I don't understand what you mean. I realize that most moderate Muslims aren't tied to terror. Was that your point?
Yes I think that's very easy to do, if it needs to be done at all. Moderate Muslims are just as worried/scared/concerned about terrorism as you and I. In fact they should be more concerned because the bee hive is usually somewhere around the Middle East, whereas for you to become a victim it would require a historic act of terrorism. These people don't live "amongst us" in the Middle East. I've lived in the Middle East and travelled all over having never coming into contact with a "millitant" or anything. In 99.9% of cases, you will publicly and socially see absolutely no difference between a terrorist and a conservative. The real ideas come out when they are amongst each other I suppose. On a similar but smaller scale, I doubt you have ever met someone who has said s/he wants to bomb abortion clinics, but it's a matter of certainty that you've met someone who wouldn't mind it (without you knowing that they don't mind). You know what I mean? The problem is the authorities can't fix this in Dubai, Kabul, Washington or London. This movement we're talking about is not related to race or nationality or geography. It's an ideology and it's, unfortunately, the ideology of the richest individuals on earth. You have a few people with tons of money, and everyone else is super-oppressed, uneducated, miserable, vengeful, etc.. Can you blame youngsters for being easily swayed? Consider the fact that someone shot freaking Mahatma Gandhi knowing he would die, but happy that his family would receive tons of money. Are these people as rare as we think, or are people as loyal to their morals as their options allow? I'm not minimizing their actions. I'm just trying to say the problem is with the source. With the people who are running this show at the top. Those people don't gove a damn about "condemnation". That's evidenced by the fact that they kaffir (remove the status of "Muslim") from any scholar or person who disagrees with them. They don't listen to anyone, they are not rational. IMO as long as there are oppressed people, there will be potential candidates for terrorism. This is not unique to Islam - it happens all over Africa as well. There are two differences: ideology (nationalism vs religionism) and money (the people who have this ideology in the Muslim world are among the richest and most powerful). As long as that money exists and potential candidates exist, this kind of terrorism will exist in some form or another. Now I understand that your priority is that the terrorism against US interests stop, but the reality of the Middle East is that we need this terrorism to dissapear rather than take another name as it has been doing forever now. I tried to make that as coherent as possible.
Lots of seemingly coherent words, but the fact remains that you, Mathloom, want the cartoonist to live in fear for the rest of his life because of a cartoon. The only way this goal of yours is achievable is if a real threat exists. Therefore all your words ring hollow. You also try to pin all blame on the Saudis and their money, and oppression, and yadayada. This may be partly true, but it is a convenient way for you to pretend that you are not yourself sharing some of the same ideology when you say you want the cartoonist to live in fear for the rest of his life because of a cartoon. The bolded part is something that is true. And it does not only apply to the distinction between terrorist and conservative, but also between someone who pretends to be moderate and someone who is in reality not moderate, but shares some of the same ideology the terrorists believe in. Look at yourself. Here, you act like a wolf in sheep's clothing. Only when provoked or when you are careless, you let your actual ideological self be seen. Like when you stated that you want the cartoonist to live in fear for the rest of his life.
