Scorpio wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

I know. We should rather kick all of the refugees out. It's impossible to know who of those have been radicalized or will be in the future. Too bad for everyone else.

It's not refugees committing these attacks. It's people who were born and raised in the West. Look at the most recent big attacks in the west:
-Paris: All the terrorists were EU citizens, no refugees;
-Brussels: All terrorists were born and raised in Belgium;
-Orlando: Born and raised in the US;
-Nice: Identity not yet released (though terrorist has been identified), but believed to be a 31 year-old man with dual Tunisian - French citizenship. In other words, not a refugee.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34832512

"The Paris prosecutor's office said fingerprints from the dead attacker matched those of a person who came to Europe with migrants via the Greek island of Leros. The man may have been posing as a Syrian refugee."

So even if most of them were born and raised in Europe, it would appear that at least one of them used Europe's liberal immigration laws for his advantage.

Besides, let's not forget that none of those people would have been in the EU in the first place if Europe had followed stricter immigration and refugee policy that brought their parents or grandparents to Europe. More poorly integrated Muslims Europe has more terrorism it will see, and currently their numbers are rising faster than ever. The damage that has been already done when so many Muslims were let in and then allowed not to adopt western way of life can't be easily reversed, but every day even more damage is being done. Among refugees that have arrived this and last year are many future terrorists, or their parents.

AirPacific747 wrote:

I see your point but again those refugees will have children growing up here who will become radicalized when they feel that they don't know where they belong.

Thank god we have people like you that will constantly remind them that they don´t belong here. Bit of a selffullfilling prophecy there...

The refugees should be sent back to Syria when peace prevails and there should be no attempt to integrate them.

90+% of refugees go back home one peace prevails from my very welcoming country.

Our societies are already having very hard times coping with the huge waves of refugees/immigrants.

Only in your head.

Don't you think that those money spent trying to integrate a relatively 'handful' amount of immigrants couldn't be better spent in the countries where they come from where they could save many more lives instead of the privileged few.

It would, but then you have this enormously large crowd of people that is against foreign aid programs. Maybe you are not one of them, but the most xenophobics don´t want foreigners to get anything from them, neither direct or indirect help. They should just should up and don´t look too poor when we are on vacation. They may very well just go and kill those people themselves, because that is what they want.

best regards
Thomas

"90+% of refugees go back home one peace prevails from my very welcoming country. "

Source for this info? How big percentage of Iraqi refugees who arrived to Germany after the 2003 invasion have returned to the country? What about Somali refugees?

Realistically speaking Syria, Libya and such may remain unsafe for several decades, I'll eat my hat if people who have enjoyed German welfare for 20 years, or perhaps even found an employment in some cases, will willingly return back after such a long time. Now that the situation in some parts of Somalia has become somewhat stable many of Somali refugees who have settled to Finland go take holidays there, but very few are actually returning. And we do still grant asylum to people coming from some parts of Somalia, about 26 years since the war started.

pvjin wrote:

"90+% of refugees go back home one peace prevails from my very welcoming country. "

Source for this info?

Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. I posted that before, in a discussion you took part in.
Speaking of sources, you still owe me that study that you claimed to have in the other threat......

Realistically speaking Syria, Libya and such may remain unsafe for several decades,

Possible

I'll eat my hat if people who have enjoyed German welfare for 20 years, or perhaps even found an employment in some cases, will willingly return back after such a long time.

Well, enjoy eating your hat, because even those refugees from the Balkans, that enjoyed much more generous welfare than what we have today, went back home with a rate of 90+%

but very few are actually returning. And we do still grant asylum to people coming from some parts of Somalia, about 26 years since the war started.

In order to make that statement, you have to have a thoroughly made study regarding how many went back, when did they start moving back, how long did they stay in Finland, and so on...

Care to share that with the crowd?

best regards
Thomas

Scorpio wrote:

Redd wrote:

The common denominator is Islam, more refugees = more Islam in the future. The key question is how to work with/against the Muslim community to stop these things from happening.

Taking on the problem starting with religious leaders is probably a good start. The simple people that commit theses acts of terrorism don't get these ideas all on their own, usually anyways.

The common denominator is radical Islam, not just 'Islam'. And yes, the key question is indeed how to stop this from happening. Working against the Muslim community as a whole and throwing them all on one heap won't be the solution, that's simply the perfect recipe for more terrorism, not less. A dual approach will be needed. On the one hand, radicals need to be rooted out: extremist preachers have to be deported, and existing radicals need to be dealt with. Any ties with Suadi wahhabism need to be cut. On the other hand, we need to work WITH the Muslim community to prevent young muslims from becoming radicalised. There needs to be a counterforce to the radical messages being spread by internet and other preachers. There are already Muslim religious leaders in the west calling for a new, modern and western Islam, a reinterpretation of the texts and religion to make it fit into a modern, secular Western society. Those voices need to be supported by the governments, and these are the people we need to be working with. They know the communities, they see how young people are being corrupted today. They're the key to bringing about change: the ones within the community who have a positive plan for the future.

And we need to stop demonising muslims as a group, because those who are demonising them, including idiots like Trump, are actively helping the terrorists.

Do you really think our governements have the guts to deport radical islamists? Your approach already fails there.

Our societies are already having very hard times coping with the huge waves of refugees/immigrants.


Only in your head.

Tell me: How is integration going? Because here we are still teaching them how to use a toilet in the west and how to behave around women. What's the employement rate amongst these refugees? How is sending denied asylum seekers home going?

90+% of refugees go back home one peace prevails from my very welcoming country.

Joke of the day.

tommy1808 wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

I see your point but again those refugees will have children growing up here who will become radicalized when they feel that they don't know where they belong.

Thank god we have people like you that will constantly remind them that they don´t belong here. Bit of a selffullfilling prophecy there...

The refugees should be sent back to Syria when peace prevails and there should be no attempt to integrate them.

90+% of refugees go back home one peace prevails from my very welcoming country.

Our societies are already having very hard times coping with the huge waves of refugees/immigrants.

Only in your head.

Don't you think that those money spent trying to integrate a relatively 'handful' amount of immigrants couldn't be better spent in the countries where they come from where they could save many more lives instead of the privileged few.

It would, but then you have this enormously large crowd of people that is against foreign aid programs. Maybe you are not one of them, but the most xenophobics don´t want foreigners to get anything from them, neither direct or indirect help. They should just should up and don´t look too poor when we are on vacation. They may very well just go and kill those people themselves, because that is what they want.

best regards
Thomas

Lol tommy! Only ultra leftists can spin these events around to be the fault of skeptics. Why don't you just move to Iraq if you want that level of multiculturalism?

Wake up.

LSZH34 wrote:

Joke of the day.

Out of the refugees from the Balkan that swarmed Germany in the early 90´s, with the same doomsday xenophobic rhetoric as we have today, just 6% had remained in Germany by the end of 2001. That means that less than 10 years after the whole mess started, 94% of them have returned home.

If there is a joke in it, it is your ignorance of facts.

best regards
Thomas

Redd wrote:

The common denominator is Islam

The other denominators are they had shitty or no job, came from neighborhoods pretty much abandoned by local authorities and were treated like second-class citizens in their own country.

But why not pretend there's only one problem and one solution... It is so much easier.

Trump '16

Maybe commitment to non-Integration shown by some countries in Europe are actually contributing to non-Integration of foreigners.

There is no way I will defend this terrorists. But the key is preventing them from getting radicalised, and this is not achieved by putting them in Banlieues or Gjellerup Parken. By constantly promoting upper right-wing positions like Le Pen and Dansk Folkeparti are doing, Europe does not get any safer, that is for sure.

TheSonntag wrote:

Maybe commitment to non-Integration shown by some countries in Europe are actually contributing to non-Integration of foreigners.

There is no way I will defend this terrorists. But the key is preventing them from getting radicalised, and this is not achieved by putting them in Banlieues or Gjellerup Parken. By constantly promoting upper right-wing positions like Le Pen and Dansk Folkeparti are doing, Europe does not get any safer, that is for sure.

It's funny you should mention it, but we don't have the same problem with neo nazis that Germany and Sweden have. I wonder why

You see extreme violence in those two countries towards immigrants. History repeating itself. Why not just be a little sensible instead of being so naive?

tommy1808 wrote:

Out of the refugees from the Balkan that swarmed Germany in the early 90´s, with the same doomsday xenophobic rhetoric as we have today, just 6% had remained in Germany by the end of 2001. That means that less than 10 years after the whole mess started, 94% of them have returned home.

That's how it was in Germany. The numbers are somewhat in the 70-80% range in Switzerland and increased again in the early 2000s. I don't know how many refugees you took from the Balkan but it certainly was not 1 million. Plus you have to deal with countries that don't take their fellow people back and the whole situation in the middle east is much much bigger and worse than it was on the Balkan. It's not far-fetched that you will have a lot more struggle with people from the middle east than from Eastern Europe.

Bundesamt für Migration und Flüchtlinge. I posted that before, in a discussion you took part in.
Speaking of sources, you still owe me that study that you claimed to have in the other threat......

Didn't link any as I was abroad and had no access to a proper PC with keyboard.

Anyway, you can find many different studies of reliable sources from here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ ... statistics

Yes, it's wikipedia, but that doesn't make the original sources listed there any more unreliable.

All the data pretty clearly shows that blacks do commit a disproportionate amount of crime in the US. Such a huge difference simply can't be explained just by racism in the police forces. Again, if you ask me the behind it is a combination of lower average socioeconomic status of blacks in the US, and ghetto culture that has formed over the time. Of course one can argue that all this goes back to the time of slavery, and indeed has in that way its roots in racism towards blacks.

In order to make that statement, you have to have a thoroughly made study regarding how many went back, when did they start moving back, how long did they stay in Finland, and so on...

Care to share that with the crowd?

Number of people in Finland with somali as native tongue from 1991 until 2015:

http://pxnet2.stat.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/fi/St ... c8aa95c74a

Can't see anything to indicate a significant emigration back to Somalia there.

LSZH34 wrote:

Do you really think our governements have the guts to deport radical islamists? Your approach already fails there.

Wait, I'm taking heat from the guy whose solution is to deport the immigrants because MY approach is something 'our governments don't have the guts to do'?

Really?

blueflyer wrote:

Redd wrote:

The common denominator is Islam

The other denominators are they had shitty or no job, came from neighborhoods pretty much abandoned by local authorities and were treated like second-class citizens in their own country.

But why not pretend there's only one problem and one solution... It is so much easier.

Trump '16

Why do only people belonging to one religion behave this way ? I am sure there are plenty of christians, atheists etc in similar pitiful conditions and they don't react like this?

And in this case, and in the Orlando shooting massacre case, and the Bangladesh cafe massacre, all the perpetrators were educated, had jobs and were citizens of those countries.

Why do only people belonging to one religion behave this way ? I am sure there are plenty of christians, atheists etc in similar pitiful conditions and they don't react like this?

I suppose it's because in radical Muslim circles a loser can get fame for massacring people of different religion and even a promise of a prosperous afterlive, while Christianity, Atheism and such don't offer anything of that sort for losers among them. Thus probably most Christian or Atheist losers just kill themselves and/or excessive amounts of alcohol and drugs.

blrsea wrote:

I am sure there are plenty of christians, atheists etc in similar pitiful conditions and they don't react like this? .

Well, not so long ago hordes of Christians slaughtered tens of thousands other Christians over their decision to stop paying a tax to the church .... religious people are time bombs pretty independent from what exactly they believe. If you look at federal prison system inmates that becomes very clear.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

blrsea wrote:

I am sure there are plenty of christians, atheists etc in similar pitiful conditions and they don't react like this? .

Well, not so long ago hordes of Christians slaughtered tens of thousands other Christians over their decision to stop paying a tax to the church .... religious people are time bombs pretty independent from what exactly they believe. If you look at federal prison system inmates that becomes very clear.

best regards
Thomas

Was this in the last 20-30 years?50 years back? Not right to hold behavior of 100+ years back to today's norms. Can that be used to equate current violence? societal norms have changed a lot over the last 50 years itself, leave alone 100s of years. What was probably not possible 50-100 years back due to religious/social norms are reality today in many countries like say divorce, live-in relations, homosexuality etc. Can't equate crimes that occured long back to current day's.

blrsea wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

blrsea wrote:

I am sure there are plenty of christians, atheists etc in similar pitiful conditions and they don't react like this? .

Well, not so long ago hordes of Christians slaughtered tens of thousands other Christians over their decision to stop paying a tax to the church .... religious people are time bombs pretty independent from what exactly they believe. If you look at federal prison system inmates that becomes very clear.

best regards
Thomas

Was this in the last 20-30 years?50 years back? Not right to hold behavior of 100+ years back to today's norms. Can that be used to equate current violence? societal norms have changed a lot over the last 50 years itself, leave alone 100s of years. What was probably not possible 50-100 years back due to religious/social norms are reality today in many countries like say divorce, live-in relations, homosexuality etc. Can't equate crimes that occured long back to current day's.

Despite globalization and western influences the world still obviously doesn't have any form of common societal norms. The enlightenment, rise of scientific world view, the idea of democracy and so on never really become things in large parts of the world, and still aren't.

What we see in Europe is ultimately a conflict of very different ideas of what a good society would look like and what's an individuals position in that society. The conflict is between largely secularized westerners and relatively fundamentalist Muslims. Obviously there are always exceptions, like particularly liberal Muslims and particularly conservative Christians.

blrsea wrote:

Was this in the last 20-30 years?

20 years ago...

Best regards
Thomas

AirPacific747 wrote:

Does it matter if their parents had status of being refugees or immigrants? Their genetic, religious and cultural background is the same and it can't be a coincidence that its time after time again people with the same religious, cultural and genetic background committing these horrible crimes.

You know, you're right. It's genetic. Only solution is to round them up, put them on trains, and ship them off to gas chambers. But we'll do it nicely and humanely this time.

DocLightning wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

Does it matter if their parents had status of being refugees or immigrants? Their genetic, religious and cultural background is the same and it can't be a coincidence that its time after time again people with the same religious, cultural and genetic background committing these horrible crimes.

You know, you're right. It's genetic. Only solution is to round them up, put them on trains, and ship them off to gas chambers. But we'll do it nicely and humanely this time.

Bla bla bla. Typical emotional response to a rational debate. Just because German nazis did that, doesn't mean that we either have to accept an infinite amount of immigrants from the Middle East and Africa OR ship them off to concentration camps. I really thought you would have a more rational approach given you're a doc, doc!

In France most migration from "Arab" countries is from non Arab countries : Morrocco, Tunisia, Algeria. And it's family migration, so not that easy to stop.

DocLightning wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

Does it matter if their parents had status of being refugees or immigrants? Their genetic, religious and cultural background is the same and it can't be a coincidence that its time after time again people with the same religious, cultural and genetic background committing these horrible crimes.

You know, you're right. It's genetic. Only solution is to round them up, put them on trains, and ship them off to gas chambers. But we'll do it nicely and humanely this time.

This thread has turned my stomach so much. We live in dark times.

Doc, it's not one but two "reasonable" posters who have now invoked genetics--ambiguously to show either that certain races are predisposed toward violence or rape, or to show they will never be "Europeans," or both.

We are edging closer and closer to 1933 each day, thanks to a small but determined number of mass-homicidal maniacs and a population that seemingly won't learn from history.

NB: AirPacific's question about doing more to help people in their places of origin during wars and famines as a first line of action is a reasonable one. Indeed, that will have to be part of any strategy in a globalizing world. But letting in refugees at crucial crisis points should be too. Most of all, demonizing and discriminating against first, second, third or tenth generation Muslims in Europe is part of the problem driving this cycle, not part of the solution.

n229nw wrote:

DocLightning wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

Does it matter if their parents had status of being refugees or immigrants? Their genetic, religious and cultural background is the same and it can't be a coincidence that its time after time again people with the same religious, cultural and genetic background committing these horrible crimes.

You know, you're right. It's genetic. Only solution is to round them up, put them on trains, and ship them off to gas chambers. But we'll do it nicely and humanely this time.

This thread has turned my stomach so much. We live in dark times.

Doc, it's not one but two "reasonable" posters who have now invoked genetics--ambiguously to show either that certain races are predisposed toward violence or rape, or to show they will never be "Europeans," or both.

We are edging closer and closer to 1933 each day, thanks to a small but determined number of mass-homicidal maniacs and a population that seemingly won't learn from history.

NB: AirPacific's question about doing more to help people in their places of origin during wars and famines as a first line of action is a reasonable one. Indeed, that will have to be part of any strategy in a globalizing world. But letting in refugees at crucial crisis points should be too. Most of all, demonizing and discriminating against first, second, third or tenth generation Muslims in Europe is part of the problem driving this cycle, not part of the solution.

N229nw, most immigrants will not cause problems but it can't be a coincidence that it's always the same type of people doing these things. And don't blame the French society for not doing enough for these people. You see the same type of attacks in Baghdad, Afghanistan, Syria etc where people are willing to blow themselves up and kill many innocent people in the name of religion even when they were born and raised in the country their ancestors have been living in for centuries.

I am not trying to excuse this action, it's a terrible murder, but what we are discovering bit by bit, makes me wonder if it's really a terrorist attack, or an action of a loser.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... mailonline
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07 ... ra-was-cr/

why don't we see Indonesian Islamic attacks like the ones we see done by Muslims from the Middle East? I just wonder what the difference is then.

AirPacific747 wrote:

why don't we see Indonesian Islamic attacks like the ones we see done by Muslims from the Middle East? I just wonder what the difference is then.

When you ask this question an answer comes to mind, the only thing those people have in common is religion, still some are very peaceful others are not. is the problem lies in the religion itself or the way some people manipulate that religion for political gain or power sharing?
Is it the education or lack of it??
Is it the influence of one sect in the religion?
Is it the lessons people get at some Mosques and Madrassa with no control on the message or explanation?

Honestly i don't have an answer.

SOBHI51 wrote:

I am not trying to excuse this action, it's a terrible murder, but what we are discovering bit by bit, makes me wonder if it's really a terrorist attack, or an action of a loser.

It is not much different from the profiles of many of the Paris attackers. Most of them could hardly be described as staunch adherents, at least until the end. And the ISIS members themselves are more of a gang of thugs and criminals than as devout as you'd typically see in al qaeda. Doesn't mean the Islamic ties aren't there too.

SOBHI51 wrote:

When you ask this question an answer comes to mind, the only thing those people have in common is religion, still some are very peaceful others are not. is the problem lies in the religion itself or the way some people manipulate that religion for political gain or power sharing?
Is it the education or lack of it??
Is it the influence of one sect in the religion?
Is it the lessons people get at some Mosques and Madrassa with no control on the message or explanation?

The religion itself definitely has a problem, with no authority on what is or isn't 'Unislamic' it's hard to justify terrorists' actions as such. The Quran has some OK bits, but it's got some deeply unpleasant bits, which manifests itself most extremely with ISIS, but the governments of several Islamic countries are still terrible. Hating homosexuals and being intolerant of 'other minorities' is a common feature of several Islamic countries, which tells me that the problem is at least partly in the ideology. There needs to be a reformation and enlightenment.

SOBHI51 wrote:

I am not trying to excuse this action, it's a terrible murder, but

Using 'but' in a sentence like that usually means you're trying to excuse in one way or another. The guy well have been a loser, in fact it's pretty certain he was. But his unpleasant views come from somewhere, it's not just the 'hostility' of the host country, because other religions and ideologies aren't as reviled. And I'm afraid to say that many of the unpleasant views come from the Quran, which if we are to believe os the word of Allah means that everything in the book is right. You can justify pretty much anything that it says, and since it's there it can't be wrong. Which is why there needs to be a clearer definition of what separates supposed 'not real' Muslims with 'real' Muslims. With any luck the Unislamic parts will include changing the laws of the stricter Muslim countries. I hold no hope.

Using 'but' in a sentence like that usually means you're trying to excuse in one way or another. The guy well have been a loser, in fact it's pretty certain he was. But his unpleasant views come from somewhere, it's not just the 'hostility' of the host country, because other religions and ideologies aren't as reviled. And I'm afraid to say that many of the unpleasant views come from the Quran, which if we are to believe os the word of Allah means that everything in the book is right. You can justify pretty much anything that it says, and since it's there it can't be wrong. Which is why there needs to be a clearer definition of what separates supposed 'not real' Muslims with 'real' Muslims. With any luck the Unislamic parts will include changing the laws of the stricter Muslim countries. I hold no hope.[/quote]

I understand about the "but" word, but i am sure you understood what i meant, as always, i will never accept people using Islam to commit acts of terrorism.

I am lucky, my religious education i received in both Syria and Egypt called for peace and understanding and i was in a Catholic school, till 1967 we did have jewish people in our classes and the majority of others were Christians, they never taught us to hate them or kill them, and that is real Islam.

n229nw wrote:

IMissPiedmont wrote:

And I just logged into my Facebook account and turned on the TV. Total silence on both fronts. Last week there was nonstop news coverage and outrage expressed on both. I guess lives don't matter to people in the US unless they are white US citizens. I am sickened by this.

Seriously? There is already non-stop coverage.

Though you are completely wrong about this being under-reported (it will be the top headline for days), you are ironically right in one sense. The reason it will be the top headline for days is precisely because most of the victims are White and "Western." When this has happened in Istanbul, there was far far less "I am Turkey" stuff and people changing their flags etc. on social media. There are all kinds of reasons for this, regarding human nature, but they are actually the things that are brought to light by recent events within America. People find it much easier to sympathize with people they see as "like them" and much harder to feel pain for people who they see as "Other." It is an instinct to fight if we want to start working our way out of this mess.

We absolutely need to find a way to reduce events such as this worldwide.

bourbon wrote:

France and the rest of Europe need to finally get off their political correctness high horse and embrace reality.

Oh please, what is your solution? Demonize everyday Muslim citizens more?

Stop freely allowing in refugees and deal with the issue of those already in the country. Inform immigrants that they MUST assimilate into the respective countries by the time their initial green card expires (not sure what the European version of a green card is)
Any talk of violence in the name of Allah is grounds of immediate deportation (if not a citizen).

If immigrants do not start assimilating there is going to be violence against them by the citizens of the countries. Maybe then the local religious leaders will tell their followers to wake up.

SOBHI51 wrote:

I understand about the "but" word, but i am sure you understood what i meant, as always, i will never accept people using Islam to commit acts of terrorism.

Using Islam to commit acts of terrorism is a daily fact of life in Islamic countries. Several have laws based on what the Quran says, and their laws are so barbaric that calling them backwards is too kind. Maybe I'm being liberal with the use of 'terrorism' but executing people for homosexual acts looks like terrorism to me.

SOBHI51 wrote:

I am lucky, my religious education i received in both Syria and Egypt called for peace and understanding and i was in a Catholic school, till 1967 we did have jewish people in our classes and the majority of others were Christians, they never taught us to hate them or kill them, and that is real Islam.

What makes your education 'real' and ISIS' version of Islam 'wrong'? If it's in the Quran, surely it can't be wrong? Which is why we need an authority on what is right or wrong.

Never taught to hate or kill them? Not just ISIS that didn't get the memo.

What makes your education 'real' and ISIS' version of Islam 'wrong'? If it's in the Quran, surely it can't be wrong? Which is why we need an authority on what is right or wrong.

Never taught to hate or kill them? Not just ISIS that didn't get the memo.[/quote]

God gifted us with something called brains, we must use it.
I believe with the Azhar explanation of the Quran
It's not the message which is wrong but how it's explained and how it is understood.
You didn't get the memo, we were never taught that other religions are our enemies, period

SOBHI51 wrote:

I am not trying to excuse this action, it's a terrible murder, but what we are discovering bit by bit, makes me wonder if it's really a terrorist attack, or an action of a loser.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... mailonline
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07 ... ra-was-cr/

It wouldn't really make sense that only successful people with no criminal record could be terrorists, would it? This guy probably was a loser with a lot of issues, but I highly doubt he would have committed the massacre if he hadn't been influenced by the radical ideology.

SOBHI51 wrote:

.

1.God gifted us with something called brains, we must use it.
2. I believe with the Azhar explanation of the Quran
3. It's not the message which is wrong but how it's explained and how it is understood.
4. You didn't get the memo, we were never taught that other religions are our enemies, period

1. Speak for yourself, God means nothing to me. My brain was put there by other means. Why write the whole thing down if some if it is wrong?
2. Good for you. Now I ask again, what makes your education real?
3. Leaving explanations to beings as flawed and influenced by the past as humans? What could possibly go wrong?
4. Evidently this doesn't apply universally. The fact that Islam has been at war for many centuries says this isn't true, and it's not an excuse for the bigotry and oppression that are a feature of the more Islamic countries. Didn't Brunei ban Christmas because supposedly Santa hats make people's faith in Islam waiver?

blueflyer wrote:

Redd wrote:

The common denominator is Islam

The other denominators are they had shitty or no job, came from neighborhoods pretty much abandoned by local authorities and were treated like second-class citizens in their own country.

Like about 20% of the population of almost every western country. Should we provide different jobs and conditions according to religious faith?

I'm an educated person and I realize what kind of effects social and economic factors have on a population and more specifically minorities, but you don't see African Americans plowing trucks into people and shooting airports and other public spaces up with AK-47's. Why do I mention African Americans? Because that's a group that has suffered more from neglect and prejudice (and violence) than any Muslim group in the west.

Modern day terrorism is mostly Islamic, that's why I asked what I believed to be a very reasonable question. How do we deal with this? I don't think it's absurd to suggest that we go after the religious leaders spreading this terrorism scourge.

SOBHI51 wrote:

When you ask this question an answer comes to mind, the only thing those people have in common is religion, still some are very peaceful others are not. is the problem lies in the religion itself or the way some people manipulate that religion for political gain or power sharing?
Is it the education or lack of it??
Is it the influence of one sect in the religion?
Is it the lessons people get at some Mosques and Madrassa with no control on the message or explanation?

Honestly i don't have an answer.

The problem boils down to not necessarily to Islam as a whole, but to Sharia.

I think Newt Gingrich said it right last night. Sharia law, as far as it deals with anything other than your own personal relationship with God, is incompatible with modern societies which respect freedom of religion, speech etc. That should be recognized.

Sharia includes things like:
- Death to apostates
- wife-beating
- Stoning to death for adultery
- death to those who insult Islam or its prophet.
- death to gays

There are many others. Values such as these are not compatible with living in a modern society. Many muslims do not subscribe to this form of Sharia, and they of course can be welcomed anywhere. But anyone who subscribes to the type of Sharia listed above needs to be rooted out.

And the Islamic world in general desperately needs a reformation that removes this form of Sharia from the religion. If it does not, I fear that one day (this century, or 500 years from now) it will come to blows - Islam vs the rest of the world.

MrHMSH wrote:

SOBHI51 wrote:

.

1.God gifted us with something called brains, we must use it.
2. I believe with the Azhar explanation of the Quran
3. It's not the message which is wrong but how it's explained and how it is understood.
4. You didn't get the memo, we were never taught that other religions are our enemies, period

1. Speak for yourself, God means nothing to me. My brain was put there by other means. Why write the whole thing down if some if it is wrong?
2. Good for you. Now I ask again, what makes your education real?
3. Leaving explanations to beings as flawed and influenced by the past as humans? What could possibly go wrong?
4. Evidently this doesn't apply universally. The fact that Islam has been at war for many centuries says this isn't true, and it's not an excuse for the bigotry and oppression that are a feature of the more Islamic countries. Didn't Brunei ban Christmas because supposedly Santa hats make people's faith in Islam waiver?

Can you explain other means?
Because i believe this is the true Islam, and not the Wahabi sect nor the Islam teached in there schools.
Anything can and might go wrong But Islam was not the only religion with infighting IE Ireland.

The problem boils down to not necessarily to Islam as a whole, but to Sharia.

I think Newt Gingrich said it right last night. Sharia law, as far as it deals with anything other than your own personal relationship with God, is incompatible with modern societies which respect freedom of religion, speech etc. That should be recognized.

Sharia includes things like:
- Death to apostates
- wife-beating
- Stoning to death for adultery
- death to those who insult Islam or its prophet.
- death to gays

There are many others. Values such as these are not compatible with living in a modern society. Many muslims do not subscribe to this form of Sharia, and they of course can be welcomed anywhere. But anyone who subscribes to the type of Sharia listed above needs to be rooted out.

And the Islamic world in general desperately needs a reformation that removes this form of Sharia from the religion. If it does not, I fear that one day (this century, or 500 years from now) it will come to blows - Islam vs the rest of the world.[/quote]

A lot of Muslims don't believe in Sharia laws, a lot of it was written at least 200 years after the death of the Prophet.
I always try to abide by the laws of the country i leave in and when and if i have to travel to a country with a severe Sharia law, i stay indoors.

SOBHI51 wrote:

Can you explain other means?
Because i believe this is the true Islam, and not the Wahabi sect nor the Islam taught in their schools.
Anything can and might go wrong But Islam was not the only religion with infighting IE Ireland.

Do you think I'd study something in-depth that I have nothing but pure contempt for?

You're one man. What you believe isn't representative of everyone. The way religion works is that there isn't ever a 'true' way. That's true of most religions. You claimed that your education was the real version of Islam. I ask you again, what makes your way of believing right? You've got to acknowledge that many ways of interpreting Islam are disgraceful, and this is a fundamental flaw this kind of ideology.

Also 'other religions have infighting' isn't a defence. You're free to start a thread about that. This is about Islam. I'm making criticisms, you're defending them. Don't just point somewhere else and say others have a similar problem, we already know. If you're pointing elsewhere then it's hard to assume anything other than that you've not got any real defence, you can only sidestep the questions.

MrHMSH wrote:

SOBHI51 wrote:

Can you explain other means?
Because i believe this is the true Islam, and not the Wahabi sect nor the Islam taught in their schools.
Anything can and might go wrong But Islam was not the only religion with infighting IE Ireland.

Do you think I'd study something in-depth that I have nothing but pure contempt for?
Did you?
BTW still waiting to find out from you what other means you got your brains from.

You're one man. What you believe isn't representative of everyone. The way religion works is that there isn't ever a 'true' way. That's true of most religions. You claimed that your education was the real version of Islam. I ask you again, what makes your way of believing right? You've got to acknowledge that many ways of interpreting Islam are disgraceful, and this is a fundamental flaw this kind of ideology.
Not everyone maybe, but a majority. I believe it's right because it teach me me respect and caring.

Also 'other religions have infighting' isn't a defence. You're free to start a thread about that. This is about Islam. I'm making criticisms, you're defending them. Don't just point somewhere else and say others have a similar problem, we already know. If you're pointing elsewhere then it's hard to assume anything other than that you've not got any real defence, you can only sidestep the questions.

Did you?
BTW still waiting to find out from you what other means you got your brains from.
Not everyone maybe, but a majority. I believe it's right because it teach me me respect and caring.
You said that wars in Islam goes back hundred of years, N. Ireland isn't long time ago.
BTW when you want to criticize something at least study it from all sides not just Sharia=Islam= bad

SOBHI51 wrote:

1.Did you?
2. BTW still waiting to find out from you what other means you got your brains from.
3. Not everyone maybe, but a majority. I believe it's right because it teach me me respect and caring.
4. You said that wars in Islam goes back hundred of years, N. Ireland isn't long time ago.
5. BTW when you want to criticize something at least study it from all sides not just Sharia=Islam= bad

1. Not in depth. Living in a very strict Islamic country taught me a fair amount though. And that country managed to get worse after I left!

2. Evolution. I'm not certain on the details, but just because you believe in God it doesn't mean I do, and don't assume that your beliefs apply to me. I'm not the result of God putting me here, I'm the result of my father's sperm meeting my mother's egg cell. Biology.

3. I'm afraid I need more than 'I believe' in order for me to consider your perception correct. The fact that bigoted views are widespread amongst several Islamic communities in Western countries (and possibly their own countries) tells me that respect and caring isn't a universal teaching. I've never seen a poll where homosexuals weren't viewed negatively by Muslims. Women also get a rough deal.

4. It doesn't. What's the relevance? I'm not a Christian. I don't live in Ireland or N. Ireland. Why do you need to mention it, and why do you think it's a defence for some of the unpleasant attributes of Islam?

5. Religion is a terrible thing. There are some OK points, but religion as a whole is a flawed, corrupted concept that is easily used to justify horrible atrocities. I try to see the good points, but it's hard to look past the fact that bigotry and discrimination is a common theme amongst a larger proportion of the Islamic communities than there should be. If Islam was a more pleasant religion I'd say nice things, but it's not.

Sadly with the terror event in Nice, we see once again a 'lone wolf' attack, using accessible weapon (a large truck) for their selfish desire for attention for themselves or their 'cause'. Worse is that such attacks will encourage more racism, ethnic hate, hate for Islam, discrimination in daily life including in housing, education, jobs and social services, more police, thus leading to even more attacks. It is a death spiral that needs to end but I don't know how.

Redd wrote:

I'm an educated person and I realize what kind of effects social and economic factors have on a population and more specifically minorities, but you don't see African Americans plowing trucks into people and shooting airports and other public spaces up with AK-47's. Why do I mention African Americans? Because that's a group that has suffered more from neglect and prejudice (and violence) than any Muslim group in the west. Modern day terrorism is mostly Islamic

Funny you should mention this, because the other group that has recently taken increasingly to mass-homicidal rampages of this kind is white male Americans, with the preferred weapon being precisely AR-15 type weapons (and the enabling factor being easy access).

The Quran has not suddenly changed over the last twenty years, but this kind of incident in Europe is relatively quite new, so perhaps if you are looking for an influential factor uniting recent attacks in Europe, it might be as much the power of copying American movies, video games, and real-life massacres (which always seem to bring the gunman's name into fame afterward, sadly). In the Orlando case, we can't tell where the relative apportionment of motivation and preparation lies between self-hating steroid-user and "radicalized Muslim" in the perpetrator.

And it's not only European Muslims who happen to be dragging with them more and more people when their own lives seem hopeless. Consider the Germanwings Flight 9525 copilot who took 150 people with him when he killed himself. That's almost twice as many as this messed-up person took with him in Nice. Indeed, in this most recent case, we don't know much yet about the killer's motivations. He wasn't a practicing Muslim even. As in most of the other cases with recent terrorist attacks in Europe, he was, however, a petty criminal. He was upset his marriage dissolved. And I'd bet he fetishized violent movies and games. One could argue that he decided to go out in the "American" way as much as in the "Muslim" way...

There are certainly other factors--but I think it is dangerously reductive to try to isolate one strand only, which is what the Right-wing populists are pushing for, including in this thread when they start harping on about the "cancer" of Islam.

Redd wrote:

I don't think it's absurd to suggest that we go after the religious leaders spreading this terrorism scourge.

I don't think you'd find too many people arguing with that--if it is done carefully and doesn't turn into a witch hunt against Muslim citizens and their places of worship.

bourbon wrote:

IMissPiedmont wrote:

And I just logged into my Facebook account and turned on the TV. Total silence on both fronts. Last week there was nonstop news coverage and outrage expressed on both. I guess lives don't matter to people in the US unless they are white US citizens. I am sickened by this.

Are you high and blind? It has been nonstop news coverage. Get out of here with your nonsense "only whites lives seem to matter" rhetoric.There are at least 80 people that have just been massacred with at least 2 of them being US Citizens.

France and the rest of Europe need to finally get off their political correctness high horse and embrace reality.

And another idiotic response. Did I turn on your television? Did I claim anything other than the facts from my location? I did not. There was nothing in the news locally, nothing in my Facebook feed (not that that by itself means anything), my point was that after the police killings in Dallas a week ago, there were special reports on all local TV stations and my Facebook feed was inundated with "how horrible", "tragic", and the ever present, useless "prayers".

If you are unable to understand this, perhaps you need to return to school and get a proper education.

cpd wrote:

IMissPiedmont wrote:

windy95 wrote:

What the heck are you babbling about? It is all over the news and FB, Twitter etc...

Babbling? Let's see now. NBC has something called Spartan Ultimate Tea, Challenge, PBS is covering something that I cannot figure out, ABC has something called Greatest Hits, CBS has a show called Life in Pieces. Facebook's top stories are Juna, Phil Mickelson, Chris Froom, a motorcycle crash in Kentucky, something called Mischa Barton, a baby imitating Rocky Balboa, Ploice shootings showing no racial bias, Joe Paterno's son, a racist mug in Texas, and Rufus Wainwright covering "Hallelujah". Not a single post from all the Jesus freaks that were "praying" 6 days ago.

Be careful with your choice of words unless you want to be considered a fool

You could have logged on to look at SMH: http://www.smh.com.au - it had it as breaking news. Or if right wing coverage is more your thing, http://www.news.com.au, where the feature box at the moment is about the attacks, and two other prominent sections of the front page are also devoted to it.

Meanwhile, http://www.abc.net.au/news/ has the top positions on its homepage devoted to the attack, but for balance, shows a bit on Donald Trump with a strange looking grin on his face, just to prove that we don't just focus only on one thing. There are probably a lot of other news sources you could look at across the world.

sovietjet wrote:

Or this

How does this solve the problem of a French Tunisian - if we are to go by identification found. Or what about the attacks in the USA, do we have a ground zero in the USA as well? If you apply this strategy, every city in the world will be flattened. You'll have done the work of the terrorists though.

Your kind of response is exactly what they want. You are aiding the PR campaigns of IS by responding in this manner. They are winning, and you are playing a part in it. Also, Israel will likely launch a strike back in retaliation for wiping them out, if we go by your map... The fallout is hardly going to stop at national borders.

All I wrote was that there was no local coverage, and nothing on Facebook. I could have, and did, log into other sites for valid news. I did not expect the idiotic responses I got from two members here. If they are unable to understand the fine points of a statement, they need to acccept the fact that they are unable to make a rational point and should therefor remain silent. You did not make an idiotic statement, and no, right wing coverage is not my choice.

Dreadnought wrote:

The problem boils down to not necessarily to Islam as a whole, but to Sharia.

Shariah is not a body of law to trot out when you feel like condemning someone or something. Shariah is not about stoning people or chopping off hands, even if in some countries these things might happen.

Shariah is much more than that but can be broadly divided into ibadat (that which pertains to worship) and mu'amalat (pertaining to transactions and relations between people). The latter includes behaviours that most people would find perfectly reasonable. Actions like looking after widows and orphans; giving to charity; being honest in your dealings with others; and so on. But of course people tend to overlook this aspect when they seek to condemn all Muslims.

MrHMSH wrote:

Do you think I'd study something in-depth that I have nothing but pure contempt for?

Why ever not? I have read Mein Kampf and many documents from Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. It doesn't mean that I sympathise with the views expressed but it does help in understanding the period. I have also been studying the Abrahamic religions for six decades but it hasn't inspired me to convert to any of them. It has helped me try to understand the way some people think and why they think that way.

Was it not Baruch Spinoza who wrote: "I have striven not to laugh at human actions, not to weep at them, nor to hate them, but to understand them."

SOBHI51 wrote:

AirPacific747 wrote:

why don't we see Indonesian Islamic attacks like the ones we see done by Muslims from the Middle East? I just wonder what the difference is then.

When you ask this question an answer comes to mind, the only thing those people have in common is religion, still some are very peaceful others are not. is the problem lies in the religion itself or the way some people manipulate that religion for political gain or power sharing?
Is it the education or lack of it??
Is it the influence of one sect in the religion?
Is it the lessons people get at some Mosques and Madrassa with no control on the message or explanation?

Honestly i don't have an answer.

Saudi Arabia has been at the forefront of pushing wahabbism across the world, which sticks to stricter and more literal interpretation of quran. And they have trained thousands of mullahs across the world in their ideology. And Saudi Arabia is a close ally of US and Iran is axis of evil?? With the kind of indoctrination that the Saudis and their allies do across the world, is it any wonder we see so many people getting radicalized in mosques after listening to these wahabbi mullahs?Why do they end up more agitated than being peaceful after visiting a place of worship? Isn't place of worship a place where you try to find inner peace and calmness?

SOBHI51 wrote:

The problem boils down to not necessarily to Islam as a whole, but to Sharia.

I think Newt Gingrich said it right last night. Sharia law, as far as it deals with anything other than your own personal relationship with God, is incompatible with modern societies which respect freedom of religion, speech etc. That should be recognized.

Sharia includes things like:
- Death to apostates
- wife-beating
- Stoning to death for adultery
- death to those who insult Islam or its prophet.
- death to gays

There are many others. Values such as these are not compatible with living in a modern society. Many muslims do not subscribe to this form of Sharia, and they of course can be welcomed anywhere. But anyone who subscribes to the type of Sharia listed above needs to be rooted out.

And the Islamic world in general desperately needs a reformation that removes this form of Sharia from the religion. If it does not, I fear that one day (this century, or 500 years from now) it will come to blows - Islam vs the rest of the world.

The main problem is that many muslims, even the so called moderates, refuse to believe there is anything wrong with Quran. When these type of attacks occur, the common refrain is "they are not true muslims, Islam is religion of peace. killing even one innocent is killing of humanity". After that, its business as usual. Not a single moderate calls for removal of these verses or at least putting less emphasis on it when preaching in mosques.

Will Saudi Arabia which aggressively promoted wahabbism now promote a peaceful version of Islam? No, and they have their own political and religious reasons not to do it. And all these mullahs who go over to the middle-east countries or countries like pakistan come back more radicalized, and preach it to their followers.

Instead of so-called moderates just saying usual platitudes after each islamist-inspired attacks, if they try to force their mullahs or their countries to adopt a peaceful version of Islam which calls for peaceful co-existence, world will be a better place.

blrsea wrote:

Will Saudi Arabia which aggressively promoted wahabbism now promote a peaceful version of Islam? No,

Of course not.
The problems of the Middle East and the world that have been occurring over the last 15years would have been more easily solved had the US just gone and overthrown the Saudi government. Instead it's been hundreds of thousands dead from wars, thousands dead from attacks on civilians and millions displaced, seeking refuge or experiencing discrimination. The west still sucks up to the fundamentalists when they need to, and will throw secularists under the bus when they need to (ie Assad).

If you're going to stop the growth of fundamentalist Islam, it has to be done at the source, and the biggest source is the Saudis. It's the one single act that would do most to ending this wave of violence. Unfortunately looks like the west is too captive to all that black gold to ever do it.

blrsea wrote:

The main problem is that many muslims, even the so called moderates, refuse to believe there is anything wrong with Quran. When these type of attacks occur, the common refrain is "they are not true muslims, Islam is religion of peace. killing even one innocent is killing of humanity". After that, its business as usual. Not a single moderate calls for removal of these verses or at least putting less emphasis on it when preaching in mosques.

Many christians, even the so called moderates, refuse to believe there is anything wrong with the Bible. Even when they legislate and demand consequences to other people's actions and are told about other laws in their holy book, they insist that christianity is a religion of peace. Not a single moderate calls for the removal of the violent verses from the Bible or at least putting less emphasis on it when preaching in churches.