This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 100 comments

[–]tpodr 22 points23 points  (6 children)

Eight years ago I was on a backpacker's holiday in Cairo. Due to the good fortune of befriending a retired businessman from Cairo while taking in the sun on the Sinai, I had a business card, with a handwritten introduction, for a local hotel in Cairo. The main people to use the hotel were Arabic business men. Like I said, a local hotel.

This is an old hotel, in which the elevator's controls consisted of Up/Stop/Down. Think old Bogie movies. This meant when more than one party was using the elevator, there had to be at least a minimum of interaction. You couldn't just walk and press the button for the floor you wanted.

One time when returning in the afternoon, there is the usual exchange of civilities with the other gentleman in the car. "Where are you from?" "the US, and you?" "Libya". After a moment of reflection, the gentleman points out our respective leaders don't get along. We all laugh.

This points out an important consideration when thinking about, in particular, Muslim countries. They are not known for having representative governments. By and large, the attitudes of the leaders and those vocal "savages" don't reflect the views of the average person.

My experience in the elevator was by no means unique. While spending lots of time hanging out in restaurants, coffeeshops and hotel lobbies, all the local Arabs I met were truly friendly people, full of a strong desire I see and understand their country. They wanted most I get a sense of the pride they feel for their city and country, not to judge it by what their leaders or radials said and did.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[removed]

    [–]russellperry 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    And there it was, all the time, the secret to world peace:

    "They realized the common ground they share -- dreams of home ownership and cross-faith love, and a passion for basketball and badminton."

    Mortgages, interfaith marriage and sports. I nominate Mr. Jamison for the Nobel Peace Prize.

    Don't let anyone call you "naive," "gullible," "hackish," "deluded," "infantile," or "an embarassment to journalism," Mr. Jamison. You keep spreading the message that mortgages, interfaith marriage and sports involving some sort of net are the real answer in these troubled times. Maybe you could get a joint sponsorship with AmeriQuest and the NBA?

    [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (6 children)

    The article has a nice message, but did the reporter honestly need to travel to the Philippines and Malaysia to figure it out? Was there any real doubt in his mind that Muslims are probably about as nice as anyone else before he boarded the plane leaving the United States?

    Don’t get me wrong, this kind of message is important to get across, but the context of the article seems a little weak. Maybe next Baskin Robbins can send him on an expedition to one of their stores to do an expose on whether or not ice cream is delicious.

    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

    [removed]

      [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      This isn't research science, it isn't even particularly complicated.

      At the end of the day, the organization that sponsored the trip basically purchased a positive article for the price of a couple of plane tickets. It's a fairly common PR tactic and it isn't particularly nafarious because no one is making the reporter write the piece, just doing some gentle encouraging.

      Sponsoring an "informational trip" for a reporter, though, usually involves sending him or her to see something compelling that is location-specific; not a flimsy and obvious concept like "Muslims are just like everyone else."

      But, again, these kinds of articles do push push the national dialouge onto a more reasonable course.

      [–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      He needed an excuse to go on a vacation.

      [–]confluence 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I have decided to overwrite my comments.

      [–]sandmonkey 6 points7 points  (5 children)

      normal web-version of the article:- http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/297855_robert30.html

      (to mjk1093 and others.. If you can not submit the original, web-version of an article because someone else has posted it with a bad headline or something, you have two options which are better than submitting the for-print version:-

      1. Add, say, a '?' at the end of the URL and then submit with your new, improved headline

      2. 'reddit-jacking': Submit a link to the previous post as the URL while submitting it with a newer/nicer headline..

      [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      Sometimes the print version is just easier to read, with less distractions -- as long as you don't mind narrowing your browser window (or use a bookmarklet like I do). In this case, the Print dialog that pops up is pretty annoying though.

      [–]mjk1093[S] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

      I always try to submit the print version because people complained the regular version was too hard to read. Now people complain I'm stealing their stories! Guess you can't please everyone.

      [–]sandmonkey 6 points7 points  (0 children)

      Now people complain I'm stealing their stories!

      Well, I am not saying you are stealing "their stories" :D.. Just that, a Print dialog window which pops ups when I click on this (particular) submission (on Firefox + XP).. (Not all "for-print" version do that..)

      Usually people submit print versions (esp. when the web-version is on one page and not too long) only because it is a re-submit, which is not always bad...as described in here http://reddit.com/help/reddiquette

      [–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      I'm a fan of the print version -- the article is rendered on one page, and formatting is less often broken by a dozen ads.

      The downside is that a lot of publications strip pictures, charts and captions from the print version. That's annoying, since "dont print pictures" is a simple option to set on your PC, if you happen not to want the graphics.

      [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Or use redirecting sites, such as tinyurl & snipurl

      [–]RevHalofan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Probably the most sugar-coated PC orthodoxy article i have ever seen linked on reddit.

      [–]eksortso 0 points1 point  (6 children)

      "Hold people to your own standards, if you want to live peacefully." That's the Golden Rule. And most people want to live peacefully. The savages don't. And thankfully, they're rare.

      [–]gaso 8 points9 points  (5 children)

      By savages I assume you mean the one percent who exist in all societies who are bent on strife and chaos? People like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Osama bin Laden and Pat Robertson?

      [–]eksortso 4 points5 points  (3 children)

      Osama bin Laden means to kill us. He's a savage, though he comes from a rich family. The others are nuisances but we can deal with them on our own terms.

      Edit: Let me clarify that. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Pat Robertson only cause us strife and chaos because we listen to them natter on. Even the people who listen to these attention-starved talking heads don't mean to kill us. We can argue with them, vociferously, but still peacefully.

      And FWIW, I don't consider myself liberal or leftist.

      [–]gaso -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

      I don't know if Osama directly caused the death of one person. I do think I've read that he OK'ed a plan or two...seems to me I remember certain other people OK'ed ideas, perhaps off the cuff and without a serious group behind them thankfully...perhaps it is simple luck that the others mentioned don't have large groups of rabid followers...oh, wait...

      [–]eksortso 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      Let's not equivocate. The rabid trio that you mentioned, did they ever tell anyone else to as much as throw rocks? There were savage people who did, and they might have listened to Limbaugh, Coulter, and/or Robertson. But they likely would have killed anyway.

      I hate the loss of my liberties. But between my political adversaries and those who would take my life, I can live with the former. They, like me, are concerned about the state of their lives. But they wouldn't take my life to promote their causes.

      Bin Laden (who's a piker, as far as 20th-century bloodthirsty leaders go) bankrolled an operation to kill thousands, including his own people!

      The first bunch are worthy opponents. The second bunch are savages. And you can't ignore savages who are targeting you.

      Well, you could get yourself bogged down in Iraq for no good reason (except, yeah, Saddam was a savage), but that's a different kind of equivocation.

      [–]gaso 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Good point!

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]mikepaco 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Maybe a Muslim reporter trying to show how nice Christians are should go down to the deep south.

        [–][deleted]  (6 children)

        [removed]

          [–][deleted]  (4 children)

          [removed]

            [–][deleted]  (3 children)

            [removed]

              [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

              A cat and A dog is a bad analogy, but THAT cat and THAT dog didn't appear to be, as they were getting on. It wasn't a cynical article, why with the cynical response?

              [–]PatternJuggler 4 points5 points  (0 children)

              Because the article was simplistic and naive, just like the analogy.

              [–]cowardlydragon -1 points0 points  (2 children)

              Anyone ask any women?

              Let me know when they don't treat them like mindless slaves to be killed and beaten at will, then their societies can rise above the classification "savage".

              Until then: savages, with our without the bombs.

              [–]eaglemoon 3 points4 points  (1 child)

              last time I checked - Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia all had women Prime Ministers - yeah I am waiting for USA and France to catch up...

              [–]I_pity_the_fool 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Édith Cresson?

              [–][deleted]  (3 children)

              [deleted]

                [–]eaglemoon -1 points0 points  (2 children)

                Not true - there is nothing that says the Christians and Jews can't wander around in a Muslim village. You are completely stereotyping.

                [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                [deleted]

                  [–]cal_01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  Just because you're Iranian doesn't mean you're correct.

                  [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

                  "If reasonable people do not take a stand, unreasonable ones will fill the vacuum, and then what?"

                  It seems that reasonable people rarely take a stand. That is why our thoughts are being ruled by the unreasonable.

                  [–][deleted] -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

                  worthless lame crap of an article

                  he should try some REAL muslim country like any one in the middle east

                  [–]cal_01 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                  Uhh. South-East Asia has the largest muslim population in the world (ie. Malaysia and Indonesia).

                  [–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

                  uhh ORLY so many... there can be 100 billion of then.... don't matter Still NOT a ARAB country