You still think religion is causal, and the truth is that religion is not causal to extremist movements. If religion were causal, then religion would always cause extremist movements, and there is not an extremist Buddhist movement, not an extremist Sufi movement, not an extremist Hindu movement, etc. I understand the simplicity of wanting to blame religion because of your own personal trauma with religion and subsequent atheistic bent, but man is to blame, not God. Doing away with all religions, is itself an extremist position.
You are way too serious optional. My post was satire. Go pop a top and chill Phill, sit back Jack, take a sip and smile. It's mostly cool.
Now... we have this extremist label... and leftists are telling you that Americans are too stupid to understand its not Islams fault but the extremist brain... I have a questions... if americans are too stupid... how dumb are the suicide bombers themselves... and if people are that dumb shouldn't we be holding the Imam's who preach that stuff accountable? I have no desire to hold all of Islam accountable... but lets blame the radical mosques at least. optzz pieces is well written but you have to ask yourself if understanding the motivation matters.... because if you concern yourself with the motivation... you develop a society which rots from its core as pyshrinks tell you its not the criminals fault. When you say oh McVeigh is an extermist and suicide bombers are extremists and then fail to a do an analysis of what really caused the behavior because its is not P.C. you have no chance of improving society. Christianity does not preach bombing. If a Christian preacher is preaching violence... he is immediately isolated... his preaching is not condoned by others. McVeigh was not acting according to the teachings of Christian leaders. There are no Christian preachers teaching suicide bombings. Yet we have liberals... after every act of terror firing off the articles for slate and CNBC and the times and everyone else immediately saying don't judge the teachings or what caused the mind set... look for some other cause.. to every situation we get a series of: Don't blame the traitorous politician blame the electorate. Don't blame the criminal who commits the act... blame the schools. Don't blame the shooter blame the gun manufacturer Don't blame the Imam who rotted the brain of the congregation and created suicide bombers... blame their lack of education or something else. In short... don't blame anyone but the society you wish to hold responsible (and change so ) for some other reason.
What is important to understand is that Islam itself is not the problem, but Muslim extremists, who do not represent all of Islam. Yes, it is important to recognize the cause of extremist growth. Until you understand that, and attack the root of extremist thinking, and also understand who and why certain people are susceptible to extremist thinking, you will never be able to nip these extremist movements in the beginning. Blame is actually useless. Laws are useful, and prosecuting those who break the law is useful. Getting extremist movements to combat other extremist movements, generally leads to racism, bigotry, etc. If there were currently an extremist group who were Christians, who looked to the Bible and spun something to rationalize their violent movement...would that be the fault of Jesus or Moses, and Christians as a group? Of course not. If you want to stop the spread of anything that is dangerous, you have to understand what you are dealing with. Did Japanese internment camps really help the US win the war against Japan? No. There is no evidence of that, which is why internment camps have been denounced for what they were. Idiotic flame throwers like Mann Coulter with her "Convert them to Christianity or kill them" are extremist thinkers, and they do nothing but inflame situations. "Christianity does not preach bombing." The IRA were Catholic, and bombers. They were also extremists and terrorists. Some extremists are violent and employ violence to promote their political causes. Some Muslims are extremist and employ violence. Therefore, Islam is the cause of extremism....just does not follow logically. Why are there so many unemployed young men in the middle east, who get wrapped up in extremist movements? That's the real question.
At some point the numbers become large enough that people are no longer extremist they are typical for a good sized group. You may then intelligently assign concern to the culture the country or the Religion or group. For instance you know it might be stupid to walk around La Jolla and say I have a lot of money to invest.... you know the white collar criminals will come out. Are all educated guys in La Jolla con men? no... but there sure are a lot of them. Are con men in La Jolla extremist... I would say no... they are part of the culture. In the 80s and 90s you had to beware of guys on wall street with high water pants and brooks brothers suits... they were generally faking a look that was once respected... Are all waspy looking guys on wall street extremist crooks... no but it be wrong to proceed as if Wall street was out to steal your money? Is there something wrong with drawing associations based on observation and experience.... No... that is how we survive... its why I.Q.s are respected...
I don't agree that at some point large enough numbers disqualify extremists as being extremists. Extremist is in the thinking. Extreme, rather than moderate. The IRA rationalized violence because they had a violent temperament. In their mind, the end justified the means, which is not a principle that is either Catholic or genuine Christian. I don't really see the colonists as terrorists after collectively they declared war on England. You could say that before they formed a collective they were rogue terrorists, but after each colony agreeing to sign off on the Declaration of Independence, they were acting as a sovereign (though not recognized by England) state. Extremist is not a pc term at all, it is easy to spot extremist thinkers. They speak in all or nothing language, they don't agree with the concept of compromise, they often believe that God is on their side, and they argue something as certain that cannot usually be known with true certainty. I don't view the colonists once they joined collectively as extremists, but rather as an organized group seeking particular freedoms. They did not look to attack England, they simply sought out freedom. India did the same thing with England, but thanks to Ghandi without the need for violence.