[ Outline ] · Standard · Linear+ In U.S., fear and distrust of Muslims runs deep, story from reuters

[Deepone]

WASHINGTON (Reuters)- When radio host Jerry Klein suggested that all Muslims in the United States should be identified with a crescent-shape tattoo or a distinctive arm band, the phone lines jammed instantly.

"For me to suggest to tattoo marks on people's bodies, have them wear armbands, put a crescent moon on their driver's license on their passport or birth certificate is disgusting. It's beyond disgusting.

"Because basically what you just did was show me how the German people allowed what happened to the Jews to happen ... We need to separate them, we need to tattoo their arms, we need to make them wear the yellow Star of David, we need to put them in concentration camps, we basically just need to kill them all because they are dangerous."

Those in agreement are not a fringe minority: A Gallup poll this summer of more than 1,000 Americans showed that 39 percent were in favor of requiring Muslims in the United States, including American citizens, to carry special identification.

Roughly a quarter of those polled said they would not want to live next door to a Muslim and a third thought that Muslims in the United States sympathized with al Qaeda, the extremist group behind the September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

"The level of knowledge is very, very low," said Mohamed Esa, a U.S. Muslim of Arab descent who teaches a course on Islam at McDaniel College in Maryland. "There are 1.3 billion Muslims in the world and some people think they are all terrorists."

And optimists saw signs of change in the November 4 election of the first Muslim to the U.S. House of Representatives, which has 435 members.

full story:
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews....C1-ArticlePage1

[Deepone]

Based on the fact that americans are from Europe..
and basing on history, as you seem to like, I would like to point out the disregard of others: supporing slavery for long time, treatment of native americans, vietnam... I suppose you get the point ?

And did Finland surrender for enemy more than ten times stronger ? no - and we held our own! Hitler is not a person who is approciated but I would like to point out that even HE respected Finnish military. Should say enough of being on the losing side ? ;)
Going back to neutrality.. I give you an example: Sweden during WW2. They were able to maintain that throughout the war, and as it so happens, they were NOT conquered, they did NOT need to surrender. And on many nations that had to surrender on the verge of destruction, the resistance lived on..

EDIT: Just as a question.. what kind of countries you would like ALL countries to be ? Thinking of others or just themselves ? War-promoting countries or Peace-promoting countries ?

This post has been edited by Deepone: Dec 7 2006, 01:42 PM

[artzelda]

Would any of these supposed neutral countries remain neutral after all their neighbors had been conquered? I doubt it.

As for slavery, the US never supported slavery, but it did tolerate it. In fact more American died eliminating slavery in our civil war. Even the founders of the US Constitution debated about slavery. Learn your history.

Not all Americans are from Europe. Those that are came for a reason. Not because Europe was so good.

I want countries to respect their citizens, impose and guarantee human rights and allow liberties such a freedom of speech to the extent the US does, freedom of religion to the extent the US does, guarantee a Bill of Rights to the extent the US does. No country on earth, including Finland, guarantees these rights and freedoms to the extent the US does.

The concern for native americans you speak about was really conducted and promulgated by the Europeans that came to this country and moved West. But I guess Findland and other European countries have treated there NATIVES well also, except who were the natives of Europe - Europeans.

The disregard for others you talk about seems a little disingenuous because no country has to accept the concerns of other countries in the implementation of its foreign policy. If other countries don't agree or view it as a threat they can respond appropriately and face the consequences. Europe should have some regard for the opinions of Americans. bitch Bitch BITCH that's all they do. But recent events have shown what Europeans have done and continue to do to minorities in their countries, things which would not be allowed in the US.

In fact the one country in the world that most people want to emigrate to is the US. No other country has the immigration and waiting lines at their embassies of people wanting to get visa to emigrate to the US - this one fact is indisputable.

[Deepone]

Would any of these supposed neutral countries remain neutral after all their neighbors had been conquered?  I doubt it.

As for slavery, the US never supported slavery, but it did tolerate it.  In fact more American died eliminating slavery in our civil war.  Even the founders of the US Constitution debated about slavery.  Learn your history.

if US never supported it, then why it was there in the first place.. ? Why was it necessary to have a civil war ? If I recall my history lessons, America had a civil war because of part wanting to keep the slavery, not because it just conquered some land from the people supporting it.. well technically that might be said that way too I guess.

Not all Americans are from Europe.  Those that are came for a reason.  Not because Europe was so good.

Yes, because they wanted the gold from the native people, they were interested in the offer of receiving free land .. basically greed ? Or because of them having to flee because there were convicted in EU for criminal actions ?

I want countries to respect their citizens, impose and guarantee human rights and allow liberties such a freedom of speech to the extent the US does, freedom of religion to the extent the US does, guarantee a Bill of Rights to the extent the US does.  No country on earth, including Finland, guarantees these rights and freedoms to the extent the US does.

.. to the extent the US does ? so it is bad if there are more freedoms than you have ? I wouldnt go to say that.. And if you say "to the extent" then yes, only US does that way, but for me it feels the nordic (and EU) press have a lot of more liberties, as do the people. Are your companies allowed to see where the emails are directed towards ? Think so - but it is NOT possible here. That just as an example, fully knowing that I'm no expert in the laws there nor the laws here, and with adding my opinion of the EU citizens having more liberties than US ones.

The disregard for others you talk about seems a little disingenuous because no country has to accept the concerns of other countries in the implementation of its foreign policy. If other countries don't agree or view it as a threat they can respond appropriately and face the consequences.  Europe should have some regard for the opinions of Americans.  bitch Bitch BITCH that's all they do.  But recent events have shown what Europeans have done and continue to do to minorities in their countries, things which would not be allowed in the US.

which minorities you are referring to, if I may ask ? I admit that some people have problems tolerating foreigners even here in Finland. But it is still safe for everyone to walk around the city during the night, at least here in Tampere.. that is true for whole Finland as well I think. We don't really have to worry that much about the crimes here - there are some, sure, but it is really low amount.
So you are saying everyone should bend to US will if I summarize yourself ? It does seem a bit weird that we should have regards to US but yet no country should have regards to others ? In my view, foreign policy is all about regards to other countries by the defination of its meaning..