https://www.theguardian.com/world/shortcuts/2017/mar/26/muslims-condemn-terrorism-stats
QuoteIt happened in history class. Heraa Hashmi, a 19-year-old American Muslim student at the University of Colorado, was supposed to be discussing the Crusades with the man sitting next to her. Within a few minutes, however, he was crusading against Islam.
“Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims,†Hashmi’s classmate told her. What’s more, he complained, not enough Muslims were making a stand against terrorism.
Hashmi was perplexed by this analysis. Muslims are constantly denouncing atrocities that have been committed in the name of Islam. Yet many people seem to think Muslims don’t condemn terrorism enough. So Hashmi decided to put the notion to the test. Using Google spreadsheets, she made a “712-page list of Muslims condemning things with sourcesâ€, which she tweeted. The list includes everything from acts of domestic violence to 9/11.
Hashmi’s project isn’t just designed to prove that Muslims are constantly condemning terrorism; she made it to demonstrate how ridiculous it is that Muslims are constantly expected to offer apologies for terrorist acts. Muslims, notes Hashmi, are “held to a different standard than other minorities: 1.6 billion people are expected to apologise and condemn [terrorism] on behalf of a couple of dozen lunatics. It makes no sense.†After all, Hashmi, says, “I don’t view the KKK or the Westboro Baptist church or the Lord’s Resistance Army as accurate representations of Christianity. I know that they’re on the fringe. So it gets very frustrating having to defend myself and having to apologise on behalf of some crazy people.â€
Link to the full doc...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e8BjMW36CMNc4-qc9UNQku0blstZSzp5FMtkdlavqzc/edit#gid=0
Keep in mind... this is a 712 page document that is still in progress. And we can just ignore the bigger issue that we actually expect Muslims to apologize for people they consider fringe and radical when we would never hold ourselves to the same standard.
And with that, cue pr and Munch to shift the goalposts or explain how its Muslim propaganda funded by Soros in 3, 2, 1...
Nah, can't be arsed, just had dinner.
The fact that he still is a muslim is surprising.
There are no human standards ...
Either I enslave your children, rape your women, kill you and drink your blood from your skull ... or I don't. Natural law? Total bullshit. Human decency? More bullshit. If someone is being nice to you, they just haven't gotten around to destroying you yet ... like a praying mantis, only one that recently ate and isn't hungry.
On the other hand, I wouldn't be arguing with a Muslim about anything. It is rude. Just give them the Gaddafi treatment, Hillary approves.
Lets do some virtue signalling. It feels so good.
Quote from: pr126 on March 29, 2017, 11:35:41 PM
Lets do some virtue signalling. It feels so good.
Used to be, do gooders actually had to do something to help someone (usually someone who didn't want the help) ... now they only have to pose.
Meanwhile, over in Berlin.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/03/29/parents-campaign-to-have-gay-teacher-removed-from-nursery/
QuoteA group of Muslim parents have threatened to start a campaign to have a gay preschool teacher sacked.
The group of parents in Berlin reportedly threatened to gain signatures for a petition to have the man removed from his post at a kindergarten in Reinickendorf.
The Tagesspiegel newspaper earlier this week reported that the parents were worried about the teacher taking their children to the toilet.
“For some of them, a gay man is automatically a pedophile,†the teacher told the newspaper.
Following protests against his position at the kindergarten, Tagesspiegel reports that the man asked to be transferred to another school.
But the management at the nursery refused, backing the teacher and saying that parents should move their children if they are unhappy.
According to the Local, many parents have removed their children from the kindergarten.
Social Democrats senator for education Sandra Scheeres, also supported the teacher.
“We don’t tolerate discrimination. We want to raise the number of male kindergarten teachers so that they become important role models for children,†Scheeres said.
Adding that “again and again, parents treat male nursery teachers with suspicion.â€
Many have taken to social media to support the teacher, with one saying: “Muslims protest against teacher â€" the problem? He’s gay: welcome to the Middle Ages.â€
Remember, not all muslims. I suppose it is progressive through, since the Muslim parents didn't ask to have the teacher beheaded.
I would call out the most ironic thing here, but that's like telling people a shit sandwich smells
Quote from: pr126 on March 29, 2017, 11:35:41 PM
Lets do some virtue signalling. It feels so good.
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQSW-Ad5RFv2tPgfN8vbPWCvRGXT3KKAGJ_2_FpX4PQoaQrxvqejA)
I think I do.
Wikipedia:
QuoteVirtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral values by an individual done primarily with the intent of enhancing that person's standing within a social group. The term was first used in signalling theory, to describe any behavior that could be used to signal virtue â€" especially piety among the political or religious faithful.[1] Since 2015, the term has become more commonly used as a pejorative characterization by commentators to criticize what they regard as the platitudinous, empty, or superficial support of certain political views on social media; and also used within groups to criticize their own members for valuing outward appearance over substantive action.[2][3][4]
Atheon does substative action ... he/she lives outside the US by choice. This may be a good choice given trends ;-(
Quote from: pr126 on March 29, 2017, 11:35:41 PM
Lets do some virtue signalling. It feels so good.
"Why don't Muslims condemn terrorism? Silent majority! THEY ALL AGREE WITH TERRORISM!"
"Actually, that's not true, and here is evid..."
"LOL PAT YUR SELF ON THE BACK MORE! SJW CUCK!"
QuoteVIRTUE SIGNALING: The term was first used in signalling theory, to describe any behavior that could be used to signal virtue â€" especially piety among the political or religious faithful.
Actually a necessary word. I've witnessed the behavior frequently in religion and politics without knowing what to call it. Apparently, the transparency of he behavior is so widely apparent to others that it deserves a psychological label. Picture a social gathering of the pious fundamentalists each flaunting his belief in a competition to be "holier than thou." The more half-hearted may not feel compelled to be the holiest in the room, but is still compelled to make a good showing, less they appear flawed or unworthy.
Honor killings would be a good example. Actually killing your sister to show the rest of the community how honorable you are.
Quote from: pr126 on March 30, 2017, 05:12:38 AM
I think I do.
Wikipedia:
Wait, after actually reading that, you have proven yet again you have no grasp of the English language. That is not even remotely relevant.
Quote from: SGOS on March 30, 2017, 07:47:36 AM
Honor killings would be a good example. Actually killing your sister to show the rest of the community how honorable you are.
It is an old tribal custom.
If he did not kill her, he would lose face, and the tribe would exiled him.
Plus, the female could never marry, her worth is nil, therefore with no support of the tribe she would starve and die. Spoiled goods as it were.
In the tribe everybody knows everybody else. Can't be hushed up.
Very harsh I know, but those were the rules and they did not change at all.
In some parts of the world it is still primitive mediveal times rule.
When they come to the more advanced parts of the world, the bring their mental baggage with them.
Can't get rid of the tribal mentality.
Quote from: Shiranu on March 30, 2017, 08:28:22 AM
Wait, after actually reading that, you have proven yet again you have no grasp of the English language. That is not even remotely relevant.
Wait, I don't give a damn what you think.
You can get lost.
Quote from: pr126 on March 30, 2017, 10:28:47 AM
Wait, I don't give a damn what you think.
You can get lost.
You realise the irony of telling OP to get lost, right?
when the media has convinced atheists that islam needs their protection.
lol.
Serious question, Shiranu:
Why do so many Muslims and hardcore liberals defend Islamic terrorism though?
Talking specifically about instances like the Charlie Hedbo shooting, where it is undeniable that Islam was the motivator
I in no way imply that the majority or even half of muslims in the western world are as atrocious as the people that shot up a bunch of cartoonists that simply drew a picture of their beloved pedophile prophet... but I find it really interesting how so many muslims and hardcore liberals go on the defensive of the people that carry out these acts. And no. I don't mean they go on the defensive for muslims in general, that is waaaay more understandable, I'm talking about how people defend the specific perpetrators of the crimes committed.
Way too many people just went and said "well you shouldn't criticize their faith" AS IF IT IS A JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO SHOOT SOMEONE. Give me a fucking break. If it was christans that did this, or even any other demographic, they would have universal damnation by everyone, but somehow, there is a large group of people that give this violent and irrational thinking a pass, and that isn't ok
Quote from: PickelledEggs on March 30, 2017, 01:37:04 PM
Serious question, Shiranu:
Why do so many Muslims and hardcore liberals defend Islamic terrorism though?
Talking specifically about instances like the Charlie Hedbo shooting, where it is undeniable that Islam was the motivator
A. Because they are idiots.
B. Very much for the same reason some members of the LGBT community because obnoxiously flaunting of their homosexuality, African Americans defend the "ghetto" mindset, etc. etc. ... when you are a member of, or support, a group that is constantly under attack, and more often than not inaccurately under attack, it reaches a point where you overly (and occasionally wrongly) defend the cause because it's become such a habit to defend it from false attacks.It also just becomes impossible to tell who is legitimately attacking an actual issue within the community and who is just being hateful.
I would say column A is probably larger than column B, but B does has a sizeable population as well.
Edit: That said, I disagree with your premise that Islam was the motivator. That idea completely ignores a huge swath of anti-Muslim sentiment and xenophobia that is growing stronger and stronger within our culture. Both were in the wrong, but the unfortunately reality is the one who was provoked, even if it was a fringe group within it, who takes all the blame.
Something I keep seeing on my FB page:
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/b8/04/dd/b804dd07147118bbc7d2b7e6b8863b35.jpg)
This is why I refer to Facebook for facts as much as I would refer to Dennis Nilsen for sex tips.
Quote from: pr126 on March 30, 2017, 05:12:38 AM
I think I do.
But the original post is in no way an example of that.
Right-wingers throw that phrase around like they throw "socialism" around, not knowing that it actually means.
Quote from: PickelledEggs on March 30, 2017, 02:42:52 PM
I in no way imply that the majority or even half of muslims in the western world are as atrocious as the people that shot up a bunch of cartoonists that simply drew a picture of their beloved pedophile prophet... but I find it really interesting how so many muslims and hardcore liberals go on the defensive of the people that carry out these acts. And no. I don't mean they go on the defensive for muslims in general, that is waaaay more understandable, I'm talking about how people defend the specific perpetrators of the crimes committed.
Way too many people just went and said "well you shouldn't criticize their faith" AS IF IT IS A JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO SHOOT SOMEONE. Give me a fucking break. If it was christans that did this, or even any other demographic, they would have universal damnation by everyone, but somehow, there is a large group of people that give this violent and irrational thinking a pass, and that isn't ok
I don't think anyone who claims that criticizing Islam is a justifiable reason to be shot can be defined as liberal, so you are wrong in saying that any liberal has said that, because that would by definition make them not liberal. Have some Muslims said that it was justifiable? I'm sure they have since plenty of Muslims think drawing the Prophet or making fun of Islam should be a crime.
I don't think those on the left saying that they would prefer that Islam not be mocked were justifying Charlie Hebdo. If a school shooting happens and I say that it's too bad the shooter was bullied, I'm not saying that the shooting was justified because of the bullying. Now, I don't think mocking Islam is the same as bullying and I like the work of Charlie Hebdo and think Islam needs to be criticized and satarised, but the point of view of some on the left is, I think at least, that we've done enough by bombing the shit out of Muslims, so why piss them off and rub it in even more by mocking their faith on top of the bombs and real bigotry?
Why do politicians defend Islam and say that it's a religion of peace that shouldn't be mocked? They're trying to get the votes of Muslims. Why do many regressives defend Islam and call it a religion of peace? They've bought into the Islamophobia BS started up by some Muslims who had very legitimate concerns about Muslims facing abuse and physical attacks, but as would be expected of religious people, they conflated that with criticizing the religion itself, so the regressives ran with this and people were now considered bigots for simply criticizing a religion. Both Bush and Obama pushed this idea, along with people in the media, so a lot of people bought into it. Obama said that the future should not belong to those who slander the Prophet, and a lot of regressives bought into the garbage.
I understand that Muslims have been through a lot of shit, but I still think that Islam needs to be criticized. The Quran does tell believers to terrorize the kuffar, and it does say that Muslims owe it to Allah to die for him. The wars are a huge deal, but these scriptures are also part of what motivates terrorists. Ex Muslims even in the west are afraid to come out as having left Islam. When a female politician shows up at a mosque in the west to show unity, she has to sit in the corner and not speak, or sit with the other women. This stuff needs to be criticized. I don't think Muslims should be expected to condemn terrorist attacks though, because even though they do read from the same Quran that the terrorists take inspiration from, when you look at the death tolls with over a million dead in just Iraq, while you have just a few thousand Westerners dead in total the last couple of decades, it starts to sound pretty darn silly to ask Muslims in the west to make it clear that they condemn the attacks every time one happens.
No matter how offensive a comic making fun of someone might be, it in no way justifies gunning down groups of people. Islam wasn't the perpetrator of that crime, techically a religion isnt a sentient being so it cant commit a crime.
But those guys who shot up the studio were muslims, and their religion does defend and even declare their actions to be Holy justified. (Yes holy justified)
So did Islam kill those people? No
Did islam cause those men to kill people who poked fun at their prophet? 90% certainty if going to their exact religious laws. 10% margin for crazy people wanting their heyday in a blaze of glory and using religion as a way to garner support.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO0bq3_EyUE&spfreload=10
Quote from: Atheon on March 30, 2017, 04:22:14 PM
But the original post is in no way an example of that.
Right-wingers throw that phrase around like they throw "socialism" around, not knowing that it actually means.
OP = #Notallmuslims. Distilled to one slogan.
Right-wingers?
There are two kind of people, right wingers and left wingers?
Is that so easy to label people?
Hmmm.
Quote from: pr126 on March 31, 2017, 03:23:01 AM
OP = #Notallmuslims. Distilled to one slogan.
Right-wingers?
There are two kind of people, right wingers and left wingers?
Is that so easy to label people?
Hmmm.
Wrong false dichotomy ... For Her/Against Her ... even if you aren't American.
Quote from: Baruch on March 31, 2017, 06:45:43 AM
Wrong false dichotomy ... For Her/Against Her ... even if you aren't American.
Right wing? What does it even mean?
Nothing can fly on one wing only. Everybody knows that.
Quote from: pr126 on March 31, 2017, 03:23:01 AM
OP = #Notallmuslims. Distilled to one slogan.
Right-wingers?
There are two kind of people, right wingers and left wingers?
Is that so easy to label people?
Hmmm.
Says the guy who has Tourette like symptoms with the words leftist and cultural Marxist...
Quote from: pr126 on March 31, 2017, 03:23:01 AMRight-wingers?
There are two kind of people, right wingers and left wingers?
There are right-wingers, and there are people who are not right-wingers. Logical complements.
Quote from: Atheon on March 31, 2017, 10:30:13 AM
There are right-wingers, and there are people who are not right-wingers. Logical complements.
Right-wingers. Scum of the earth.
They must never be given a platform to speak and spread their filthy ideas.
I see on Youtube when any of those "undesirebles" are invited to speak -(why on earth invite them in the first place?) - and prevented by the students to speak with shouths, noises and sometimes riotous violence.
Because the "not right-wingers" are so tolerant and inclusive.
Free speech for me but not for thee.
Do you see any problem with that? No? I didn't think you would.
Muslims do not condemn their religion any more than Christians condemn their own.
It's an indoctrination problem.
Reason cannot easily penetrate those thick religious walls, because those walls are not built of logic. Rather, those are walls built of cognitive dissonance.
QuoteMuslims do not condemn their religion any more than Christians condemn their own.
How could they? Islam is their very identity. Without Islam they are nothing. A filthy kufar.
Not to mention that they will get killed for apostasy.
Hey, not even a non Muslim can criticize Islam in the public square without dire consequences.
Quote from: pr126 on April 01, 2017, 01:17:24 AM
How could they? Islam is their very identity. Without Islam they are nothing. A filthy kufar.
Not to mention that they will get killed for apostasy.
Seems like primitive Christianity to me.
Quote from: Sorginak on April 01, 2017, 01:18:53 AM
Seems like primitive Christianity to me.
Except that Islam is still primitive after 14 centuries. It will stay like that for the foreseable future.
As far as I can see, Islam is winning the war of ideas.
Quote from: pr126 on April 01, 2017, 01:24:45 AM
As far as I can see, Islam is winning the war of ideas.
Islam is winning world hatred. Nothing more.
Quote from: Sorginak on April 01, 2017, 01:26:04 AM
Islam is winning world hatred. Nothing more.
Not quite. islam has plenty of help from non Muslims.
Any media outlet, news papers, TV, the academia, politicians, are helping Islam to win the battle of ideas.
The only place you will find dissent is on the Internet or a handful of politicians in Europe who are shunned and must have 24/7 body guards.
In fact, the OP of this thread is helping in a small way . Damage control. #NotallMuslims.
Quote from: Sorginak on April 01, 2017, 01:05:52 AM
Muslims do not condemn their religion any more than Christians condemn their own.
It's an indoctrination problem.
Reason cannot easily penetrate those thick religious walls, because those walls are not built of logic. Rather, those are walls built of cognitive dissonance.
Yep, weak wisted wogic ... gay ;-)
Quote from: pr126 on April 01, 2017, 01:17:24 AM
How could they? Islam is their very identity. Without Islam they are nothing. A filthy kufar.
Not to mention that they will get killed for apostasy.
Hey, not even a non Muslim can criticize Islam in the public square without dire consequences.
Enlightened people find their ways to newer and better identities. Even Western materialists ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on April 01, 2017, 03:26:59 AM
Yep, weak wisted wogic ... gay ;-)
All of a sudden I'm imagining you as Elmer Fudd
Quote from: Munch on April 01, 2017, 03:37:09 AM
All of a sudden I'm imagining you as Elmer Fudd
Mr Magoo ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbB7mo9dbEo
Why don't americans apologise for their shocking lack of mental health care every time a crazed gunman shoots up a school/movie theatre/nightclub etc..?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y14bf34JNtI
QuoteIn fact, the OP of this thread is helping in a small way . Damage control. #NotallMuslims.
Hardly. You asked for evidence, you were presented with it. You then throw a hissy fit and cry like a little baby. #NotARealAdult
Quote from: Shiranu on April 01, 2017, 06:52:24 PM
Hardly. You asked for evidence, you were presented with it. You then throw a hissy fit and cry like a little baby. #NotARealAdult
Hardly.
1. I can't remember asking
you for evidence, and 2. you would not start a thread just for my benefit.
No hissy fit at all. That is for SJWs. They do it so well.
Quote1. I can't remember asking you for evidence...
Oh, right, you only ask for evidence from people and sources that agree with you. Silly me.
Quoteyou would not start a thread just for my benefit.
Holy shit, hold the press you actually said something true for once.
Oh wait, it's April Fools... guess that explains why you would do that :(. Had me happy for a second there :(.
QuoteWhy Don't More Muslims Condemn Terrorists?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Wrx6eQZ1E