Forum

Re: US Election 2016
 

Statistics aren't racist. Sorry to burst your bubble. :(

Re: US Election 2016
 

I knew you would say that lol. we both know they don't commit anywhere close to 6% of murders. I was exaggerating the numbers to make a point. yikes bro come on...

Re: US Election 2016
 

if muslim was a race then maybe that would make sense. any race can be muslim. sorry to burst your bubble :violin:

Re: US Election 2016
 

I know that. Most people assume it is, hence the comparisons to Trump and Hitler. The point stands. Statistics are not biased. They have no feelings or care about any group.

And Muslims DO commit a large portion of MASS shootings in comparison to their population ratio.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-mus...merica/5333619

It's funny, because this article is trying to make the case that they are NON violent. Ha! But being only 1% of the population and committing 6% of the mass murders is not proving any of their points.....

Also to consider: The shootings and murders done in the name of religion vs just a person that happens to believe in it.

Many "Christians" have committed mass murder. By "christian" all they really mean is they believe in some of what the Bible says. That doesn't make anyone a christian, and it definitely does not suggest they did it in the name of God. But when your religion justifies murder, there's an issue with it.

Anyways, let's get back on topic......

Politics 2016.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Who is going to be Hillary Clinton's running mate? Any predictions?

Re: US Election 2016
 

muslims don't commit 6 percent of mass shootings. that's my point. don't make up facts because your badly losing the argument. not a good look...

oh ok I see, so when a Christian commits a murder for Christianity it really wasn't because of Christianity. when a muslim does it for islam it was all because of islam. funny logic.

all societies justify mu rder in one way or another when needed. did not America justify murder when it invaded Iraq and Afghanistan.....

also speaking of religions that justify murder... whens last time you opened your bible. plenty of violence to be found there.... just saying....

Re: US Election 2016
 

If I'm wrong, show me the stats that say otherwise. I provided evidence from a liberal news source claiming Muslims are NOT violent, and THEY stated Muslims commit 6% of Mass Shootings.

Either provide evidence or accept that you're incorrect.

Re: US Election 2016
 

New Testament Cruelty

Oh sorry my mistake

Re: US Election 2016
 

Most people who break into houses over here are smack heads, I assume its the same there. Can safely say they wouldn't care

Re: US Election 2016
 

With love from Huffingtonpost.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Sure in theory, but what actually happens in reality is the person breaking into the house goes ahead and breaks into the house anyway, only this time armed with a gun themselves.

In a situation of

I have a gun and they have a gun
v
I don't have a gun and they don't have a gun

I know which one I am more likely to come out of not having been seriously injured. Its just common sense. The statistics do also show that UK v US burglary rates, the US does have a 1.5 time higher burglary rate when population i staking into account (this is not meant as a UK v US debate, I just happen to be able to find states for the UK easily). Countries like Germany are then even lower than the UK.

The US still has a very wild west attitude towards certain things. There is nothing wrong with that, but the thought process behind thinking that the solution to reducing gun / violent crime is too give more people guns is totally mad (at least in my opinion). Clearly this does not work and the facts do back this up. Again using the US v UK stats the US has a homicide rate 4 times that of the UK

The UK does have a higher knife crime rate though than the US (25% higher approx) but when this is compered to the US gun crime rate in fatal shootings which is 3500% higher is does not balance out. This does to an extent dispel the argument that if criminals could not get guns then they would use knives (or similar) instead.

All the above stats are based on the US definition of the crime.

The logic behind everyone's right to bare arms is the US is not based on objective facts, it based on emotions and historical tradition. If all the guns were removed from the USA overnight then violent crime and murder rate levels would be reduced. Its just common sense, but the debate is not about common sense and its just not possible to remove all the guns overnight so that point is moot.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Not to turn this into a race thing....but it has a LOT to do with the demographics of the country.

There is a VERY clear trend that certain races more than others tend to disproportionately commit violent crimes.....

Germany, up until last year, was always very....German.

Re: US Election 2016
 

ahh ok I see 6% of terrorist attacks or mass shootings in u.s. from 1980 to 2005 were done by muslims ok I stand corrected. I was talking about 2008 to 2016... and I was talking about the 372 mass shootings done in 2015 of which 2 were muslim related and only one was against civilians...

so what about jews do you think their religion is violent to? they committed 7% of terrorist attacks or mass shootings from 1980 to 2005...
and their also a relatively small population in the u.s. like the muslim population

Re: US Election 2016
 

also my point was never to argue that muslims are or aren't violent.
my point was how to prevent things like Orlando. clearly the issue isn't islam or guns more so than it is foreign policy. which is exactly why they aren't releasing the full 911 call the shooter made, to the public. because in it he states why he did what he did. which is because of American foreign policy ie bombing other peoples lands and killing innocent women and children like their nothing but dogs...

democrats will say the issue is ALL because of guns
republicans will say the issue is ALL because of "radical izlam"

clear rational thinking people who want peace will say clearly the main issue is american foreign policy...

Re: US Election 2016
 

Well, just to chime in here a little,,

The term "Radical Islamic Terrorists" only exists in my opinion because there is a faction of that religion that does indeed actively preach Violence, in Islam it is referred to as "Jihad" which by definition is: "a war or struggle against non believers" a "Jihadist" is simply a Muslin who participates in a Jihad.

The VAST Majority of Muslins struggle against Non believers using Prayers, Scripture, Conversation and MANY other NoN Violent means to make their argument, this is the extent of their participation in their Jihad.

Then there are also Radicals, these are Muslims that are a VERY small minority, but non the less they DO exist. A Radical by definition is a Muslim that adopts an EXTREME position, they see Jihad as WAR, where Non Believers who are referred to as "infidel's" MUST be KILLED.

The term Radical Islam ONLY exists because a SMALL MINORITY of Muslim leaders ACTIVELY PREACH Violence. Mark my words, the Second leaders of Catholics, Switzerland, or Women begin to preach Violence that actually gets carried out is when Society will begin to see terms like "Radical Catholic Terrorists", "Radical Swiss Terrorists" or "Radical Women Terrorists" . The term "Radical Islamic Terrorists" has simply been politicized by President Obama for whatever reason.


As for Guns, Guns are simply a Tool, they do not kill people, People Kill People. All this talk about gun control after the Orlando incident is just BULL****. By some how trying to insinuate that the likelihood of the Orlando shooting could have been somehow lessened if guns were illegal is INSULTING. Yes, the world would benefit from being gun free, but to say that the Orlando incident may not have happened is IRRESPONSIBLE at best.

The VAST majority of Terrorist attacks that kill large numbers of people in Bars, Clubs, and Restaurants around the world are accomplished using Bombs NOT Guns. Bombs that are strapped to individuals willing to die by blowing themselves up in order to achieve their goal. These bombs are mostly made with common easy to obtain materials, and for those bombs that use C4, Dynamite, Semtex, or whatever kind of explosive, those materials have ALWAYS been Illegal and VERY difficult to get. Politicians need to keep that Bull**** to themselves.

Just my 2 cents worth,,,

Re: US Election 2016
 

"Jihad" which by definition is: "a war or struggle against non believers" a "Jihadist" is simply a Muslin who participates in a Jihad.

1. if you look up the straight up Arabic definition of the j-word and the Islamic definition of the j-word, in neither meanings will it say a "struggle against nonbelievers"...


"The VAST Majority of Muslims struggle against Non believers using Prayers, Scripture, Conversation and MANY other NoN Violent means to make their argument, this is the extent of their participation in their Jihad."

2. this doesn't make any sense to me. I don't believe the average muslim spends their whole life immersing themselves in this imaginary nonviolent struggle. unless you call preaching islam sometype of j*had. i was under the impression everyone has the right to preach what they believe as long as they aren't harming others.

"Then there are also Radicals, these are Muslims that are a VERY small minority, but non the less they DO exist. A Radical by definition is a Muslim that adopts an EXTREME position, they see Jihad as WAR, where Non Believers who are referred to as "infidel's" MUST be KILLED."

3. all muslims refer to nonbelievers as infidels, it doesn't mean they want to kill them tho. infidel meaning your not a believer in islam. so if you find that word offensive just become muslim then your good :bounce: ...
even the most extremist extremist does not kill people based only on the fact that the person is a nonmuslim. other factors play a role ALWAYS. ie someones invading his land, stealing his resources, killing his people, forcing a way of life OR system on his land which is against the very core of his peoples beliefs etc etc...
this is the exact problem tho. as long as you think the other side are just evil zombies who hate us because of our western freedoms and because of all the infidels, then your missing the big picture.


"The term Radical Islam ONLY exists because a SMALL MINORITY of Muslim leaders ACTIVELY PREACH Violence. Mark my words, the Second leaders of Catholics, Switzerland, or Women begin to preach Violence that actually gets carried out is when Society will begin to see terms like "Radical Catholic Terrorists", "Radical Swiss Terrorists" or "Radical Women Terrorists" . The term "Radical Islamic Terrorists" has simply been politicized by President Obama for whatever reason."

4. please name me one sunni Islamic leader who preached or preaches literal violence who is still free today in the west??? none that I know of so that's definitely not the issue. The fact is muslims really do not have freedom of speech in the west and this is well known.

I seem to remember a radical who used Christianity to get us involved in two bloody wars overseas. I think his name was mister Jorge w bish or bush.

Re: US Election 2016
 

this argument has become quite redundant... if I could just clarify I never meant to come on here specifically to defend islam. as it doesn't need my defending and people have the right to believe what they want. my point was just to say that the issue here is clearly in my "opinion" political more so than religious or guns... :violin::coffee::violin:

Re: US Election 2016
 

1. if you look up the straight up Arabic definition of the j-word and the Islamic definition of the j-word, in neither meanings will it say a "struggle against nonbelievers"...

I Did, and I have, you clearly do not know me well enough. Those who Know me know that I COMPLETELY research EVERYTHING. Jihad has a wide meaning, from War, Struggling, Conforming to, Practicing, basically either struggling with your inner spirit or an Outer struggle with NoN believers. This has been a source of debate among Muslims LONG before you or I were born and will be LONG after we are gone.

This does not change the fact that there are radical factions that use extreme interpretations of the Quran and its interpretations that can help create an Orlando. You sound like someone who KNOWS this assuming that everyone else does not can be interpreted as insulting other members of this forums intelligence.
-----------------------------

"2 this doesn't make any sense to me. I don't believe the average muslim spends their whole life immersing themselves in this imaginary nonviolent struggle. unless you call preaching islam sometype of j*had. i was under the impression everyone has the right to preach what they believe as long as they aren't harming others."

"Struggling" against NoN Believers or Infidels simply means the day to day occurrences that that MOST modern Muslims are subjected to, particularly in Western countries, like maybe Things on TV, how western women dress and MUCH more.
The "Struggle" may even be with their own Family members, not just Infidels. Trying to explain to children or Wives why they cannot watch that particular TV Show, or dress that certain way. How many Muslim women who question why they cannot wear certain articles of clothing, or why they cannot Vote, ect, ect,. Im SURE that answering these simple concerns can be quite a Struggle, for some Muslins, they may even consider it a "War"
-----------------------------------------

3 all muslims refer to nonbelievers as infidels, it doesn't mean they want to kill them tho. infidel meaning your not a believer in islam. so if you find that word offensive just become muslim then your good, even the most extremist extremist does not kill people based only on the fact that the person is a nonmuslim. other factors play a role ALWAYS. ie someones invading his land, stealing his resources, killing his people, forcing a way of life OR system on his land which is against the very core of his peoples beliefs etc etc...
this is the exact problem tho. as long as you think the other side are just evil zombies who hate us because of our western freedoms and because of all the infidels, then your missing the big picture.

You accuse me of "Missing the Big Picture" at this point I must accuse you of either having a reading or a comprehension problem. Here is what I actually wrote:

Then there are also Radicals, these are Muslims that are a VERY small minority, but non the less they DO exist. A Radical by definition is a Muslim that adopts an EXTREME position, they see Jihad as WAR, where Non Believers who are referred to as "infidel's" MUST be KILLED.

The term Radical Islam ONLY exists because a SMALL MINORITY of Muslim leaders ACTIVELY PREACH Violence.,,,,,,

As for other Factors, such as Western Policy's in the Middle East, as you pointed out in a previous post, that is probably so, but that is a REASON for all of those HORRIFIC actions around the world and does NOT having ANYTHING to do with the legitimacy of the term "Radical Islamic Terrorists"
------------------------------------

4. please name me one sunni Islamic leader who preached or preaches literal violence who is still free today in the west??? none that I know of so that's definitely not the issue. The fact is muslims really do not have freedom of speech in the west and this is well known.

There are Tens of thousands of Islamic leaders in Mosques around the world, I can ASSURE you there are a few who do preach something along the lines of "Death to America" I know that such a message has been taught in Muslim countries, that has been shown on TV MANY times.
---------------------------------------

"I seem to remember a radical who used Christianity to get us involved in two bloody wars overseas. I think his name was mister Jorge w bish or bush"

This is simply INCORRECT, Christianity had NOTHING with George Bush going to war, Oil, Israel, 911, bad Intelligence information, American Corporations, all these reason can be made into a argument as to why Bush went into the Middle East everyone with a little bit of brains has their lis of reasons as to why Bush went into the Middle East, Christianity is on NO ONES list.
If you want an example of Radical Christianity try the Crusades, or The Spanish Inquisition

Re: US Election 2016
 

"This does not change the fact that there are radical factions that use extreme interpretations of the Quran and its interpretations that can help create an Orlando. "

1. agreed....but the shooter already stated why he did this... he didn't do it because of a verse from the quran.... he did it in his own words because "i want America to stop bombing my country and killing women and children"



"There are Tens of thousands of Islamic leaders in Mosques around the world, I can ASSURE you there are a few who do preach something along the lines of "Death to America" I know that such a message has been taught in Muslim countries, that has been shown on TV MANY times."

2. I said name one western English speaking muslim leader who is free that preaches violence... you failed.... tens of thousands around the world? not sure where you pulled that number from but I can assure you there are plenty of people around the world that hate us(americans) and their NOT all muslims...





"This is simply INCORRECT, Christianity had NOTHING with George Bush going to war, Oil, Israel, 911, bad Intelligence information, American Corporations, all these reason can be made into a argument as to why Bush went into the Middle East everyone with a little bit of brains has their lis of reasons as to why Bush went into the Middle East, Christianity is on NO ONES list.
If you want an example of Radical Christianity try the Crusades, or The Spanish Inquisition"


3. yes those were all reasons as well... but bush himself called this war a "crusade"... that's what he called it. NO DOUBT he used Christianity to rally the troops and motivate them for these wars. deny it all you want but proofs in the pudding. bush always made this about religion. funny when someone kills in the name of Christianity, you blame everything but Christianity, but when someone kills and happens to be muslim you automatically blame islam. why such double standards tho :pout:

Re: US Election 2016
 

First Off all I ever set to do was to legitimize the use of the term "Radical Islamic Terrorists", I NEVER in ANY point made it about the Religion, as a matter of FACT I repeatedly stated that it is a very SMALL portion of Muslims, you seem to more about making it about the religion.

For the record I am NEITHER Christian Nor Muslim, God to me is simply a nice collection of stories.

As for Muslin leaders, Imams are Muslim leaders, and EVERY Muslim community in this country has an Imam that is often chosen from his community. There is also no Governing body for Imams, this done in the local community, there are over 2.5 Million Muslims in the USA, OVER 1.5 Billion Worldwide, so it is easy to see how tens of thousands are Imams. I can assure you that a few are extremists.

As for Bush, yes he used the word Crusade, so what does that Mean? The word Crusade means to take part of,or in this case Lead, a cause or campaign, of a social, political, or, YES, religious issue, or in this case war. Bushs crusade in this case was CLEARLY political, Religion had NOTHING to do with it. Just as Religion had nothing to do with Orlando, HOWEVER the incidents in Orlando, France, California and ALL of the many terrorist attacks committed around the world were indeed committed by "Radical Islamic Terrorists" that is an accurate and acceptable FACT, that has been politicized by President Obama. As for WHY these terrorist acts were committed, well, that's a whole other debate.

Re: US Election 2016
 

I think we agree more than we disagree... my only point is there is no "Extremists" without the political reasoning behind it as well. add religious backing plus politicial issues like invading ones country and then you get what some would call "extremists"... that's my main point here.

as far as bush. it was religiously motivated for him. yes the war was about oil and other things but he definitely made it clear it had to do with religion.
enjoy the few youtube clips below... :clap: crusade has always been the Christians version of the word j*had... crusade has always been used by some Christians in their war against the muslims.

Re: US Election 2016
 

Bush was a con man and full of ****. He doesn't have a Christian bone in his body.