[Closed] Muslims offended again

I cant help but think the UK was wrong in rejecting Germany's advances to be allies during WW2, Hitler respected the UK and wanted it....our politicians rejected it.
An alliance with Germany would've made us unstoppable in Europe (perhaps the world?)...the UK could've turned a blind eye to the ethnic cleansing that the Nazis were carrying out and Europe would look a lot different now, no outsiders causing problems, no Gypsies etc etc, a proper Europe for Europeans not any old Tom, Dick or Harry that wants to come here.

The benefit of hindsight eh?

5 percent in the UK think attacks against civilians justified, or something.

or something? really? or what? 0.5% 0.05%?

It's a generally accepted stat that between 5% and 15% of muslims globally can be described as having fundamentalist beliefs, I low balled it. The studies are easily available all over the web especially when Kaspersky isn't blocking all the bloody sites.

It's a generally accepted stat that between 5% and 15% of muslims globally can be described as having fundamentalist beliefs, I low balled it. The studies are easily available all over the web especially when Kaspersky isn't blocking all the bloody sites.

Accepted by who?

Was the research process similar to Family Fortunes?

Being 'offended' is a way of making yourself a victim. Then you 'retaliate' and you are not responsible for your actions but someone else is since you are a victim. This rhetorical sleight of hand is used in all conflicts and currently it seems that Hamas is making the victim IDF bomb the hell out of Gaza including UN schools full of civilians.
Taking offence is a simple way of abdicating responsibility for your own aggressive behaviour. If people were really offended then perhaps they would be happier living under regimes which perpetuate their particular beliefs. (unlikely) Or is it a way of trying to reshape the culture of a country to an Islamic model?(more likely)

Accepted by various governmental, independent research and thinktank types but yes that's right they asked 100 members of the public how many muslim fundies there probably 🙄 are.

I'm also not going to rise to your strawman comment re terrorists.

Even if we accept your "accepted" figure, it's a big jump further to declare all religious fundamentalists "nutters" as you have. But considering there isn't even an accepted definition of what makes a fundamentalist it's hard to see how you can put any sensible number on it

you mean like the jewish community in the wake of what's going on in Gaza?

Er, no.

[i]between 5% and 15% of muslims globally can be described as having fundamentalist beliefs[/i]

I expect a similar number of Christians could be described like that. They don't necessarily support acts of terrorism or killing though?

Accepted by various governmental, independent research and thinktank types but yes that's right they asked 100 members of the public how many muslim fundies there probably are.

come on then, 1 link. 1 government link.

considering there isn't even an accepted definition of what makes a fundamentalist it's hard to see how you can put any sensible number on it

Even if we accept your "accepted" figure, it's a big jump further to declare all religious fundamentalists "nutters" as you have.

Why? If you believe in and live your life based on a set of supernatural beliefs without a shred of evidence and those beliefs infact inform some questionable(at best)moral decisions I'd say you were, in fact, a nutter.

Saudi Arabia is a [i]State[/i] of 28 million people who observe strict(fundamental)islamic beliefs, I need to find another 30 million or so people globally that fit the same bill, do I really have to do the maths for you.

Do you really not accept that there are 75 million islamic people who at a fundamental level want their version of the truth to be adopted worldwide? Find out how many muslims are Salafists and it gives you an idea of the numbers of really serious nutters.

I'm not being alarmist just working through the numbers.

36% of 16 to 24-year-olds believe if a Muslim converts to another religion they should be punished by death, compared with 19% of over-55s

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6309983.stm

Sounds pretty fundamentalist to me. People can believe what they want but death for rejecting a religion?

Saudi Arabia is a State of 28 million people

... which needs to employ a substantial police force to ensure its population is being Islamic enough and not (for example) driving while female, in an annoyingly 19th century way.

I don't think simply totalling up entire countries' populations is a remotely credible approach to working out how many insane Muslims there are in the world.

Whereas in Israel a reported 97% of the population think that attacks against civilians is justified. Yay religion!

I doubt 97 percent think that attacks with the specific aim of killing civilians is as high as 97 percent, although I would imagine it would be closer to the numbers that think so in other middle eastern countries as opposed to the number of British muslims who do. War probably increases people's apathy towards civilian deaths.

[img] [/img]

From my links.

... which needs to employ a substantial police force to ensure its population is being Islamic enough and not (for example) driving while female, in an annoyingly 19th century way

OK there are about 2000 muslim fundamentalists worldwide and it's not a problem, my mistake.

If the M'lims are not fighting other religions then they fighting amongst other Islamic sects.

They are pain in the backside and will not integrate and now flying Gaza flags outside their houses in my street.

it's a big jump further to declare all religious fundamentalists "nutters" as you have.

Sorry, I'm confused. Could you give me an example of some religious fundamentalists who aren't nutters please? I'm not overly sure which demographic you're referring to here.

Joolsburger you sound like a bit of a fundamantalist nutjob yourself the way your trying to push your viewpoint down everones throats. By the way when was the last time a muslim confronted you in person and tried to indoctrinate you ?

Joolsburger you sound like a bit of a fundamantalist nutjob yourself the way your trying to push your viewpoint down everones throats. By the way when was the last time a muslim confronted you in person and tried to indoctrinate you ?

Last time I was on the street in Oxford. But hey, let's keep the debate revolving around emotional attacks by both sides. Instead of reasoned debate and thought with you know.... some facts thrown in and relevant articles used as references.

Meh

On a side note, what do people think of the new wave of Islamic neo-colonial intentions from so called moderates such as Erdogan? Who has stated that Thessaloniki belongs to Turkey, a man who has also been stirring up trouble among the Turkish populations of Vienna and Germany? And the increasingly vocal supporters for the cause of 'occupied moorish territory' lol.

I have no idea what has been posted but this made me chuckle : "Muslims offended again" then in the Daily Telegraph article this :

[i]A Glasgow 2014 spokesman said: "Glasgow 2014 have received no complaints from the Commonwealth Games Associations of the competing nations and territories following the Opening Ceremony." [/i]

So "Muslims offended again" turns out according to the Daily Telegraph to be two individuals in Malaysia.

And for balance here's two individuals who shame the West :

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

How long has Ian Hislop been in the police?

No idea. Since they scrapped minimum height requirement ?

joolsburger - Member

Why? If you believe in and live your life based on a set of supernatural beliefs without a shred of evidence and those beliefs infact inform some questionable(at best)moral decisions I'd say you were, in fact, a nutter.

Ah. So all religious people are nutters. Except the hypocrites obviously.

Writing off 28 million people as nutters because they live in Saudi Arabia is just phenomenal.

Ah. So all religious people are nutters. Except the hypocrites obviously.

Writing off 28 million people as nutters because they live in Saudi Arabia is just phenomenal.

I would consider the 5 to 15 percent of muslims that support terrorism to be nutters.

We have plenty of nutters as well, but if Jehovah's Witnesses were blowing themselves up I somehow doubt you'd be as outraged by the nutter comment. Personally, I do consider highly religious misogynists to be nutters so I would never visit a state like Saudi Arabia.

The question asked to get those numbers was: “Some people think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies. Other people believe that, no matter what the reason, this kind of violence is never justified. Do you personally feel that this kind of violence is often justified to defend Islam, sometimes justified, rarely justified, or never justified?”

So if you say violence against civilian targets to defend islam can be acceptable, you're a nutter. Substitute "Israel", ask yourself the same question, then have a think.

I would consider the 5 to 15 percent of muslims that support terrorism to be nutters.

80% of Jewish Israelis support terrorism against Arabs. So more nutters in Israel than in Saudi Arabia according to your logic.

That number is way higher in places like Saudi Arabia and Jordan, also where did you find that number and what was your point?

So if you say violence against civilian targets to defend islam can be acceptable, you're a nutter. Substitute "Israel", ask yourself the same question, then have a think.

The question implies intentionally targeting civilians. However, it's one of the reasons why I'm not as quick to damn Israel as you are. As the other sides opinions are just as horrific, the only difference being their ability to kill each other - morally they are equals. Live by the sword etc ad nauseum.

Do you think the Muslim descendants of Al Andalus should be allowed the right of return to Spain? I'm on the fence about this but I'd be interested to here your opinion on it.

So, nutter or hypocrite?

I'd consider radicals of any religion as nutters, or anyone for that matter who thinks explicitly targeting civilians is acceptable.

The argument is whether Israel does that and how many Israelis support targeting civilians for the lolz.

No idea. Since they scrapped minimum height requirement ?

Well played 😆

Tom they either target them or they are really bad shots 🙄

Can we have a little balance here.

FWIW they do not actively target children but they do accept that large numbers of them will die when they target hamas and they bomb UN sites, hospitals and schools or safe havens they have advised them to go to as they deliver a collective punishment

None of this is legal or moral.

If the M'lims are not fighting other religions then they fighting amongst other Islamic sects.

It's a good job that you don't get any of that nonsense with other religions. Can you imagine Protestants fighting Catholics? The very notion!

Tom_W1987 - Member

The argument is whether Israel does that

It's really not, Israel attacks civilian targets, that's undeniable. And that's what the question you're using to support your nutter claim asked.

So it's hypocrite then. A shame. I was kind of hoping you might actually subject yourself to your own judgement, it's an interesting experience to come up short of your own standards.

Prove to me that the IDF expressly attacks civilian targets Northwind.

FWIW they do not actively target children but they do accept that large numbers of them will die when they target hamas and they bomb UN sites, hospitals and schools or safe havens they have advised them to go to as they deliver a collective punishment

I do agree with your sentiment here, however, it's being reported that over the past week Israelis have hardened their opinions due to the response of the worlds media. I wonder how much of their willingness to "get the job done" and attack targets near schools and hospitals is because of that. I would also still be interested to see reliable evidence of the ratio of civilian casualties to combatants before I can support any claim that the Israeli's are collectively punishing Gazans by disproportionately killing civilians.

I'm uneasy about jumping to conclusions before seeing evidence.

I see Ernie et al have not taken the Al Andalus bait yet.

This opening ceremony sound like a bad Miley Cyrus video

Israelis have hardened their opinions due to the response of the worlds media. I wonder how much of their willingness to "get the job done" and attack targets near schools and hospitals is because of that.

Sounds to me like the world's media should stop criticizing Israel for killing civilians as it might be making things worse, ie, Israel is having to kill even more civilians as a result.

So hush everyone and let the Israelis carry on killing innocent civilians without too much criticism.

BTW it's not "targets [i]near[/i] schools and hospitals" it's direct strikes on schools and hospitals.

Writing off 28 million people as nutters because they live in Saudi Arabia is just phenomenal.

I really wasn't. My point (albeit put badly) was that in a fundementalist state such as Saudi you could easily get to a figure higher than 5% for fundamental muslims therefore it would be very easy to see how you could get a 5% figure for global islamic fundamentalism as an average across all islamic states. I'd suggest you'd get a similar number for christians, jews, etc etc. Fundamentalist to me means people who unquestioningly believe their magic books and also believe those who interpret the will of god on their behalf like clerics etc.

People seem surprised at the use of the word nutter, if I sincerely believed in Russell's teapot you'd quite rightly think me a nutter - I see little difference between that and religion.

It looked like a bad Miley Cirus video!

Is there any other kind of Miley Cirus video?

People seem surprised at the use of the word nutter, if I sincerely beleived in Russell's teapot you'd quite rightly think me a nutter - I see little difference between that and religion.

Atheists make up less than 3% of the worlds population. Being a "nutter" is obviously normal for a human.

Atheists make up less than 3% of the worlds population. Being a "nutter" is obviously normal for a human.

Yup. Although there are degrees to nutterism and wahabbis are close to the top of that list. Along with extremely orthodox Jews, the church of Christian Scientists, certain Buddhist sects etc etc

if I sincerely beleived in Russell's teapot you'd quite rightly think me a nutter

Either that or everyone else around you are all teapotists and have said they'll kill you if you don't believe in teapots, so you just go along with it.

Though that raises an interesting question; what if in that community, no-one really believes, but they're all afraid of the perceived group wisdom to say different?

Sounds to me like the world's media should stop criticizing Israel for killing civilians as it might be making things worse, ie, Israel is having to kill even more civilians as a result.

So hush everyone and let the Israelis carry on killing innocent civilians without too much criticism.

BTW it's not "targets near schools and hospitals" it's direct strikes on schools and hospitals.

You can mediate without hardening one side further. Also, I'd add, why are Palestinians letting Hamas fire from within schools? Although I don't agree with targeting schools with heavy weaponry.

there are degrees to nutterism

I see, so it's not as straightforward as "you have a religion you must be a nutter".

Fascinating.