freediver wrote on Oct 12^th, 2012 at 8:30pm:

I already said the IRA death rate is so many times higher than muslims in the UK, and that ETA is so many times higher than muslims in Spain - forget what it was, but feel free to read over what I already said. I believe both countries have seen only one islamic terrorist attack that has resulted in casualties, but I could be wrong. That both countries have seen a steady accumulation of deaths by separatists over a long period indicates a different kind of threat - and I would argue greater threat.

Quote:


I think you misunderstand. The fact that he contradicts me was exactly the point. I don't believe that all or even most terrorists around the world are muslims, and I also believe that the existence of such a view in society - which is clearly widespread - is dangerous. This chap is just one example of the presence of this view. I only quoted him to point out that this view (that all/most muslims are terrorists) exists to disprove your absurd claim that this belief only comes from (in your words) "imaginary people with imaginary beliefs" - remember?

Quote:


I don't think its "slightly behind" - as the figures I alluded to before will demonstrate. Moreover, there has been a grand total of 2 islamic attacks in Europe (that I am aware of), whereas the separatist attacks have been a constant terror for the population for literally decades.

Quote:


9/11 was massive, it was the worst terrorist attack in - well probably ever. But it was also a one-off. The issue is what is the threat today. The public - understandably - is obsessed by the prospect of another 9/11 around every corner. Yet the actual evidence indicates that these fears are unfounded. My question is, while the islamists got lucky on 9/11, how many other 9/11s have been planned or attempted and failed by non-islamists over the years? How many are being planned now? I'm not saying they are an imminent threat either, but we do run the risk of missing one threat while obsessing with another. It happened in Norway last year.


Quote:


Quote:


what part of "we cannot clear our names unless we own up to the shameful fact that terrorism has become an Islamic enterprise; an almost exclusive monopoly, implemented by Muslim men and women" - don't you understand?

Quote:


I was talking about Europe - but in any case, there are currently  over 476 thousand muslims in Australia. Out of 400 protesters, I believe there were around 100 who were violent. Hmmm 100 muslims out of 476 thousand - you really gonna try and argue that violence is representative of the Australian muslim community? Good luck with that.

The first gulf war had about 1000 times more victims than all those acts put together. What a joke. That list is pathetic.

The Russian invasion of Afghanistan had just as many as did the Russian invasion of Chechnya... Beslan? You dare bring up an isolated incident that involved such a small handful of people, when we have genocides like Afghanistan and Chechnya to define the Russian-Muslim relationship for us?

I'm surprised someone could be so stupid as to bring such pathetic figures. Only because you're so incredibly ignorant I guess, you know no better.

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 13^th, 2012 at 11:34am:


so beslan cannot be remembered as an islamic terrorist attack because many muslims died elsewhere?

Bertram wrote on Oct 13^th, 2012 at 11:47am:


It was a Chechen response to the atrocious genocide the Russians had carried out against their people. It is usually trotted out by ignorant anti-Islamists in some lame attempt to equate Islam with the revenge the Chechen people took against the Russians. Usually this involves associating Islam with the senseless murder of children (at Beslan), completely ignoring the plight of the tens of thousands of innocent Chechen children who were tortured, raped and murdered by the Russians, and which that desperate act was in retalliation for.

Your attempt to disconnect the events at Beslan from the Russian genocide of Chechens, and parade it around as an independent act of Islamic violence, is pretty pathetic.

Quote:


You jump rather conveniently between claiming to understand what the evidence says and using your ignorance as a debating tactic.

Quote:


In what sense was it a one-off? Do you know something that everyone else doesn't? Or are you referring to the effectiveness of anti-terrorism measured within the airline industry?

Quote:


How were they lucky? Should people have been more aware of the Islamic terrorist threat?

Quote:


He is saying it is not a monopoly and you are deliberalty misrepresenting him. If someone told you they almost died, would you go round insisting they are actually dead? If someone claims they almost won a game, do you think that means they won?

Quote:


Do you mean violent in that particular event, or violent in general? How many do you think support the death penalty for blasphemy?

Quote:


Once again Abu misses the point completely.

Quote:


So it was not a terrorist attack because you support it?

Poor little terrorist can't handle his own medicine.

Big Dave wrote on Oct 27^th, 2012 at 7:54pm:

You do realise that is what lead to the Palestinians having to defend themselves in the first place don't you?