Good analysis.
If those who espouse socialism would read your post and substitute the word socialism for communism they might get a clearer understanding of the nonsense they want to rule their lives. If you listen to Sanders you might realize that either he doesn't understand what he's talking about or he's just a smooth liar.

While I bow to the great Durant, I would have said that philosophy keeps it alive.

Man O Man, there are time when I think I'm writing in Sanskrit.
I was putting what you said in a neat little juicy context, not criticizing that you justified bad behavior.

I never said he was. I said that the moderates (if they exist) should speak out loud and clear against the radicals. I would feel more comfortable if I heard them on a regular basis. With a very few exceptions -- do you hear them? There is no anti radical movement among the Muslim population. Why? Are the 1.8 billion so intimidated by the 200 million that they fear to speak out? If that's true, then how, as their avowed enemy should we feel?

Herb, you know my comments don't justify any bad behavior....

Those are Palestinian atrocities that happen and the people may be Islamist in belief ... it is NOT the religion perpetrating the atrocity.

The "war" was not a declared one when the Irgun massacred and unsettled civilians. It was much like what Palestinians d today and bother are/were wrong an indefensible.

That sound familiar to the American Indian atrocities committed against the settlers in the USA west. Both are terrorist acts

the Iman of Iran is a Radical and NEVER been considered a moderate

You have not heard the Head Imam of Iran Condemn the entire USA as the great Satan? I will be much less suspicious of Muslims when the so-called moderates speak out loudly condemning the radicals.

Yes, and the many killings perpetrated by the Irgun. Desperate times. In some cases it was self defense. In some cases it was retribution. In some cases it was indefensible. That's war, but still, indefensible is indefensible. There are killings, that should not have happened in every conflict, since the beginning of wars. Not defending so much as looking at reality. However, you realize that is no justification for Muslim atrocities, such as sneaking into an Israeli home and stabbing the family to death including the children.

Mac, I thought the topic was the rationality of "Islamophobia", not whether radical Islamic terrorists have spawned "Islamophobia". My comments, in context, don't excuse any "bad behavior".

It was my cookie jar.

Exactly.
Bad behavior is not justified by citing other bad behavior.

Pointing out the failings of group B does not excuse the failings of group A or "put it in perspective" as if to give it a pass for bad behavior. If you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar and you point out your sibling has done the same thing, it doesn't mean your hand is not in the jar. The topic here is Islamophobia presumably as brought about by radical Islam. What other groups have done is virtually irrelevant.

Yes, Zen, and the leadership of that society wished to check those radicals by issue of open invitations to the Founders to be guests of honor at a grand necktie party.

Choose your radicals. The Founders were radically extricating themselves and fellow citizens from subjugation and tyranny, whereas the Islamic radicals are instilling subjugation and tyranny. Islamic political ideology is not compatible with a Democratic Constitutional Republic.

read about the founding of Israel and the massacres perpetrated at Deir Yassin and many others by Zionists. (I am not anti-Israel).

Ilan Paape has written about the issue often. ( He is unliked by many Israelis)

http://monabaker.com/quotes.htm
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/histor...
https://electronicintifada.net/conten...
there is much additional information, you just have to search.

Saying that all of Islam are terrorists or inferring that statements, allows for recruitment of radicals to become terrorists .

THEY (Islam) do not identify us as devils, some radical terrorists who happen to be Islamic do. It is that element we should fight NOT insult the ENTIRE religion

your recruiting assumption is false -- turn it around,
and note that their identifying us as devils doesn't
cause us to recruit more devils for our cause.
instead, their calling us devils recruits for them. -- j
.

Well Said Sir! -- j
.

You left out the Greek Gods.
Also, there's the worship of Eris, Greek Goddess of Chaos. Seems appropriate in this day and age to worship the Holy Chao.

Herb, I get it. Dialectical materialism is religious in the sense of it's exclusionary focus. For me, the difference between communism and Islam is communism excluded a rational view of man and ethics (discarding consciousness as the product of so many neural impulses), while Islam discards a rational view of all of metaphysics (and therefore all existence).

To explain, communist thought supposed man to be divided into two: capitalist and proletariat. The capitalist was attacked, in thought and action, on the grounds that his profit motive would be replaced by a system of communal ownership. The flaw, as we know, is that there is no restriction against arbitrary claims to ownership and no means of determining need beyond the relative misery of those competing for scarce resources. And, as Ayn Rand put it, "morality ends where a gun begins".

Which brings us now to Islam, and the Islamic Sharia Law in particular. Those who follow Pamela Geller are well aware of the struggle against an atrocity known as the Ground Zero Mosque. She points out to well-meaning but perhaps naive Americans that such a proposal is not a gesture of good-will or even of remembrance. It is the manifestation of a supremacist culture. This behavior, if it can be called that, is ubiquitous across the globe and totally consistent with Islamic practice. The Dome of the Rock being perhaps the most glaring example. It should be an indication to anyone that Islam, at least in its current state and possibly since its inception, does not recognize the cultural achievements of any culture other than it's own, which would be laughable considering Islam itself is no more than waring sects fighting for dominance among its own adherents, except for the fact that this cultural psychosis has expanded into civilized cultures in an effort to legitimize itself. This is due to the bad metaphysics that Islam holds fundamental (no pun intended).

Islam does not establish a connection to the role of consciousness (to perceive that which is), but rather seeks to re-write reality (and particularly history - though this is hardly a distinguishing characteristic among a long list of tyrannical cultures). But I will argue that Islam has no concept of consciousness. That is, it has no understanding that existence precedes it. Therefore, by its own admission, it seeks to convert or enslave all humanity in order to force it's own lack of understanding on others in order to legitimize itself. Yes, Islam is a second-hander in the deepest sense. Not like the communist who justifies his theft in a relativistic comparison to the lowest economic state. But a second-hander in terms of a war against consciousness, and thus also existence. Islam justifies murder by reference to it's hatred toward reality. If this sounds harsh, consider the root of the cultural conflict present in our times. It is, as Ayn Rand pointed out long ago, bad metaphysics.

Connor:
If the conversation devolved as you described I would do my best to close this thread down, and consider leaving the Gulch.

They've also are doing a good job of killing off other Muslims whose interpretation varies from theirs. The radicals are are mad-dog bloody excuses for scum who use the excuse of a religion to justify the satisfaction they get of performing atrocities, like crucifying and torturing children.

sjatkins:
Not true.
Any way you count it, radicalization is pretty much agreed to be at least 10%. The latest count of Muslims puts them close to or even over 200 billion. And, as I pointed out, that could amount to around 200 million radicals. With 200 million radicalized Muslims all over the world, it isn't paranoid to think that there is one living in your neighborhood, particularly if you are in a good target area. Also, I am very careful to point out that it is that 10% group that is worrisome, not the entire Muslim population. That being said, it is perfectly rational to be suspicious anytime one encounters a Muslim.

Examples, please.
I know a few Zionists and their rhetoric is forceful, even radical. I have yet to see them move militarily except in self defense. Don't get me wrong, I have many contentious issues with Israel, but aggressiveness isn't one of them.

Got it.