That was not my intent. By using the term "they (the millions) support an effectively embedded network", I meant to imply much smaller numbers, hundreds or thousands (the Salafist network), are doing the dirty work of recruiting, financing and organizing the actual terrorists. The Salafist fish swims in the larger sea of Muslims.
No "proof" from me. It's all there on CNN: in France alone it is estimated that at least 1000 French nationals have been recruited, financed and transported to train in Syria or Yemen. Say there is 1 funded recruiter, perhaps with his Imam, family, scouts or bodyguards for every 10 recruits. That's easily some multiple of 100 in France alone.
It wouldn't matter cause it isn't Christianity or Judaism* that is causing such chaos in the world today. Look Scaff, people wouldn't be bashing Islam if it's adherents learned how to act like they belong in the 21st century.
"I don't condone violence but if you insult the prophet then hey, you had it coming", is what they're saying. Literally hundreds of millions worldwide would happily support the curbing of free speech. Because religion. Because feelings. Tell me that isn't a problem. No, try living in a country where the limitation of free speech has been abused, then tell me that isn't a problem.
And a similar number of American Catholics supported direct action by the IRA, as such I take it you will be treating all Christians (as you are also incapable of looking at sects in Islam) in the same way.
What horrifying implications? "Risk marginalizing Muslims into being radicalized, blah blah blah"? Yeah, it's all your fault these guys can't understand how to live in a free society. Fix it.
Again your using the issues you have to demand a blanket approach to all.
The ones that we discovered when we had a policy of assimilation as a part of the government's plan to bring the indigenous population in line with society at large. Now, I appreciate that it is a different demographic, but the policy of assimilation was traumatic as people were forcibly removed from their homes and family units, and were essentially given no choice but to abandon their cultural beliefs and adopt someone else's values for that someone else's sake.
You are comparing killing in the interest of national security (however baseless that may be, the US is frickin' paranoid to be killing "enemies" abroad) and killing because of blasphemy.
A sizable chuck of them are. You just have to read the comments coming from Muslims which is overwhelmingly "they had it coming". Even my mom rationalized the killing but can you blame her, she's religious, and we've never had absolute free speech anyway. It's not my role as a kafir to work with them and change their opinion. They've already written me off with their intolerant, discriminatory religion. Though, it is my role as a human with the freedom of speech to criticize and ridicule bad ideas.
Where are the other religious groups which have killed people because their religion was insulted? (Honest question if I happened to miss any.)
Oh, the multiculturalism aspect.
No, I'm comparing support by religious groups for the targeting of civilians.
A sizable chuck of them where you are maybe, not where I am.
Its rather telling that you have to narrow it to one single incident and cause isn't it.
None of which is Multicuturalism!
When did I say that? You're just like every Islamophobe out there, trying to characterise its most radical form as the default belief of every Muslim.
Two out of four. A hijab is an open-faced headscarf. The niqab covers the face, but leaves a slit for the eyes. And the burqa completely covers the face and the eyes, with a mesh-like veil for the wearer to see through.
Odd then that only one of us is able to seem that all religions contain people who are a problem and that punishing the whole for the actions of the few doesn't work.........................
No not in my opinion, this has been covered before.
Actually a number of orthodox Christian and Jewish sects have exactly the same clothing requirement for women (just as they do for men around beards and headwear), its not unique to Islam.
One of us is supporting people who hold beliefs which fly in the face of logic and rationality. I support none of that and if I were in your shoes I would be bashing Christianity just the same.
There you go with the name calling. Doesn't matter that I spent half my life with Muslims and was mostly happy living with them. I criticize Islam therefore I am an Islamophobe. I live with the "moderate" form and they still believe in radical ideas. Well too bad, 🤬 me right? Good riddance the West. The more I speak with you guys, the less I care.
That's the point I was trying to make - that women wearing robes over their head is not unheard of in a variety of faith. But where it's seen as a sign of devotion in the likes of Catholicism, Christianity and Judaism, it's interpreted as oppression in Islam (and if ever a Muslim woman tells you she wears her headscarf as a sign of devotion, she's obviously lying because she was forced to wear it by an oppressive male but does not want to incur his wrath by admitting the "truth").
Yep.
The problem is the cherry-picking of arguments. If you open yourself up to alternative explanations, it challenges your preconceptions. It's easy to believe that Muslim women are forced to wear veils against their will, because that fits everything that we are told about Islam - that it's barbaric, that it's misogynistic, that it's archaic.
The systematic human rights violations in Muslim countries are no coincidence.
Nor is it endemic to the developing world. Just days before the attacks on Charlie Hebdo, I saw a report on the BBC about the way the French are treating the Roma people. Or there is the way Israel opposed the International Criminal Court's recognition of Palestine as a state because it would allow the Palestinians to take cases against the Israelis to the ICC for prosecution. Or what about the CIA report into torture, which revealed massive human rights violations (and which, sadly, nothing seems to have come of)?
The question was asked, "do millions of Muslims support terrorism?". The answer is obviously yes. I'm not sure why Christians or Jews supporting drone strikes has anything to do with that. If 100% of North Koreans supported death by torture would that make any difference to millions of Muslims supporting terrorism? Separate issues and one doesn't mitigate that other.
So you don't consider the actions carried out by the IRA to have been terrorism then?
)
Actually he originally posted it to prove that millions in France support terrorism, that you describe drone strikes as national security is something that many on the receiving end may debate.@Dotini lol, sacred cow. When their oil runs out you're gonna turn right around and invade them, right?
@Scaff, the poll Johnny presented asked Muslims about violence against civilians in the defense of Islam. Then you come up with evidence of Americans who support violence against civilians in the interest of national security. I'm an atheist and I would support drone strikes if it is killing enemies of my country. Get a poll which show Christians who support violence against civilians in the defense of Christianity. (Why the hell am I defending religious people?!!
I though this was the Islam what's your view on it thread. I don't see how what the IRA did has anything to do with Islam, whether they are the same or polar opposites.
