I recently read an article on Wired about a new training technique the FBI is now using that informs agents on how religion relates to a person's propensity for violent terrorist activity.
The FBI is teaching its counterterrorism agents that “main stream” [sic] American Muslims are likely to be terrorist sympathizers; that the Prophet Mohammed was a “cult leader”; and that the Islamic practice of giving charity is no more than a “funding mechanism for combat.” - Wired
In one seminar the FBI presented a graph demonstrating how Christianity, Judaism, and Islam relate to an individual's inclination towards violence.
As you can clearly see in the chart above, as time goes on, the followers of Judaism and Christianity have become less-violent. The opposite is shown for followers of Islam, with a line showing that they are just as violent as they were 1400 years ago.
The implications of this type of "training technique" are obvious. Stating that devout, mainstream Muslims are more violent than their Jewish and Christian counterparts is controversial enough, yet attempting to quantify that claim through the use of a graph takes it even further.
It seems that the FBI is treading on very shaky legal ground with this new campaign, whether or not it it will be challenged in court is yet to be seen.
Legality aside, is this a legitimate training technique used by the FBI or is it morally reprehensible religious stereotyping?
The implications of this type of "training technique" are obvious. Stating that devout, mainstream Muslims are more violent than their Jewish and Christian counterparts is controversial enough, yet attempting to quantify that claim through the use of a graph takes it even further.
It seems that the FBI is treading on very shaky legal ground with this new campaign, whether or not it it will be challenged in court is yet to be seen.
Legality aside, is this a legitimate training technique used by the FBI or is it morally reprehensible religious stereotyping?
As unfortunate as it is, I think this is a SOMEWHAT accurate graph. The problem with it is that it doesn't show that the MAJORITY of Muslims are not violent people...and that that is a very large majority nowadays. However, for the really devout Muslims, I think this graph is accurate.
ReplyDeleteDevout Christians don't really commit acts of terrorism. There are radical fringe groups who associates themselves with Christianity, but the basis for their actions cant really be found in the religion of Christianity.
I think a lot of people would say that for Muslims, it's more difficult because 1. there are so many radical groups 2. they are so active and 3. there are a lot of passages in the Koran that advocate violence and there are entire branches of Islam dedicated to interpreting them in this fashion.
At what point do you draw the line? There are so many amazing Muslim people and Arab people, yet you have radicals.
ReplyDeleteCan you compare yourself walking down an alley and seeing a family vs. seeing a group of younger minority group? The general public would naturally feel more uneasy based upon what is portrayed in the news, and what we have seen around.
What is the limit? It is important to be aware, but aware on the basis of truth and not "the general public" sentiment.
Good post!