(03-22-2012 12:28 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I understand those who want to make it perfectly clear that the vast majority of Muslims are everyday folks not approving of terrorism. I get that. Indeed, the percentage of Muslims who condone or support jihad may be in the low single-digits (just an example, I don't know the actual number), not to mention that some of the things the US and European governments have done in the past half-century may have contributed some unintentional consequences. Those things are worth pointing out.

Indeed. And since the attack on 9/11, Americans have rightly been reminded how unfair it is to equate the hundreds of millions of decent Muslims with radicals who behead, car bomb and assassinate in the name of Islam. (Remember, the book doesn't mean what it says, except when it.......... does?)

To bad our liberal commentariat doesn't seem to make a similar distinction between regular conservatives and racists, mysogynists, and that random quasi-religious terrorist.

(03-22-2012 12:28 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  But having said that, when considering all religions and their fringe wings now, nothing rivals the fundamentalist fringe of Islam in terms of scope, organization, and the desired fear achieved. People are extremely reluctant to produce art, books, films, etc, critiquing Islam in any way, and that speaks to the power and influence of these fringe groups. The constant "comeback" references of McVeigh or the Norweigen guy, or reaching waaaay back a millennium ago to the Crusades, in an attempt to create an equivalency is pure silliness.

When Westerners like McVeigh kill, it’s the West’s fault. But when Muslims kill, it’s the West’s fault, or at least the killing cannot be disussed without liberal references and moral equivelating of McVeigh. It’s Liberalism 101. It’s a Liberal denial mechanism to help Liberals avoid having to confront their own shameful past associations, projections, and probably for most of them, daddy issues.

How is this even debatable? Motown is absolutely correct about the vast majority of Muslims, but if we track homicides for, say, the last 10 years by the ideology of the motive (NOT the perpetrator) is there any question which ideology gets the most hits? By a few orders of magnitude! Does any other ideology even come close?

That said, I have NO IDEA what we do about it. We're not going to make a religion illegal and we're not going to isolate its practitioners. Are we saying "religious profiling" is acceptable? That would be difficult to do without violating civil rights and/or the First Amendment, right?

(03-22-2012 04:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  How is this even debatable?

Exactly. And I have plans for that $100K.

(03-22-2012 06:19 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 04:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  How is this even debatable?

Exactly. And I have plans for that $100K.

But, you must be careful about semantics. After all, the "no transgressions in islam" thread on Usenet was one of the longest in the history of the internet for a long time. If you allow the argument that "they were only killed in defense", you've conceded that killing three jewish schoolchildren is a defensive act because (as, for instance, Hamas does) these three children will one day be soldiers (or, if girls, they will one day bear soldiers as children).

(03-22-2012 06:19 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 04:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  How is this even debatable?

Exactly. And I have plans for that $100K.

Just in the US from 2002-2010 around 146K murders have occurred. Throw in the end of 2001 and 2011 and you are already at 163K. Sorry torchy - you loose.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

(03-23-2012 02:44 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 06:19 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 04:34 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  How is this even debatable?

Exactly. And I have plans for that $100K.

Just in the US from 2002-2010 around 146K murders have occurred. Throw in the end of 2001 and 2011 and you are already at 163K. Sorry torchy - you loose.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

This has nothing to do w/ the bet. But then that's the only way I lose to you schmucks.

(03-22-2012 11:03 AM)OrangeCrush22 Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 10:31 AM)Paul M Wrote:  

(03-22-2012 10:10 AM)RobertN Wrote:  Keep on believing that.

18623 documented deadly terror attacks since 9/11. I'd list them for you but that is far to many. Here is a link listing attacks for the last 30 days with more links at the bottom covering all reported attacks since 9/11. Bury your head if you want.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

Is there a site like that for every religion? Because I'm willing to bet just as many people have been killed in the name of Jesus as Muhammad.

In the last 10 years?