Several people killed by vehicle on New York City bike path

[owl sees all]

One of my big turn-offs is when someone calls an athiest a racist for critising their religion. Same goes for anyone who says not liking Jews is anti-semitic. I don't like any religions personally. But what has race got to do with religion?

[Grouse]

18 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Oh, so, you give the urban dictionary the same authority as the world's leading scholarly dictionary of english? Really?

And anyway, playing etymology to arrive at a definition of a word is a sure way to come a cropper. Take for instance, anti-semite.  By your way of defining a word an anti-semite is some who is against semites. Like arabs. Therefore if you're an anti-semite, you hate arabs. And assyrians. And chaldeans. Some ethiopians. Oh yes, and Jews, too. And maybe not all Jews since there's some dispute about the lineage of some groups. Do you see the problem? Scholars of language understand that many if not most words have a developed sense that more often than not strays from from the original coinage. Language is not mathematics.

Clearly it's not me who should be doing research.

 

OK, fair enough

 

Suffice to say, I do not like Muslims. Full stop.

 

I do not fear them

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia

[Morch]

1 hour ago, ilostmypassword said:

Yes, a clear insight into the actual threat as opposed to the magnifying effects of fear and hatred is definitely questionable. We've seen how well ignoring such easy and obvious insights has worked in the recent past.

 

Doubt we see eye to eye as to what constitutes a "clear insight", or for that matter, what falls under "magnifying". As for "ignoring" this or that, cuts both ways.

[Morch]

52 minutes ago, Grouse said:

China?

 

Big country. In Asia. What about it? Not properly Communist in any meaningful way for quite some time now. If anything it makes the argument about countering ideologies even stronger.

[Morch]

47 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Why are you so resistant to banning halal meat? It's barbaric, inhumane and medieval. Why should Western school kids have to eat it? Why pamper to Muslims in prison?

 

I don't know that I'm "so resistant" to banning halal meat as such. Don't have much of an opinion about it, really. Don't avoid places selling halal, don't look for them either. If halal was offered as a choice, no issues with that. If it was to replace other offerings wholesale, of course a no go. Being in prison doesn't necessarily have anything to do with one's religion. What's the point of denying prisoners the practice of their religion? How's that "pampering"?

 

[Tchooptip]

10 hours ago, impulse said:

 

There's a tiny subset of just about every religion out there who will call up ancient texts to justify despicable actions.  Like the KKK and other racists groups throughout their history.  And those guys who bombed the King David Hotel. 

 

Today, it's a tiny percentage of Muslims around the world that get all the press.  But they're certainly not unique.

 

You are undoubtedly right, not only do I agree with you, but its a fact some Muslims could be charming, welcoming, educated with a sense of humour and so and so, and those one are also friends with non-Muslims , example the famous TV star doctor OZ is a Muslim

The problem of this percentage you called tiny, is a percentage of about a quarter of the world population that is to say not far from two billion people.

[Grouse]

52 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I don't know that I'm "so resistant" to banning halal meat as such. Don't have much of an opinion about it, really. Don't avoid places selling halal, don't look for them either. If halal was offered as a choice, no issues with that. If it was to replace other offerings wholesale, of course a no go. Being in prison doesn't necessarily have anything to do with one's religion. What's the point of denying prisoners the practice of their religion? How's that "pampering"?

 

My idea is just to make the West less attractive to immigrants. Is that too cynical or is it pragmatism?

 

I could never live in Saudi. I think we should consider that.

 

Nothing too extreme, just encourage a bit of reverse immigration!

 

One thing I would like you to consider is the economic drivers here. Right now, many British school kids are fed halal food because it is cheaper to feed everyone the same as opposed to feeding it only to kids dressed for an Aladdin panto!

Edited November 1, 2017 by Grouse

[Opl]

12 hours ago, impulse said:

 

There's a tiny subset of just about every religion out there who will call up ancient texts to justify despicable actions.  Like the KKK and other racists groups throughout their history.  And those guys who bombed the King David Hotel. 

 

Today, it's a tiny percentage of Muslims around the world that get all the press.  But they're certainly not unique.

 

 

The risk is not linked to the percentage , the threat comes from the netwotk of terror cells spreading all  around the world.

And yes,  a  "tiny percentage" but of a growing number,  all over the world - and in non-muslim countries - gets all the press.

For good reasons , it's far more difficult to control, than a "high percentage" of a small number in limited parts of the world.

    

 

Edited November 1, 2017 by Opl

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Big country. In Asia. What about it? Not properly Communist in any meaningful way for quite some time now. If anything it makes the argument about countering ideologies even stronger.

https://www.ft.com/content/82c92b28-eff9-11de-833d-00144feab49a

 

I don't think Trumpism impresses!

[Skeptic7]

Don't stereotype! 

 

[Morch]

6 minutes ago, Grouse said:

My idea is just to make the West less attractive to immigrants. Is that too cynical or is it pragmatism?

 

I could never live in Saudi. I think we should consider that.

 

Nothing too extreme, just encourage a bit of reverse immigration!

 

One thing I would like you to consider is the economic drivers here. Right now, many British school kids are fed halal food because it is cheaper to feed everyone the same as opposed to feeding it only to kids dressed for an Aladdin panto!

 

How about applying a better screening, and pressure bring focused on problem elements rather than the whole immigrant population?

 

I think you'd never want to live in Saudi Arabia anyway. Maybe we should consider that. But the point isn't about playing tit-for-tat.

 

And sorry, not getting into the halal in the UK thing - not on topic and been done to death.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, Grouse said:

https://www.ft.com/content/82c92b28-eff9-11de-833d-00144feab49a

 

I don't think Trumpism impresses!

 

I don't think the PRC can be called Communist in a very meaningful way, and once more - not quite on topic, thanks.

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

How about applying a better screening, and pressure bring focused on problem elements rather than the whole immigrant population?

 

I think you'd never want to live in Saudi Arabia anyway. Maybe we should consider that. But the point isn't about playing tit-for-tat.

 

And sorry, not getting into the halal in the UK thing - not on topic and been done to death.

Fair points!

 

My own points are NOT off topic. These attacks are coming from within our communities in the west

 

My idea is to encourage "reverse immigration" by making life rather less comfortable for Muslims. Nothing draconian, just less conducive than life in The Levant for example

[oxo1947]

At least eight dead in New York with the terrorist shouting "Allahu Akbar". Some thick newsreader on the BBC has just said "We still doesn't know what the motive is".........

 

[InMyShadow]

These events are expected and unfortunately no longer draw much interest. Not many replies

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, InMyShadow said:

These events are expected and unfortunately no longer draw much interest. Not many replies

If only.

[nasanews]

4 hours ago, sanemax said:

Wahhabisn has everything to do with Islam .

Its Islam in its purest form

Islam is the human values we all share whereas Wahhabisim is a Saudi religious Ideology created 300 years ago based on extremism which resulted unfortunately in ISIS maniacs.

[sanemax]

36 minutes ago, nasanews said:

Islam is the human values we all share whereas Wahhabisim is a Saudi religious Ideology created 300 years ago based on extremism which resulted unfortunately in ISIS maniacs.

Who is "we" ?

I do not share those values .

Count me out of the equation

[brewsterbudgen]

At least eight dead in New York with the terrorist shouting "Allahu Akbar". Some thick newsreader on the BBC has just said "We still doesn't know what the motive is".........


 

Thankfully the BBC is not Fox News.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[simple1]

10 hours ago, RickBradford said:

The BBC, as usual, manages to avoid all mention of Muslims or Islam or shouts of "Allahu Akbar" or anything unpleasant like that, with the exception of the coy aside:

 

A note was found in the truck that referred to so-called Islamic State, a law enforcement source told CBS News.

 

Imagine if this had been a white male mowing down ethnic minorities -- it would have been news fodder for months.

 

The BBC and other self-styled elites cosset Islamic terrorists because they see them as less of a threat to their own well-being than the large number of less "progressive" white citizens of their own countries.

 

This is seen every time these incidents occur, with the main source of BBC anxiety being to avoid an "Islamophobic backlash", whatever that means.

As usual politically based pathetic right of center nonsense. Some time has now passed, with the BBC now reporting details currently known . One expects MSM to behave in this manner, not hyperbole feeds from the likes of Infowars or some other ridiculous misinformation source people such as you base their claims.

 

RIP for the dead and condolences for loved ones, quick recovery for those injured.

[TEFLKrabi]

Why on earth would I want to do that? Muslims can do what they like in their homelands. In the west they should fully integrate or bugger off

I agree that integration is key but I’ve also worked or lived in 7 different majority Islamic countries and never been forced to fully integrate. I think, from the comments, too many view Saudi Arabia as typical of Islamic countries. No one in their right mind would consider Saudi as a shining example but countries like Jordan and Lebanon are very free and open.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[katana]

15 hours ago, impulse said:

 

There's a tiny subset of just about every religion out there who will call up ancient texts to justify despicable actions.  Like the KKK and other racists groups throughout their history.  And those guys who bombed the King David Hotel. 

 

Today, it's a tiny percentage of Muslims around the world that get all the press.  But they're certainly not unique.

 

The fact that not all Muslims are acting on the numerous passages in the Koran advocating violence against non-believers is despite Islam, not because of it. Islam is in effect the exact opposite of a religion of peace.

[Andaman Al]

So, the transport massacre in New York leaves  8 dead and others injured. Trump's immediate response is to tighten immigration and become less politically correct.

 

In Las Vegas, 58 people were killed and 489 injured. Trump's response was that it was not the right time to talk about gun control.

 

Great leadership Mr President 

[nausea]

4 hours ago, sanemax said:

Who is "we" ?

I do not share those values .

Count me out of the equation

I think he's talking about Hegelian universal values, not specific to any religion, but specific to the human race. You may fall outside of "the universal" if you value your personal agenda above "the universal" or if you have a committment to a divine authority that you consider is above "the universal". So, at the end of the day, no, most of us do not share Islamic values as they value divine authority above common human values, and many use it as justification for acts the rest of us find abhorrent. The fact there may be, as in many religions, a substratum of common human values that the majority might adhere to is neither here nor there. 

[greatwhitenorth]

President Trump blames Chuck Schumer within 24 hours of the tragedy. Sarah Huckleberry says it's not political.

 

Schumer’s measure was absorbed into a broader House immigration bill, which was sponsored by Schumer and 31 others, including several Republicans. The legislation passed in a bipartisan vote of 231 to 192. The Senate version, which contained the “diversity immigrants” provision, passed in an overwhelming 89-to-8 vote  ( 44 republicans in the Senate)and was signed into law by Bush at the end of 1990.

[observer90210]

This attack will be caviar served in a golden dish for the usual, impotent brainless racists and white supremacists !!....but relax people....the new computer ban's on airlines will solve it all !!

 

RIP to the innocent who lost their lives for no reason....

[observer90210]

3 hours ago, TEFLKrabi said:

I agree that integration is key but I’ve also worked or lived in 7 different majority Islamic countries and never been forced to fully integrate. I think, from the comments, too many view Saudi Arabia as typical of Islamic countries. No one in their right mind would consider Saudi as a shining example but countries like Jordan and Lebanon are very free and open.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

and who is amongst Saudia Arabia's main business partners ?.... some things are connected and the whole issue is a bit more complicated...

[katana]

14 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

14 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

To integrate goes directly again Islamic teaching in the Quran, so they would be compromising their religious beliefs.  Therefore, it could be said that those who integrate are not 'real' Muslims at all

Since, according to many of the posters, the Koran commands Muslims to kill infidels, then 99.999 percent of Muslims are not "real" Muslims either.

That's a facile response.
Terrorism and killing infidels is only one of many ways to wage jihad. There are several types of jihad. In Islamic teachings, there are five pillars of Islam, five things every Muslim should do. But according to Mohammad, jihad is more important than any of them. It is a religious duty for each Muslim to struggle for the establishment of Sharia law everywhere in the world. Some do it with bombs. Some do it with immigration and high birthrate. Some do it with relentless political actions (waging jihad by gaining concessions). Some do it with "mainstream, moderate" Muslim organizations that try to undermine Western governments.
So, just because a muslim isn't killing infidels, does not mean he is not a true muslim since he can also perform other types of jihad.
The Muslims who are terrorists are able to do what they do because of support from their community, and that support is motivated by Islamic teachings. It is also motivated by the hope that the supporters will gain entry to Paradise. The martyr can plea to Allah (once he arrives in Paradise) on behalf of up to seventy of his relatives to get them a ticket to Paradise. For those who believe this, it is an incentive to help any of their relatives who plan on killing non-Muslims. In other words, that "small percentage" of Muslims who are active terrorists are only the tip of the iceberg of popular support for the killing of non-Muslims. Remember the jubilation in the Muslim world when thousands of non-Muslims were killed on 9/11?

Edited November 1, 2017 by katana

[hawker9000]

14 hours ago, DavisH said:

Most Muslims are embarrassed by the shenanigans of ISIS and their deranged followers. ISIS is about acquiring power through the Middle East, and has nothing to with Islam, per se.... 

Disagree.  I think MOST Muslims globally speaking regard ISIS and terrorist groups with a certain degree of at least passive tolerance, if not tacit approval, in the belief or hope that their interests as Muslims are being somehow advanced on a global scale through actions they themselves would never undertake, but are reasonably content to have others not directly connected carrying out.   But westerners see and have contact with a minority of necessarily more moderate western-facing Muslims and think that's representative of the entire Muslim world community.   And then there are some westerners who have simply been successfully intimidated into apologizing for Muslims whom they simply fear might blow up the world if awareness of their abominations and intolerance is not suppressed.

[FreddieRoyle]

update to this story. A 2nd man has been arrested over this NYC truck jihad. Mukhammadzoir Kadirov also from Uzbekhistan. Yesterday we were told, "don't worry, it's just a lone wolf" and now there's what? a second lone wolf? Could there have been a pack of "lone wolves"? Were these lone wolves sheltered and nurtured by the local community? By respected elders at their local mosque? 

 

Without over-reacting the proper measures that must be immediately implemented are 1) the outlawing of torturing animals to death aka Halal foods, 2)total ban on visas for muslim non citizens, 3) strict supervision of mosques, all speakings to be in English language and all recorded, or better still close them all, 4) absolute zero tolerance on Sharia 5)deportation of the whole family unit of anybody involved in terror. The age of submission and appeasement is over, thanks to strong leadership at present.

 Reading comments here and elsewhere gives me hope that people have finally woken up and rejected the old canard - Islamic terror is nothing to do with Islam. Yeah right!