DescentBB

Cuda68 wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:null it would be stupid to imply that al Queda is the only dangerous faction within the Muslim world.

There are many factions in Islam and not all of them are "dangerous." Most of them are not "dangerous." What would you have moderate muslims do? Bomb Iran with private money?

Where do learn this stuff? Can you provide some sort of factual reference for this?

Can you? It's easier to prove a positive, after all.

SO you wonder why people say your a troll. Provide the information and stop dodging.

...what sort of information does he need to provide to you? That all Muslims aren't radical fundamentalists? I'd think looking around in your own community would be enough to refute that.

Also, I loathe my countrymen sometimes...

Posting a picture from image shack with no statistics data to back said image is hardly proof to his comments. Why did he not post the statistical data that goes along with the image? Are we just to sallow a graph with no statistical data as fact?

How about all these terrorist organizations. Which would start making that little dot bigger. the list below nowhere finishes the list of Islamic terrorist organizations

al Qaeda

Armed Islamic Group (GIA)

The Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)

Al-Jihad a.k.a. Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Jihad Group, Islamic Jihad

Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group, IG)

Hezbollah (Party of God) a.k.a. Islamic Jihad, Revolutionary Justice Organization, Organization of the Oppressed on Earth, and Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine

HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)

he Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ)

Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)

Qibla and People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD)

Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)

A list of international terrorist organizations considered by the U.S. State Department to be active during the last five years.


http://www.cdi.org/terrorism/terrorist-groups.cfm

A few more...

I see this crap all the time, so JFTR…

The burdon of proof is always on the person making a claim/charge there are no exceptions except in the case where it’s that person’s personal opinion, where in that case it should be duly noted.

It doesn’t matter if it’s a positive, negative or neutral…or how “obvious” the answer should be.

And I’m sick of people making claims, and then telling people it’s “their” duty to go look it up…no sorry…you made the claim, it’s your duty to prove it, not mine.

At least that’s the way it is in America…errr..Unitedstatesica.


Try that in court, and see how far it gets you…

Plaintiff: Your honor, the defendant smashed into my car…
Judge: Present evidence…
Plaintiff: go look it up yourself.
Judge: You have no evidence?
Plaintiff: You go find it, it’s obvious.
Judge: Case dismissed.

Why I would have to say he has the right to build a church right next door to that mosque. Just like Greg Gutfeld has a right to build a gay bar next door to the mosque. Under Islamic law homosexuality is it punishable by death.

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:null it would be stupid to imply that al Queda is the only dangerous faction within the Muslim world.

There are many factions in Islam and not all of them are "dangerous." Most of them are not "dangerous." What would you have moderate muslims do? Bomb Iran with private money?

Kind of changed the subject there didn't you?

As to what I would suggest they do? Well something this side of dancing in the streets when they saw the two towers fall....something this side of accepting as status quo when they see their woman stoned to death for being so bold as to be raped....etc. etc.

There is such a giant gaping chasm between what they do to tacitly sustain the radicals and them bombing Iran that I wonder what compels you to leap over it?

But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

Will Robinson wrote:But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

No. I don't have data on other groups. Do you have data on them? If so, give it to me and I will alter the image.

Heretic wrote:SO you wonder why people say your a troll. Provide the information and stop dodging.

You.

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

No. I don't have data on other groups. Do you have data on them? If so, give it to me and I will alter the image.

We did, a few posts ago.

Cuda68 wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

No. I don't have data on other groups. Do you have data on them? If so, give it to me and I will alter the image.

We did, a few posts ago.

I don't see numbers.

EDIT: Nevermind, it's in that link. This'll take me a while to collect all this data into a representational, easy-to-read format.

While you build that, watch this.....

null0010 wrote:

Cuda68 wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

No. I don't have data on other groups. Do you have data on them? If so, give it to me and I will alter the image.

We did, a few posts ago.

I don't see numbers.

EDIT: Nevermind, it's in that link. This'll take me a while to collect all this data into a representational, easy-to-read format.

Give that propeller on the top of your beenie a big spin and put a number value on Iran's decades of creating and operating it's proxy warrior wings of Hezbollah and Hamas while you're at it, I could use a good laugh.
Or just Google the population of Iran and subtract the number of political prisoners they haven't beheaded yet that should get one of your omitted factions up to date...

Will Robinson wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Cuda68 wrote:

null0010 wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:But back on the subject of my post that you dodged. Can we take from your response that you acknowledge your attempt to depict al Queda as the lone bad element in an otherwise benign Islam was a lame thing to do?

No. I don't have data on other groups. Do you have data on them? If so, give it to me and I will alter the image.

We did, a few posts ago.

I don't see numbers.

EDIT: Nevermind, it's in that link. This'll take me a while to collect all this data into a representational, easy-to-read format.

Give that propeller on the top of your beenie a big spin and put a number value on Iran's decades of creating and operating it's proxy warrior wings of Hezbollah and Hamas while you're at it, I could use a good laugh.
Or just Google the population of Iran and subtract the number of political prisoners they haven't beheaded yet that should get one of your omitted factions up to date...

Hello, ad hominem and sweeping generalization...

So Will, do all those people yelling out on Tehran's rooftops against the government get lumped in with the \"ebil terrorists,\" or separately?

I guess the use of hyperbole is reserved only for you.
I was just more than a little floored at your comment that you were actually going to run off all nerd like and start coloring circles to include Hamas and Hezbollah, etc. to your pretty chart so I started to point out that it really isn't a simple numbers game when the spirit of satire crept up and slipped away with me.

Example, what color and where in the chart do you put the Iranians who niether take part in terrorism directly nor do they ever raise even a cross look toward their religion, it's clerics and their traditions which perpetuate the export of terrorism from their country?!? Have you really got a crayon that color and size?

Topgun....just follow along this covers your question nicely....I'm going green so you don't get your own reply, you'll have to share.

Will Robinson wrote:I'm going green so you don't get your own reply, you'll have to share.

Will Robinson wrote:Example, what color and where in the chart do you put the Iranians who niether take part in terrorism directly nor do they ever raise even a cross look toward their religion, it's clerics and their traditions which perpetuate the export of terrorism from their country?!? Have you really got a crayon that color and size?

Yeah, it's called "burnt sienna"

DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!!!!!!!!!

[RIP]Hydra wrote:DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!!!!!!!!!

That is what they say. Did anyone by chance notice in that url that there is a known Islamist Terrorist orginastion here in the U.S. with 35 compounds and over 3 thousand known members AND have committed over 50 acts of known terrorism in the last 30 years including the first bombing at the Twin Towers. And guess what....there still here and still active.

Sleep Well

UNITED STATES

NAME: Jamaat ul-Fuqra

DATE STARTED/FIRST ACTIVE: Early 1980s.

GOALS: Purify Islam through violence.

MAIN ANTI-U.S. ACTIVITIES TO DATE: Assassinations and fire-bombings across the United States in the 1980s. Members in the United States have been convicted of criminal violations, including murder and fraud.

STRENGTH: Unknown.

OPERATIONAL LOCATIONS: North America, Pakistan.

AFFILIATIONS: None.

COMMENTS: Members have purchased isolated rural compounds in North America to live communally, practice their faith, and insulate themselves from Western culture.

Yep.

If you google that orginsation you can find a fact sheet made in 2/09 showing them as active and in military style training here in the States. And then look at the Iman for them. He is the same one that the reporter Dan Pearl was going to see when he wascaptured and beheaded. Freaky Stuff

As a side note:

Thanks to Null for having me do some research, I never would have relized any of this was going on.

Ordered another case. Prices are dropping surprisingly.

Funny read by the Onion

You know, I keep thinking back to what THEIR book says when dealing with infidels,
it is perfectly alright to lie, cheat, act like friends, whatever it takes till they are in a position to cut your throat.
Has everyone forgotten that sad little fact?

null0010 wrote:Funny read by the Onion

Sorry I don't read liberal BS


But I am still waiting for your response to the numbers I provided, or do you only roll your eye's.

Cuda68 wrote:Sorry I don't read liberal BS

For once I can agree with you. It's BS. That's the point of The Onion.

VonVulcan wrote:You know, I ... Has everyone forgotten that sad little fact?

I'm wondering what little tid-bits are within the Bible or Torah say similar things, but are considered "depreciated", or are glazed over in modern conversation. I honestly don't have the time to research such a question myself, but the idea that ONLY the Koran, and no other holy books say to distrust "non-believers" is absurd.

On the other side, if we assume that the Bible is somehow devoid of such messages, what of the people who swear up and down that the Bible says that they can do rather unpleasant things to those that didn't exactly ascribe to their belief system? One may label them as "fringe", which sounds about right to me, but why is it only the Bible, then, the only one that might possibly be misinterpreted for the wrong reasons by a minority who don't represent the opinions of the vast majority of those following?

Which is why I don't care for organized religion. They all have blood on there hands for similar reasons. I prefer to make my opinions of them by there actions. My thoughts might be harsh, but there based on fact and circumstances I have lived through and seen.

What I find curious is…I have lived thru and seen probably the very same things you are referring to, and I came out the other end hating an entirely different group of people.

Isn’t that odd?

Interesting for sure

Cuda68 wrote:But I am still waiting for your response to the numbers I provided, or do you only roll your eye's.

There's a lot of numbers. If you think you can do it faster, by all means.

Not by any means

Just poken ya to make sure I was not forgotten.

d3jake wrote:I'm wondering what little tid-bits are within the Bible or Torah say similar things

The only thing I can think of is the spies sent to Canaan as a precursor to invasion, and Rahab lying about their whereabouts to protect them. This was in the context of open warfare, though.

what of the people who swear up and down that the Bible says that they can do rather unpleasant things to those that didn't exactly ascribe to their belief system?

They are rather incorrect.

I don't know enough of the Koran to be able to say if the same assessment applies to those VV was referring to.

Can’t think of anything in the New Testiment, but the Old Testiment ascribes a great deal of things to be done to unbelievers/misbehavers…mostly these things being done by God himself, and therein lies the problem. People then take these things (punishment) upon themselves in the name of god, just as some of the followers of Islam do.

Lothar wrote:This was in the context of open warfare, though.

I'm not sure if this helps your argument though--that you can lie to the non-believers when planning to invade and massacre them.

Seems now that one of the backers of the Mosque gave money to group later linked to Hamas. It may have been unfortunate and most likely a mistake but it happen.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/ ... D9I0NU9O0/

Jeff250 wrote:

Lothar wrote:This was in the context of open warfare, though.

I'm not sure if this helps your argument

Wasn't so much "making an argument" as "answering a question".

d3jake wrote:.... but why is it only the Bible, then, the only one that might possibly be misinterpreted for the wrong reasons by a minority who don't represent the opinions of the vast majority of those following?

You got the right idea wondering about the differences but asked the wrong question. You would represent reality more accurately if you asked Why is it, out of all the religions, the clerics of Islam still teach lessons of racism and xenophobia and relative to leaders of other religions have progressed so little?

I can tell you I think it is two fold. The followers of Islam mix politics and religion and because the religion had a much more violent and racist foundation than other religions so it has produced whole cultures of the dangerous-to-nonbelievers type that make the fringe from other religions look like wimps. You might get stared at real mean like by a hard core Baptist if you tell a Jesus joke, you might get beheaded if you tell a Muhammad joke.

But of course I'm supposed to ignore that and repeat the fallacy that 'Hey, all religions are full of bad stuff why single Islam out?'
When of course the answer is because the difference is exploding right in front of us on a regular basis!

Lothar wrote:
I don't know enough of the Koran to be able to say if the same assessment applies to those VV was referring to.

Check this Lothar.




Particularly from the three minute mark on.