'Islamophobia' fuelling terrorism: UN chief

[The Eagle]

'Islamophobia' fuelling terrorism: UN chief
February 13, 2017

RIYADH - "Islamophobia" in parts of the world is fuelling terrorism, the head of the United Nations said on a visit to Saudi Arabia Sunday, as anti-immigrant sentiment rises in some countries.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres made the comment to reporters after talks with Saudi King Salman, Crown Prince and Interior Minister Mohammed bin Nayef, and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

"One of the things that fuel terrorism is the expression in some parts of the world of Islamophobic feelings and Islamophobic policies and Islamophobic hate speeches," Guterres said at a joint news conference with Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir.

"This is the best support that Daesh can have to make its own propaganda," Guterres said, using an Arabic acronym for the Islamic State group of Sunni extremists in Syria and Iraq.

The jihadist group has also claimed deadly attacks in Saudi Arabia and in Europe.

Anti-immigration politicians including France's Marine Le Pen have seen their popularity rise after an influx to Europe of migrants, many of them Muslims fleeing wars in Syria and elsewhere.

US President Donald Trump issued an order in late January that denied entry to all refugees for 120 days. It also blocked travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. Refugees from Syria were blocked indefinitely.

But the order has faced obstacles and on Thursday an appellate court decided unanimously to maintain a block on Trump's order.

Syria's conflict has created 4.8 million refugees and killed more than 310,000 people since it began with anti-government protests in March 2011.

Guterres said "we will never be successful in fighting terrorism in Syria if an inclusive political solution is not found for the Syrian people."

A new round of UN-sponsored peace talks is scheduled for February 20 in Geneva.

Guterres arrived in Saudi Arabia from Turkey and is to be in Dubai on Monday for the World Government Summit during his regional tour.

 

[Stag112]

It's simple, if we start saying nice things about wahhabism, they will start loving us and preaching coexistence.

He is making a limited point that xenophobia rising in the west will be used by IS for propaganda. It is the same old logical fallacy that if we deny all kinds of propaganda reasons to terrorists, they can be defeated. I have no words for such defeatist mentality. Everyone gets affected by rising xenophobia, not just wahhabi zombies Mr Guterres. Instead of addressing that issue you fell into the Islamist victimhood trap.

 

[oFFbEAT]

Terrorism fueling islamophobia and islamophobia fueling terrorism....vicious cycle.

 

[Tshering22]

"Islamophobia" in parts of the world is fuelling terrorism, the head of the United Nations said on a visit to Saudi Arabia Sunday, as anti-immigrant sentiment rises in some countries.

A hollow statement.

Picture this as an example; there is a country of people who have never seen or known Muslims or islamic religion. When they first encounter them, usually from unstable countries whose people seek refugee and asylum statuses in countries like Sweden, Norway etc.

Suddenly they see the population explode of the people who came into their country and over the period of years, demanding more and more of their customs be considered mainstream. This when complied partially or refused, results in rioting, killing, looting, pillaging, murdering and even raping (in Sweden's case), becomes a big problem for the society that invited these asylum seekers.

They have never seen anything like this.

So what would be their first instinct? To link it to a common factor.

Furthermore, scholars and renowned members of that group start telling off the host country/community that they are wrong and that it is all a misconception while they have physically seen it all happen. All this instead of correcting their own followers.

Meanwhile, influential politicians try to look extra liberal and ignore these things by brushing them under the carpet, further fuelling the discontent. In countries where such things are not a norm, it is shocking, harrassing and confusing for the locals to see such a behaviour. Suddenly, those who are happily living in their countries are no longer safe. Their government politicians play the liberal card and ignore it despite knowing the dangers of lack of law and order. Everything becomes religion based and even criticising the criminals of a certain group becomes 'racism' or 'phobia'.

That's the tipping point where people say they have had enough and then the radical right wing takes roots and powers.

____

Short version: If politicians don't indulge in Stockholm Syndrome and treat violation fo the law of the land as just that, things will automatically fall in place and dangerous elements on both sides will be kept at bay.

Case and point Australia, where law of the land is higher than Sharia and is adhered to, compared to Sweden which is suffering from its apologetic attitude.

____

Who suffers?

The well-meaning, educated Muslims who haven't done anything wrong.

Terrorism fueling islamophobia and islamophobia fueling terrorism....vicious cycle.

Just an appeasement tactic when visiting a theocratic country.

Ironically, UN never dares to speak up against KSA or its regime for not allowing other religions in as 'human rights' but is comfortable enough to tell us and other countries to adjust to their demands. Typical hypocrites.

 

[The Eagle]

A hollow statement.

Picture this as an example; there is a country of people who have never seen or known Muslims or islamic religion. When they first encounter them, usually from unstable countries whose people seek refugee and asylum statuses in countries like Sweden, Norway etc.

Suddenly they see the population explode of the people who came into their country and over the period of years, demanding more and more of their customs be considered mainstream. This when complied partially or refused, results in rioting, killing, looting, pillaging, murdering and even raping (in Sweden's case), becomes a big problem for the society that invited these asylum seekers.

They have never seen anything like this.

So what would be their first instinct? To link it to a common factor.

Furthermore, scholars and renowned members of that group start telling off the host country/community that they are wrong and that it is all a misconception while they have physically seen it all happen. All this instead of correcting their own followers.

Meanwhile, influential politicians try to look extra liberal and ignore these things by brushing them under the carpet, further fuelling the discontent. In countries where such things are not a norm, it is shocking, harrassing and confusing for the locals to see such a behaviour. Suddenly, those who are happily living in their countries are no longer safe. Their government politicians play the liberal card and ignore it despite knowing the dangers of lack of law and order. Everything becomes religion based and even criticising the criminals of a certain group becomes 'racism' or 'phobia'.

That's the tipping point where people say they have had enough and then the radical right wing takes roots and powers.

____

Short version: If politicians don't indulge in Stockholm Syndrome and treat violation fo the law of the land as just that, things will automatically fall in place and dangerous elements on both sides will be kept at bay.

Case and point Australia, where law of the land is higher than Sharia and is adhered to, compared to Sweden which is suffering from its apologetic attitude.

____

Who suffers?

The well-meaning, educated Muslims who haven't done anything wrong.

No disagreement w.r.t. Muslims are suffering due to wrong doings of the people in the name of Islam. However, there is a primary question before Immigrant issue that who actually forced them immigrants to leave their homelands to the xyz countries that such large scale travel can cause many issues. Countries those are involved in bombing and invading immigrant's homes are actually responsible for the cause that in the end couldn't handle the pressure, still trying to justify their crime through highlighting cases of immigrants. Immigrants never demands Sharia law at large in hosting country but there are few factions causing as such that creates problems for others.

The subject issue highlights the side effects and wrongs of Islamophobia in the world that Muslims condemns the terrorism totally but are still labeled all with same paint without any difference which causes anger and rage among community.

 

[Tshering22]

No disagreement w.r.t. Muslims are suffering due to wrong doings of the people in the name of Islam. However, there is a primary question before Immigrant issue that who actually forced them immigrants to leave their homelands to the xyz countries that such large scale travel can cause many issues.

I agree that the present situation is a created one. People there are not angry about the genuine refugees but about those who do not speak against the wrongs of their own community.

Many terrorists have hidden themselves in the guise of other refugees and have sneaked into Europe. That's where the problem is coming. You know the mass incidents that have taken place across northern and western Europe, resulting in public anger.

The problems in very liberal countries like Sweden and Norway started way before the refugee crisis happened. What Germany and others are seeing now are only the shockwaves of the disaster that started over a decade back.

Not everyone is as tolerant as eastern faiths and sometimes may brand the entire community.

Therefore, the onus is upto the leaders of the community to educate their youth not to mis-represent religion and cause embarrassment.

 

[The Eagle]

I agree that the present situation is a created one. People there are not angry about the genuine refugees but about those who do not speak against the wrongs of their own community.

Many terrorists have hidden themselves in the guise of other refugees and have sneaked into Europe. That's where the problem is coming. You know the mass incidents that have taken place across northern and western Europe, resulting in public anger.

The problems in very liberal countries like Sweden and Norway started way before the refugee crisis happened. What Germany and others are seeing now are only the shockwaves of the disaster that started over a decade back.

Not everyone is as tolerant as eastern faiths and sometimes may brand the entire community.

Therefore, the onus is upto the leaders of the community to educate their youth not to mis-represent religion and cause embarrassment.

Surely religious scholars and elders must do their job to guide people and for the same reference, the list would be high but I will quote Imam-e-Ka'aba (Scholar leading prayer in Ka'aba) that openly called ISIS and other terrorists as non-believers/not Muslims because these terrorists are killing humans as well as damaging Islam.

Now coming at Islamophobic point, banning veil contrary to the part of Islam, Burqa/Hijab ban etc are like providing a chance for those who can take law into hands in the name of Islam. Also, such provocations can result as a rage among Muslims. Muslims detained at Airports just because of being Muslim etc cannot be called as anti-Terrorism act but it is like Generalizing the terrorism with Islam in whole and blaming the same upon Muslims. There is no such thing as terrorism in Islam that everyone can read and clearly understand that Islam totally prohibits such and asks Muslims to avoid the same the how come a Muslim would do that.

There are incidents in West/US that are also based upon discrimination against Muslims especially attacks on Muslim Woman and there is always a point where, a human being human will loose control due to continuous harassment and hatred/provocation. The dispute started when Muslim Countries were bombed without any clue and forced the peaceful citizens to leave their country and migrate towards EU/US that actually were bombing there homes. These attackers themselves invited the immigrants to justify their attack as in support of people of those countries and showing face of helping them. Once large populace migrated, there are extreme elements those who work for no side but miscreants causing unrest and war, provoke people and few fall for the trap hence, sometimes involvement of Muslims as well into such incidents but due to rage and vengeance. NATO/US attacked civilians and killed almost 18 or so innocents including woman and Children then should also feel the pain of grieving person who lost children/wife/mother family etc. The same person can be a better choice for those extremists and terrorists and may fall as prey to the extremists agenda.

Invading countries in the name of so-called war against terrorism is the first root cause of spread terrorism that previously such factions were at-least hiding in a single or couple of countries but discriminate bombing forcing people for migration actually provided a chance for them terrorists to get along and reach EU/US for doing the same what they were doing back there. When it comes to responsible and the forces that caused such cancer spreading, no covering justifications or save face/blame games can resolve the matter until & unless the real issue is discussed by accepting own mistakes and sitting to resolve the issue if those powers wants to yet compromising on backing such proxies to achieve ill diplomatic agendas. In other words, the terrorists those who were only damaging Muslims in their own countries now actually reached far side of the world including those who indirectly supports them for their own achievements against rivals like "having the taste of own medicine" yet propagating the same against Islam & Muslims which is also the part of same agenda of Islamophobic people. In the end, for merely a reference, see how Trump actually banned seven countries as terrorists rather than strengthening the security system, creating a place in the hearts of the people so they can help Trump etc to deal with such cancer but there is no intention to resolve the real issue except brand Muslims as terrorists at large without any difference and propagate the false, fake and fabricated stories with justifications to cover own crimes. Going by the same logic, people who attacked Masjids (Non Muslims) should also be branded as either Christian Terrorists, Jew terrorists, Hindu Terrorists, Secular Terrorists or any other religion that the attacker is affiliated so also, his/her country be named as terrorists state, but NO.... IMO, that is not the solution to deal with specific lot of people causing unrest and chaos in society and posing threat to the peace of the world.

 

[Tshering22]

Surely religious scholars and elders must do their job to guide people and for the same reference, the list would be high but I will quote Imam-e-Ka'aba (Scholar leading prayer in Ka'aba) that openly called ISIS and other terrorists as non-believers/not Muslims because these terrorists are killing humans as well as damaging Islam.

I was referring to the common muslims in Europe, India and in general, non-Islamic countries, who keep quiet when something goes wrong from their community but the moment someone points it out, he or she is branded as 'islamophobe' to silence the person. This has happened with me as well when I mentioned about the wrongs that happens in Muslim dominated areas against non-muslims and why no one says or does anything against it. You'll be surprised how an Indian muslim branded me as a hater.

I could expect that from someone in Pakistan, who surprisingly enough, are much more rational than many muslims here itself.

This continual branding soon wears off the psychology of the accused and then they literally take the path of what they have been accused.

Trump rode on this very sentiment in US.

Marine La Pen of France, Geert Wilders of Netherlands and even UKIP leaders would soon do the same.

Basically, nationalist/culturist movements across the world are thriving because multiculturalism has brought no results. Tolerance has been misused and laws have been abused.

Now coming at Islamophobic point, banning veil contrary to the part of Islam, Burqa/Hijab ban etc are like providing a chance for those who can take law into hands in the name of Islam. Also, such provocations can result as a rage among Muslims. Muslims detained at Airports just because of being Muslim etc cannot be called as anti-Terrorism act but it is like Generalizing the terrorism with Islam in whole and blaming the same upon Muslims. There is no such thing as terrorism in Islam that everyone can read and clearly understand that Islam totally prohibits such and asks Muslims to avoid the same the how come a Muslim would do that.

The banning of burqa has a single reason:

Militants and radicals can use it to escape as the facial veil doesn't leave much scope for identification.

Why is it a rage when the security situation demands it? Yes it doesn't look good; but times have changed and people are at risk much more than ever. Maybe in those days things weren't as bad so these things could be implemented.

They aren't biased towards you alone when it comes to hiding faces; people of any religion any group cannot cover their faces in public offices and places of businesses.

Even Buddhists, the very observant ones and Jains, again very observant ones cannot cover their faces in public places of business and concern. (If you noticed, some of our folks wear surgeon like masks for religious reasons).

Not much to their liking but they agree because of changing times.

There are incidents in West/US that are also based upon discrimination against Muslims especially attacks on Muslim Woman and there is always a point where, a human being human will loose control due to continuous harassment and hatred/provocation. The dispute started when Muslim Countries were bombed without any clue and forced the peaceful citizens to leave their country and migrate towards EU/US that actually were bombing there homes. These attackers themselves invited the immigrants to justify their attack as in support of people of those countries and showing face of helping them. Once large populace migrated, there are extreme elements those who work for no side but miscreants causing unrest and war, provoke people and few fall for the trap hence, sometimes involvement of Muslims as well into such incidents but due to rage and vengeance. NATO/US attacked civilians and killed almost 18 or so innocents including woman and Children then should also feel the pain of grieving person who lost children/wife/mother family etc. The same person can be a better choice for those extremists and terrorists and may fall as prey to the extremists agenda.

In the case of Syria and Iraq, I will have to agree with you on this one.

But then what excuse do you say for India who hasn't attacked any middle eastern country? Philippines, who is quietly sitting in a corner of the world? Thailand, a pacifist Buddhist nation?

See, justification can have no ends.

The point is, there is a problem that both western and muslim societies have and must take measures to address them.

Pointing fingers at each other will only result in more animosity.

Unless the Muslim society fixes its interpretations of combat and self-defence, people of other cultures will continue getting antagonised as everyone has their own interpretations.

This gets highlighted very much as only Islam and Christianity have active militias or groups with radical thoughts and act on the basis of religious fervour. Especially at a mass international scale.

Even at a regional level, you won't hear Wiccans conducting massacres against Voodoo practitioners in Africa.

In a world with thousands of cultures and religions, it is difficult to justify or explain when one or two religions predominantly end up getting radicalised while no other group conducts radical actions, not just in the West but also in the countries that have done no harm to them like the countries I mentioned above.

 

[The Eagle]

I was referring to the common muslims in Europe, India and in general, non-Islamic countries, who keep quiet when something goes wrong from their community but the moment someone points it out, he or she is branded as 'islamophobe' to silence the person. This has happened with me as well when I mentioned about the wrongs that happens in Muslim dominated areas against non-muslims and why no one says or does anything against it. You'll be surprised how an Indian muslim branded me as a hater.

I could expect that from someone in Pakistan, who surprisingly enough, are much more rational than many muslims here itself.

This continual branding soon wears off the psychology of the accused and then they literally take the path of what they have been accused.

Trump rode on this very sentiment in US.

Marine La Pen of France, Geert Wilders of Netherlands and even UKIP leaders would soon do the same.

Basically, nationalist/culturist movements across the world are thriving because multiculturalism has brought no results. Tolerance has been misused and laws have been abused.



The banning of burqa has a single reason:

Militants and radicals can use it to escape as the facial veil doesn't leave much scope for identification.

Why is it a rage when the security situation demands it? Yes it doesn't look good; but times have changed and people are at risk much more than ever. Maybe in those days things weren't as bad so these things could be implemented.

They aren't biased towards you alone when it comes to hiding faces; people of any religion any group cannot cover their faces in public offices and places of businesses.

Even Buddhists, the very observant ones and Jains, again very observant ones cannot cover their faces in public places of business and concern. (If you noticed, some of our folks wear surgeon like masks for religious reasons).

Not much to their liking but they agree because of changing times.



In the case of Syria and Iraq, I will have to agree with you on this one.

But then what excuse do you say for India who hasn't attacked any middle eastern country? Philippines, who is quietly sitting in a corner of the world? Thailand, a pacifist Buddhist nation?

See, justification can have no ends.

The point is, there is a problem that both western and muslim societies have and must take measures to address them.

Pointing fingers at each other will only result in more animosity.

Unless the Muslim society fixes its interpretations of combat and self-defence, people of other cultures will continue getting antagonised as everyone has their own interpretations.

This gets highlighted very much as only Islam and Christianity have active militias or groups with radical thoughts and act on the basis of religious fervour. Especially at a mass international scale.

Even at a regional level, you won't hear Wiccans conducting massacres against Voodoo practitioners in Africa.

In a world with thousands of cultures and religions, it is difficult to justify or explain when one or two religions predominantly end up getting radicalised while no other group conducts radical actions, not just in the West but also in the countries that have done no harm to them like the countries I mentioned above.

To cut long in short and as I said before, a Muslim cannot be banned being Muslim only and Terrorism has not religion. Leading Islamic Scholars have long ago declared every type of terrorism as Haram/illegal/prohibited. Muslim society doesn't need such fix alone but the the whole world and Muslim countries cannot be blamed for the same alone. The Islamophobic are those who actually blames Muslim for everything and opposes Islam just because of Muslims only. Pointing out the problem and real issue doesn't allow anyone to call someone Islamophobic etc and same problem exists with others as well. If Burqa Ban is justified as anti-terrorism which disrespects Muslim Women at large than how others expect a Muslim to respect their law or religion when such can cause damage to Muslim. Not a plausible explanation to justify the burqa ban that too from the world that actually reached Moon, Mars even searching for life there, can track a tiny thing on earth by satellite and with the help of every tech yet finding Burqa as a cover for terrorism. Read about Rohingya Muslims killing and for a while, for the sake of humanity and you will find the more rage and vengeance inside you that very few can control and the rest will avenge.

I previously quoted different religions merely for reference and for burqa ban reference, what about a Nun in veil that may carry a bomb underneath and those who attacked Muslim Prayer Places from Babri Masjid to Quebic in Canada, were not wearing Burqa at all but still nothing stopped them doing so. The white guy shoots many of students in a college/school was not a burqa terrorist and examples goes on as the list is long. What I am trying to say is, those banning countries are actually scared to hell due to their atrocities and war crimes against Muslim that even doubts any Muslim because of the religion, as terrorist. A padre wears gown as well, and can hold a suicide jacket underneath etc. A man riding motorbike with helmet and fully packed can also be a risk being anyone. These Burqas were never ever a threat until & unless, Muslims are bombed and then the fear of response however, there are still countries that did not ban Burqa but living in Peace. India never reported in Burqa group or Burqa causing any threat to peace at all, despite of large Muslim populace but if the one has to be a terrorist etc, wouldn't be stopped by Burqa alone and this issue has to be addressed. Banning and stopping Muslim merely is not the solution at all but will fuel more hatred among Muslims against them that doing so.

There is a reason that it is called as "Islamophobia fueling terrorism" based upon findings, studies and a lot of observations. The world leaders want to solve the matter there are thousand ways to do so but if none want to do it, there are billions of excuses to blame others and continue.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Unless the Muslim society fixes its interpretations of combat and self-defence, people of other cultures will continue getting antagonised as everyone has their own interpretations.

This gets highlighted very much as only Islam and Christianity have active militias or groups with radical thoughts and act on the basis of religious fervour. Especially at a mass international scale.

Even at a regional level, you won't hear Wiccans conducting massacres against Voodoo practitioners in Africa.

In a world with thousands of cultures and religions, it is difficult to justify or explain when one or two religions predominantly end up getting radicalised while no other group conducts radical actions, not just in the West but also in the countries that have done no harm to them like the countries I mentioned above.

Your points above are why, I think, that "Islamophobia" is a rational response by most people of the world. Perhaps in centuries past Christianity also had an expansionist agenda, but not since the end of colonialism. Islam is a unique major religion in that its founder, who is revered and emulated as the "most perfect human being" that ever lived, was a military leader who ordered other communities and individuals to be put to death in the name of Islam.

 

[BATMAN]

@UN chief... why this MOFO can't send UN army to Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Yemen?

 

[mohd497]

Your points above are why, I think, that "Islamophobia", is a rational response by most people of the world. Perhaps in centuries past Christianity also had an expansionist agenda, but not since the end of colonialism. Islam is a unique major religion in that its founder, who is revered and emulated as the "most perfect human being" that ever lived, was a military leader who ordered other communities and individuals to be put to death in the name of Islam.

That is wrong. Neither Jesus(PBUH) or Mohammad(PBUH) ordered anyone to be killed in the name of religion. Yes, few people gain power and use religion for there own gain like churches and kings in Europe.

 

[Stag112]

That is wrong. Neither Jesus(PBUH) or Mohammad(PBUH) ordered anyone to be killed in the name of religion. Yes, few people gain power and use religion for there own gain like churches and kings in Europe.

You quite simply validated his point about why islamophobia is a valid response for many people. Because instead of giving a rational response to allay his fears, you responded with denial.

If people can not reason with you, they are going to respond in a different manner.

 

[The Eagle]

You quite simply validated his point about why islamophobia is a valid response for many people. Because instead of giving a rational response to allay his fears, you responded with denial.

If people can not reason with you, they are going to respond in a different manner.

The reasoning of people needs to be based upon logic and facts not some personal grudge and enmity due to a mindset and lack of knowledge. Merely reading news and the repetition of Islamic Terrorism actually took over every mind that cannot think out of the box otherwise, there is still a world that exist like before or one can say, before this mental plague of so-called terrorism paint only against Islam.

 

[Stag112]

The reasoning of people needs to be based upon logic and facts not some personal grudge and enmity due to a mindset and lack of knowledge. Merely reading news and the repetition of Islamic Terrorism actually took over every mind that cannot think out of the box otherwise, there is still a world that exist like before or one can say, before this mental plague of so-called terrorism paint only against Islam.

Sir, the issue is not Islam. Pretty bad stuff is also to be found in religious books of other people. We however have generally, overwhelmingly agreed that the stuff incompatible with today's world should be ignored if not outrightly outlawed (example India, or just about any other western country).

That is an open mind willing to accept, introspect and correct.

All we get from Muslims is denial, crying victimhood and outright supremacism. Hence his point that since a dialogue with Muslims is nearly impossible, for many fear is a rational choice.