible or are they being asked whether people should react to such provocative cartoons..). I mean its a confusing question. And then there is so much variance in terms of oppinion and beliefs. To say that this poll is a definitive reflection on UK Muslims forgets that Muslims are individuals and religious understanding and interpretation is a spectrum and not monolithic.

Since you want to nit pick, how about this ?

Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can “never be justified”, 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable.

But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied “don’t know” or refused to answer.

I read this as 32% think that violence is justified. Would you disagree ?

BBC News - Most British Muslims ‘oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals’

[Southie]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

I read this as 24 pct

[Southie]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

That is still high

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Jack_Sparrow

Since you want to nit pick, how about this ?

I read this as 32% think that violence is justified. Would you disagree ?

BBC News - Most British Muslims ‘oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals’

Who’s nit picking?
Im referring to the 27 percent who sympathize with the motive. That was the stat on which basis the author concludes that such people are “extremist.”

This is a separate statistic.

"Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can “never be justified”, 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable.

But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied “don’t know” or refused to answer"

Thats sad, but 32 percent ? Because they dont know or refuse to answer, they must be in support ? Maybe, Maybe not.

[Southie]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@ Med. This figure is astounding. Between 24 to 32 pct advocating violence. Or saying violence justified.

If this figure is correct, it is alarming. And needs to be addressed.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Southie

@ Med. This figure is astounding. Between 24 to 32 pct advocating violence. Or saying violence justified.

If this figure is correct, it is alarming. And needs to be addressed.

I dont generally read to much into these things. Polls are indicative, not often definitive.

There are always those in every society that hold unconventional views. This one is a particularly touchy subject.

yes, there is need for caution, at the very least. But we already knew that. I dont think these people are particularly dangerous nor do I think there is need for panic. i have known my own share of Muslims who believe such things, and they continue to live normal peaceable lives. Fear mongering on the other hand, as this article does, can only push such people in the wrong direction.

[psyah]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Med911

"Sympathize with the motive" just sounds horrible doesn't it ? But really, there are countless examples of motives we can at least empathize with.

Motives are often just, even if they result in the worst of atrocities.

Yes quite ... First of all Jack Sparrow conflated "sympathising with the motives" with "sympathising with the killers". The second thing is ... To sympathise with a motive is merely to say that their moral standing is the same ... I.e "it is offensive to Muslims if anyone ridiculed the holy Prophet (SAW)" ... That is a motive shared ... Now some Muslims will react in their offended state by taking violent action and others would not ... So really ... What is the media trying to get at when it states "sympathising with the motives" ? Does it wish to make the numbers of Muslims look worse than it is? Does it wish to alienate more Muslims? Rather it should be made to hold responsibility for its actions ... Sue the media for Libel I say ...

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@psyah

Yes quite ... First of all Jack Sparrow conflated "sympathising with the motives" with "sympathising with the killers". The second thing is ... To sympathise with a motive is merely to say that their moral standing is the same ... I.e "it is offensive to Muslims if anyone ridiculed the holy Prophet (SAW)" ... That is a motive shared ... Now some Muslims will react in their offended state by taking violent action and others would not ... So really ... What is the media trying to get at when it states "sympathising with the motives" ? Does it wish to make the numbers of Muslims look worse than it is? Does it wish to alienate more Muslims? Rather it should be made to hold responsibility for its actions ... Sue the media for Libel I say ...

These days it seems everyone is interested in Muslim opinions.

Meanwhile, how many Americans feel torture and extra-judicial murder of US citizens in certain circumstances is justified ? How many Hindus and Jews support violence under "certain circumstances."

Honestly this whole thing about cartoons wasnt an issue until it became one. You know the show "South Park" on comedy central showed the prophet in one of its cartoons as far back as early 2000 ? Its was never an issue. Now they've created this atmosphere where its almost as if they are waiting for a response from some Muslims. Trying to goad people into making statements like violence in sometimes justified in cases of blasphemy, just so they can write these articles. Calm the hell down i say.

It didnt even need to be 24 percent, its could have been 1 percent and thats still roughly 30,000 British muslims... (assuming 5 percent of people in England are Muslim)

[Jack_Sparrow]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Med911

Who's nit picking? Im referring to the 27 percent who sympathize with the motive. That was the stat on which basis the author concludes that such people are "extremist."

This is a separate statistic.

"Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable.

But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied "don't know" or refused to answer"

Thats sad, but 32 percent ? Because they dont know or refuse to answer, they must be in support ? Maybe, Maybe not.

You just picked one of the questions about "sympathizing with motives" and I agree that it was poorly worded. However, the other question was pretty clearly worded and the response there is also pretty clear. Moreover when you put the responses for the first question in the context of the second one, it changes the whole narrative. There is no ambiguity here - those who support the motive also support violence.

[Jack_Sparrow]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@psyah

Yes quite ... First of all Jack Sparrow conflated "sympathising with the motives" with "sympathising with the killers". The second thing is ... To sympathise with a motive is merely to say that their moral standing is the same ... I.e "it is offensive to Muslims if anyone ridiculed the holy Prophet (SAW)" ... That is a motive shared ... Now some Muslims will react in their offended state by taking violent action and others would not ... So really ... What is the media trying to get at when it states "sympathising with the motives" ? Does it wish to make the numbers of Muslims look worse than it is? Does it wish to alienate more Muslims? Rather it should be made to hold responsibility for its actions ... Sue the media for Libel I say ...

Let me repeat for you -

[QUOTE]
*Asked if acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet Muhammad can "never be justified", 68% agreed that such violence was never justifiable.

*But 24% disagreed with the statement, while the rest replied "don't know" or refused to answer.

[/QUOTE]

The question is pretty clear. There is no beating about the bush with sympathy for motives. 32% seem to support violence, which is alarming.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Jack_Sparrow

You just picked one of the questions about "sympathizing with motives" and I agree that it was poorly worded. However, the other question was pretty clearly worded and the response there is also pretty clear. Moreover when you put the responses for the first question in the context of the second one, it changes the whole narrative. There is no ambiguity here - those who support the motive also support violence.

No, those are two different things.

I picked the exact question the author cited to justify his conclusion that people who support the motive are "extremists."

The motive most muslim's will support. That does not make the extremists.

And the ones that claim to believe violence is justified, were not the basis on which the author made his conclusion. He specifically said, those who support the motive are extremists.
My response was directed toward the article. You threw in that second part only after the fact.

As pertains to the second part though. I already responded to that point. Be cautious, but dont read to much into it. There are many people who have non-conventional beliefs. Its not a reason to panic. And it certainly isnt a reason to demonize Muslims, especially in the current Anti-Muslim atmosphere.

[Med911]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Jack_Sparrow

Let me repeat for you -

The question is pretty clear. There is no beating about the bush with sympathy for motives. 32% seem to support violence, which is alarming.

Again, its 24 percent not 32 percent. Your not doing a very good job of hiding your bias here.

Alarming ! Oh no, 24 percent of British muslims think violence is sometimes justified in cases of Blasphemy. lets all hide under our beds. God knows, you as a HIndu would know nothing off violence for the sake of religion.

Polls are only indicative, they aren't definitive. There is more to the issue then can be gleamed from a simple question. You have to take precautions against genuine threats, but dont let polls scare you. Even if they support violence in certain situations, doesn't actually make them violent or a threat. But if you spread fear and paranoia, its going to poison the atmosphere even further as this article does, and alienate people who would otherwise remain productive members of the society.

[Southie]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Med911

Again, its 24 percent not 32 percent. Your not doing a very good job of hiding your bias here.

Alarming ! Oh no, 24 percent of British muslims think violence is sometimes justified in cases of Blasphemy. lets all hide under our beds. God knows, you as a HIndu would know nothing off violence for the sake of religion.

Polls are only indicative, they aren't definitive. There is more to the issue then can be gleamed from a simple question. You have to take precautions against genuine threats, but dont let polls scare you. Even if they support violence in certain situations, doesn't actually make them violent or a threat. But if you spread fear and paranoia, its going to poison the atmosphere even further as this article does, and alienate people who would otherwise remain productive members of the society.

I agree that among the 24 to 32 pct who believe violence is Justified Most wont Actually Engage In Violence. But the fact that they are supportive of it is alarming. Because they do provide moral support to those who engage in violence.

Support for violence should always be a no no. Whether it is for unjustified wars or in the name of religion.

[psyah]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Jack_Sparrow

Since you want to nit pick, how about this ?

I read this as 32% think that violence is justified. Would you disagree ?

BBC News - Most British Muslims ‘oppose Muhammad cartoons reprisals’

Peace Jack Sparrow

You see that question is a meaningless one it does not get to the root of terroristic tendencies. The reason being that if I were to have to answer it, I too would end up in the “violent” side, but I feel I am the least violent of them all.

1. Where a strict law is in place prohibiting defamation of religious figures.
2. Where evidence is obtained that ridicule is intended
3. Where a clear penalty is in place associated with number 1) that deems such punishment should be in place.
4. If convicted and no apology or removal of said material is done then …

If such people are sentenced with a violent sentence then that in my view is “justified” …

a) It does not mean I would be the violent one
b) Rather I would seek to protect even the biggest mischief maker until he is properly trialled and convicted.

Lastly … The person of RasoolAllah (SAW) is very dear to us … Harassment is actually a violent action … but it leaves no mark … It hurts hearts … Violence breeds more violence … Although I have strong principles in place to control anger … If you were to make anyone angry … This forcing of them to lose composure and decorum and then expect them to follow a rule of “no violence” … is unreasonable. You can’t talk sense to a person who has lost his marbles … So don’t make people lose their marbles. Is that justification? Strictly it is a type of justification … But it does not get to the root of the problem. The root of the problem is to look at the cause of what makes violent leaning people cross over into violent territory. It is the external stimulus … No matter how petty it is … It is a significant straw to break the camel’s back … Such people are trodden on by society all their lives, they get some recluse from it all by absorbing themselves in love for their religion and then the oppressors don’t leave them alone in that domain either … They invade that area too and poke them with insults and ridicule. Is that justification of violence … You see in a way it is … But I’m merely providing you reasons why these people are doing what they do … My explanation or rationalisation to the violent reaction to the cartoons is unacceptable to the media and they want any such explanation giving person to also be called “a sympathiser and supporter of violent action”.

This statistic is most likely filled with people like me …

I’m surprised that 68% of Muslims think that “violence is never justified” … May be they had not considered the above scenario. I think they must have been answering from a personal point of view that “they would never allow themselves to be tipped in to that mode” in which case I can be part of that group too … But if you study a whole group of people then others could be different and their losing control will result in to violence … No matter what anyone says about it. So the rest of the 32% were probably not answering from a personal point of view.

[Southie]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@psyah

Peace Jack Sparrow

You see that question is a meaningless one it does not get to the root of terroristic tendencies. The reason being that if I were to have to answer it, I too would end up in the "violent" side, but I feel I am the least violent of them all.

1) Where a strict law is in place prohibiting defamation of religious figures. 2) Where evidence is obtained that ridicule is intended 3) Where a clear penalty is in place associated with number 1) that deems such punishment should be in place. 4) If convicted and no apology or removal of said material is done then ...

If such people are sentenced with a violent sentence then that in my view is "justified" ...

a) It does not mean I would be the violent one b) Rather I would seek to protect even the biggest mischief maker until he is properly trialled and convicted.

Lastly ... The person of RasoolAllah (SAW) is very dear to us ... Harassment is actually a violent action ... but it leaves no mark ... It hurts hearts ... Violence breeds more violence ... Although I have strong principles in place to control anger ... If you were to make anyone angry ... This forcing of them to lose composure and decorum and then expect them to follow a rule of "no violence" ... is unreasonable. You can't talk sense to a person who has lost his marbles ... So don't make people lose their marbles. Is that justification? Strictly it is a type of justification ... But it does not get to the root of the problem. The root of the problem is to look at the cause of what makes violent leaning people cross over into violent territory. It is the external stimulus ... No matter how petty it is ... It is a significant straw to break the camel's back ... Such people are trodden on by society all their lives, they get some recluse from it all by absorbing themselves in love for their religion and then the oppressors don't leave them alone in that domain either ... They invade that area too and poke them with insults and ridicule. Is that justification of violence ... You see in a way it is ... But I'm merely providing you reasons why these people are doing what they do ... My explanation or rationalisation to the violent reaction to the cartoons is unacceptable to the media and they want any such explanation giving person to also be called "a sympathiser and supporter of violent action".

This statistic is most likely filled with people like me ...

I'm surprised that 68% of Muslims think that "violence is never justified" ... May be they had not considered the above scenario. I think they must have been answering from a personal point of view that "they would never allow themselves to be tipped in to that mode" in which case I can be part of that group too ... But if you study a whole group of people then others could be different and their losing control will result in to violence ... No matter what anyone says about it. So the rest of the 32% were probably not answering from a personal point of view.

Actually you miss the point. Violence of ALL sorts is not appropriate. Even if sanctioned by a kangaroo court based on religious laws.

Far too many people are being punished under such sham laws and barbaric regimes. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.

It is time for decent and NON VIOLENT people to shun such laws and regimes. No more hiding behind religion to approve of 1000 lashes for a blogger (as an example).

People need to grow up. And that means not getting bent out of shape each time someone insults their religion. Express your displeasure. Organize protests. Exercise your vote.

But stop. Just stop with using religious laws as cover to punish people who insult a religion.

ANY religion. No ifs ands or butts.

[psyah]

Re: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists

@Southie

Actually you miss the point. Violence of ALL sorts is not appropriate. Even if sanctioned by a kangaroo court based on religious laws.

Far too many people are being punished under such sham laws and barbaric regimes. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right.

It is time for decent and NON VIOLENT people to shun such laws and regimes. No more hiding behind religion to approve of 1000 lashes for a blogger (as an example).

People need to grow up. And that means not getting bent out of shape each time someone insults their religion. Express your displeasure. Organize protests. Exercise your vote.

But stop. Just stop with using religious laws as cover to punish people who insult a religion.

ANY religion. No ifs ands or butts.

Peace Southie

You have a too good opinion of me to say that I missed the point. I agree in principle that violence should be no more ... Then please criticise the instigators of violence not the reactionaries ... The Charlie Hebdos of this world are being violent ... Violence should be halted by the strong nations first see if you can convince them then the rest will follow.