Foxy “religious fervor has erupted in the Islamic world in general and in the Middle East in particular”

No it has not…. It has always been there…
There is nothing new,

except

a few more politicians trying to make their political names on finding a justification for the intolerance of fundamentalists

as far as tolerance is concerned, we have two choices

surrender to it or deal with it, as harshly as it would seek to deal with us.

Imho I have no intentions of surrendering to the intolerance of Islamists as I would surrender to the intolerance of Christian or Jewish fundamentalists by any name.

Like dearest Margaret said

“All attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail. It must be business as usual.”

In the final analysis

a dead fundamentalist/terrorist represents

a good result.

Herman
"Western imperialism or colonialism, support for Israel, past provocations"

+ plus end of cold war.

Left a vacancy though didn't we? Add that to oil money. Power vacuum plus $$ = oooops.

I agree with the word 'intensified' only because the opportunity for that to happen has 'exploded' - 'cuse the pun - since we began invading the M.E. I think it's fairly obvious that that has given many devotees motivation to join the cause because of the duty they feel in being a Muslim, but I don't think the intensity they feel for their faith has altered since Mohammed was playing 'Cowboys and Indians' ... so to speak.

Do you think it's any different for us?. I think we only label it another way. How has the numbers changed for us and the amount of people joining the armed forces since the wars began. Really, I think you'd see a sharp rise.

Islam has had Jihad's and Fatwa's for ever. Last century they were mostly aimed at the Israeli's but now that focus has merely spread to a larger spotlight.

Foxy, to answer your question, there are a number of reasons.

The interesting thing is however, if you examine various Islamic societies
a bit more closely, you land up with what we have, ie a small
proportion are fundamenalist-fanatical, the majority kind of go
along with the crowd and follow their customs, then a significant
amount are basically secular. You can apply that to Jews, Christians
and Muslims. Its the fanatics in all three, that are the problem.

Wahabi Islam used to be the most extreme and when Saudi Arabia was
formed, the Sauds did a deal with the Wahabs. The net result of this
has been that mega billions of petro Dollars have been spent on
spreading Wahabi Islam around the world.

At the same time an even more militant form of Islam was formed,
based on the interpretations of Sayed Qutb, an Egyptian who lived
in the 60s, went to America and was shocked by the culture.
He was jailed, but wrote alot of stuff, like "Milestones", which
you can download on the net for free. It gives you an insight into
his thinking and his influence on radical Islam, bin Laden,
Zawahiri and all the rest, has been enormous. He calls for
the overthrow of the West.

The thing is, anyone can claim to be a Muslim and their interpretation
is as valid as the followers they have.

So to sum it up, I'd say that petrodollars and the teachings of
Sayed Qutb, have been what has turned some parts of the Islamic
world, far more militant.

Foxy,

< is it time to profile Muslim passengers on flights?>

Taking aside an elderly white grandmother for special screening because her number came up,
while ignoring an Islamic male immediately following her is a criminal waste of time and resources.
It is obviously driven by political correctness gone mad but to do otherwise would be discrimination,
so it’s more acceptable (to some) to play pretend security with a dangerous numbers game.
Resources permit screening 5% of passengers so every twentieth passenger it is then,
regardless of race, colour or creed.
This is the grim reality that the multicultural ideology has brought us to.
Grim because it facilitates “incidents” like flight 253.
Grim because it will inevitably lead to the death of innocents.
Grim because it is avoidable.

When looking for a rapist do the police include women and children as potential suspects,
so as not to be guilty of gender profiling?
Imagine police checking the DNA of women and children as rape suspects according to a numbers game,
dictated by the availability of resources.
They would be criminally stupid do so.

Everything has its consequences and slavish adherence to the multicultural ideology is not exempt.
One of Janet Napolitano’s first acts as U.S. Director of Homeland Security was to issue
a nationwide bulletin warning of the threat of right-wing extremism.
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf
She has yet to even acknowledge the dangers of Islamic extremism.
The world is paying a high price for this kind of blind, ideologically-driven incompetence.

I say,
so we only have resources to commit to screening 5% of airline passengers?
Muslims make up 5% of airline passengers?
What a happy coincidence.

I wouldn’t object to a DNA test eliminating me as a rape suspect, saying
“Why don’t you test those women and children. This is discrimination.”
I would want to establish my innocence.

To me, and others, profiling is the most logical course of action to ensure everyone's safety.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/12/please_search_me_next_time_i_b.html

Some related light relief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxsCxtzJEdM

Foxy;
Islam via its religious leaders has deliberately stuck itself in the
time of the dark ages, ie late first millennium.
A simple example, they cannot change their rule on pork even though
the rest of the world now understands the animal husbandry needs of pigs. They seem unable to update their mental processes.

The suicide bombers really believe they will go to paradise as a martyr.
Sad, really.
Other nations, religions etc have had the same complaints as Islam
claims, but have not engaged in the brutal owardly anti humanity acts
that moslems have engaged in. There is a difference to the genocides
etc of previous centuries, this is being done in the name of God.
In any case precedence is not an excuse.

The only solution I can see that will probably work is to disengage
from all Islamic countries and ban any travel between moslem and non
moslem countries, repatriate moslems to their country of origin,
and apply the same sort of rules as they apply to Christians in their
countries.

Pretty drastic, but I have never heard anyone make a better suggestion.

Oil is a problem for now anyway, but if theu want to sell it it could
be done through designated trading ports, like the Chinese did in the
ninteenth century.

I know all this will not happen because it is too politically incorrect.

Frankly, I don't think there is a solution, any more than there is a
solution to the Israel/Palestinian problem.