I can just about guarantee you that the FBI already has plants/paid informants inside mosques. Just because we don't read about it in the news doesn't mean it's not happening.
You're right, but it can't just be informants. For example, why didn't his ex-wife dime him out?
I think the lone shooters are going to be nearly impossible to stop.
Was it his ex-wife? I thought they were still together
edit: honestly I've kind of wondered why we haven't seen more lone shooter terrorism (al-queada/ISIS, etc.) since 9/11.
I think lone-shooter terrorism will continue to grow. It appears, to me, that psychos all over the world are pledging their allegiance to ISIS. It seems (and I could be totally wrong about this) that Al-Qaeda would train terrorists and send them out on missions. ISIS surly does this too. But I think ISIS has many "members" that really have no connection to them other than pledging allegiance. Was the Orlando shooter under orders of ISIS to do what he did? Has he ever met or communicated with an ISIS official? The answer doesn't really matter. He did what he did because of the influence of ISIS; be it directly or just because he believes in the message of ISIS.
This is why I support military action against ISIS. Another "war on terror" I suppose. If the influence by the leaders of ISIS is so strong that it's trickling down to everyday psychopaths, we've got to cut the head off the snake so to speak. How do we do that? Well that's where I have no clue.
Your first and second paragraphs don't really jive for me. The fact that ISIS leadership is not instrumental in planning and coordinating attacks is evidence that military action won't have the desired effect. Unfortunately, ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now, if we bomb away the current incarnation, it will pop up somewhere else. Lone shooters will continue to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if the actual organization is decimated, and as long as there are even a handful of actual, on the ground participants, they will continue to claim credit for attacks they didn't orchestrate.
Well if the first and second paragraphs don't "jive" for you, I guess my post in general doesn't....as it's only two paragraphs.
Anyway, I completely agree with you when you say "ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now" and that there's lunatics that will pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if there is no organization. But I still feel that taking out ISIS leadership would be a start towards making progress. We have to start somewhere.
According to a research at Uppsala university more than half of the death victims right now in the world is directly connected with militant Islamists, jihadism.
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
McVeigh wasn't motivated by the bible. He was anti-government. Not a good example.
It's a good example. McVeigh was very fond of the Christian Identity movement.
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
McVeigh wasn't motivated by the bible. He was anti-government. Not a good example.
It's a good example. McVeigh was very fond of the Christian Identity movement.
he may have been fond of it but he didn't kill 168 people in ok city in the name of the christian identity movement.
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
Because there aren't 200,000 mcveighs forming a caliphate in several countries throwing gay people off the roof and beheading people from different religions. Radical Christianity doesn't remotely exist at the same levels as radical Islam. Islamic terrorism is not isolated but expected. Nobody is expecting a white guy from Mississippi to blow up a federal building. And if they do they don't say God be Praised before they do it because it isn't motivated by their interprtation of the Bible. That is why!
Again, I'm not comparing the level of threat between the two, I'm talking about how it's viewed and digested. And McVeigh was motivated by the Bible. It's interesting that you say no one's expecting a white guy to blow up a federal building, when that actually has happened!! You just reinforced my point: white domestic terrorists are put in a different category, when the actual individual motivations are pretty much the same.
question: if your mother, sister or any loved one said she was marrying a muslim and flying to Pakistan to meet the family, wouldn't you be the least bit concerned ? my friends daughter did just that and it did not go well in fact her husbands father hated the white American girl his son married then would let her leave the house or the country, if my friend didn't have friends in government she may have never come home...you don't want to ask him about muslims.
Godfather.
I would be concerned, of course, because of the treatment of women in that country. But that has zero to do with deporting American citizens who are Muslims, which is what you floated yesterday.
how else would we get a handle on the terrorism committed by "home grown muslims" ?
Godfather.
The same way we stamp out terrorism by Dylan Roof, the Colorado shooter, Timothy McVeigh and the Bundy clan. Intelligence, surveillance when supported by legal orders, and 'see something, say something'. There is NOTHING that gives us the right to take away the rights, deport or detain citizens. If we learned nothing else from the Japanese internment camps, let's learn that.
Let's also learn that Islamic ideology is a problem. Please watch this...
The point this speaker is making is that these thoughts are mainstream. This is what everyone must comprehend and this is he ideology that must be confronted. With strength we must say this is not ok. No more being tolerant of the intolerant.
And we need to be intolerant of the intolerant. You're not going to extinguish the largest religion in the world so you must marginalize extremism. That's the point.
The goal isn't to extinguish but to implement a reformation and this can't happen until we are at least willing to recognize the full depth of the problem.
Can we also implement reform for the radical christians?
We should discuss that "problem" when everyone from Muslim countries aren't trying to immigrate to historically Christian countries (European countries, US, Canada).
No one is trying immigrate the other way unless they are wannabe terrorists because shocker....historically Christian countries are a whole lot safer and provide more freedom than Muslim nations..
Tell that to the families of the thousands that are killed by guns in the good ole USA. We're a Christian nation. Christian nation that cherishes right to buy military style weapons that were used in this killing.
God and guns and hate. USA USA USA.
Can deflect about other countries and cultures but we created a mess.
Then we have racist baiting presidential republican nominee!?!?!?!?
USA USA USA.
Horrible argument. As goofy as some of GF's, but from the other side of the spectrum. Just terrible.
The USA is a mixed bag. It is not a Christian nation. Are you Christian?
The Middle East occupation is about oil and capitalism is at its roots. Period. There's a little piece of it tied to the US relations with Saudi (again oil and profit related). But to say it's Christians that have rallied to fight opponents of the bible is ridiculous.
Why do you gotta be that way?
I don't think he's all that off base. I'm sure if your broke down public support for the wars demographically, you would find considerably higher support within the evangelical Christian community. Not to mention - perception plays a huge roll here. I don't know how many middle eastern residents view the wars as Christian violence by Christian nations, but if the generalizations of Islam by people in North America are any indication, it would be a large percentage. So does it really matter if Christianity is at the core of the wars or not, if their governments and media and leaders make it so - the same way ours do?
As for Christian terror...most incidents fall under 'the terror attacks we don't care about'. people seem to have quickly forgotten Joseph Kony and the Lord's Resistance Army...haven't seen a word about Nigerian witch hunters in the media...how many people here are familiar with anti-balaka? There are Christian terrorists in other African nations, and places like India as well. we could talk about Jewish terrorists for days. For the most part, terror is founded in places of economic disadvantage and/or oppression. Who are the world's worst oppressors and who are the money men behind those oppressors? Most of us can agree on root causes; we need to mirror our condemnation.
I can just about guarantee you that the FBI already has plants/paid informants inside mosques. Just because we don't read about it in the news doesn't mean it's not happening.
You're right, but it can't just be informants. For example, why didn't his ex-wife dime him out?
I think the lone shooters are going to be nearly impossible to stop.
Was it his ex-wife? I thought they were still together
edit: honestly I've kind of wondered why we haven't seen more lone shooter terrorism (al-queada/ISIS, etc.) since 9/11.
I think lone-shooter terrorism will continue to grow. It appears, to me, that psychos all over the world are pledging their allegiance to ISIS. It seems (and I could be totally wrong about this) that Al-Qaeda would train terrorists and send them out on missions. ISIS surly does this too. But I think ISIS has many "members" that really have no connection to them other than pledging allegiance. Was the Orlando shooter under orders of ISIS to do what he did? Has he ever met or communicated with an ISIS official? The answer doesn't really matter. He did what he did because of the influence of ISIS; be it directly or just because he believes in the message of ISIS.
This is why I support military action against ISIS. Another "war on terror" I suppose. If the influence by the leaders of ISIS is so strong that it's trickling down to everyday psychopaths, we've got to cut the head off the snake so to speak. How do we do that? Well that's where I have no clue.
Your first and second paragraphs don't really jive for me. The fact that ISIS leadership is not instrumental in planning and coordinating attacks is evidence that military action won't have the desired effect. Unfortunately, ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now, if we bomb away the current incarnation, it will pop up somewhere else. Lone shooters will continue to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if the actual organization is decimated, and as long as there are even a handful of actual, on the ground participants, they will continue to claim credit for attacks they didn't orchestrate.
Well if the first and second paragraphs don't "jive" for you, I guess my post in general doesn't....as it's only two paragraphs.
Anyway, I completely agree with you when you say "ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now" and that there's lunatics that will pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if there is no organization. But I still feel that taking out ISIS leadership would be a start towards making progress. We have to start somewhere.
I didn't finish my thoughts in that post. I didn't mean that we shouldn't intervene militarily, that is absolutely a necessity at this point. What I don't want is for it to turn into a full on war, which will only continue the status quo for generations. We need to use local governments to police themselves and open up inroads of economic freedom into the region to break the hold of extremism. It is a long process, but one far less costly than decades long wars that accomplish nothing. We have to live with the fact that we can't save the world from itself, and we have to accept that we only cause more misery when we try to do that. Saddam Hussein was a monster, but Iraq was a much better place in which to exist than it became during and after our attempts to make it what we consider to be better.
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
Because there aren't 200,000 mcveighs forming a caliphate in several countries throwing gay people off the roof and beheading people from different religions. Radical Christianity doesn't remotely exist at the same levels as radical Islam. Islamic terrorism is not isolated but expected. Nobody is expecting a white guy from Mississippi to blow up a federal building. And if they do they don't say God be Praised before they do it because it isn't motivated by their interprtation of the Bible. That is why!
Again, I'm not comparing the level of threat between the two, I'm talking about how it's viewed and digested. And McVeigh was motivated by the Bible. It's interesting that you say no one's expecting a white guy to blow up a federal building, when that actually has happened!! You just reinforced my point: white domestic terrorists are put in a different category, when the actual individual motivations are pretty much the same.
The OKC bombing was 21 years ago. My point is that people don't get concerned about radical Christians or talk about it because it doesn't happen often, so it really isn't a problem.
I can just about guarantee you that the FBI already has plants/paid informants inside mosques. Just because we don't read about it in the news doesn't mean it's not happening.
You're right, but it can't just be informants. For example, why didn't his ex-wife dime him out?
I think the lone shooters are going to be nearly impossible to stop.
Was it his ex-wife? I thought they were still together
edit: honestly I've kind of wondered why we haven't seen more lone shooter terrorism (al-queada/ISIS, etc.) since 9/11.
I think lone-shooter terrorism will continue to grow. It appears, to me, that psychos all over the world are pledging their allegiance to ISIS. It seems (and I could be totally wrong about this) that Al-Qaeda would train terrorists and send them out on missions. ISIS surly does this too. But I think ISIS has many "members" that really have no connection to them other than pledging allegiance. Was the Orlando shooter under orders of ISIS to do what he did? Has he ever met or communicated with an ISIS official? The answer doesn't really matter. He did what he did because of the influence of ISIS; be it directly or just because he believes in the message of ISIS.
This is why I support military action against ISIS. Another "war on terror" I suppose. If the influence by the leaders of ISIS is so strong that it's trickling down to everyday psychopaths, we've got to cut the head off the snake so to speak. How do we do that? Well that's where I have no clue.
Your first and second paragraphs don't really jive for me. The fact that ISIS leadership is not instrumental in planning and coordinating attacks is evidence that military action won't have the desired effect. Unfortunately, ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now, if we bomb away the current incarnation, it will pop up somewhere else. Lone shooters will continue to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if the actual organization is decimated, and as long as there are even a handful of actual, on the ground participants, they will continue to claim credit for attacks they didn't orchestrate.
GENEVA — Islamic State forces have committed genocide and other war crimes in a continuing effort to exterminate the Yazidi religious minority in Syria and Iraq, United Nations investigators said on Thursday, urging stronger international action to halt the killing and to prosecute the terrorist group.
The investigators detailed mass killings of Yazidi men and boys who refused to convert to Islam, saying they were shot in the head or their throats were slit, often in front of their families, littering roadsides with corpses. Dozens of mass graves have been uncovered in areas recaptured from Islamic State and are being investigated.
The investigators have produced 11 reports documenting wide-ranging crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by many parties to the five-year-old civil war in Syria, but in a report released on Thursday, they invoked the crime of genocide. They based their findings on actions taken by the Islamic State since August 2014 against 400,000 members of the Yazidi community, followers of a centuries-old religion drawing on many faiths.
Praise Allah, that this is a religion of peace! Things would be pretty messed up otherwise.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
question: if your mother, sister or any loved one said she was marrying a muslim and flying to Pakistan to meet the family, wouldn't you be the least bit concerned ? my friends daughter did just that and it did not go well in fact her husbands father hated the white American girl his son married then would let her leave the house or the country, if my friend didn't have friends in government she may have never come home...you don't want to ask him about muslims.
Godfather.
I would be concerned, of course, because of the treatment of women in that country. But that has zero to do with deporting American citizens who are Muslims, which is what you floated yesterday.
how else would we get a handle on the terrorism committed by "home grown muslims" ?
Godfather.
The same way we stamp out terrorism by Dylan Roof, the Colorado shooter, Timothy McVeigh and the Bundy clan. Intelligence, surveillance when supported by legal orders, and 'see something, say something'. There is NOTHING that gives us the right to take away the rights, deport or detain citizens. If we learned nothing else from the Japanese internment camps, let's learn that.
Let's also learn that Islamic ideology is a problem. Please watch this...
The point this speaker is making is that these thoughts are mainstream. This is what everyone must comprehend and this is he ideology that must be confronted. With strength we must say this is not ok. No more being tolerant of the intolerant.
With strength MUSLIMS must say this is not okay. Anyone else saying it is pointless. It has long been my argument that Muslims in general don't stand up against Islamic terrorism and just fanaticism in general anywhere near enough.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I can just about guarantee you that the FBI already has plants/paid informants inside mosques. Just because we don't read about it in the news doesn't mean it's not happening.
You're right, but it can't just be informants. For example, why didn't his ex-wife dime him out?
I think the lone shooters are going to be nearly impossible to stop.
Was it his ex-wife? I thought they were still together
edit: honestly I've kind of wondered why we haven't seen more lone shooter terrorism (al-queada/ISIS, etc.) since 9/11.
I think lone-shooter terrorism will continue to grow. It appears, to me, that psychos all over the world are pledging their allegiance to ISIS. It seems (and I could be totally wrong about this) that Al-Qaeda would train terrorists and send them out on missions. ISIS surly does this too. But I think ISIS has many "members" that really have no connection to them other than pledging allegiance. Was the Orlando shooter under orders of ISIS to do what he did? Has he ever met or communicated with an ISIS official? The answer doesn't really matter. He did what he did because of the influence of ISIS; be it directly or just because he believes in the message of ISIS.
This is why I support military action against ISIS. Another "war on terror" I suppose. If the influence by the leaders of ISIS is so strong that it's trickling down to everyday psychopaths, we've got to cut the head off the snake so to speak. How do we do that? Well that's where I have no clue.
Your first and second paragraphs don't really jive for me. The fact that ISIS leadership is not instrumental in planning and coordinating attacks is evidence that military action won't have the desired effect. Unfortunately, ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now, if we bomb away the current incarnation, it will pop up somewhere else. Lone shooters will continue to pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if the actual organization is decimated, and as long as there are even a handful of actual, on the ground participants, they will continue to claim credit for attacks they didn't orchestrate.
GENEVA — Islamic State forces have committed genocide and other war crimes in a continuing effort to exterminate the Yazidi religious minority in Syria and Iraq, United Nations investigators said on Thursday, urging stronger international action to halt the killing and to prosecute the terrorist group.
The investigators detailed mass killings of Yazidi men and boys who refused to convert to Islam, saying they were shot in the head or their throats were slit, often in front of their families, littering roadsides with corpses. Dozens of mass graves have been uncovered in areas recaptured from Islamic State and are being investigated.
The investigators have produced 11 reports documenting wide-ranging crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by many parties to the five-year-old civil war in Syria, but in a report released on Thursday, they invoked the crime of genocide. They based their findings on actions taken by the Islamic State since August 2014 against 400,000 members of the Yazidi community, followers of a centuries-old religion drawing on many faiths.
Praise Allah, that this is a religion of peace! Things would be pretty messed up otherwise.
will they act any different in America ?......your damn straight, most Americans own guns.
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
McVeigh wasn't motivated by the bible. He was anti-government. Not a good example.
Agree. The Radical Muslim terrorist kill in the name of their god- Fort Hood, 9/11, Boston, Orlando, San Bernardino, the axe guy in NYC and probably many more all shouted praise to Allah while killing. I cant recall a single incident in recent history where a mass shooting/killing was done in the name of the Christian god-yes maybe some have been Christians, but they didn't claim to do it for their god or religion.
Christian extremists how a better record for drinking the Kool-Aide and killing themselves than killing others for their cause-which isn't much to be proud of either.
IRAQ!!!!!!
Why many Christians supported the war. Christians have killed 100 times the muslims as Muslims have killed Christians. But let's not let facts get in the way of realities.
Iraq is on the other side of the globe. Not that it doesn't count, but the original question was in response as to why we associate terrorism with Islam. That is because nearly all terrorist acts in the US are not religious, or are affiliated with Islam. And I wont deny Christians have killed, but 100 times more? I don't think that is accurate, ISIS is killing Christians by the thousands right now, I don't think Christians are killing Muslims in numbers close to a million. I'm not even sure they are matching what ISIS has done in the last year?
I was asking my friend, who's a Bosnian Muslim, about the hijab the other day and I was saying to her how we find such aspects hard to understand. I think it's important to remember that we cannot judge all Muslims by the actions of a relatively tiny percentage, no matter how terrible the deeds. We talked a bit about the general perception of Islam and these were just some of her thoughts.
'Most muslims are decent, warm, peaceful people.. A few bad eggs...and the whole religion is typecast. We don't consider the extremists to be muslim for their actions are not justifiable. Sadly the media is to blame a lot i think.'
It's the same thing with Christian extremists, but the difference with them is that the general public accepts the notion that they aren't representing Christianity because most of us in the U.S. have a lot of familiarity with the religion. When a Christian extremist kills someone, we attribute their motivations to something else and find a different label for them.
This has come up before.
The Christian extremists are cupcakes compared to Islamic extremists. It's not even remotely close... and I am as critical of Christianity as anyone on these boards (see recent posts in the last pages of this thread).
The Crusades don't count- too many centuries ago. The occasional abortion clinic bombing is legitimate- but so infrequent that the event is hardly alarming. And capitalist ventures such as the US one in the Middle East are not in the name of religion- as much as some want to categorize such as so given their agenda they are trying to promote (and that you might have been alluding to with your last sentence).
So... exactly what Christian crimes compare to the Islamic terrorist events we continually hear about ( including the ones that- as PJSoul would suggest- we don't care about)?
Whenever I make this point, people always respond with saying that Muslim terrorists are way more of a threat than Christian terrorists. My point isn't to compare the level of threat between the two, but to look at how we talk about the two groups, how the media covers it, and how we then subsequently respond to the two groups. McVeigh killed 168, but how is this Christian terrorist talked about?
McVeigh wasn't motivated by the bible. He was anti-government. Not a good example.
It's a good example. McVeigh was very fond of the Christian Identity movement.
Sorry, but as strong as you typically are on these pages... you're not in this instance. Was he fond of Metallica? Maybe heavy metal music inspired him?
He was a conspiracist that was attacking the government- his own.
And is a case, as someone else noted... 21 years ago, the only one you can present to further your argument that Christians are just as violent as Muslims (not that it is legitimate in the first place)?
Wasn't it something about his weirdo father being fired from the postal service or something along those lines (or was it McVeigh himself?), and then it devolved from there??
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Wasn't it something about his weirdo father being fired from the postal service or something along those lines (or was it McVeigh himself?), and then it devolved from there??
Wasn't it something about his weirdo father being fired from the postal service or something along those lines (or was it McVeigh himself?), and then it devolved from there??
I think he was X-Military ?
Godfather.
He was just one of those anti-gov't nuts. Just like the Bundy's and the other douches that are rotting in jail because they thought the 'people' would flock to them when they took the refuge in Oregon. Obviously McVeigh was much worse, but it's from the same mindset.
Wasn't it something about his weirdo father being fired from the postal service or something along those lines (or was it McVeigh himself?), and then it devolved from there??
I think he was X-Military ?
Godfather.
He was just one of those anti-gov't nuts. Just like the Bundy's and the other douches that are rotting in jail because they thought the 'people' would flock to them when they took the refuge in Oregon. Obviously McVeigh was much worse, but it's from the same mindset.
They are going to pin this on mateens wife. An insider on the Orlando police force told CNN that "...the signs were there.....and had his wife simply made a phone call, this could have been avoided." Isn't that exactly what the gun shop employees did 2 weeks prior?
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
They are going to pin this on mateens wife. An insider on the Orlando police force told CNN that "...the signs were there.....and had his wife simply made a phone call, this could have been avoided." Isn't that exactly what the gun shop employees did 2 weeks prior?
Well yeah but the gun shop employees only did it because they're racist bastards who were stereotyping the poor guy! Taking their warning seriously might have hurt Mateen's feelings!
They are going to pin this on mateens wife. An insider on the Orlando police force told CNN that "...the signs were there.....and had his wife simply made a phone call, this could have been avoided." Isn't that exactly what the gun shop employees did 2 weeks prior?
Well yeah but the gun shop employees only did it because they're racist bastards who were stereotyping the poor guy! Taking their warning seriously might have hurt Mateen's feelings!
haha and those racist profiling bastards were right ! knowing who his father is and the politics he supports the cops should have had an eye on him when the gun shop called in.
Comments
Godfather.
Anyway, I completely agree with you when you say "ISIL, ISIS, Daesh, whatever you call it is a thing bigger than itself now" and that there's lunatics that will pledge their allegiance to the Islamic State even if there is no organization. But I still feel that taking out ISIS leadership would be a start towards making progress. We have to start somewhere.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Godfather.
As for Christian terror...most incidents fall under 'the terror attacks we don't care about'. people seem to have quickly forgotten Joseph Kony and the Lord's Resistance Army...haven't seen a word about Nigerian witch hunters in the media...how many people here are familiar with anti-balaka? There are Christian terrorists in other African nations, and places like India as well. we could talk about Jewish terrorists for days.
For the most part, terror is founded in places of economic disadvantage and/or oppression. Who are the world's worst oppressors and who are the money men behind those oppressors? Most of us can agree on root causes; we need to mirror our condemnation.
We need to use local governments to police themselves and open up inroads of economic freedom into the region to break the hold of extremism. It is a long process, but one far less costly than decades long wars that accomplish nothing.
We have to live with the fact that we can't save the world from itself, and we have to accept that we only cause more misery when we try to do that. Saddam Hussein was a monster, but Iraq was a much better place in which to exist than it became during and after our attempts to make it what we consider to be better.
Godfather.
Godfather.
And I wont deny Christians have killed, but 100 times more? I don't think that is accurate, ISIS is killing Christians by the thousands right now, I don't think Christians are killing Muslims in numbers close to a million. I'm not even sure they are matching what ISIS has done in the last year?
He was a conspiracist that was attacking the government- his own.
And is a case, as someone else noted... 21 years ago, the only one you can present to further your argument that Christians are just as violent as Muslims (not that it is legitimate in the first place)?
http://www.businessinsider.com/20-years-after-the-oklahoma-city-bombing-timothy-mcveigh-remains-the-only-terrorist-executed-by-us-2015-4
Godfather.
Godfather.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
we will find a way, we will find our place
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
we will find a way, we will find our place
knowing who his father is and the politics he supports the cops should have had an eye on him when the gun shop called in.
Godfather.