"Mainstream (practicing) Muslims are violent, radical"

A fresh batch of “counter-terrorism” training documents (including PowerPoint presentations), acquired by “Danger Room" (at Wired.com), reveals the extent to which anti-Islamic propaganda and rhetoric has influenced and saturated the American psyche.

According to these documents, 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.” (Source)

These are some of the graphs presented:


in other words, "Muslims are still the violent barbarians" (Graph Source)



"Islam is stagnant" and "Devout Muslims are violent" (Graph Source)

In another, longer, ppt. presentation called "Doctrinal basis for Jihad", the author, William Gawthrop, atempts to demonize the practice of 'Zakat' (alms giving) as a form of "warfare/terrorism funding mechanism." And he even added "Jihad" (i.e. "holy war") as the sixth pillar of the Islamic "ideology" (apparently Islam is not even a religion).


Saying that Islam promotes violent warfare,
and the 'devout' are more inclined to violence (Source)


What I also found interesting in this "training program", is that ‘moderates’ and ‘mainstream’ Muslims are distinguished and defined by the very same ‘extremist’ terminology that is being critiqued, albeit reversed. If you take a look at the graph below, ‘Moderates’ are the “hypocrites/innovators/apostates” which are also deemed non-violent. Where as the “devout/pious” (practicing) Muslims are “violent” and potentially dangerous.

"moderates" non-violent vs. "devout" violent (Graph Source)



(Source, see above)

If you ask me, this is pretty darn scary! Especially if you look at the incarceration rates and false 'terrorism' charges laid against so many Muslims in the years following Sept. 11. due to racial profiling yes, but also due to ‘devoutness’ profiling. I suppose this may explain, why. What else is apparent from these presentations is that, at least Gawthrop, would want Muslims to move into a secular direction, and ultimately apostate form the religion, since there is absolutely no way for a Muslim to be devout and non-violent; even though millions of peaceful ‘mainstream’ Muslims testify to the atrociousness of such lies and propaganda. I, a practicing American Muslim, am appalled (but sadly not surprised) that something like this could even pass the board and be presented as competent material for “counter-terrorism” training!

What are your reactions to these graphs?