Attacks by Extreme Muslims in Western countries on the rise

[thegreekdog]

I refuse to vote in that poll because it's stupid.

[Symmetry]

Kenyan Muslims shield Christians in bus attack
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-35151967

Good. Were the people attacking the bus Muslims?

Yah. al-Shabab.

Sorry, I did know the answer before I asked the question.

I was simply pointing out Symmetry's weird semi-hypocritical stance on this issue. On the one hand, Christians are Bible-thumping pedophiles bent on destroying all other religions and killing innocent people who aren't white and/or Christian. On the other hand, Muslims are peaceful people who want nothing more than to exist in conjunction with their Christian and Jewish brothers. In my limited experience, every group has some bad people and some good people and we should strive to parse out the good and the bad so that we don't end up making broad generalizations.

LOL- troll fail.

[PLAYER57832]

In my limited experience, every group has some bad people and some good people and we should strive to parse out the good and the bad so that we don't end up making broad generalizations.

Agreed.

There are always groups bent on the destruction of those who disagree. That Islamic terrorism against the west is on the rise is a function of the fact that we now have more contact between the groups.

[mrswdk]

I refuse to vote in that poll because it's stupid.

Fascist.

[GoranZ]

New Year, Old Fear


*source

[GoranZ]

Attacks continue in EU and abroad...
Today at least 8 Germans dead in Istanbul blast

[GoranZ]

Unspoken Story of Europe's Islamization: Who's Behind the Terror Upsurge?

[waauw]

Not sure if all the statistics are true - I know some of them are - but if they are, they are terrifying.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics

some negatives:

• Turkey has more journalists in prison than any other country in the world, almost double that of China and Iran.
• 40% of Indonesian Muslims say they would use violence against those blaspheming Islam.
• 78% of British Muslims support punishing people who publish cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.
• Pew survey finds 100% of Jordanians have either "somewhat unfavorable" or "very unfavorable" views of Jews.
• 46% of UK Muslims believe "the Jewish community in Britain is in league with the Freemasons to control the media and politics."
• Homosexual relationships, acts or behavior illegal in 36 Islamic countries. 10 impose the death penalty for homosexuals.
• Two thirds of all reported incidents of anti-gay violence in Amsterdam are by Muslim youths.
• Turkey tops Europe and US for incidents of violence against women, with 4 out of 10 women beaten by their husbands.
• There are 13 countries in the world where the state can execute you for being atheist. Every single one is officially Islamic.
• 9 of the top 10 persecutors of Christians are Islamic countries. Of the top 50 countries, only 12 have a source other than Islam.
• Pakistan ranked No. 1 in searches for "child sex," "animal sex," "rape sex," "camel sex," "dog sex," "rape video."
• Only 8% of Egyptians, 11% of Malaysians, and 22% of Turks agree that Darwin’s theory is probably or most certainly true.
• Majority of world's Muslims favor changing laws in their countries to allow stoning/amputation for "crimes", and death for apostasy.

some positives or neutrals:

• Iran has the lowest mosque attendance of any Muslim country, with less than 2% of adults attending Friday services.
• Mosque attendance is dropping faster than church attendance in the Netherlands.
• Pew study finds Islam loses as many adherents via conversion as it gains. Growing numbers only due to high birth rate etc.
• 75% of new Muslim converts in the US leave Islam within a few years.
• Iranians made the highest number of visits to "immoral sites" on Ashura Day.
• In 2010 Malaysia was the world's tenth largest consumer of alcohol.

[Symmetry]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

[waauw]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

[Symmetry]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background, the provenance of a piece of information is useful in figuring out its veracity.

You're argument before was that you were sure some of it was true, and you had doubts about others, so I suppose the question is- which parts do you think are true?

[waauw]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background, the provenance of a piece of information is useful in figuring out its veracity.

You're argument before was that you were sure some of it was true, and you had doubts about others, so I suppose the question is- which parts do you think are true?

Treatment of atheists and homosexuals, and the views of muslims towards cartoons.
All three horrific details.

[Symmetry]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background, the provenance of a piece of information is useful in figuring out its veracity.

You're argument before was that you were sure some of it was true, and you had doubts about others, so I suppose the question is- which parts do you think are true?

Treatment of atheists and homosexuals, and the views of muslims towards cartoons.
All three horrific details.

And the other stuff you posted you don't really trust?

[waauw]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background, the provenance of a piece of information is useful in figuring out its veracity.

You're argument before was that you were sure some of it was true, and you had doubts about others, so I suppose the question is- which parts do you think are true?

Treatment of atheists and homosexuals, and the views of muslims towards cartoons.
All three horrific details.

And the other stuff you posted you don't really trust?

I'm uncertain. Some of them seem to be very plausible, others are astonishing enough to be met with scepticism.

[Symmetry]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background, the provenance of a piece of information is useful in figuring out its veracity.

You're argument before was that you were sure some of it was true, and you had doubts about others, so I suppose the question is- which parts do you think are true?

Treatment of atheists and homosexuals, and the views of muslims towards cartoons.
All three horrific details.

And the other stuff you posted you don't really trust?

I'm uncertain. Some of them seem to be very plausible, others are astonishing enough to be met with scepticism.

Why did you post the stuff you don't trust, if I may ask, given your previous statement that "what matters is whether the info is true"?

Given the weird source, why trust it at all? Why not post a reputable source for the things you believe to be true instead?

[waauw]

Why did you post the stuff you don't trust, if I may ask, given your previous statement that "what matters is whether the info is true"?

Given the weird source, why trust it at all? Why not post a reputable source for the things you believe to be true instead?

For the fun of it. Also if you click on the url, and follow through. The website does mention its sources.

[Dukasaur]

Also if you click on the url, and follow through. The website does mention its sources.

This is the key point. The site is thoroughly annotated and sourced.

[Symmetry]

Why did you post the stuff you don't trust, if I may ask, given your previous statement that "what matters is whether the info is true"?

Given the weird source, why trust it at all? Why not post a reputable source for the things you believe to be true instead?

For the fun of it. Also if you click on the url, and follow through. The website does mention its sources.

Ok- thanks for clearing that up. I don't really want to fund those kind of sites by giving them views, so I shall trust you when you say that it's not really trustworthy.

[waauw]

Why did you post the stuff you don't trust, if I may ask, given your previous statement that "what matters is whether the info is true"?

Given the weird source, why trust it at all? Why not post a reputable source for the things you believe to be true instead?

For the fun of it. Also if you click on the url, and follow through. The website does mention its sources.

Ok- thanks for clearing that up. I don't really want to fund those kind of sites by giving them views, so I shall trust you when you say that it's not really trustworthy.

You might have gotten the wrong idea. It's not an anti-islam website.

[Symmetry]

Why did you post the stuff you don't trust, if I may ask, given your previous statement that "what matters is whether the info is true"?

Given the weird source, why trust it at all? Why not post a reputable source for the things you believe to be true instead?

For the fun of it. Also if you click on the url, and follow through. The website does mention its sources.

Ok- thanks for clearing that up. I don't really want to fund those kind of sites by giving them views, so I shall trust you when you say that it's not really trustworthy.

You might have gotten the wrong idea. It's not an anti-islam website.

So, it's not an offshoot of Faith Freedom International?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_F ... ernational

Type of site- Anti Islamic

Perhaps I should quote wikiislam itself on the matter:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam#History

WikiIslam was created on October 27, 2005, in collaboration with various individuals from Faith Freedom International who provided the site with server space, technical help and exposure.

Yeah, I'm gonna go stick with anti-Islam.

[waauw]

I find it no more anti-islam than Richard Dawkins is to religion in general. Information, if true, is unbiased regardless of subjective origin.

[Symmetry]

I find it no more anti-islam than Richard Dawkins is to religion in general. Information, if true, is unbiased regardless of subjective origin.

It's an anti-Islam spin-off from an anti-Islam website, titled specifically targeting Islam. If that doesn't persuade you that it's anti-Islam, I don't know what what will.

I've posted my evidence as to why the site is untrustworthy, and you've posted a bunch of stuff from the site about Muslims that you yourself find untrustworthy.

Seems like a slam-dunk.

[GoranZ]

They're meant to be terrifying, an extreme right website promoting Islamaphobia would hardly be doing its job if it weren't peddling irrational fear of Muslims, would it?

Doesn't matter. What matters is whether the info is true.

I'm from an academic background

Great, so you presume that if you are with academic background your views will be different?

As a Muslim living in UK, what are your views on the following subjects?

• 40% of Indonesian Muslims say they would use violence against those blaspheming Islam.
• 78% of British Muslims support punishing people who publish cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.
• 46% of UK Muslims believe "the Jewish community in Britain is in league with the Freemasons to control the media and politics."
• 9 of the top 10 persecutors of Christians are Islamic countries. Of the top 50 countries, only 12 have a source other than Islam.
• Only 8% of Egyptians, 11% of Malaysians, and 22% of Turks agree that Darwin’s theory is probably or most certainly true.

[Symmetry]

With regards to the provenance of sources, yes. A fact needs a verifiable source, and a trustworthy one. Waauw was arguing that the source doesn't matter, as long as it's true.

After chatting with him, Waauw accepted that he didn't really trust the stuff he posted either, and it seems he was unaware of the provenance.

Academic training is brutal when it comes to referencing and judging sources. I'm generally lazier here than in RL, but the training sticks sometimes even here.

[GoranZ]

With regards to the provenance of sources, yes. A fact needs a verifiable source, and a trustworthy one. Waauw was arguing that the source doesn't matter, as long as it's true.

After chatting with him, Waauw accepted that he didn't really trust the stuff he posted either, and it seems he was unaware of the provenance.

Academic training is brutal when it comes to referencing and judging sources. I'm generally lazier here than in RL, but the training sticks sometimes even here.

Questions remain... Or do you completely agree with the answers of your fellow Muslims?

As a Muslim living in UK, what are your views on the following subjects?

• 40% of Indonesian Muslims say they would use violence against those blaspheming Islam.
• 78% of British Muslims support punishing people who publish cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.
• 46% of UK Muslims believe "the Jewish community in Britain is in league with the Freemasons to control the media and politics."
• 9 of the top 10 persecutors of Christians are Islamic countries. Of the top 50 countries, only 12 have a source other than Islam.
• Only 8% of Egyptians, 11% of Malaysians, and 22% of Turks agree that Darwin’s theory is probably or most certainly true.