Europe submits voluntarily

[DrZoidberg]

Nobody is disputing that. The disagreement is about what the causes are. Reading Jihadwatch isn't going to help you figure it out.

You're kidding right!!!! The fucking causes are ISLAM!!!!

I think you've proved my point.

There's roughly a billion Muslims in the world. If Islam caused terrorism in the west how do you explain all the Muslim "terrorists" being lazy and not committing acts of terror? Are they being bad Muslims? How does Jihadwatch explain all the peaceful Muslims?

Even if Islam is part of the explanation, it's hardly the whole explanation. Isn't it more likely that it's the other reasons for the "Islamic" terror attacks that lead to the attacks? What does Jihadwatch say about that?

At no point did Osama Bin Laden say that he committed the acts of terror because of Islam. And he gave his motivations in detail. But not according to Jihadwatch.

 

[Warpoet]

If a news media prints the proceedings in a court which are as they occurred and Jihadwatch cut and pastes it, that portion if unaltered will be just as factual.

In which case, the appropriate response would be to cite the news outlet directly. Under no circumstance should a source like Jihadwatch ever enter the picture, or should anyone take time out of their day to read it.

 

[angelo]

You're kidding right!!!! The fucking causes are ISLAM!!!!

I think you've proved my point.

There's roughly a billion Muslims in the world. If Islam caused terrorism in the west how do you explain all the Muslim "terrorists" being lazy and not committing acts of terror? Are they being bad Muslims? How does Jihadwatch explain all the peaceful Muslims?

Even if Islam is part of the explanation, it's hardly the whole explanation. Isn't it more likely that it's the other reasons for the "Islamic" terror attacks that lead to the attacks? What does Jihadwatch say about that?

At no point did Osama Bin Laden say that he committed the acts of terror because of Islam. And he gave his motivations in detail. But not according to Jihadwatch.

The proof is in the eating! How many Islamic terrorist attacks have been committed in Japan or China. Two countries that don't welcome Islam!. Besides, Muslims attack other Muslims of other Muslim factions in much greater numbers.

 

[LordKiran]

I think you've proved my point.

There's roughly a billion Muslims in the world. If Islam caused terrorism in the west how do you explain all the Muslim "terrorists" being lazy and not committing acts of terror? Are they being bad Muslims? How does Jihadwatch explain all the peaceful Muslims?

Even if Islam is part of the explanation, it's hardly the whole explanation. Isn't it more likely that it's the other reasons for the "Islamic" terror attacks that lead to the attacks? What does Jihadwatch say about that?

At no point did Osama Bin Laden say that he committed the acts of terror because of Islam. And he gave his motivations in detail. But not according to Jihadwatch.

The proof is in the eating! How many Islamic terrorist attacks have been committed in Japan or China. Two countries that don't welcome Islam!. Besides, Muslims attack other Muslims of other Muslim factions in much greater numbers.

China has historically been tolerant of other faiths and has a Muslim population of around 20 million. China also has troubles with its muslim population related to living conditions, poverty, china's cultural and political dominion over people who'd rather have their own state, and the fact that China has been steadily trying to remove their ethnic identities via Hanification.

Logically, it follows that China's trouble related to its Muslim population centered in Xinjiang has more to do with its attempts to snuff out their ethnicity and keep them down than anything intrinsic to Islam. If china were so concerned about Islam or muslims in their borders, you'd think they'd be willing to recognize a free nation of East Turkestan and rid themselves of the problem all together.

You were saying?

 

[DrZoidberg]

The proof is in the eating! How many Islamic terrorist attacks have been committed in Japan or China. Two countries that don't welcome Islam!.

About 2% of China is Muslim. There's about as many Muslims in China as there is in Saudi Arabia. Muslims who have been, and still are, horrendously oppressed by the central government. As far as I know it's still illegal for any public office holder to be a Muslim in China. Which causes problems since all Uyghurs are Muslim. They're a bit peeved because of this. Which has led to quite a lot of conflicts and terror attacks.

Did you miss the memo?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_conflict

Obama bin Laden explained that the reason USA was targeted in 9/11 was because of American aggressions in the Middle-East. The Paris attacks was because of French involvement in the Syrian war. And so on and so on. Don't you think that's a better explanation as to why there's been so few Muslim terror attacks in Japan? Maybe? Perhaps? Yes? No?

Besides, Muslims attack other Muslims of other Muslim factions in much greater numbers.

Your arguments are so confused. How doesn't this prove that Islam isn't the real reason for "Islamic" terror?

https://quran.com/4/92-93

The Quran is pretty clear on that it's forbidden for Muslims to kill each other. Yet, somehow they manage to do it just fine.

Either the Quran is the problem, or it isn't. You can't have it both ways. If Muslims aren't slavishly following the Quran then the reason for Islamic terror is something else.

 

[LordKiran]

About 2% of China is Muslim. There's about as many Muslims in China as there is in Saudi Arabia. Muslims who have been, and still are, horrendously oppressed by the central government. As far as I know it's still illegal for any public office holder to be a Muslim in China. Which causes problems since all Uyghurs are Muslim. They're a bit peeved because of this. Which has led to quite a lot of conflicts and terror attacks.

Did you miss the memo?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xinjiang_conflict

Obama bin Laden explained that the reason USA was targeted in 9/11 was because of American aggressions in the Middle-East. The Paris attacks was because of French involvement in the Syrian war. And so on and so on. Don't you think that's a better explanation as to why there's been so few Muslim terror attacks in Japan? Maybe? Perhaps? Yes? No?

Besides, Muslims attack other Muslims of other Muslim factions in much greater numbers.

Your arguments are so confused. How doesn't this prove that Islam isn't the real reason for "Islamic" terror?

https://quran.com/4/92-93

The Quran is pretty clear on that it's forbidden for Muslims to kill each other. Yet, somehow they manage to do it just fine.

Either the Quran is the problem, or it isn't. You can't have it both ways. If Muslims aren't slavishly following the Quran then the reason for Islamic terror is something else.

I KNEW IT!!!!!!!!

 

[DrZoidberg]

The proof is in the eating! How many Islamic terrorist attacks have been committed in Japan or China. Two countries that don't welcome Islam!. Besides, Muslims attack other Muslims of other Muslim factions in much greater numbers.

China has historically been tolerant of other faiths and has a Muslim population of around 20 million. China also has troubles with its muslim population related to living conditions, poverty, china's cultural and political dominion over people who'd rather have their own state, and the fact that China has been steadily trying to remove their ethnic identities via Hanification.

Logically, it follows that China's trouble related to its Muslim population centered in Xinjiang has more to do with its attempts to snuff out their ethnicity and keep them down than anything intrinsic to Islam. If china were so concerned about Islam or muslims in their borders, you'd think they'd be willing to recognize a free nation of East Turkestan and rid themselves of the problem all together.

You were saying?

In what way has China been tolerant of religion?

 

[LordKiran]

China has historically been tolerant of other faiths and has a Muslim population of around 20 million. China also has troubles with its muslim population related to living conditions, poverty, china's cultural and political dominion over people who'd rather have their own state, and the fact that China has been steadily trying to remove their ethnic identities via Hanification.

Logically, it follows that China's trouble related to its Muslim population centered in Xinjiang has more to do with its attempts to snuff out their ethnicity and keep them down than anything intrinsic to Islam. If china were so concerned about Islam or muslims in their borders, you'd think they'd be willing to recognize a free nation of East Turkestan and rid themselves of the problem all together.

You were saying?

In what way has China been tolerant of religion?

I didn't say recently. China has been around for several millennia, or rather, multiple empires have existed in the place we consider china with similar attributes that allow us to lump them together for the most part. A lot of that history does include contact with foreign religions, some of which shaped Chinese spiritualism (Whatever that amounts to these days) I'm not saying ancient china is comparable to our western democracies in terms of tolerance for other faiths or that ancient chinese empires didn't at times show extreme intolerance for religious faiths (The Qin dynasty comes to mind.) But it wasn't all bad.

If you were a christian living in 7th century Tang China, it wasn't such a bad place to be.

 

[DrZoidberg]

In what way has China been tolerant of religion?

I didn't say recently. China has been around for several millennia, or rather, multiple empires have existed in the place we consider china with similar attributes that allow us to lump them together for the most part. A lot of that history does include contact with foreign religions, some of which shaped Chinese spiritualism (Whatever that amounts to these days) I'm not saying ancient china is comparable to our western democracies in terms of tolerance for other faiths or that ancient chinese empires didn't at times show extreme intolerance for religious faiths (The Qin dynasty comes to mind.) But it wasn't all bad.

If you were a christian living in 7th century Tang China, it wasn't such a bad place to be.

Aha. Yes. I saw somewhere that how tolerant an empire is to religions is a factor of how relatively big the ruling ethnic group is compared to the conquered people. I forgot the exact number. But if the ruling ethnic group made up more than 40% of the overall population they'd be extremely intolerant. All empires started out intolerant, and became tolerant over time, as they grew. For example, the Persian empire was religiously intolerant until they conquered Babylon, and then over-night shifted attitude completely. This was simply due to Cyrus making the shrewd judgement that if he would have any hope of hanging onto Babylon he would need plenty of local support.

So the Chinese empire's tolerance of minorities is really only a measurement of the size of the ruling ethnic group. Or more precisely, just the size of the empire. Any empire big enough will be very tolerant and multi-cultural. This rule isn't applicable on a communist state (or any modern democracy) because the ruling elite isn't explicitly members of any ethnic group. Instead they try to encourage diversity among the ruling elite. So in theory the ruling elite is supposed to mirror the make-up of the population in general. Which allows for much greater intolerance than what a monarchy could socially tolerate without breaking apart.

Historically China has had lots of Christians. It's partly a Christian culture, from way back. There were plenty of Mongol warlords that were Christian, and they spread Christianity as the Mongol empire grew.

 

[LordKiran]

I didn't say recently. China has been around for several millennia, or rather, multiple empires have existed in the place we consider china with similar attributes that allow us to lump them together for the most part. A lot of that history does include contact with foreign religions, some of which shaped Chinese spiritualism (Whatever that amounts to these days) I'm not saying ancient china is comparable to our western democracies in terms of tolerance for other faiths or that ancient chinese empires didn't at times show extreme intolerance for religious faiths (The Qin dynasty comes to mind.) But it wasn't all bad.

If you were a christian living in 7th century Tang China, it wasn't such a bad place to be.

Aha. Yes. I saw somewhere that how tolerant an empire is to religions is a factor of how relatively big the ruling ethnic group is compared to the conquered people. I forgot the exact number. But if the ruling ethnic group made up more than 40% of the overall population they'd be extremely intolerant. All empires started out intolerant, and became tolerant over time, as they grew. For example, the Persian empire was religiously intolerant until they conquered Babylon, and then over-night shifted attitude completely. This was simply due to Cyrus making the shrewd judgement that if he would have any hope of hanging onto Babylon he would need plenty of local support.

So the Chinese empire's tolerance of minorities is really only a measurement of the size of the ruling ethnic group. Or more precisely, just the size of the empire. Any empire big enough will be very tolerant and multi-cultural. This rule isn't applicable on a communist state (or any modern democracy) because the ruling elite isn't explicitly members of any ethnic group. Instead they try to encourage diversity among the ruling elite. So in theory the ruling elite is supposed to mirror the make-up of the population in general. Which allows for much greater intolerance than what a monarchy could socially tolerate without breaking apart.

Historically China has had lots of Christians. It's partly a Christian culture, from way back. There were plenty of Mongol warlords that were Christian, and they spread Christianity as the Mongol empire grew.

Oh absolutely! I hold no notion that imperial rulers elect to be tolerant of their foreign subjects out of the goody goodness of their hearts, but then that's not the conversation is it? Bottom line, China is well within it's ability to maintain military control over the region of Xinjiang without the cooperation of the peoples living there. It therefor stands to reason that China does not need to be tolerant of Uyghur Muslims living there because the whole idea is to phase them out anyway. As ethnic cleansings go, it's definitely gentle at least....

 

[barbos]

 

[whichphilosophy]

If a news media prints the proceedings in a court which are as they occurred and Jihadwatch cut and pastes it, that portion if unaltered will be just as factual.

In which case, the appropriate response would be to cite the news outlet directly. Under no circumstance should a source like Jihadwatch ever enter the picture, or should anyone take time out of their day to read it.

It's easy enough to find the sources if they are not mentioned. Just enter a few phrases and google or dogpile.com can pick this up.

 

[LordKiran]

In which case, the appropriate response would be to cite the news outlet directly. Under no circumstance should a source like Jihadwatch ever enter the picture, or should anyone take time out of their day to read it.

It's easy enough to find the sources if they are not mentioned. Just enter a few phrases and google or dogpile.com can pick this up.

Alternatively, people can cite sources that don't suck balls.

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's easy enough to find the sources if they are not mentioned. Just enter a few phrases and google or dogpile.com can pick this up.

Alternatively, people can cite sources that don't suck balls.

The intent is to find the sources of articles posted by Jihadwatch. This would show whether or not such a source existed.

 

[Warpoet]

The intent is to find the sources of articles posted by Jihadwatch. This would show whether or not such a source existed.

You keep dodging the point, which is that Jihadwatch should have never been sourced to begin with. If the information it "reports" is valid, the poster citing it should have gone directly to a credible source, and it's their responsibility alone to do this, not ours to separate the substance from the bullshit.

 

[angelo]

China has historically been tolerant of other faiths and has a Muslim population of around 20 million. China also has troubles with its muslim population related to living conditions, poverty, china's cultural and political dominion over people who'd rather have their own state, and the fact that China has been steadily trying to remove their ethnic identities via Hanification.

Logically, it follows that China's trouble related to its Muslim population centered in Xinjiang has more to do with its attempts to snuff out their ethnicity and keep them down than anything intrinsic to Islam. If china were so concerned about Islam or muslims in their borders, you'd think they'd be willing to recognize a free nation of East Turkestan and rid themselves of the problem all together.

20 million from population of over 1 billion? Besides, one hardly hears of European like terrorist attacks in China. Nothing like this for example.........
An app has been launched in Paris warning people if they are in a so-called no-go zone and giving live alerts of sexual assaults.

Dozens of people have already downloaded No-Go Zone, which is available on Google Play, and it currently has a rating of 4.3 out of 5.

Its designers say the app is meant to let people know if they are in a dangerous area and allow them to avoid places in the French capital where they might be at risk of violence or crime.

Other users can upload current incidents, ranging from attacks to sexual assaults, and they will beamed straight to a smartphone or device.

The app’s description online reads: ‘Whether you are staying in an unknown location, looking for a safe place to live, on your way to a specific location then No-Go Zone allows you to reduce any risk of aggression, theft, harassment or incivility.’…

 

[whichphilosophy]

Irrational fear of the other.

It isn't just something children say.

I'm a mixture of 4 nationalities. My daughters are a mix of 5. I dread the idea of them marrying another mix.

 

[DrZoidberg]

China has historically been tolerant of other faiths and has a Muslim population of around 20 million. China also has troubles with its muslim population related to living conditions, poverty, china's cultural and political dominion over people who'd rather have their own state, and the fact that China has been steadily trying to remove their ethnic identities via Hanification.

Logically, it follows that China's trouble related to its Muslim population centered in Xinjiang has more to do with its attempts to snuff out their ethnicity and keep them down than anything intrinsic to Islam. If china were so concerned about Islam or muslims in their borders, you'd think they'd be willing to recognize a free nation of East Turkestan and rid themselves of the problem all together.

20 million from population of over 1 billion? Besides, one hardly hears of European like terrorist attacks in China.

You're all over the place. Obviously the Muslim terror attacks in China are for other reasons than Islam. As is all other "Muslim" terror attacks.

The fact that you don't hear of them is only an indicator of the media you consume. It's not like it's been a state secret. Well.. it has in China. But outside China it's not been a secret at all. If you could be bothered to learn about it.

China is a communist state. They see it as a sacred mission to destroy all religion, including Islam. At least officially. In practice they've liberalised a lot. If you think recognising East Turkestan was ever an option you're sadly deluded about the Chinese government. What do you think the Tibetan invasion was about? Or the bases in the South China sea. China is still, very aggressively, doing the best they can to keep spreading their borders and to conquer new lands.

Officially it's all about spreading the love of communism. Giving people independence so they can practice their religious way in peace is so not on for China.

Nothing like this for example.........


An app has been launched in Paris warning people if they are in a so-called no-go zone and giving live alerts of sexual assaults.

Dozens of people have already downloaded No-Go Zone, which is available on Google Play, and it currently has a rating of 4.3 out of 5.

Its designers say the app is meant to let people know if they are in a dangerous area and allow them to avoid places in the French capital where they might be at risk of violence or crime.

Other users can upload current incidents, ranging from attacks to sexual assaults, and they will beamed straight to a smartphone or device.

The app’s description online reads: ‘Whether you are staying in an unknown location, looking for a safe place to live, on your way to a specific location then No-Go Zone allows you to reduce any risk of aggression, theft, harassment or incivility.’…

Why did you even bring this up? How is this relevant? In China they need apps to warn them off government attacks. The main perpetrator of violence is still the government. So I think they have other things to worry about.

But I looked up the No-Go Zone app. It doesn't fetch data from anywhere. All content is user generated. If anybody is witness to anything they're supposed to report it in the app. If you know anything about witness psychology it's a completely worthless app. It's more a measurement of people's hysteria than anything actually happening.

Here's what I think. I think a clever app designer thought of a niche in the market and went for it. It's a one dollar app. I'm pretty sure the goal is just to generate enough interest so that people will download it out of curiosity. They'll all realise it's worthless. But it's just a dollar. So they don't care. And he gets to laugh all the way to the bank. There's tonnes of apps like it. They're simple to knock together. And it's clearly a shitty low budget app.

I don't think anybody is going to be helped by this, and I don't think anybody will use it for long.

 

[angelo]

You're all over the place. Obviously the Muslim terror attacks in China are for other reasons than Islam. As is all other "Muslim" terror attacks.

The fact that you don't hear of them is only an indicator of the media you consume. It's not like it's been a state secret. Well.. it has in China. But outside China it's not been a secret at all. If you could be bothered to learn about it.

China is a communist state. They see it as a sacred mission to destroy all religion, including Islam. At least officially. In practice they've liberalised a lot. If you think recognising East Turkestan was ever an option you're sadly deluded about the Chinese government. What do you think the Tibetan invasion was about? Or the bases in the South China sea. China is still, very aggressively, doing the best they can to keep spreading their borders and to conquer new lands.

Officially it's all about spreading the love of communism. Giving people independence so they can practice their religious way in peace is so not on for China.

Nothing like this for example.........


An app has been launched in Paris warning people if they are in a so-called no-go zone and giving live alerts of sexual assaults.

Dozens of people have already downloaded No-Go Zone, which is available on Google Play, and it currently has a rating of 4.3 out of 5.

Its designers say the app is meant to let people know if they are in a dangerous area and allow them to avoid places in the French capital where they might be at risk of violence or crime.

Other users can upload current incidents, ranging from attacks to sexual assaults, and they will beamed straight to a smartphone or device.

The app’s description online reads: ‘Whether you are staying in an unknown location, looking for a safe place to live, on your way to a specific location then No-Go Zone allows you to reduce any risk of aggression, theft, harassment or incivility.’…

Why did you even bring this up? How is this relevant? In China they need apps to warn them off government attacks. The main perpetrator of violence is still the government. So I think they have other things to worry about.

But I looked up the No-Go Zone app. It doesn't fetch data from anywhere. All content is user generated. If anybody is witness to anything they're supposed to report it in the app. If you know anything about witness psychology it's a completely worthless app. It's more a measurement of people's hysteria than anything actually happening.

Here's what I think. I think a clever app designer thought of a niche in the market and went for it. It's a one dollar app. I'm pretty sure the goal is just to generate enough interest so that people will download it out of curiosity. They'll all realise it's worthless. But it's just a dollar. So they don't care. And he gets to laugh all the way to the bank. There's tonnes of apps like it. They're simple to knock together. And it's clearly a shitty low budget app.

I don't think anybody is going to be helped by this, and I don't think anybody will use it for long.

I was going to post comments by Aryan Hirsi Ali, but i sense that it's a waste of time to apologists of islam and the left such as yourself.

 

[DrZoidberg]

You're all over the place. Obviously the Muslim terror attacks in China are for other reasons than Islam. As is all other "Muslim" terror attacks.

The fact that you don't hear of them is only an indicator of the media you consume. It's not like it's been a state secret. Well.. it has in China. But outside China it's not been a secret at all. If you could be bothered to learn about it.

China is a communist state. They see it as a sacred mission to destroy all religion, including Islam. At least officially. In practice they've liberalised a lot. If you think recognising East Turkestan was ever an option you're sadly deluded about the Chinese government. What do you think the Tibetan invasion was about? Or the bases in the South China sea. China is still, very aggressively, doing the best they can to keep spreading their borders and to conquer new lands.

Officially it's all about spreading the love of communism. Giving people independence so they can practice their religious way in peace is so not on for China.



Why did you even bring this up? How is this relevant? In China they need apps to warn them off government attacks. The main perpetrator of violence is still the government. So I think they have other things to worry about.

But I looked up the No-Go Zone app. It doesn't fetch data from anywhere. All content is user generated. If anybody is witness to anything they're supposed to report it in the app. If you know anything about witness psychology it's a completely worthless app. It's more a measurement of people's hysteria than anything actually happening.

Here's what I think. I think a clever app designer thought of a niche in the market and went for it. It's a one dollar app. I'm pretty sure the goal is just to generate enough interest so that people will download it out of curiosity. They'll all realise it's worthless. But it's just a dollar. So they don't care. And he gets to laugh all the way to the bank. There's tonnes of apps like it. They're simple to knock together. And it's clearly a shitty low budget app.

I don't think anybody is going to be helped by this, and I don't think anybody will use it for long.

I was going to post comments by Aryan Hirsi Ali, but i sense that it's a waste of time to apologists of islam and the left such as yourself.

I fail to see how I'm an Islamic apologist. I think Islam is an awful religion. I think the way Islam reveres martyrs is directly responsible for generating willing subjects for terror attacks. I don't think Islam helps anything.

But while I see lots of problems with Islam I don't see it as the only problem. I don't even see it as the biggest problem. I'm also aware of the fact that there's tonnes of secular Muslims. Muslims that are happy about the west. There's loads of gay Muslims. There's loads of transexual Muslims. Muslims come in every shape and size.

Syria is a great example. It's a war where the two main belligerents is on one side a blood thristy dictator and on the other side Insane fundamentalist Muslims. It's war where both sides are led by a Hitler. Most of the Muslims in Syria are highly secularised. They are on the level of Turkey.

In a war where one side is fundamentalist Muslim fighting a Jihad, why would a Muslim flee that country? Could it be because they are secular Muslims, who don't want anything to do with fundamentalists? You haven't given any explanation for why a Muslim would want to flee from living under a caliphate? In your world view, wouldn't that be the best thing ever for a Muslim? Your world view makes no sense.

The world is more complicated than you make it out to be. I'm not a Muslim apologist. I'm an enemy of Islam. But you don't seem to get that.

Your concept of the world is too simple Angelo. It's not as easy as = Muslim bad. Islam is an unhelpful religion and world view. But it's not a corrupting force of pure evil. Islam is a popular religion because there's lots of good things about it. I think the bad things outweigh the good things. But there's a billion people who don't agree. We're sharing the planet with them. In a heavily globalised world, we just have to find a way to get along.