[Kenny Bunk]

We can't lose sight of the fact that most Muslims DO NOT endorse terrorism, and are in fact very much against it.

My friend, those do not seem to be accurate observations. If they were, I could very easily be proven wrong, and pray that you might do so.

What I deduce from my observations, and I have both lived and workled for long periods in Muslim lands, is that if most Muslims were against Islamic terrorism, it would not exist. More specifically, it certainly could not exist as a global phenomenon. You would be more correct to say that most Muslims do not publicly endorse terrorism. There is no need for them to do so, since their acknowledged religious leaders do it for them.

But in our culture, in Anglo-Saxon and Roman Law, silence can be deemed consent. IMHO, when it comes to terrorism, the silence of the Muslims is absolutely deafening.

[wvobiwan]

I agree with you about the silence of the moderate Muslims, it is indeed deafening. And I'm sure that there is an element that does indeed at least tacitly agree with the crazies through their silence.

But I also think that moderating Islam is the best course of action if it can be done. By moderating, I mean instilling fact that in a modern society a religion must subject to common law. Hunting down and killing the Islamist crazies is the other part of that strategy.

[Wurlitzer]

"But in our culture, in Anglo-Saxon and Roman Law, silence can be deemed consent. IMHO, when it comes to terrorism, the silence of the Muslims is absolutely deafening. "

Brilliant Kenny Bunk! Dittos!