Real news, real discussion, and Big Macs.

[gmanpilot 0]

So I tune in last night during the news hour, and switch to PBS. There was a roundtable discussion going on between four non-violent, devout followers of Islam (an Imam, a reporter, a professor, and a student) about the recent Fetwah and the struggle to supplant the hate filled fundamentalists/jihadists as global representatives of the Muslim community and Islamic faith. The message, basically, is that change must start in the mosques and neighborhoods, and that these outspoken and brave revolutionaries for peace need a world-wide platform. Why are we not helping to keep bombs off busses by supporting this peaceful jihad??

This was an important, productive, and substantive news/debate without a loudmouth moderator or 15 second sound bites, the likes of which I have not seen on the networks or CNN/FOX, etc.. WHY NOT?? Is it because when we tune in for the news we would rather hear about the latest fad diet, Martha Stewart, or Michael Jackson? Really?

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[wmw999 2,122]

Was that the Jim Lehrer News Hour? If so, it's wonderful, isn't it?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[AlexCrowley 0]

I think for the most part that people dont' want intelligent debate. It's far easier to create a partisan issue and let people have knee jerk emotional reactions to an oversimplified statement.

TV doesnt seem to enjoy being subtle. It's about getting eyeballs, having two guys scream at each other is better television than 4 guys sitting around a table talking endlessly.
How can you know who the bad guy is if no one is shouting?
Who's the good guy if a subject is complex enough that there are more than 2 valid points of view?

How is it compelling TV for the channel surfer if it takes more than 10 seconds to summarize the debate, or boiled down into a pithy text crawl to be displayed under the current speaker?

TV producers are gutless, it's audience fickle. PBS isnt so beholding to it's sponsors, and it enjoys its brand mystique of being for the educated middle-class, which is why you'll find better quality news programming on it.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

Was that the Jim Lehrer News Hour? If so, it's wonderful, isn't it?

Yep, it really is a good broadcast. I just can't stomach the network/cable hog-calling format and specious "news", the content of which is determined by Pizza Hut and Wall-Mart. Geez, I'm getting old and cranky.

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[SpeedRacer 1]

It has always amazed me that there are these radio and TV personalitys (Limbaugh, Oreilly, Hannity etc etc) that just get up there & spout their own political opinions & get PAID for it. when you can go into bar or onto speaker corner & hear stuff that is just as stupid & opinionated. These a-holes are no better informed than anyone else, & they just somehow get paid to do what everyone else is doing everyday for free.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[AlexCrowley 0]

Yeah, ive been trying to work out how to monetize my ability to BS on random topics. So far my lack of charisma has hampered me.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[ViperPilot 0]

The majority of people just don't care about "real" news/debates. Sadly, more people would rather hear about the latest J Lo saga or Brad did this, blah blah blah. It's ridiculous, but it's the world we live in.

[Gawain 0]

While it's all fine and good that an American Imam believes that the changes have to occur in the Mosques, etc., that also means that the people in leadership in those Mosques have to be removed one way or another.

Peaceful Jihad? That's the oxymoron of the millenium.

Look, it's getting pretty simple here. I know there are only a relative "few bad apples" in the 1.5 billion Muslims in this world that taint the image of the whole. However, in addition to "speaking out" against this behavior (which is sorely lacking in my opinion), the community of Muslims must take real action to physically remove these elements of hate from their midst. This must be done by following different leaders, going to a different Mosque, or installing new leaders to guide their faith.

This will not happen because the people of this religion as a whole have been beaten into submission by a decay of their civilization and motives of their leadership over the past five centuries.

What does this mean? I can't speak for the whole world, or even my whole country, but I can speak for myself. If and when another major terror attack hits my beloved USA, I won't give two sh*ts anymore about the "talk" to reform and reign-in the extremists of Islam, it will be time to get the politics out of the ROE of our troops in the region...and God forbid if it's a mass destructive weapon.

We have only begun to fight back after more than 10 years of being hit by these lunatics. People better be ready to toughen up their skins and effect real change. My fear is it will take yet another mass attack like 9/11 or 3/11 or 7/7 on my soil to remind people once again.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[gmanpilot 0]

Quote

Peaceful Jihad? That's the oxymoron of the millenium.

Well, that was sort of intentional. I think it encapsulates the dilemma.

_________________________________________
-There's always free cheese in a mouse trap.

[AlexCrowley 0]

And now, from the 'missed the point' file:

Quote

Look, it's getting pretty simple here. I know there are only a relative "few bad apples" in the 1.5 billion Muslims in this world that taint the image of the whole. However, in addition to "speaking out" against this behavior (which is sorely lacking in my opinion), the community of Muslims must take real action to physically remove these elements of hate from their midst. This must be done by following different leaders, going to a different Mosque, or installing new leaders to guide their faith. etcetc

I think the point of the thread was regarding the media and how it presents information to viewers rather than Islam.

Theres been many recent threads that discuss the topics you've bought up here, do a search and you'll find each point discussed to death.

I'm not trying to be an asshole but your comments seem to fit in with the previously stated : It's easier to create a partisan argument by oversimplifying a complex issue and let people have knee-jerk emotional reaction to it rather than take the time to inform and present the information in a way that allows for complexity and takes more than 10 seconds and a text crawl to summarize.

With regards to a peaceful Jihad: www.answering-christianity.com/peaceful_jihad.htm

Pretty easy to argue that this is simply one interpretation, but Christianity also has its pacifists and its blood thirsty warmongers. I like to believe that the loud psycho god squad is the minority with moderate, peace loving christians silently sit and weep.

Olympics, Oklahoma, 9/11. All on american soil. All terrorist attacks. All different motivations. Could focusing merely on Islam as our bogeyman also be an oversimplification?

Our society needs its enemies, it's bogeymen - generally we like a primary international and primary domestic. In recent years: Communists, Saddam, Islam. liberal protestors (hippies), homosexuals (Aids) inner city crack users, pitbulls, outcast teenagers/shooters, homosexuals (marriage). The media generates it's own when it gets bored. Anyone can think of many more generalizations that have become self sustaining media frenzies. Bill Hicks, a standup comedian, used to do a bit about Aids infected, crack addicted, maneating pitbulls and Ted turner needing to get laid.

Each had its headlines, its over simplifications and its villification of a subsection of local and international society. Through generalization and cliche we waded through life and death issues by over simplifying complex and difficult situations, generating a media frenzy of hype and half truths. At it's worst it led to the creation of panicked and ill-thought laws that a confused and fearful public welcomed with open arms, yet offered no real protections while demonizing a minority (certain parts of the Patriot Act, the recent anti-pornography law). At its least malignant, it merely tarred sections of a population somewhat unfairly.

Rather than hijack the thread I'd be happy to let you yell at me in a PM


Remember, if it bleeds it leads.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[bodypilot90 0]

Quote

peaceful Jihad

what a joke. as long as extremist in their ranks are not exposed by their own, then the group is as guilty as the extremist themselves. PBS is a poor place to put tax money and is no longer needed.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

And now, from the 'missed the point' file:

... ...

Rather than hijack the thread I'd be happy to let you yell at me in a PM


Remember, if it bleeds it leads.

I'm not going to yell at you...much... Just kidding.

I understand your point.

I understood the point that was originally brought up about the discussion overall, and why there aren't more discussions like it, etc. I believe my point is still valid.

I further believe that the time for this in-depth discussion is past. There is no unified Church, Islamic organizaiton or Judaic sect in this world. While the Catholic Church is the largest unified religion in the world, it's fragments or Protestants around the world do not make a jihad to destroy their fellow Christians, or even other religions. In fact, despite the differences, and in some cases animosity, Catholics along with other Christians acknowlege their differences and still some look for ways to re-unify the Church.

In Iraq alone, Sunnis place more importance on "Pan-Arabism" than Shia Arabs, while Shia Arabs place more importance on the actual religion than the Sunnis. The Kurds prioritize the Clan and Tribe over Religion or State.

Meanwhile all three of the aforementioned Cultural Sects distrust each other over issues which date back to days before the Ottoman Empire. The fanatics within each of these sects are killing more of their own than they are of each other.

None of these have a desire of reform within their own house, and thus talk of it is of little benefit. That's just my opinion.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 1,623]

So why is it the job of the US to solve these intra-Islamic issues?

IMO we are stirring the pot just by being there.

George Washington was dead right in his farewell address.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.