Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 12-14-2005, 04:23 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

Why do you think most terrorists are muslisms? I would think that terrorists are the ones commiting terrorism.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 12-14-2005, 04:39 PM
tripp0807 tripp0807 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 69
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think most terrorists are muslisms? I would think that terrorists are the ones commiting terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see by this nonsensical response that you're just pumping your post count so that when you spam posters with RB offers, people think that you're a poster with some history.

Going for that third *?
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 12-14-2005, 04:46 PM
mackthefork mackthefork is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 82
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The jury system works well, IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, OJ is proof that all the undereducated jurors who otherwise would be sitting at home watching soaps, are so very capable of logically judging the facts of any case and rendering a true verdict.

This is in fact just an indictment of the jury system.

[/ QUOTE ]

the legal system is no different to any other part of the free market, simply put, the more money one has the greater chance he has of getting away with murder, or child abuse or anything else.

Mack
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 12-14-2005, 04:50 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

What is nonsensical about my post? Why do you think most terrorists are muslims?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 12-14-2005, 05:08 PM
tripp0807 tripp0807 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 69
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
What is nonsensical about my post? Why do you think most terrorists are muslims?

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well.

Let's follow our conversation.

I say that while most Muslims are not terrorists, most terrorists are Muslim, without reference to any geographical restrictions.

You reply that I should look at terrorism that has been committed in the United States, entirely overlooking the fact that I did not, in any way, restrict my statement to the U.S.

I tell you to respond to my actual statement.

You say that most terrorists are not Muslim, but in fact, are terrorists.

Your statement is nonsensical because it actually seeks to ignore reality by removing a relevant characteristic from the equation without explaining why it should be removed from consideration.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 12-14-2005, 05:10 PM
DVaut1 DVaut1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 27
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. Most Muslims aren't terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Please do provide empirical evidence here. Remember to include all historical instances of terrorism as well.

Forgive me, but I did actually "laugh out loud" when I read what you wrote here. But I'll be anxiously awaiting the results of your inquiry nonetheless.

[ QUOTE ]
Your 99%+ figure is deceiving, at best. Just because they aren't engaged in terrorism or acts of terrorism (redundant) doesn't mean anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

That doesn't mean ANYTHING?!?!?!?

[ QUOTE ]
I would venture to guess that the amount who support terrorism is significantly more than >1%. Otherwise, it wouldn't still be going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by 'support'?

That is the distinction I'm making between "terrorism" and "acts of terrorism". Let's include 'funding' and other direct assistance of terrorism as constituting 'acts of terrorism' -- or, at least, let's call it actions that we would legitimately call criminal. Just for simplicity's sake -- as I'm not claiming 'acts of terrorism' is necessarily the best way to describe the various direct support mechanisms that could aid terrorism.

Let's exclude 'sympathize with terrorists' or 'agrees with their ends' or even 'agrees with their means'. Surely you can make a distinction between merely sympathizing with terrorism, and with participating in terrorism itself -- or more succinctly, you can make a distinction between thoughts and actions, correct?

Now, how many Muslims would you guess are engaged in acts of terrorism? -- keeping in mind that no statistics exist which are even close to accurate -- but ALSO keeping in mind that, as there are 1 billion estimated Muslims in the world, TEN MILLION of those Muslims would have to be engaging in terrorism to equal 1% of the world's Muslims -- and lastly, of course, keeping in mind that 'engaging' in terrorism implies some kind of action, and not merely thought or sympathy.

Clearly you mean something by 'support', but I'm just not sure what. I'm all ears as to how you propose we define 'support' of terrorism.

If we're talking about Bluff's OP, I don't have anything relevant to add on whether or not we should condemn Muslim groups cheering the acquittal of a terrorist sympathizer. It's a legitimate debate to have, and I think it's more than valid to debate the condemnation of those who support terrorism, etc. But it's a debate I'm not concerned with here.

But getting back to the point at hand: when BluffTHIS says lets "look at Muslims and how they interpret it (it=Koran) and act on it" -- let's do just what Bluff asks we do.

We can probably say, with great confidence, that 99% + of Muslims have not participated in terrorism in any kind of significant way.

So, using Bluff's standard, by looking at the actions of Muslims, I think we're forced to conclude that there's nothing inherent about Islam or the Koran that would lead us to claim it's intrinsically belligerent or violent.

-------------------

On side note, let's take apart your argument that if 'support' weren't significantly greater than '1%', 'terrorism' wouldn't be happening.

How many Americans support the neo-Nazis like Timothy McVeigh? Did the Oklahoma City Bombings 'still go on'?

[ QUOTE ]
Who danced in the streets on 9/11? I saw those pictures of the Palestinians.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's say, for instance, you're correct: Palestinians dance in the streets after hearing of 9/11. What exactly are the implications here?

Nuke em'? Outlaw dancing?

Was there some political reason why Palestinians may have been dancing? Or is it only because they're Muslim?

[ QUOTE ]
I could go on, but I hope you understand how personal non-involvement with terrorist acts does not make one anti-terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay -- again, was not Bluff's claim that we should look at actions ? Most Muslims aren't terrorists. So I think I've got my answer, if we're using Bluff's standard.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 12-14-2005, 05:30 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

You say x (terrorists are muslims).
I reply y (in america, most terrorists are not muslims).

This is clearly pertinent to the conversation.

So, prove your statement. What information leads you to believe that most terrorists are muslims?
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 12-14-2005, 05:50 PM
tripp0807 tripp0807 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 69
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL. Most Muslims aren't terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Please do provide empirical evidence here. Remember to include all historical instances of terrorism as well.

Forgive me, but I did actually "laugh out loud" when I read what you wrote here. But I'll be anxiously awaiting the results of your inquiry nonetheless

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well. I can't prove that Islamic terorism has intentionally killed more innocent people than any other group, but I'd be hard pressed to disbelieve it, and I'd suspect most educated common-sense people would as well.

Perhaps you can come up with a list demonstrating that a group other than Islamists have intentionally (and successfully) targeted more civilians for death in the last twenty five years:

9 November 2005 - 2005 Amman bombings, over 60 killed and 115 injured, in a series of coordinated suicide attacks on Hotels in Amman, Jordan. Four attackers including a husband and wife team were involved,
7 July 2005 - Multiple bombings in London Underground, 53 dead killed by four suicide bombers.
4 February 2005 - Muslim militants attacked the Christian community in Demsa, Nigeria, killing 36 people, destroying property and displacing an additional 3000 people.
11 March 2004 - Multiple bombings on trains near Madrid, Spain. 191 killed, 1460 injured. (alleged link to Al-Qaeda)
16 May 2004- Casablanca Attacks - 4 simultaneous attacks in Casablanca killing 33 civilians (mostly Moroccans) carried by Slafaia Jihadia.
12 October 2002 - Bombing in Bali nightclub. 202 killed, 300 injured.
24 September 2002 - Machine Gun attack on Hindu temple in Ahmedabad, India. 31 dead, 86 injured
7 May 2002 - Bombing in al-Arbaa, Algeria. 49 dead, 117 injured
March 9, 2002 - Café suicide bombing in Jerusalem; 11 killed, 54 injured
March 3, 2002 - Suicide bomb attack on a Passover Seder in a Hotel in Netanya, Israel. 29 dead, 133 injured
February 26, 2002 - Train of Hindu pilgrims bombed in Gujarat, India; 59 dead
11 September 2001 - 4 planes hijacked and crashed into World Trade Center and Pentagon by 19 hijackers. Nearly 3000 dead.
7 August 1998 - Embassy bombing in Tanzania and Kenya. 225 dead. 4000+ injured
25 June 1996 - Khobar Towers bombing, 20 killed, 372 wounded.
26 February 1993 - First World Trade Center bombing. 6 killed.
18 April 1983 - Embassy in Lebanon bombed. 63 killed.

Source: Wikipedia

Most followers of current events will notice that a only a small number of suicide bombings in Israel are listed here.

I would also like to add that my putting "LOL" in my original post was unnecessary and rude. My apologies.

[ QUOTE ]
Your 99%+ figure is deceiving, at best. Just because they aren't engaged in terrorism or acts of terrorism (redundant) doesn't mean anything.

That doesn't mean ANYTHING?!?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, perhaps I shouldn't have said it meant nothing. I'd prefer that they be passive supporters than active human bombs.

[ QUOTE ]
I would venture to guess that the amount who support terrorism is significantly more than >1%. Otherwise, it wouldn't still be going on.

What do you mean by 'support'?

That is the distinction I'm making between "terrorism" and "acts of terrorism". Let's include 'funding' and other direct assistance of terrorism as constituting 'acts of terrorism' -- or, at least, let's call it actions that we would legitimately call criminal. Just for simplicity's sake -- as I'm not claiming 'acts of terrorism' is necessarily the best way to describe the various direct support mechanisms that could aid terrorism.

Let's exclude 'sympathize with terrorists' or 'agrees with their ends' or even 'agrees with their means'. Surely you can make a distinction between merely sympathizing with terrorism, and with participating in terrorism itself -- or more succinctly, you can make a distinction between thoughts and actions, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course there is a distinction, but I think that you place far too much reliance on it. Do you really think that there would be such a significant amount of terrorism in the Middle East if there was no support for it?

[ QUOTE ]
Now, how many Muslims would you guess are engaged in acts of terrorism? -- keeping in mind that no statistics exist which are even close to accurate -- but ALSO keeping in mind that, as there are 1 billion estimated Muslims in the world, TEN MILLION of those Muslims would have to be engaging in terrorism to equal 1% of the world's Muslims -- and lastly, of course, keeping in mind that 'engaging' in terrorism implies some kind of action, and not merely thought or sympathy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure I know why you included this. I acknowledged in my post that less than 1% of Muslims were actively involved in terrorism. Where you and I differ is the role that those cheering them on and encouraging them play.

[ QUOTE ]
Clearly you mean something by 'support', but I'm just not sure what. I'm all ears as to how you propose we define 'support' of terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I defined this above. When there are people cheering you in the streets, encouraging the hatred that leads to terrorism and condoning the acts/means of the terrorists, that's what I mean by support. I think we agree that financial support isn't support of terrorism, rather, it is terrorism.

[ QUOTE ]
If we're talking about Bluff's OP, I don't have anything relevant to add on whether or not we should condemn Muslim groups cheering the acquittal of a terrorist sympathizer. It's a legitimate debate to have, and I think it's more than valid to debate the condemnation of those who support terrorism, etc. But it's a debate I'm not concerned with here.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with most of this.

[ QUOTE ]
But getting back to the point at hand: when BluffTHIS says lets "look at Muslims and how they interpret it (it=Koran) and act on it" -- let's do just what Bluff asks we do.

We can probably say, with great confidence, that 99% + of Muslims have not participated in terrorism in any kind of significant way.

So, using Bluff's standard, by looking at the actions of Muslims, I think we're forced to conclude that there's nothing inherent about Islam or the Koran that would lead us to claim it's intrinsically belligerent or violent.

[/ QUOTE ]

What we can do is look at the type of things that people have done in its name, which can be said for any major religion.

-------------------

[ QUOTE ]
On side note, let's take apart your argument that if 'support' weren't significantly greater than '1%', 'terrorism' wouldn't be happening.

How many Americans support the neo-Nazis like Timothy McVeigh? Did the Oklahoma City Bombings 'still go on'?

[/ QUOTE ]

It did. Does it occur with the alarming frequency at which incidents of Islamic terrorism occur? No.


[ QUOTE ]
Who danced in the streets on 9/11? I saw those pictures of the Palestinians.

Let's say, for instance, you're correct: Palestinians dance in the streets after hearing of 9/11. What exactly are the implications here?

Nuke em'? Outlaw dancing?

Was there some political reason why Palestinians may have been dancing? Or is it only because they're Muslim?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's not say that I EVER advocated nuclear warfare. I do think the fact that they're Muslim plays a significant role in the way we look at this. I didn't notice any Tibetian monks or Eastern Orthodox Russians doing it - the fact that it was constrained to one religious group, in my opinion, says something.

[ QUOTE ]
I could go on, but I hope you understand how personal non-involvement with terrorist acts does not make one anti-terrorism.

Okay -- again, was not Bluff's claim that we should look at actions ? Most Muslims aren't terrorists. So I think I've got my answer, if we're using Bluff's standard.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that the fact that Palestinians were dancing in the streets on 9/11 after the worst terrorist attack in US history, which was perpetrated by their fellow Muslims in the name of Islam, does not constitute an "action?"
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 12-14-2005, 05:55 PM
tripp0807 tripp0807 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Philly
Posts: 69
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
You say x (terrorists are muslims).
I reply y (in america, most terrorists are not muslims).

This is clearly pertinent to the conversation.

So, prove your statement. What information leads you to believe that most terrorists are muslims?

[/ QUOTE ]

See the above post, part 1.

On another note, I find it tremendously ironic that you accused MMMMMM of trying to make it look like another poster said something he didn't actually say, and you blatantly do the same thing to me:

[ QUOTE ]
You say x (terrorists are muslims)

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong. I never implied that all terrorists are Muslim.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 12-14-2005, 06:23 PM
DVaut1 DVaut1 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 27
Default Re: Muslim Groups Cheer Aquittal of Cheerleader of Islamic Terrorism

[ QUOTE ]
I would also like to add that my putting "LOL" in my original post was unnecessary and rude. My apologies.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think it was unnecessary nor rude, and there's no need to apologize. I personally enjoy the banter.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.