Thoughts go out to those in Berlin

[Cornelius_Fudge]

8 hours ago, eFestivals said:

The freedoms and pleasures I enjoy at Glastonbury aren't even allowed in THIS COUNTRY.  PMSL

You're not providing me with any evidence at all, apart from there's a book in the world you don't like.

You then associate all people with a strong attachment to that book as being identical in thought when their actions prove differently. UIf you want to talk evidence, let's talk about 2Bn Muslims and fuck all terrorism. They're not even as 'good' at it as the Irish.

But that book damns them, each and every one of them, but the bible damns no one. It must be because of the free halo you get with each copy you buy.

 

Well, I can now figure out at least you like to do to get high, myself included, but you know what I meant anyway
Drugs, open alcohol in a field or a park, music festivals in general, women being allowed to wear what they want, two men kissing, holding hands for couples in general. Very difficult in a lot of strict Muslim countries - based on the book I'm criticizing, yes.

FFS. Evidence. The Human Rights watch, the political shift in Turkey to a dictatorship using Islam quite easily as a tool. Not as good at as the Irish? It's not a competition... That's a very strange wage of looking at it, but from 2002 to 2016 ISIS have killed 30,000. How many did the IRA kill during a similar length of time?

Again, your last sentence, haven't said that it's all... it's possible to be a moderate Muslim. As long as that includes treating women equally, homosexuals equally, apostates equally etc. I know if people keep saying 'all' enough and trying to make my statements monolithic, eventually my real words won't even matter, but hey ho.

[arcade fireman]

Bloody hell this is an ignorant post, the fact you typed it out on Christmas morning yet more bizarre. We'll start with this little gem:

On 25 December 2016 at 10:33 AM, Cornelius_Fudge said:

I wasn't going to reply again, but that's such a strange post.

Saying something happens in another country or religion, therefore these deaths and killings are okay and therefore not up for criticism, seems an odd way to explain something, as if somehow, I'm saying Christian killings are okay - they are equally not good for humanity

At what point did I say it was okay? Here is what I actually said. 

Quote

Plenty of non-Muslim countries (particularly sub-Saharan African Christian countries) can imprison people for being homosexual. And while both are disgusting, the death penalty is the exception not the rule amongst Muslim countries. And the principle of punishing homosexuality in the penal code is not confined to Muslim countries. Indeed even in India the Supreme Court voted to keep homosexuality illegal the other year. 

YOU are making this about Muslims. You are claiming their religion as a massive outlier. Yet at the same time you are pointing to things which certainly have parallels under other religious regimes elsewhere. Clearly I said they were disgusting, not okay. But these disgusting things have parallel elsewhere. So no, it's not okay, but neither is it something which is confined to Muslims.

Quote

Did you even read that Wikipedia page? They state quite clearly that the majority of Islamic countries use it and the two where it's 'illegal' state it happens anyway. And yes, if the Aztecs did it as well and were now operating a global holy war, people would also want to criticise them too. Again, it's about perspective. Islamic terror is happening on such a large scale across the world, and that's just not true of the Christian radicals you site.

Well this is a lie. It doesn't say that anywhere in the wikipedia page that the majority of Islamic countries use it. Why would you make that up? How bizarre. 

What would you define as an Islamic country?

There are around fifty countries with a Muslim majority in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country (sort the table by % Muslims).

There are ten Muslim majority countries named in that article on stoning, with one (Nigeria) a minority country but quite divided along religious lines. This patently is not the majority of Muslim countries. And neither does it happen particularly often in most of those countries listed. Things that happen rarely in a small minority of countries cannot be used in any way as something which is identifiable amongst Muslims in general. That should be obvious.

Muslims aren't operating a "global holy war" though. This is you applying the actions of a tiny minority to massive group of well over a billion people. If this "holy war" involved something akin to the World Wars, with Muslim majority nation states getting big armies forming significant sections of their populations together to attack ours, you might have a point. But they don't and so you don't. 

Quote

It's good at least that you can are honest that a lot of the migrants have come from places where brutality and sexual violence is the norm. At least we're getting somewhere on that front.

Syria has had human rights issues for years - political prisoners getting locked up, issue with freedom of speech/the press - but not issues specific to being an Islamic country but similar issues to huge swathes of the world. However the situation you described only started during the Syrian civil war. Brutality and sexual violence is not part of the inherent culture of Syria, but rather happens when many countries descend into catastrophic civil war. To imply otherwise just demonstrates your shattering ignorance. 

Quote

Yes, passages are just as frequent in the Bible, but then why is Islam different? Because it's the literal word of God. The trouble when things are literal, people are allowed to interpret them literally, because it's exactly what God is commanding you to do. Whereas the Bible is open to interpretation, because it was written by men, the Koran wasn't. There's a huge difference right there.

This is laughable. Clearly both books are open to interpretation, otherwise you wouldn't see both Muslims and Christians practicing their faiths in all sorts of different ways, not to mention all sorts of different sects in both religions. There isn't any clear definitive guide to how Christians see the Bible and plenty see it as non-literal, but clearly there are mainstream sources see the Bible as God's literal word:

http://www.christianity.com/bible/authorship-and-inspiration/what-evidence-is-there-that-the-bible-is-in-fact-gods-word-11542346.html

28% of Americans see it as God's literal word, sure more don't but I would wager that figure will be a lot more skewed in, for example, the African countries:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/170834/three-four-bible-word-god.aspx

Quote

I don't know why you bring money in to it. For example in China, they have literally hundreds of millions of people below the poverty line, but they're one of the most secure and safest places in the world. They also have high punishments for doing crime, but what is one of the differences? They don't have a religious book leading them and telling them that the word of God allows them to kill.

You have spectacularly missed the point of what I was saying. The point is this - any religion and poverty can be a noxious mix. There is an obvious correlation between poverty and how strongly people follow their faith. Whether it's Islam, Christianity (the LRA, the millions of AIDS cases which the Catholic Church are responsible for) or Hinduism (the various brutalities carried out under the caste system, the infanticide of females in villages), the worst religious atrocities have usually happened in areas desperately poor. The main exceptions being those places with a religious theocratic monarchy. 

So why you bring China into this, a country famously largely atheistic is beyond me. And even with this atheism the country is notorious for human rights abuses which is another reason why this is such an odd comparison. Do you know much about what happened to practitioners of Falun Gong? Or the various atrocities committed against the Tibetans and the Uyghurs? It isn't just a country with "high punishments for doing crime", far from it. 

Quote

As for the women you've talked about 'in any large workplace in the UK' - again something anecdotal and completely unproven - if I did meet a woman and she "identified" as Muslim, that means precisely zilch for your argument. She might drink, she might have had sex outside of marriage, but the chance of those two things happening is probably because she grew up in a secular society and isn't really following the Koran so closely, and actually it wouldn't be me who defines whether or not she is a good Muslim or not, but the majority of Muslims who would find her behaviour abhorrent.

It isn't unproven. I work as a doctor in the NHS, do you think I am lying? Literally anyone who works in the NHS will tell you about the scores of Muslim women working as doctors and nurses. Actually a fair few of the women at my medical school were on scholarships from Malaysia - their Muslim government paid for them to study medicine in the UK. The dentists shared the same building as us training, again plenty of them were Muslim. Plenty of schools will have Muslim female teachers. I'm sure there will be statistics somewhere about what % of British doctors are Muslim women but it will be very high. 

Indeed as this article suggests, the biggest problem isn't them being oppressed but them applying for jobs but being passed over for jobs they apply for:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/hijab-wearing-muslim-women-being-passed-over-for-jobs-in-last-fo/

Why are we defining this argument by sex before marriage and drinking? How daft. Plenty of religious people of any description don't have sex before marriage, plenty of others don't drink full stop. I am defining it by women leading independent and fulfilling lives of their own, and surely doing a professional job is a much bigger indicator of this than whether they like a few beers on a Saturday night. 

Are you saying the scores and scores of Muslim women being breadwinners for their family, earning money for themselves and doing high powered professional jobs aren't following the Koran properly? Maybe you could tell them that. I'm sure they'd appreciate your knowledgable input. 

Quote

Yes, Turkey, I mentioned before, was the most moderate Muslim majority country, is actually becoming closer to a dictatorship than ever - introducing religion along the way. Erdogan has sacked army officials, judges, teachers, journalists etc. The government there has built more than 17,000 new Mosques in the last fifteen years, he has lifted bans on the hibjab, nearly a million students now go to Islamic schools - although only about 60,000 had gone in 2002. This is a nice quote from Erdogan;

"The Mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers"
or perhaps this one...
"The term 'moderate' Islam is ugly and offensive. There is no 'moderate' Islam. Islam is Islam"

Yes, I forgot Turkish Muslims are responsible for the things Erdogan says. Just as Americans are each individually responsible for everything Trump says. The fact is that there are many Muslim majority countries who either are or have had a fairly recent history of being secular - Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world and is hardly a hotbed of Islamism. Various Central Asian countries are run as secular countries with any human rights abuses not done in the name of Islam. Egypt has been pretty stable and quite liberal until the massive unrest recently. Malaysia is Muslim majority and run and though there's problems still relatively secular. Lebanon is majority Muslim and secular. Other places e.g. Afghanistan used to be very liberal until the Taliban came round in the early 1980s. 

The Muslim world just isn't one homogenous monstrosity of beheadings, stonings and not allowing women to drive, as much as it may suit your general world view for this to be true. It's a tapestry of countries which are very different to each other in their interpretations of their religion, with our own Governments aiding and abetting some of the worst offenders and creating the conditions in other countries for them to thrive. 

Edited December 26, 2016 by arcade fireman

[guypjfreak]

Wow you're still at it lol. 

Did anyone see the programme about ten Muslims all living in a house.. Abit like big brother..

Any way they were all different and I'd say normal  apart from  one who wasn't born a Muslim but came from London I think and HE was a nutter, rude, sexist and was quite OK with other Muslims killing as he said the unbelievers... 

ANYWAY the point being he was nuts and made it clear that he would be happy to go and fight for the cause as he called it... And it's people like that that fuck shit up.. Some one said about knowing Muslims.. Well I know quite a few and most are top of the range but I do have a step brother who turned to Allah and HES a true to life fucking dickhead.. 

He changed his name to usif and moved to Malaysia and his wife has to do EVERYTHING he says when he says it.. He's the same as that bloke on that programme nuts, nutty as a fruit cake and can make a real Muslim look bad.. And he used to be a Punk lol know if his wife or kids say boo to him there fucked.. 

ANYWAY there's good and bad most Muslims born and brought up to the ways of that culture ( like any other culture ) are OK.... Where as small minded people like my step brother and other people that have insecurity issues or are just nuts can turn to a religion just cos it suits there fucked up ideals of life.. You can't blame all for a few........... 

 

 

Saying that all religions are nuts end ov... And yep I can't stand my step brother lol but what I've written is true... 

 

Can you lot stop fucking arguing now tho.. Tis nearly a new year peace and shit to all men and women and all that yea 

[arcade fireman]

5 minutes ago, guypjfreak said:

Well I know quite a few and most are top of the range but I do have a step brother who turned to Allah and HES a true to life fucking dickhead.. 

He changed his name to usif and moved to Malaysia and his wife has to do EVERYTHING he says when he says it.. He's the same as that bloke on that programme nuts, nutty as a fruit cake and can make a real Muslim look bad.. And he used to be a Punk lol know if his wife or kids say boo to him there fucked.. 

ANYWAY there's good and bad most Muslims born and brought up to the ways of that culture ( like any other culture ) are OK.... Where as small minded people like my step brother and other people that have insecurity issues or are just nuts can turn to a religion just cos it suits there fucked up ideals of life.. You can't blame all for a few........... 

Don't know if you've seen the film Four Lions but...

[guypjfreak]

32 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

Don't know if you've seen the film Four Lions but...

No I've not old son pray tell 

[arcade fireman]

3 minutes ago, guypjfreak said:

No I've not old son pray tell 

 I'm sure lots on here will have seen it, it's a comedy farce film about four idiotic terrorists who want to launch an attack but don't have a clue what they're doing. The guy in the picture is a converted Muslim and makes the most stupid and outrageous suggestions. Worth a watch. 

[guypjfreak]

18 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

 I'm sure lots on here will have seen it, it's a comedy farce film about four idiotic terrorists who want to launch an attack but don't have a clue what they're doing. The guy in the picture is a converted Muslim and makes the most stupid and outrageous suggestions. Worth a watch. 

Cool cool old son I'll look it up cheers... Need a bit of laugh now and then don't you.. Our son got us to watch cannibal the musical.. That was quite funny 

[Slugworth]

1 hour ago, guypjfreak said:

No I've not old son pray tell 

It's brilliant.

[guypjfreak]

Well sad to see more deaths in Turkey with innocent people seeing in the new year.... Can't argue with this one Neil old son... Very sad which ever way you look at it. 

[Ommadawn]

36 minutes ago, guypjfreak said:

Well sad to see more deaths in Turkey with innocent people seeing in the new year.... Can't argue with this one Neil old son... Very sad which ever way you look at it. 

Wanna bet

Edited January 2, 2017 by Ommadawn

[guypjfreak]

9 hours ago, Ommadawn said:

Wanna bet

9 hours ago, Ommadawn said:

Wanna bet

Lol yea probably won't even post ANYTHING now 

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, guypjfreak said:

Well sad to see more deaths in Turkey with innocent people seeing in the new year.... Can't argue with this one Neil old son... Very sad which ever way you look at it. 

I've not argued against the sadness, I've only argued about what it means.

You know, like when someone says it's Muslims against the west while bombings of Muslims in Turkey shows it's not true.

Or when someone laughs at a terrorists mother disowning him as fake, so presumably the same geezer is now going to say that the condemnation of Turkey's PM & President is fake too. I guess the public outrage in Turkey is too.

For once the UK press has managed a fairly even take of this Turkey bombing, which has to be applauded ... but they'll still be morons here in the UK being the same old morons.

[guypjfreak]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I've not argued against the sadness, I've only argued about what it means.

You know, like when someone says it's Muslims against the west while bombings of Muslims in Turkey shows it's not true.

Or when someone laughs at a terrorists mother disowning him as fake, so presumably the same geezer is now going to say that the condemnation of Turkey's PM & President is fake too. I guess the public outrage in Turkey is too.

For once the UK press has managed a fairly even take of this Turkey bombing, which has to be applauded ... but they'll still be morons here in the UK being the same old morons.

I wanted to put a like on that old son.. Nicely put....some times things that are written don't translate the same as if you were talking face to face with people... I hope you and whoever it was can put shit aside.. I did not intend this thread to be so Argumentative lol. Peace and cider. G

[Cornelius_Fudge]

On 26/12/2016 at 6:06 PM, arcade fireman said:

Bloody hell this is an ignorant post, the fact you typed it out on Christmas morning yet more bizarre. We'll start with this little gem:

At what point did I say it was okay? Here is what I actually said. 

YOU are making this about Muslims. You are claiming their religion as a massive outlier. Yet at the same time you are pointing to things which certainly have parallels under other religious regimes elsewhere. Clearly I said they were disgusting, not okay. But these disgusting things have parallel elsewhere. So no, it's not okay, but neither is it something which is confined to Muslims.

Well this is a lie. It doesn't say that anywhere in the wikipedia page that the majority of Islamic countries use it. Why would you make that up? How bizarre. 

What would you define as an Islamic country?

There are around fifty countries with a Muslim majority in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country (sort the table by % Muslims).

There are ten Muslim majority countries named in that article on stoning, with one (Nigeria) a minority country but quite divided along religious lines. This patently is not the majority of Muslim countries. And neither does it happen particularly often in most of those countries listed. Things that happen rarely in a small minority of countries cannot be used in any way as something which is identifiable amongst Muslims in general. That should be obvious.

Muslims aren't operating a "global holy war" though. This is you applying the actions of a tiny minority to massive group of well over a billion people. If this "holy war" involved something akin to the World Wars, with Muslim majority nation states getting big armies forming significant sections of their populations together to attack ours, you might have a point. But they don't and so you don't. 

Syria has had human rights issues for years - political prisoners getting locked up, issue with freedom of speech/the press - but not issues specific to being an Islamic country but similar issues to huge swathes of the world. However the situation you described only started during the Syrian civil war. Brutality and sexual violence is not part of the inherent culture of Syria, but rather happens when many countries descend into catastrophic civil war. To imply otherwise just demonstrates your shattering ignorance. 

This is laughable. Clearly both books are open to interpretation, otherwise you wouldn't see both Muslims and Christians practicing their faiths in all sorts of different ways, not to mention all sorts of different sects in both religions. There isn't any clear definitive guide to how Christians see the Bible and plenty see it as non-literal, but clearly there are mainstream sources see the Bible as God's literal word:

http://www.christianity.com/bible/authorship-and-inspiration/what-evidence-is-there-that-the-bible-is-in-fact-gods-word-11542346.html

28% of Americans see it as God's literal word, sure more don't but I would wager that figure will be a lot more skewed in, for example, the African countries:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/170834/three-four-bible-word-god.aspx

You have spectacularly missed the point of what I was saying. The point is this - any religion and poverty can be a noxious mix. There is an obvious correlation between poverty and how strongly people follow their faith. Whether it's Islam, Christianity (the LRA, the millions of AIDS cases which the Catholic Church are responsible for) or Hinduism (the various brutalities carried out under the caste system, the infanticide of females in villages), the worst religious atrocities have usually happened in areas desperately poor. The main exceptions being those places with a religious theocratic monarchy. 

So why you bring China into this, a country famously largely atheistic is beyond me. And even with this atheism the country is notorious for human rights abuses which is another reason why this is such an odd comparison. Do you know much about what happened to practitioners of Falun Gong? Or the various atrocities committed against the Tibetans and the Uyghurs? It isn't just a country with "high punishments for doing crime", far from it. 

It isn't unproven. I work as a doctor in the NHS, do you think I am lying? Literally anyone who works in the NHS will tell you about the scores of Muslim women working as doctors and nurses. Actually a fair few of the women at my medical school were on scholarships from Malaysia - their Muslim government paid for them to study medicine in the UK. The dentists shared the same building as us training, again plenty of them were Muslim. Plenty of schools will have Muslim female teachers. I'm sure there will be statistics somewhere about what % of British doctors are Muslim women but it will be very high. 

Indeed as this article suggests, the biggest problem isn't them being oppressed but them applying for jobs but being passed over for jobs they apply for:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/hijab-wearing-muslim-women-being-passed-over-for-jobs-in-last-fo/

Why are we defining this argument by sex before marriage and drinking? How daft. Plenty of religious people of any description don't have sex before marriage, plenty of others don't drink full stop. I am defining it by women leading independent and fulfilling lives of their own, and surely doing a professional job is a much bigger indicator of this than whether they like a few beers on a Saturday night. 

Are you saying the scores and scores of Muslim women being breadwinners for their family, earning money for themselves and doing high powered professional jobs aren't following the Koran properly? Maybe you could tell them that. I'm sure they'd appreciate your knowledgable input. 

Yes, I forgot Turkish Muslims are responsible for the things Erdogan says. Just as Americans are each individually responsible for everything Trump says. The fact is that there are many Muslim majority countries who either are or have had a fairly recent history of being secular - Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world and is hardly a hotbed of Islamism. Various Central Asian countries are run as secular countries with any human rights abuses not done in the name of Islam. Egypt has been pretty stable and quite liberal until the massive unrest recently. Malaysia is Muslim majority and run and though there's problems still relatively secular. Lebanon is majority Muslim and secular. Other places e.g. Afghanistan used to be very liberal until the Taliban came round in the early 1980s. 

The Muslim world just isn't one homogenous monstrosity of beheadings, stonings and not allowing women to drive, as much as it may suit your general world view for this to be true. It's a tapestry of countries which are very different to each other in their interpretations of their religion, with our own Governments aiding and abetting some of the worst offenders and creating the conditions in other countries for them to thrive. 

What a wonderful piece of apologetic pap. You're really scraping the barrel with your own 'interpretations' of Islam and then rather patronizingly suggesting that your view is more indicative of Islam, instead of the Muslim countries which routinely suppress women and treat them like shit.

Theologians much smarter than you or I explain the Koran is meant to be the 'true' word of God. So, yeah, rationally speaking, that's why you see so many religious extremist groups coming from Islam. The connection is quite clear and the dead in Turkey, the dead in Berlin, the dead in Paris, the dead in Nice, the raped women in Sweden, the raped women in Germany, the New Years eve rampage by immigrants in Dortmund (etc etc because I could go on) surely wouldn't appreciate your apology nonsense "oh their interpretation is wrong, that's all. They should listen to me and my interpretation" bollocks. 

But they don't listen to you and your cherry picked nonsensical, apologist waffle.

The statistics are clear; the human rights websites have got a lot of data for you to look at. Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Douglas Murray - they use evidence, not just theories or slogans. Evidence, evidence, evidence. History books have a lot of information too if you ever cared to open a book and broaden your horizons further back then between the 50s and 70s.

You're actually right about Afghanistan though, being a more liberal place between the 50s and 70s. But was this because of Western influence and culture. So, what happened after that? Hmmm... Oh that's right... they rejected both Western culture and Russian culture and went back to being Islamic. They even replaced the word Democratic in their country's title if you needed any more help realising what the connection in this transformation was. I mean, your cherry picking is absolutely disgraceful (although quite funny). A few decades of heavy Western and Soviet influence brought modernization and peace in the region... not Islam.

I'm not making Islam an outlier - whatever the hell you mean by that - because I've never said I like other religions either. Again, this type of idiotic argument I've heard from more than one person in this thread. Just because I haven't mentioned all the shit things done by other religions doesn't mean I'm in favour of those ones either! Shocker. I wonder if this time it will sink in... I doubt it. Selective, cherry picking et al.

It says in the Wikipedia page that other countries don't condone stoning or let it be legal, but it also says that it still happens outside of governmental law, so I suppose we're both right about that one though.

Perhaps with all your brilliant rhetoric about female breadwinners, could provide some information or evidence of all these fantastic female feminist Islamic women? I won't hold my breath. Unfortunately again, your cherry picking skills are at work. You choose to be blinded by the few good examples (if you can even find evidence of this to be true) than look at the whole sum.

Oh my fucking Aunt. You're using Indonesia and Egypt as grounds for a good example? Yeah okay, they might drink there a bit more, but they also provide women with a virginity test there when they join the army. Not to mention radical Islam in the country has actually been gaining ground for a while now. Please do some research and use facts - not just anecdotal claptrap like "just walk in to any Indonesian restaurant in Hackney and you'll see women in headscarves serving pork, whilst necking shots at the bar with her non-Muslim boyfriend" You might want to check the current state of them...

https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/08/10/these-political-games-ruin-our-lives/indonesias-lgbt-community-under-threat

https://www.hrw.org/middle-east/n-africa/egypt

If you're so sure about your theory that everything is fine and lovely and there's no problem in all of these Muslim majority countries that clearly have a lot of human rights violations to be found, perhaps you could explain to me why terrorism and rape has risen so much in Europe in the last few twenty years? Is it because problems and practices and religion from the Middle East has started becoming more common in Europe? Or, in your eyes, is it just a huge coincidence?

Maybe you could explain to me, why there are so many terrorists following Islam at the moment? Why not Christianity? Or Hinduism? If it was colonialism, or isolation or not assimilating, then I'd expect almost every group of foreigners coming to Europe to be bombing and raping so much, but they're not. So can you explain to me what the difference is? If it's because Christian-Judeo Europe has been able to change so dramatically why is it now Europe's responsibility to change the Muslim world by using our continent and the deaths of people and rape of women as the board with which they can transform? Explain to me why so many people have died also in Turkey, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Afghanistan at the hands of Islamic radicals but it's somehow Europe's responsibility to fix all that? Or do you just feel guilty about colonization or 'white privilege'? Just explain why you believe all the stuff you do without any facts to back up your bloody theories.

And if there's no connection between what is happeneing in Europe at the moment, then why aren't other large groups of 'outliers' to use your term, not causing so much damage. Why no large Chinese group in Cologne who sexually assaulted 500 women? no 1000 people fighting the police and sexually assaulting women in Dortmund this year India? Why no large group of Brazilians have been running up and down France driving lorries in to people and blowing people up and shooting people? So you explain to me what the problem is and stop burying you head in the apologetic sand.
 

[Alex DeLarge]

Charlie Brooker's Wipe was fantastic about Farage, the man who has no time for women being sexually assaulted.

[Cornelius_Fudge]

4 minutes ago, Alex DeLarge said:

Charlie Brooker's Wipe was fantastic about Farage, the man who has no time for women being sexually assaulted.

There's a new series of Screen Wipe?!

[Alex DeLarge]

33 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

There's a new series of Screen Wipe?!

Haha I wish! Sorry I meant the year in review.

[arcade fireman]

4 hours ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

What a wonderful piece of apologetic pap. You're really scraping the barrel with your own 'interpretations' of Islam and then rather patronizingly suggesting that your view is more indicative of Islam, instead of the Muslim countries which routinely suppress women and treat them like shit.

Theologians much smarter than you or I explain the Koran is meant to be the 'true' word of God. So, yeah, rationally speaking, that's why you see so many religious extremist groups coming from Islam. The connection is quite clear and the dead in Turkey, the dead in Berlin, the dead in Paris, the dead in Nice, the raped women in Sweden, the raped women in Germany, the New Years eve rampage by immigrants in Dortmund (etc etc because I could go on) surely wouldn't appreciate your apology nonsense "oh their interpretation is wrong, that's all. They should listen to me and my interpretation" bollocks.
 

Tell me which theologians are saying that those carrying out terrorist attacks are carrying out the literal word of the Koran. Go on, give a few sources. Not just one - since you can track down one fringe lunatic from any field to say anything. Show evidence there is even a consensus amongst theologians that the terrorists carrying out Muslims are the ones faithfully following their religion and not the ones perverting it. 

Clearly it is a question of interpretation. Otherwise we would be seeing the MAJORITY of Muslims carrying out or directly supporting these terrorist attacks. Do you think all the vast majority of good law abiding Muslims who abhor this rubbish are actually bad Muslims who don't follow their faith? Or do you think the vast majority of Muslims secretly support this stuff and aren't telling anyone but each other? For your fallacy to be true, it would have to be one of the two. Maybe they should listen to your half baked shit about their religion, since you know their religion so much better than they do.

This isn't just true for terrorism. If you engaged or got to know a lot of Muslims you will see a lot of them practice their faith in different ways. Some pray five times a day, some only when they can. Some go to Mosque more than others. Some women wear headscarves, some don't. Some will go and socialise in places where others drink alcohol even if they don't drink themselves (as a guy and a girl did on our Christmas party), others feel such a thing would be wrong (fair enough). What else would you put that down to, oh great scholar of Islam? 

Bringing the rapes in? Real classy. You could at least say the terrorists are claiming to do so in the name of Islam so this is relevant. But now you're saying that those carrying out those sex attacks are carrying out the true word of the Koran. Maybe you could tell the next Muslims you meet that the Muslim people who are following their religion properly are the ones carrying out rapes and sexual assaults.

Quote

The statistics are clear; the human rights websites have got a lot of data for you to look at. Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Douglas Murray - they use evidence, not just theories or slogans. Evidence, evidence, evidence. History books have a lot of information too if you ever cared to open a book and broaden your horizons further back then between the 50s and 70s.

You're actually right about Afghanistan though, being a more liberal place between the 50s and 70s. But was this because of Western influence and culture. So, what happened after that? Hmmm... Oh that's right... they rejected both Western culture and Russian culture and went back to being Islamic. They even replaced the word Democratic in their country's title if you needed any more help realising what the connection in this transformation was. I mean, your cherry picking is absolutely disgraceful (although quite funny). A few decades of heavy Western and Soviet influence brought modernization and peace in the region... not Islam.

I'm not making Islam an outlier - whatever the hell you mean by that - because I've never said I like other religions either. Again, this type of idiotic argument I've heard from more than one person in this thread. Just because I haven't mentioned all the shit things done by other religions doesn't mean I'm in favour of those ones either! Shocker. I wonder if this time it will sink in... I doubt it. Selective, cherry picking et al.

You can't make arguments yourself so you direct me to a bunch of people who can make these shite arguments more eloquently than you can. Oh... these four were the "theologians" you were talking about. This explains a lot 

"History books have a lot of information" says the guy who cites Ben fucking Shapiro as an actual source. Or Douglas Murray, the writer of a book "Neoconservatism - Why We Need It". Yeah great sources. I mean you cite someone who edited the fucking Spectator as a serious source on Islam. And you have the nerve to tell me to read a history book! 

There are some fantastic fact based articles taking down Sam Harris' nonsense (to be fair he's the only one who isn't just a right wing shitbag so the only one worth entertaining):

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/28/sam_harriss_detestable_crusade_how_his_latest_anti_islam_tract_reveals_the_bankruptcy_of_his_ideas/

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/06/sam-harris-uncovered/

Soviet culture helped make Afghanistan more modern! I've heard it all now. And your western superiority complex makes you make things up about Afghanistan! The modernisation of Afghanistan wasn't down to "Western influence". It came from within, reforms which started with Amanullah Khan in the 1920s. You might find reading a few history books helps. 

So you're not making Islam an outlier?

Is your argument that all religions teach a lot of bad things, and Islam is just another one of those religions? The biggest difference being it's been perverted and twisted to commit evil acts of late far more than the others? In which case you're basically saying what the rest of us are.

Or is your argument that Islam itself is a particularly pernicious religion compared to all others? In which case you are clearly saying it's an outlier.

You can't have it both ways. Your mate Sam Harris would freely state Islam is an outlier - I can quote numerous times where he says as much. Own the argument if this is what you feel, don't run away from it. 

Quote

It says in the Wikipedia page that other countries don't condone stoning or let it be legal, but it also says that it still happens outside of governmental law, so I suppose we're both right about that one though.

Perhaps with all your brilliant rhetoric about female breadwinners, could provide some information or evidence of all these fantastic female feminist Islamic women? I won't hold my breath. Unfortunately again, your cherry picking skills are at work. You choose to be blinded by the few good examples (if you can even find evidence of this to be true) than look at the whole sum.

Oh my fucking Aunt. You're using Indonesia and Egypt as grounds for a good example? Yeah okay, they might drink there a bit more, but they also provide women with a virginity test there when they join the army. Not to mention radical Islam in the country has actually been gaining ground for a while now. Please do some research and use facts - not just anecdotal claptrap like "just walk in to any Indonesian restaurant in Hackney and you'll see women in headscarves serving pork, whilst necking shots at the bar with her non-Muslim boyfriend"  You might want to check the current state of them...

https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/08/10/these-political-games-ruin-our-lives/indonesias-lgbt-community-under-threat

https://www.hrw.org/middle-east/n-

No, you're wrong. You represented stoning as something which was widespread throughout the Muslim world and happened regularly. I never claimed it didn't happen, just it was wholly unrepresentative of Islam/Muslims generally and didn't happen in most Muslim countries. Which is very much the picture. The vast majority of Muslims worldwide will not live somewhere stoning is done. 

Evidence? I'm not sure how or why you want me to provide evidence of my 240 strong year group at medical school, where there were 40-50 Muslim women. The fact you would even want evidence of this and think this is so fucking outlandish an idea just shows how sheltered your sad little life is. The vascular surgical trainee and her husband who works in accounting? Another one who I did one of my first jobs with who is now training to be a GP and her husband is a teacher? Those are two I've worked with who I know pretty well that I would guess are the main breadwinners for their family, one of them wears a headscarf the other doesn't but both certainly are Muslims in every sense of the word. And certainly I would at least a few guess out of the many, many others I don't know to the same degree to know what their husbands do are the same. How is this so hard for you to believe?! 

There it is again. Your definition of how liberated Muslim women are by a) whether they drink alcohol and b ) whether they will have sex with non-Muslims. It was in your previous post and it's in this post again. This, I daresay reveals a lot about how backwards your own attitudes are. It's seriously creepy. At no point did I use those two things as markers for how liberated women are.

You accuse me of "cherry picking" and using anecdotes. Yet you use cherry picking and anecdotes to prove your points.

Here's the thing. At no point would I or anyone claim that things are brilliant for women in a lot of the Muslim world. Certainly there's no denying many in power use what's written in the Koran to do some truly horrible things to women. So you posting about the Indonesian Govt making their women do virginity tests doesn't really highlight anything surprising. Not least because you are using the actions of the Indonesian Government as synonymous with the actions of their people. Maybe I will judge North Koreans by what Kim Jong Un does. Or, if we're using democratically elected governments, maybe I will judge Russians by the foul way that LGBT are treated there. Or I'll judge Zimbabweans by the actions of Mugabe? 

What many who aren't filled with the sort of bigoted hate that you are would argue is that it's very much a mixed picture. A third of the Egyptian Parliament are women (our figure is 29%). Bangladesh has had vile attacks against atheist bloggers, yet has had female PMs for the last 25 years. Pakistan very famously had a female leader. Again - this is how I would judge the liberation of women - whether they can achieve anything that men can, not by what they drink or who the fuck like you seem to.

Does this prove women are fully liberated in each of these countries? Of course not. But it certainly proves that Islam isn't synonymous with the oppression and subjugation of women like you claim it is either.

Quote

 

If you're so sure about your theory that everything is fine and lovely and there's no problem in all of these Muslim majority countries that clearly have a lot of human rights violations to be found, perhaps you could explain to me why terrorism and rape has risen so much in Europe in the last few twenty years? Is it because problems and practices and religion from the Middle East has started becoming more common in Europe? Or, in your eyes, is it just a huge coincidence?

Maybe you could explain to me, why there are so many terrorists following Islam at the moment? Why not Christianity? Or Hinduism? If it was colonialism, or isolation or not assimilating, then I'd expect almost every group of foreigners coming to Europe to be bombing and raping so much, but they're not. So can you explain to me what the difference is? If it's because Christian-Judeo Europe has been able to change so dramatically why is it now Europe's responsibility to change the Muslim world by using our continent and the deaths of people and rape of women as the board with which they can transform? Explain to me why so many people have died also in Turkey, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Afghanistan at the hands of Islamic radicals but it's somehow Europe's responsibility to fix all that? Or do you just feel guilty about colonization or 'white privilege'? Just explain why you believe all the stuff you do without any facts to back up your bloody theories.

And if there's no connection between what is happeneing in Europe at the moment, then why aren't other large groups of 'outliers' to use your term, not causing so much damage. Why no large Chinese group in Cologne who sexually assaulted 500 women? no 1000 people fighting the police and sexually assaulting women in Dortmund this year India? Why no large group of Brazilians have been running up and down France driving lorries in to people and blowing people up and shooting people? So you explain to me what the problem is and stop burying you head in the apologetic sand.

 

 At no point did I say everything was "fine and lovely" in the Muslim world you cretin. I've repeatedly stated there are big problems in a lot of Muslim countries, just I stated factors other than "ZOMG ISLAM EVIL" as you seemed to. 

Terrorism? Of course the vast majority of terrorism that's affected Europe has been affected by uses Islam as its inspiration. At what point have I said that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism? This is just feeble minded straw man idiocy. The whole argument however has been whether this is their vile interpretation of Islam which is making them do things (my argument) or whether their interpretation of Islam is essentially the same which is practiced by billions worldwide (which seems to be yours). 

Rape?! You think the increase of rapes in this country this last 20 years is down to Muslims? This is where you show yourself up to be a real bigot. If you'd just kept on the terrorist line, you probably would have at least been forgiven for just another basic simpleton who equates Islam with terrorism. But no. 2010 figures for people convicted of sexual offences by ethnicity? 8% ethnicity not known - out of the other 92%, 76% were white, 7% black and 8% white. Figures here at the bottom: https://fullfact.org/news/are-asians-disproportionately-represented-prosecutions-sex-offences/ . And certainly in 2014 at least the arrest ratios were pretty similar againhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/480250/bulletin.pdf (p.36). Do you think that 76% have been influenced by the Muslims? Because rape was a fucking rarity before the Muslims arrived. 

You might want to read up a bit on what's happening in India. Sexual assaults are rampant. Just on New Years' Eve in Bangalore there was a whole host of sexual assaults on women watching the NYE celebrations. The reaction of the Hindu authorities? To blame the women wearing Western clothes. Not to mention the horrendous multiple bus attacks in Delhi etc over the past few years. Certainly the vast majority of the perpetrators weren't Muslim. 

So let's just run this through:

You cite supposed "experts" on Islam who include an editor of The Spectator.

You claim that "western culture" brought liberalism to Afghanistan when historical evidence clearly states the opposite.

You claim the increase in rape in Europe these last 20 years is down to Muslims when clearly around three quarters of offenders (in the UK at least) are white.

You claim you don't see Muslims as an outlier when all your statements clearly state opposite.

You repeatedly define how liberated Muslim women are solely by whether they can drink alcohol and the guys they can fuck.

You are so sheltered you find the idea of Muslim women being professional and being breadwinners so foreign that you ask for evidence for it, despite our hospitals being packed with female Muslim doctors and plenty having positions of power in their own countries.

You are the very definition of ignorant. Your are limited to a small band of authors who cement your own worldview. Clearly based on your comment about wanting evidence about Muslim professional women, you clearly lead a life where you don't make meaningful connections with that many folk different to you. I feel genuinely bad for you. 

 

 

Edited January 5, 2017 by arcade fireman

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

Clearly it is a question of interpretation. Otherwise we would be seeing the MAJORITY of Muslims carrying out or directly supporting these terrorist attacks.

This ^^

The facts prove it true.

Those who don't do facts think something else.

 

PS: a fantastic post Fireman. You have more patience than I would have managed.

 

Edited January 6, 2017 by eFestivals

[Cornelius_Fudge]

11 hours ago, arcade fireman said:

Tell me which theologians are saying that those carrying out terrorist attacks are carrying out the literal word of the Koran. Go on, give a few sources. Not just one - since you can track down one fringe lunatic from any field to say anything. Show evidence there is even a consensus amongst theologians that the terrorists carrying out Muslims are the ones faithfully following their religion and not the ones perverting it. 

Clearly it is a question of interpretation. Otherwise we would be seeing the MAJORITY of Muslims carrying out or directly supporting these terrorist attacks. Do you think all the vast majority of good law abiding Muslims who abhor this rubbish are actually bad Muslims who don't follow their faith? Or do you think the vast majority of Muslims secretly support this stuff and aren't telling anyone but each other? For your fallacy to be true, it would have to be one of the two. Maybe they should listen to your half baked shit about their religion, since you know their religion so much better than they do.

This isn't just true for terrorism. If you engaged or got to know a lot of Muslims you will see a lot of them practice their faith in different ways. Some pray five times a day, some only when they can. Some go to Mosque more than others. Some women wear headscarves, some don't. Some will go and socialise in places where others drink alcohol even if they don't drink themselves (as a guy and a girl did on our Christmas party), others feel such a thing would be wrong (fair enough). What else would you put that down to, oh great scholar of Islam? 

Bringing the rapes in? Real classy. You could at least say the terrorists are claiming to do so in the name of Islam so this is relevant. But now you're saying that those carrying out those sex attacks are carrying out the true word of the Koran. Maybe you could tell the next Muslims you meet that the Muslim people who are following their religion properly are the ones carrying out rapes and sexual assaults.

You can't make arguments yourself so you direct me to a bunch of people who can make these shite arguments more eloquently than you can. Oh... these four were the "theologians" you were talking about. This explains a lot 

"History books have a lot of information" says the guy who cites Ben fucking Shapiro as an actual source. Or Douglas Murray, the writer of a book "Neoconservatism - Why We Need It". Yeah great sources. I mean you cite someone who edited the fucking Spectator as a serious source on Islam. And you have the nerve to tell me to read a history book! 

There are some fantastic fact based articles taking down Sam Harris' nonsense (to be fair he's the only one who isn't just a right wing shitbag so the only one worth entertaining):

http://www.salon.com/2015/12/28/sam_harriss_detestable_crusade_how_his_latest_anti_islam_tract_reveals_the_bankruptcy_of_his_ideas/

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/06/sam-harris-uncovered/

Soviet culture helped make Afghanistan more modern! I've heard it all now. And your western superiority complex makes you make things up about Afghanistan! The modernisation of Afghanistan wasn't down to "Western influence". It came from within, reforms which started with Amanullah Khan in the 1920s. You might find reading a few history books helps. 

So you're not making Islam an outlier?

Is your argument that all religions teach a lot of bad things, and Islam is just another one of those religions? The biggest difference being it's been perverted and twisted to commit evil acts of late far more than the others? In which case you're basically saying what the rest of us are.

Or is your argument that Islam itself is a particularly pernicious religion compared to all others? In which case you are clearly saying it's an outlier.

You can't have it both ways. Your mate Sam Harris would freely state Islam is an outlier - I can quote numerous times where he says as much. Own the argument if this is what you feel, don't run away from it. 

No, you're wrong. You represented stoning as something which was widespread throughout the Muslim world and happened regularly. I never claimed it didn't happen, just it was wholly unrepresentative of Islam/Muslims generally and didn't happen in most Muslim countries. Which is very much the picture. The vast majority of Muslims worldwide will not live somewhere stoning is done. 

Evidence? I'm not sure how or why you want me to provide evidence of my 240 strong year group at medical school, where there were 40-50 Muslim women. The fact you would even want evidence of this and think this is so fucking outlandish an idea just shows how sheltered your sad little life is. The vascular surgical trainee and her husband who works in accounting? Another one who I did one of my first jobs with who is now training to be a GP and her husband is a teacher? Those are two I've worked with who I know pretty well that I would guess are the main breadwinners for their family, one of them wears a headscarf the other doesn't but both certainly are Muslims in every sense of the word. And certainly I would at least a few guess out of the many, many others I don't know to the same degree to know what their husbands do are the same. How is this so hard for you to believe?! 

There it is again. Your definition of how liberated Muslim women are by a) whether they drink alcohol and b ) whether they will have sex with non-Muslims. It was in your previous post and it's in this post again. This, I daresay reveals a lot about how backwards your own attitudes are. It's seriously creepy. At no point did I use those two things as markers for how liberated women are.

You accuse me of "cherry picking" and using anecdotes. Yet you use cherry picking and anecdotes to prove your points.

Here's the thing. At no point would I or anyone claim that things are brilliant for women in a lot of the Muslim world. Certainly there's no denying many in power use what's written in the Koran to do some truly horrible things to women. So you posting about the Indonesian Govt making their women do virginity tests doesn't really highlight anything surprising. Not least because you are using the actions of the Indonesian Government as synonymous with the actions of their people. Maybe I will judge North Koreans by what Kim Jong Un does. Or, if we're using democratically elected governments, maybe I will judge Russians by the foul way that LGBT are treated there. Or I'll judge Zimbabweans by the actions of Mugabe? 

What many who aren't filled with the sort of bigoted hate that you are would argue is that it's very much a mixed picture. A third of the Egyptian Parliament are women (our figure is 29%). Bangladesh has had vile attacks against atheist bloggers, yet has had female PMs for the last 25 years. Pakistan very famously had a female leader. Again - this is how I would judge the liberation of women - whether they can achieve anything that men can, not by what they drink or who the fuck like you seem to.

Does this prove women are fully liberated in each of these countries? Of course not. But it certainly proves that Islam isn't synonymous with the oppression and subjugation of women like you claim it is either.

 At no point did I say everything was "fine and lovely" in the Muslim world you cretin. I've repeatedly stated there are big problems in a lot of Muslim countries, just I stated factors other than "ZOMG ISLAM EVIL" as you seemed to. 

Terrorism? Of course the vast majority of terrorism that's affected Europe has been affected by uses Islam as its inspiration. At what point have I said that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism? This is just feeble minded straw man idiocy. The whole argument however has been whether this is their vile interpretation of Islam which is making them do things (my argument) or whether their interpretation of Islam is essentially the same which is practiced by billions worldwide (which seems to be yours). 

Rape?! You think the increase of rapes in this country this last 20 years is down to Muslims? This is where you show yourself up to be a real bigot. If you'd just kept on the terrorist line, you probably would have at least been forgiven for just another basic simpleton who equates Islam with terrorism. But no. 2010 figures for people convicted of sexual offences by ethnicity? 8% ethnicity not known - out of the other 92%, 76% were white, 7% black and 8% white. Figures here at the bottom: https://fullfact.org/news/are-asians-disproportionately-represented-prosecutions-sex-offences/ . And certainly in 2014 at least the arrest ratios were pretty similar againhttps://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/480250/bulletin.pdf (p.36). Do you think that 76% have been influenced by the Muslims? Because rape was a fucking rarity before the Muslims arrived. 

You might want to read up a bit on what's happening in India. Sexual assaults are rampant. Just on New Years' Eve in Bangalore there was a whole host of sexual assaults on women watching the NYE celebrations. The reaction of the Hindu authorities? To blame the women wearing Western clothes. Not to mention the horrendous multiple bus attacks in Delhi etc over the past few years. Certainly the vast majority of the perpetrators weren't Muslim. 

So let's just run this through:

You cite supposed "experts" on Islam who include an editor of The Spectator.

You claim that "western culture" brought liberalism to Afghanistan when historical evidence clearly states the opposite.

You claim the increase in rape in Europe these last 20 years is down to Muslims when clearly around three quarters of offenders (in the UK at least) are white.

You claim you don't see Muslims as an outlier when all your statements clearly state opposite.

You repeatedly define how liberated Muslim women are solely by whether they can drink alcohol and the guys they can fuck.

You are so sheltered you find the idea of Muslim women being professional and being breadwinners so foreign that you ask for evidence for it, despite our hospitals being packed with female Muslim doctors and plenty having positions of power in their own countries.

You are the very definition of ignorant. Your are limited to a small band of authors who cement your own worldview. Clearly based on your comment about wanting evidence about Muslim professional women, you clearly lead a life where you don't make meaningful connections with that many folk different to you. I feel genuinely bad for you. 

 

 

You don't need a theologian to tell you that they're carrying out the literal word of God... because everybody who follows or studies Islam can tell you that. You don't even need to be a theologian to work that out, just have your own independent train of thought. But apparently there's still no connection between the two. Wow. Every time there's a mass murder, I suppose you go out and tell everyone how great Islam is - the very definition of an apologist.

I mentioned Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Douglas Murray, Ben Shapiro. Yes. I notice you like to attack them on their jobs/titles/politics because that's obviously what Leftist people without a clue do, but who would you like to quote? Please, offer some names for me to watch some of their stuff. I'm curious, please, very curious who you believe to be a good speaker on this matter to be. Any names? Anyone? Just that group of nurses you probably know nothing about apart from they're Muslim

So you're saying that there are not a very large group of Muslims with radical opinions? You're saying your anecdotal evidence is better than the actions and beliefs of millions of Muslims coming from the Middle East of North Africa. There's a very big difference between some that have grown up in Western civilization but still, many who have grown up in France, the UK, Germany, still also hold these radical views. Views like suicide bombings are sometimes justified. Views that honour killings are some times justified. Have you asked all these women you talk of? Have you asked them of their real beliefs? No, I thought not. But they're women, and there's 50 of them so they're the true face of Islam - according to you. Your naivety is pretty poor, as is your ability to define what is a credible source. Oh right I forgot, they can also now choose (or probably more accurate would be there brothers/husbands choose) if they have difficulties in life to be heard in Sharia court, not the British court. Which are known to be horribly unfair to women... but you know... 'goooo the tiny example I can find to support my argument'. Well done.

And yeah, as I said to someone else, just because there aren't 1 billion terror deaths every day - one because it's not so easy to do, but also because they don't want to die - doesn't mean they don't have other radical views against women and homosexuals. You seem to prefer to defend Muslims than their oppression of women and gays - which is MASSIVELY reported on websites like the Human Rights Watch. Is this the tragic life of a the Left now?! Unbelievable. Defend a miniority just because they're coming from poor countries and mostly brown or black, even though they quite clearly hate women and homosexuals. It's really pathetic.

Oh, okay, so you're just really chuffed with yourself because I got a number wrong of how many countries. Well done, you found me out, my whole argument is over now because it's actually only 15 (or possibly higher with many practicing stoning outside of the law). You're gloating of a technicality like that, for one issue I brought up. Okay, I'll admit I got the number wrong, but still though, which of these Muslim majority countries would you really let your daughter grow up in? Which one would you be happy for her to marry a Muslim guy? Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Iran? Because even wearing a headscarf is a form of oppression and telling a woman what she can and can't do. I just don't get your motivation. You're defending an ideology that would quite clearly treat your daughter/wife/mother like shit.

And hold the phone you a-class spin-wizzard. When did I say I wasn't owning my statements? I was never here defending any other religions - I seem to be the only person here who is trying to keep the focus on one ideology and not muddy the pot by trying to foolishly compare it to other religions. You can't compare Christianity to Hinduism or Judaism. But I'm definitely an atheist if that helps you sleep at night and I'm definitely against the subjection of women, LGBT people

Oh my word. When did I say that all the rape in the UK was down to Muslims? Are you high? Classic sensationalist buffoonery. Are you a secret journalist at the Guardian? Although, is it true that a lot of women have been raped by immigrants? Again I showed someone already that this is truer of immigrants than Germans, so if you deny that, not only are you lying, but you're also proving what an apologist cuck you are.

If you listen to the Douglas Murray, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro - they all use facts and evidence for their argument. Something you seem totally unable to do - apart from saying that my estimation of countries who have stoning is wrong, but please provide some actual evidence that they don't have radical views on women, gays, non-believers.

I've shown evidence that more non-Germans have been causing crimes in Germany for the last year.
There's plenty of evidence to support how shit life is in the majority of Muslim countries on websites like the Human Rights Watch.
There's plenty of evidence to show that Sharia law is generally awful to women and homosexuals and apostates in most Muslim majority countries.
There's a lot of evidence to show that the reason Afghanistan was modernized because of the West and Russian, and also because of their own people too - if you want me to type that for your own happiness - until the call to Islam took over again.

I just want to know why you think that by having a lot of Muslims in Europe is really going to see them change their opinions so much? What exactly is your end goal? Or is it you have such a horrible internal struggle to face up to reality and call a spade a spade.

And, if it was truly only down to 'interpretation' as you and some of your cohorts would like to believe, then perhaps you would like to explain why there aren't so many radical thinkers, so many terrorist organizations and so many deaths as a result of Christianity/Hinduism/Sikhism. Because they all have many millions of believers - but with very minimal violence. What is happening that is so special in the Islam world that isn't happening in the rest of the world? Is it the religion that they're interpreting? Or is it all just one big coincidence?


 

Edited January 6, 2017 by Cornelius_Fudge

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

You don't need a theologian to tell you that they're carrying out the literal word of God... because everybody who follows or studies Islam can tell you that.

Yep, those terrorists think they are.

But the vast majority of Muslims don't think the same, which is why there's only a tiny tiny TINY minority of Muslims who are those terrorists, and is why Muslim mothers and Muslim prime ministers and Muslim presidents condemn those terrorists.

You might as well be saying the same thing about Christians. There's shit loads of nasty & nutty stuff in the old and new testaments which are supposedly religious obligations, too.

What those terrorists are doing is fuck all to do with the Islamic religion that the vast majority follow, just as yank Christian extremists are fuck all to do with the Christianity that the vast majority of Christians follow.

As Fireman pointed out, you're trying to claim rape as part of their religion, which proves you as mad in the head as any of those terrorists. Mad in the head is a problem for many people, not limited to the religious and certainly not just Muslims. YOU are the proof of that.

[arcade fireman]

15 hours ago, Cornelius_Fudge said:

You don't need a theologian to tell you that they're carrying out the literal word of God... because everybody who follows or studies Islam can tell you that. You don't even need to be a theologian to work that out, just have your own independent train of thought. But apparently there's still no connection between the two. Wow. Every time there's a mass murder, I suppose you go out and tell everyone how great Islam is - the very definition of an apologist.

I've repeatedly said there is a connection. Observe my very last post:

Quote

Terrorism? Of course the vast majority of terrorism that's affected Europe has been affected by uses Islam as its inspiration. At what point have I said that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism? This is just feeble minded straw man idiocy

So why do you insist on characterising my arguments as claiming there is no connection? I have repeatedly said there is a connection, but qualified this. There is however a huge difference between two things being connected (as I have repeatedly said they are) and two things being synonymous (as you seem to claim they are.

At no point have I said "how great Islam is" you moron. I think Islam is a whole heap of fairy stories with some poisonous shit contained within its texts just like most of the other major world religions. 

Quote

I mentioned Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Douglas Murray, Ben Shapiro. Yes. I notice you like to attack them on their jobs/titles/politics because that's obviously what Leftist people without a clue do, but who would you like to quote? Please, offer some names for me to watch some of their stuff. I'm curious, please, very curious who you believe to be a good speaker on this matter to be. Any names? Anyone? Just that group of nurses you probably know nothing about apart from they're Muslim

Reza Aslan is pretty bloody good actually. You see unlike those names you mentioned, he actually is a theologian. He has a Masters from Harvard in Theological Studies. How man theological qualifications do your four horsemen have? Of course it's legitimate to discredit people who edited fucking Breitbart (as Ben Shapiro did) as being valid sources on Islam. Even Sam Harris is a neuroscientist by education. You can't just hide behind sources in lieu of actual arguments of your own, least of all sources none of whom are actually experts in their field. Selling a bunch of books doesn't make you an expert in something. But you right wingers never really liked experts anyway. 

If we're just using people we like at either end of the political spectrum, Chomsky is an atheist who makes similar points on this. Both Aslan and Chomsky have identified this wave of terrorism as being inspired by Islam (before you get the idiotic straw man in again), however have pointed the finger far more at the likes of Saudi Arabia whose brand of Wahhabism is one of the main things fuelling Islamic extremism globally. The same Saudi Arabia who have our western democratically elected Governments eating out of their hand.

I'm not sure whether you using the word "nurses" to describe doctors is a joke or not. Given your other clearly displayed attitudes towards Muslim women here, nothing would surprise me.

Quote

So you're saying that there are not a very large group of Muslims with radical opinions? You're saying your anecdotal  evidence is better than the actions and beliefs of millions of Muslims coming from the Middle East of North Africa. There's a very big difference between some that have grown up in Western civilization but still, many who have grown up in France, the UK, Germany, still also hold these radical views. Views like suicide bombings are sometimes justified. Views that honour killings are some times justified. Have you asked all these women you talk of? Have you asked them of their real beliefs? No, I thought not. But they're women, and there's 50 of them so they're the true face of Islam - according to you. Your naivety is pretty poor, as is your ability to define what is a credible source. Oh right I forgot, they can also now choose (or probably more accurate would be there brothers/husbands choose) if they have difficulties in life to be heard in Sharia court, not the British court. Which are known to be horribly unfair to women... but you know... 'goooo the tiny example I can find to support my argument'. Well done.

More straw men arguments from you. I actually grew up in the North West in a school which was 20-25% Muslim. And again my year in university had about that many Muslims. I learn a lot about people and how they are doing the job I do. Apart from the two years I lived in Sydney, most days in my school and work life from seven years old until now I will have been spending studying, working or treating Muslim people week in, week out. I don't claim the 50 women I went to medical school were the "true face of Islam". Yet another straw man argument - you seem to like these.

You see, unlike you I don't think there's any such thing as the "true face of Islam". Just like how there's no such thing as the "true face of Christianity" etc. It's utterly ludicrous you would value reading books by people with no theological credentials over personal experiences when it comes to knowing what Muslims are like. 

What do you define as "very large"? Of course there are a significant amount of Muslims with radical opinions. How many? Why do some countries (e.g. Saudi) ban women from driving and others elect them to lead their countries? This is something you have consistently failed to answer.

You think MY ability to define a credible source is poor? Sorry - on what possible fucking level are four men none of whom hold theological qualifications a credible source on Islam? Go on, tell me how Ben Shapiro is a credible source on Islam. You cited him. This should be fun. 

Quote

And yeah, as I said to someone else, just because there aren't 1 billion terror deaths every day - one because it's not so easy to do, but also because they don't want to die - doesn't mean they don't have other radical views against women and homosexuals. You seem to prefer to defend Muslims than their oppression of women and gays - which is MASSIVELY reported on websites like the Human Rights Watch. Is this the tragic life of a the Left now?! Unbelievable. Defend a miniority just because they're coming from poor countries and mostly brown or black, even though they quite clearly hate women and homosexuals. It's really pathetic

Some Islamic communities treat women like shit. Others elect them to the very top of the tree. How is it possible that so many Muslim majority countries can democratically elect women to positions of power (Pakistan, Egypt, Kosovo, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Senegal...) - these aren't just countries where they held a token position (there's plenty of other countries with a few women MPs), these are all places where they became President or where they hold a large number of seats in Parliament. Of course, many of these countries women are also treated like crap in other places. But the only one painting broad brush strokes here is you. The very fact that there are massively differing ways women are treated by the wider Muslim population (elected office is the surest possible way to demonstrate this) shows the picture is mixed and complicated.

Please though, tell me where Human Rights Watch tells me that Muslims are oppressing women and gays. I'm looking forward to this article. I'm sure they will say that various dictators and theocratic monarchies in the Islamic world are doing horrible things to women and homosexuals. On this I fully agree with them and they're correct to highlight this.

Still, if you're so keen on using HRW as a source, what do you think of these statements they put out? Or are you in fact just cherry picking?

http://globalnews.ca/news/2479988/human-rights-watch-slams-europe-us-for-blatant-islamophobia/

Or maybe this article?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/27/world-report-2016-politics-fear-threatens-rights

Or do you somehow suddenly think they're a less credible source because they have probably published some stuff that would make them lefties in your eyes?

"Defend a minority even though they clearly hate women and homosexuals"?! Fuck you are idiotic. I am defending Muslims against the broad brush strokes you paint. I am saying the Muslim world is a hell of a lot more complex than your tiny mind will give it credit for. I wholly condemn the actions of those in power in the Muslim world who use their religion as an excuse to oppress others. YOU insist on attacking a whole minority based on the actions of some.

If we're talking oppressing homosexuals though, you do realise the vast majority of sub Saharan Christian Africa also criminalises homosexuality? Or that much of the Caribbean also legislate for imprisonment for homosexuals? The Koran is not the only book which punishes homosexuality. If you can't see the massive effects poverty has on the way religion is interpreted and carried out then you're absolutely clueless. It's not a coincidence that much of the developing Christian countries also are pretty awful for gay rights too. Maybe not as bad, but it's hardly a competition. 

Quote

 

Oh, okay, so you're just really chuffed with yourself because I got a number wrong of how many countries. Well done, you found me out, my whole argument is over now because it's actually only 15 (or possibly higher with many practicing stoning outside of the law). You're gloating of a technicality like that, for one issue I brought up. Okay, I'll admit I got the number wrong, but still though, which of these Muslim majority countries would you really let your daughter grow up in? Which one would you be happy for her to marry a Muslim guy? Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Iran? Because even wearing a headscarf is a form of oppression and telling a woman what she can and can't do. I just don't get your motivation. You're defending an ideology that would quite clearly treat your daughter/wife/mother like shit.

And hold the phone you a-class spin-wizzard. When did I say I wasn't owning my statements? I was never here defending any other religions - I seem to be the only person here who is trying to keep the focus on one ideology and not muddy the pot by trying to foolishly compare it to other religions. You can't compare Christianity to Hinduism or Judaism. But I'm definitely an atheist if that helps you sleep at night and I'm definitely against the subjection of women, LGBT people

 

It's not "how many countries" you got wrong. It's your characterisation of stoning as something which was common place and habitual in the Muslim world. When in fact it's a very rare occurrence in a minority of Muslim countries worldwide. It's not a technicality, it's the very essence of what you were saying that's completely wrong.

I don't have a daughter, but if I did I wouldn't want her to grow up in most countries outside the OECD for very obvious reasons e.g. quality of life, opportunities. I'd rather she grew up in Egypt than Malawi though. I would rather she grew up Malaysia than Nigeria. I'd rather she grew up in Turkey (yes, even now) than in Russia. And again, you are the one painting the broad brush strokes. They would "quite clearly treat my daughter/mother/wife" like shit? In Saudi Arabia you might have a point. There's nothing "quite clear" about this in many other Muslim countries though. 

No, I have said you're not owning your statements. Answer my actual question on this one, I'll quote it again:

Quote

 

Is your argument that all religions teach a lot of bad things, and Islam is just another one of those religions? The biggest difference being it's been perverted and twisted to commit evil acts of late far more than the others? In which case you're basically saying what the rest of us are.

I am also, to all intents and purposes, an atheist too. But I don't subscribe to the same narrow minded views you do.

Quote

Oh my word. When did I say that all the rape in the UK was down to Muslims? Are you high? Classic sensationalist buffoonery. Are you a secret journalist at the Guardian? Although, is it true that a lot of women have been raped by immigrants? Again I showed someone already that this is truer of immigrants than Germans, so if you deny that, not only are you lying, but you're also proving what an apologist cuck you are.

CuckYou absolute fuckwit. Using the word "cuck" is one of the surest signs of a mind that's been poisoned by the alt-right. It's been well documented as a word primarily used by alt-right fucktards by many sources, including that left-liberal snowflake rag GQ:

http://www.gq.com/story/why-angry-white-men-love-calling-people-cucks

It's the surest sign of the intellectual and ideological company you keep. It doesn't even make fucking sense, when you break down the origins of the word.

I didn't say you claimed all rape in the UK was down to Muslims. Another straw man. This must be about a dozen in this post alone. Your claim was the rise of rapes was down to the "practices and religion from the Middle East".

Let's just quote it again:

Quote

If you're so sure about your theory that everything is fine and lovely and there's no problem in all of these Muslim majority countries that clearly have a lot of human rights violations to be found, perhaps you could explain to me why terrorism and rape has risen so much in Europe in the last few twenty years? Is it because problems and practices and religion from the Middle East has started becoming more common in Europe? Or, in your eyes, is it just a huge coincidence?

To be honest I have no energy in trawling through these pages and finding your minuscule point about "immigrants" (which ones?) in Germany. You can post it again if you like. And each country will have its own landscape.

What we can say for sure is that your assertions about this in the UK are absolutely factually incorrect, since the vast majority of both convictions and arrests for sexual assaults are for white men in the UK. As should be the case, given the breakdown of the population. But 76% out of 92% where ethnicity is known implies a reasonably proportionate amount. 

Quote

If you listen to the Douglas Murray, Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro - they all use facts and evidence for their argument. Something you seem totally unable to do - apart from saying that my estimation of countries who have stoning is wrong, but please provide some actual evidence that they don't have radical views on women, gays, non-believers.

You keep listing the same authors. All the time. The difference is this. How many facts have you listed? Apart from mentioning the same four authors over and over again? 

I've listed numerous Islamic countries where women have positions have significant power. I've listed numerous examples of how dangerous religious dogma and even terrorism isn't just confined to Islam. Unless you genuinely believe there are hardly any Muslim women with professional jobs (you must be genuinely sheltered if so) I have clearly demonstrated being Muslim isn't synonymous with oppressing women. I've demonstrated actually much of the world which is both religious and poor treats homosexuals like shit. I've clearly refuted your assertion that previous liberalism in Afghanistan was down to Western influence. 

You on the other hand have mischaracterised my arguments repeatedly as saying everything is fine and dandy in the Muslim world. You've claimed the increase in rapes in Europe is down to Muslim immigration in the last 20 years without any proof whatsoever - even a link with immigrants in one country is not proof for this.

Quote

 

I just want to know why you think that by having a lot of Muslims in Europe is really going to see them change their opinions so much? What exactly is your end goal? Or is it you have such a horrible internal struggle to face up to reality and call a spade a spade.

And, if it was truly only down to 'interpretation' as you and some of your cohorts would like to believe, then perhaps you would like to explain why there aren't so many radical thinkers, so many terrorist organizations and so many deaths as a result of Christianity/Hinduism/Sikhism. Because they all have many millions of believers - but with very minimal violence. What is happening that is so special in the Islam world that isn't happening in the rest of the world? Is it the religion that they're interpreting? Or is it all just one big coincidence?

 

Actually let's turn this round. The burden of proof is on you since you are the one making the accusations. I am saying Islamic terrorism is a real problem, that plenty of Muslim countries have abhorrent records on human rights, that the Koran like other holy books has some poisonous stuff in. 

However, if this is something that's inherent in Islam rather than something which has been heavily influenced by numerous geopolitical factors, how come Islamic terrorism only really became a big thing since the 1990s (arguably the 2000s since things really became widespread)? I mean of course it was a thing before, hijackings happened etc. But not on much more of a scale than the other types of terrorism. If waging a holy war on western values is such a big thing in Islam, if their religion is synonymous with murder and terrorism, why didn't we see attacks on the West long before then? 

Edited January 7, 2017 by arcade fireman

[eFestivals]

Fireman, I appauld you.

 

[arcade fireman]

On 05/01/2017 at 6:25 PM, Cornelius_Fudge said:

tremist groups coming from Islam. The connection is quite clear and the dead in Turkey, the dead in Berlin, the dead in Paris, the dead in Nice, the raped women in Sweden, the raped women in Germany, the New Years eve rampage by immigrants in Dortmund (etc etc because I could on)......

And if there's no connection between what is happeneing in Europe at the moment, then why aren't other large groups of 'outliers' to use your term, not causing so much damage. Why no large Chinese group in Cologne who sexually assaulted 500 women? no 1000 people fighting the police and sexually assaulting women in Dortmund this year? 
 

....aaand now this:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/edited-1038-headline-works-well-a7512636.html%3Famp?client=safari

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/04/german-police-slam-reports-new-years-migrant-violence.amp.html?client=safari

Be clear: this isn't to say people who are Muslims haven't actually done some terrible things or that the other stories are false. A lot of stories are factually correct.

This is about YOU. Being a far right bigoted fuckwit of minimal intelligence who uses Breitbart and fucking people who have edited Breitbart as credible sources of information on Islam.

And you have the fucking nerve to tell others about "credible sources" whilst repeatedly citing fake news as an argument (not to mention all the other shit you made up e.g. about stoning, Afghanistan etc). 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2017 by arcade fireman

[Cornelius_Fudge]

On 07/01/2017 at 3:06 AM, arcade fireman said:

I've repeatedly said there is a connection. Observe my very last post:

So why do you insist on characterising my arguments as claiming there is no connection? I have repeatedly said there is a connection, but qualified this. There is however a huge difference between two things being connected (as I have repeatedly said they are) and two things being synonymous (as you seem to claim they are.

At no point have I said "how great Islam is" you moron. I think Islam is a whole heap of fairy stories with some poisonous shit contained within its texts just like most of the other major world religions. 

Reza Aslan is pretty bloody good actually. You see unlike those names you mentioned, he actually is a theologian. He has a Masters from Harvard in Theological Studies. How man theological qualifications do your four horsemen have? Of course it's legitimate to discredit people who edited fucking Breitbart (as Ben Shapiro did) as being valid sources on Islam. Even Sam Harris is a neuroscientist by education. You can't just hide behind sources in lieu of actual arguments of your own, least of all sources none of whom are actually experts in their field. Selling a bunch of books doesn't make you an expert in something. But you right wingers never really liked experts anyway. 

If we're just using people we like at either end of the political spectrum, Chomsky is an atheist who makes similar points on this. Both Aslan and Chomsky have identified this wave of terrorism as being inspired by Islam (before you get the idiotic straw man in again), however have pointed the finger far more at the likes of Saudi Arabia whose brand of Wahhabism is one of the main things fuelling Islamic extremism globally. The same Saudi Arabia who have our western democratically elected Governments eating out of their hand.

I'm not sure whether you using the word "nurses" to describe doctors is a joke or not. Given your other clearly displayed attitudes towards Muslim women here, nothing would surprise me.

More straw men arguments from you. I actually grew up in the North West in a school which was 20-25% Muslim. And again my year in university had about that many Muslims. I learn a lot about people and how they are doing the job I do. Apart from the two years I lived in Sydney, most days in my school and work life from seven years old until now I will have been spending studying, working or treating Muslim people week in, week out. I don't claim the 50 women I went to medical school were the "true face of Islam". Yet another straw man argument - you seem to like these.

You see, unlike you I don't think there's any such thing as the "true face of Islam". Just like how there's no such thing as the "true face of Christianity" etc. It's utterly ludicrous you would value reading books by people with no theological credentials over personal experiences when it comes to knowing what Muslims are like. 

What do you define as "very large"? Of course there are a significant amount of Muslims with radical opinions. How many? Why do some countries (e.g. Saudi) ban women from driving and others elect them to lead their countries? This is something you have consistently failed to answer.

You think MY ability to define a credible source is poor? Sorry - on what possible fucking level are four men none of whom hold theological qualifications a credible source on Islam? Go on, tell me how Ben Shapiro is a credible source on Islam. You cited him. This should be fun. 

Some Islamic communities treat women like shit. Others elect them to the very top of the tree. How is it possible that so many Muslim majority countries can democratically elect women to positions of power (Pakistan, Egypt, Kosovo, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Senegal...) - these aren't just countries where they held a token position (there's plenty of other countries with a few women MPs), these are all places where they became President or where they hold a large number of seats in Parliament. Of course, many of these countries women are also treated like crap in other places. But the only one painting broad brush strokes here is you. The very fact that there are massively differing ways women are treated by the wider Muslim population (elected office is the surest possible way to demonstrate this) shows the picture is mixed and complicated.

Please though, tell me where Human Rights Watch tells me that Muslims are oppressing women and gays. I'm looking forward to this article. I'm sure they will say that various dictators and theocratic monarchies in the Islamic world are doing horrible things to women and homosexuals. On this I fully agree with them and they're correct to highlight this.

Still, if you're so keen on using HRW as a source, what do you think of these statements they put out? Or are you in fact just cherry picking?

http://globalnews.ca/news/2479988/human-rights-watch-slams-europe-us-for-blatant-islamophobia/

Or maybe this article?

https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/01/27/world-report-2016-politics-fear-threatens-rights

Or do you somehow suddenly think they're a less credible source because they have probably published some stuff that would make them lefties in your eyes?

"Defend a minority even though they clearly hate women and homosexuals"?! Fuck you are idiotic. I am defending Muslims against the broad brush strokes you paint. I am saying the Muslim world is a hell of a lot more complex than your tiny mind will give it credit for. I wholly condemn the actions of those in power in the Muslim world who use their religion as an excuse to oppress others. YOU insist on attacking a whole minority based on the actions of some.

If we're talking oppressing homosexuals though, you do realise the vast majority of sub Saharan Christian Africa also criminalises homosexuality? Or that much of the Caribbean also legislate for imprisonment for homosexuals? The Koran is not the only book which punishes homosexuality. If you can't see the massive effects poverty has on the way religion is interpreted and carried out then you're absolutely clueless. It's not a coincidence that much of the developing Christian countries also are pretty awful for gay rights too. Maybe not as bad, but it's hardly a competition. 

It's not "how many countries" you got wrong. It's your characterisation of stoning as something which was common place and habitual in the Muslim world. When in fact it's a very rare occurrence in a minority of Muslim countries worldwide. It's not a technicality, it's the very essence of what you were saying that's completely wrong.

I don't have a daughter, but if I did I wouldn't want her to grow up in most countries outside the OECD for very obvious reasons e.g. quality of life, opportunities. I'd rather she grew up in Egypt than Malawi though. I would rather she grew up Malaysia than Nigeria. I'd rather she grew up in Turkey (yes, even now) than in Russia. And again, you are the one painting the broad brush strokes. They would "quite clearly treat my daughter/mother/wife" like shit? In Saudi Arabia you might have a point. There's nothing "quite clear" about this in many other Muslim countries though. 

No, I have said you're not owning your statements. Answer my actual question on this one, I'll quote it again:

I am also, to all intents and purposes, an atheist too. But I don't subscribe to the same narrow minded views you do.

CuckYou absolute fuckwit. Using the word "cuck" is one of the surest signs of a mind that's been poisoned by the alt-right. It's been well documented as a word primarily used by alt-right fucktards by many sources, including that left-liberal snowflake rag GQ:

http://www.gq.com/story/why-angry-white-men-love-calling-people-cucks

It's the surest sign of the intellectual and ideological company you keep. It doesn't even make fucking sense, when you break down the origins of the word.

I didn't say you claimed all rape in the UK was down to Muslims. Another straw man. This must be about a dozen in this post alone. Your claim was the rise of rapes was down to the "practices and religion from the Middle East".

Let's just quote it again:

To be honest I have no energy in trawling through these pages and finding your minuscule point about "immigrants" (which ones?) in Germany. You can post it again if you like. And each country will have its own landscape.

What we can say for sure is that your assertions about this in the UK are absolutely factually incorrect, since the vast majority of both convictions and arrests for sexual assaults are for white men in the UK. As should be the case, given the breakdown of the population. But 76% out of 92% where ethnicity is known implies a reasonably proportionate amount. 

You keep listing the same authors. All the time. The difference is this. How many facts have you listed? Apart from mentioning the same four authors over and over again? 

I've listed numerous Islamic countries where women have positions have significant power. I've listed numerous examples of how dangerous religious dogma and even terrorism isn't just confined to Islam. Unless you genuinely believe there are hardly any Muslim women with professional jobs (you must be genuinely sheltered if so) I have clearly demonstrated being Muslim isn't synonymous with oppressing women. I've demonstrated actually much of the world which is both religious and poor treats homosexuals like shit. I've clearly refuted your assertion that previous liberalism in Afghanistan was down to Western influence. 

You on the other hand have mischaracterised my arguments repeatedly as saying everything is fine and dandy in the Muslim world. You've claimed the increase in rapes in Europe is down to Muslim immigration in the last 20 years without any proof whatsoever - even a link with immigrants in one country is not proof for this.

Actually let's turn this round. The burden of proof is on you since you are the one making the accusations. I am saying Islamic terrorism is a real problem, that plenty of Muslim countries have abhorrent records on human rights, that the Koran like other holy books has some poisonous stuff in. 

However, if this is something that's inherent in Islam rather than something which has been heavily influenced by numerous geopolitical factors, how come Islamic terrorism only really became a big thing since the 1990s (arguably the 2000s since things really became widespread)? I mean of course it was a thing before, hijackings happened etc. But not on much more of a scale than the other types of terrorism. If waging a holy war on western values is such a big thing in Islam, if their religion is synonymous with murder and terrorism, why didn't we see attacks on the West long before then? 

Oh my good God. Now the Alt-right invented the word 'cuck'. That's... weird... During this thread I've been told not to use the pronoun 'we' and also apparently because I used the word cuck, I'm an alt-Right member - again, a term I don't think you could define even after you looked it up  *just a joke*. I also happen to notice that there's a clear link between Islam and violence and I explain it rationally and I'm suddenly racist, bigoted, blah blah blah. I've never said white people are better than anyone, or that we're a superior race - people should be allowed to criticise ideas quite freely and I think some people in this thread certainly have some weird hypocritical notions about what words actually mean. I'm the one standing up for moderate Muslims, standing up for homosexuals, standing up for women - by calling the violence out and analysing something as the root of that.

Which is a side note on your psyche actually. A person mentions the word 'cuck' and I'm suddenly a dark, shadowy, alt-Right member. But...12 people die because of radical Islam and you think there's zero link to Islam (and/or others did, I can't be bothered to re-find everything little thing you've/others have said now). That's called the 'No true Scotsman' excuse anyway, saying they're not real Muslims. By saying that they're no real Muslims means every time someone does something bad in the name of Muslim you can just dismiss them as not being the true believers - it's patronizing, wrong, time wasting, garbage. And it is an excuse and you and others adhere to it a lot. Some people on here were claiming there was zero connection between the incidents and the religion. It's just such a time waste. And it's people like you and others who continue to deny that there's a problem, which is the original focus of this debate, is strengthening the extreme Right. It's happening in the UK, France, Austria, Germany.

But to shout people down because they do notice the patterns; it's typical extreme Left bullshit waffle.

Your go to guy is Reza Aslan? The man who lies about his degrees and repeatedly lies on camera that he's an expert?!  That's your man?! No amount of emoji's can do justice to my belly aching. That guy gets repeatedly torn to shreds for his beliefs and his 'expertise'.

You'd prefer to let your imaginary daughter grow up in Russia?! Wow, okay... whatever you say there chief.

I built my argument because you made a straw man claim that I'd said they had brought 'rape' to the UK/Europe, which is not exactly what I said and nowhere near as sinister as you made out. You just twisted my words. But I did produce data to show more non-Germans had committed crimes including sexual assaults, rape, murder, down to pick-pocketing and graffiti.

http://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/DE/2016/05/pks-und-pmk-2015.html

Again, there's plenty of facts I have given (and you can easily find the data yourself at a click of the finger) -

Swedish rapes have risen in correlation quite clearly with the rise of immigration that now it ranks as one of the worst places for women in Europe to walk home at night.
As well as the German statistics that immigrants (it says specifically immigrants and refuegees) have caused a higher amount of crime than native Germans.
All of the oppression of women stuff - which comes in the Koran and also in all of the majority Muslim countries - even if you think that covering a woman's face is a sign of oppression (not because the act itself is oppressive, but the fact she has to).
There's at least 50 no go zones in Sweden, roughly along the lines of immigrant areas.

Not to mention all the research done by PEW Research - and yes before you mention it some Conservative groups have quoted them too, but don't let that scare you off of accepting the statistics.

Now, you can play the social economical card, say it's all because of a poor/rich divide, because they're uneducated, or however else you'd like to excuse the behaviour, but for me it's clear. Some religions are more violent and oppressive than others. And please no more IRA bullshit either. They've killed a minuscule amount of people in comparison and it was a war about republicanism.

I'd recommend the following debates (for anyone reading this as well) as believe it or not, I don't have all the time on the world to keep debating things on here as much as it looks like I do and it would also allow everyone to get on with music chat which I suppose is the purpose of this site

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMraxhd9Z9Q&t=2731s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rh34Xsq7D_A&t=3398s

https://youtu.be/Q4Vlc5u46PA

 

If you happen to have any debates that are interesting too for myself, where you think you could enlighten me, I'm all for it, and also write a final rebuttal if you would like, but watch the videos, send me some videos and we can both try an enlighten ourselves/or not.

Edited January 8, 2017 by Cornelius_Fudge