Is America at war with radical Islam?

[Publicus]

<snip>

Let us assume

Let us not...it always goes in wrong and bad directions as once again evidenced in the post....

Then what percent of the Muslim population do you think, believe, understand are considered radical Islamists?

I used as an example one in a 1,000.

In your considered opinion is it one in 10,000? One in 50,000?

Pretend I'm a teenager wearing a shirt you don't like and stare me down with some numbers.

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

[BKKBobby]

Chuckd, i have also heard about that. That what really became the shahs downfall was that he permitted more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media. A big reason why I call him brainless is that he seemed to actually think that he was loved by his people. The 'leftists' were sons and daughters of the privileged minority, the (upper)middleclass. If he knew to a better extent what people thought he might not have been convinced by Carter.

[chuckd]

<snip>

Let us assume

Let us not...it always goes in wrong and bad directions as once again evidenced in the post....

Then what percent of the Muslim population do you think, believe, understand are considered radical Islamists?

I used as an example one in a 1,000.

In your considered opinion is it one in 10,000? One in 50,000?

Pretend I'm a teenager wearing a shirt you don't like and stare me down with some numbers.

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

[Steely Dan]

May I comment on your post?

You are correct that the CIA was instrumental in over throwing the rule of Mossadegh and installing, as you call him a "brainless Puppet", back into his office.

That "brainless puppet" was Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran.

The Shah was placed again, on the Peacock Throne in 1953 and very effectively ran his nation until the Islamic revolution in 1978 drove him into exile again.

I lived in Tehran and traveled quite a bit around the country from 1974 to 1979. During that nearly five year period I saw Iran move from a country where sliced bread was unavailable into a full grown partner of the west, with a growing and thriving middle class.

The government was largely secular, the economy was good and people were prosperous, free and happy.

If you feel like blaming the US for the Iranian situation, go for it. But don't blame the CIA. Blame Jimmy Carter who, on 1 January 1978 convinced the Shah to permit more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media.

The Shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to rule. The rest is history.

I thought all of it was history?

The trouble is that the history we are taught about Islam in schools bears little resemblance to what happened. This has had the effect of disarming western civilization, That the U.S is at war with radical Islam should be self-evident if history is examined in depth.

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/islam/surreal-and-suicidal-modern-western-histories-of-islam/

[CMNightRider]

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

I bet he stares at your post for a long time over those figures. It's obvious to most people except (Obama and his leftist minions) that radical Islam is a real threat, and a large percentage of the so called main stream Muslims, do quietly support the radicals.

[Publicus]

Then what percent of the Muslim population do you think, believe, understand are considered radical Islamists?

I used as an example one in a 1,000.

In your considered opinion is it one in 10,000? One in 50,000?

Pretend I'm a teenager wearing a shirt you don't like and stare me down with some numbers.

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

There seems to be a new offensive from the right here tonight.

You're regardless going to have to cite your figures because I don't trust your all Muslims are bad and evil people calculator.

The anti-Muslim campaigner Ms Gabriel claimed 180 million to 300 million Muslim radicals in Europe which is debunked by Western European intelligence agencies.

The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating.

Check the news article again that I cite in my post then get back to me without any wild figures in the eyes.

Your welcome.

[Publicus]

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

I bet he stares at your post for a long time over those figures. It's obvious to most people except (Obama and his leftist minions) that radical Islam is a real threat, and a large percentage of the so called main stream Muslims, do quietly support the radicals.

The campaigners against Muslims per se are wrong.

Muslim Publics Share Concerns about Extremist Groups

Much Diminished Support for Suicide Bombing

More than two years after the death of Osama bin Laden, concern about Islamic extremism remains widespread among Muslims from South Asia to the Middle East to sub-Saharan Africa. Across 11 Muslim publics surveyed by the Pew Research Center, a median of 67% say they are somewhat or very concerned about Islamic extremism. In five countries – Pakistan, Jordan, Tunisia, Turkey and Indonesia – Muslim worries about extremism have increased in the past year.

In many of the countries surveyed, clear majorities of Muslims oppose violence in the name of Islam. Indeed, about three-quarters or more in Pakistan (89%), Indonesia (81%), Nigeria (78%) and Tunisia (77%), say suicide bombings or other acts of violence that target civilians are never justified.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/09/10/muslim-publics-share-concerns-about-extremist-groups/

[rijb]

You really should try and educate yourself a bit more before spouting bigoted nonsense.

Try following your own advice.

- Tens of thousands of women have been executed in Iran since 1979, when the mullahs took power. They were executed on political grounds, for their opposition to the policies of the ruling government. Among those executed were tens of pregnant women.

- The worst kinds of torture are inflicted on woman prisoners who oppose the regime. These include repeated sexual assaults, amputation of body parts and...

http://www.wfafi.org/laws.pdf

Dont ignore this post or try to make it seem unrelevant by talking in circles or using a smart way of putting together your sentences Ulysses. G

Mohammad Mossadegh were a democratically elected leader in a Iran with no religious laws. He was as left-leaning as the average swedish government.

He nationalised the oil which anyone would understand cause Iran had made a very unfair deal with UK a long time ago.

UK wanted to topple him. Instead of doing it themselves they played the US and put communist paranoia into the US which then arranged a coup and toppled Mossadegh. CIA did this. Its public information. Not classified anymore.

They installed a brainless Puppet that were doing everything he was told by his foreign masters.

He got toppled and now US have to take consequence of playing god without even having a good cause.

Iran was considered the most modern and west-oriented country in the middle east.

What if USA never toppled Mossadegh?

May I comment on your post?

You are correct that the CIA was instrumental in over throwing the rule of Mossadegh and installing, as you call him a "brainless Puppet", back into his office.

That "brainless puppet" was Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran.

The Shah was placed again, on the Peacock Throne in 1953 and very effectively ran his nation until the Islamic revolution in 1978 drove him into exile again.

I lived in Tehran and traveled quite a bit around the country from 1974 to 1979. During that nearly five year period I saw Iran move from a country where sliced bread was unavailable into a full grown partner of the west, with a growing and thriving middle class.

The government was largely secular, the economy was good and people were prosperous, free and happy.

If you feel like blaming the US for the Iranian situation, go for it. But don't blame the CIA. Blame Jimmy Carter who, on 1 January 1978 convinced the Shah to permit more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media.

The Shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to rule. The rest is history.

I was there from early 1978 until the day after the Shah left.

The Shah was not a brainless puppet.

Carter was the idiot without a brain.

A lot of good people were killed because of Carter, and his ahole ambassador (Sullivan).

[Publicus]

You really should try and educate yourself a bit more before spouting bigoted nonsense.

Try following your own advice.

- Tens of thousands of women have been executed in Iran since 1979, when the mullahs took power. They were executed on political grounds, for their opposition to the policies of the ruling government. Among those executed were tens of pregnant women.

- The worst kinds of torture are inflicted on woman prisoners who oppose the regime. These include repeated sexual assaults, amputation of body parts and...

http://www.wfafi.org/laws.pdf

Dont ignore this post or try to make it seem unrelevant by talking in circles or using a smart way of putting together your sentences Ulysses. G

Mohammad Mossadegh were a democratically elected leader in a Iran with no religious laws. He was as left-leaning as the average swedish government.

He nationalised the oil which anyone would understand cause Iran had made a very unfair deal with UK a long time ago.

UK wanted to topple him. Instead of doing it themselves they played the US and put communist paranoia into the US which then arranged a coup and toppled Mossadegh. CIA did this. Its public information. Not classified anymore.

They installed a brainless Puppet that were doing everything he was told by his foreign masters.

He got toppled and now US have to take consequence of playing god without even having a good cause.

Iran was considered the most modern and west-oriented country in the middle east.

What if USA never toppled Mossadegh?

May I comment on your post?

You are correct that the CIA was instrumental in over throwing the rule of Mossadegh and installing, as you call him a "brainless Puppet", back into his office.

That "brainless puppet" was Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran.

The Shah was placed again, on the Peacock Throne in 1953 and very effectively ran his nation until the Islamic revolution in 1978 drove him into exile again.

I lived in Tehran and traveled quite a bit around the country from 1974 to 1979. During that nearly five year period I saw Iran move from a country where sliced bread was unavailable into a full grown partner of the west, with a growing and thriving middle class.

The government was largely secular, the economy was good and people were prosperous, free and happy.

If you feel like blaming the US for the Iranian situation, go for it. But don't blame the CIA. Blame Jimmy Carter who, on 1 January 1978 convinced the Shah to permit more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media.

The Shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to rule. The rest is history.

There are many of us who disagree with your characterizations and we note that you ignore or sidestep many aspects of the shah's dictatorial madness and fierce opposition to democracy.

The Iranian people did not fight to replace the Shah's regime with the current dictatorship in 1979. They fought to death for freedom and democracy, but the Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, had already destroyed most of the political organizations in Iran, including the nationalists. The current regime was the only untouched organization in the Shah’s dictatorship, with the head quarter in Qom and thousands salaried members in the mosques all over the cities and villages throughout the country. They easily came to power during the aftermath of revolution and assembled a new semi-monarchy Islamic constitutionfor themselves.

http://www.angelfire.com/home/iran/

[Steely Dan]

If you want a reasonable estimate as to how many Muslims support the radicals, either directly, or otherwise it would be useful to determine how many are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over the law of the land. Sharia law by the way would take an axe to the constitution and its amendments, though it would appear the advanced party in the Whitehouse has already set about amendments 1 and 2 with some gusto.

Edit: Statistics, here you go. In Europe the situation is frightening, over 50% in favour. They might not support radicals directly, but let it be remembered Sharia is the political aim of the radicals too.

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/04/07/support-sharia-law-world/

[Berkshire]

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

Assuming that your estimates are remotely close to reality (in terms of radical Muslims), are you in support of western right wing policies that would increase this number by a huge amount? That's what I don't get with you guys. You're concerned, to the point of being paranoid, about radical Islam, yet, every word out of your mouth would encourage an exponential increase in something you detest. I don't get it!

[Ulysses G.]

Your opinion of what increases Islamic terrorism is not exactly important to most folks on the right.

[Publicus]

If you want a reasonable estimate as to how many Muslims support the radicals, either directly, or otherwise it would be useful to determine how many are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over the law of the land. Sharia law by the way would take an axe to the constitution and its amendments, though it would appear the advanced party in the Whitehouse has already set about amendments 1 and 2 with some gusto.

Edit: Statistics, here you go. In Europe the situation is frightening, over 50% in favour. They might not support radicals directly, but let it be remembered Sharia is the political aim of the radicals too.

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/04/07/support-sharia-law-world/

People who have irrational concerns might do well to read the Q&A at the following link which discusses the following questions.....

Is Sharia compatible with American law and values?

How do American Muslims follow Sharia?

Do American Muslims want to replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia?

Is taking into account Muslim practices in U.S. courts an example of what some are calling “creeping Sharia” in the American legal system? How do you explain U.S. courts interpreting contracts based on Sharia law?

How would state laws barring any consideration of Sharia or other religious laws in courts affect American Muslims and other religious groups?

http://www.tolerance.org/publication/sharia

Anyone who thinks or believes President Obama is anti-American, anti Western, supports Islamic jihad, has radical Muslims advising him in the White House etc etc as some have posted here is plainly nuts.

[Berkshire]

Your opinion of what increases Islamic terrorism is not exactly important to most folks on the right.

At least politicians say stupid things for political reasons. They have something to gain. Why do you guys promote policies that would hurt more people than help?

My opinion is based on logic and reason. Imagine normal everyday people and their families who are just trying to live their lives. What do you think would happen to them if you take away their livelihood, freedom, opportunities, etc., and label them criminals? I know what I would do. It's not rocket science.

[Fookhaht]

Franklin Graham (son of Billy Graham) today criticized Obama for comparing ISIS to the Christian Crusades of the medieval period.

Here's an excerpt. Is what he says about Mohamed true?

[Steely Dan]

If you want a reasonable estimate as to how many Muslims support the radicals, either directly, or otherwise it would be useful to determine how many are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over the law of the land. Sharia law by the way would take an axe to the constitution and its amendments, though it would appear the advanced party in the Whitehouse has already set about amendments 1 and 2 with some gusto.

Edit: Statistics, here you go. In Europe the situation is frightening, over 50% in favour. They might not support radicals directly, but let it be remembered Sharia is the political aim of the radicals too.

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/04/07/support-sharia-law-world/

People who have irrational concerns might do well to read the Q&A at the following link which discusses the following questions.....

Is Sharia compatible with American law and values?

How do American Muslims follow Sharia?

Do American Muslims want to replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia?

Is taking into account Muslim practices in U.S. courts an example of what some are calling “creeping Sharia” in the American legal system? How do you explain U.S. courts interpreting contracts based on Sharia law?

How would state laws barring any consideration of Sharia or other religious laws in courts affect American Muslims and other religious groups?

http://www.tolerance.org/publication/sharia

Anyone who thinks or believes President Obama is anti-American, anti Western, supports Islamic jihad, has radical Muslims advising him in the White House etc etc as some have posted here is plainly nuts.

The Obama appointments are radical loons or Islamist sympathizers or both. The clownish utterances they make are hilarious if they weren't so damn serious. The tone was set early on when James Clapper characterized the Muslim Brotherhood as 'Mostly secular', this is the same Muslim Brotherhood who are designated a terrorist organization by the UAE and Egypt. Naturally the POTUS had a closed doors meeting with members of the Brotherhood and the names of attendees was initially hushed up. All from a president absent from Paris when the civilized world showed solidarity against Jihad.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/07/the-muslim-brotherhood-comes-to-the-white-house/

Then we have to consider the Obama aid who had to resign shortly after opining that a Caliphate was inevitable. Then there's Chuck Hagel being elbowed for warning that ISIS was a great danger to the U.S.

The list is endless.

[pigeonjake]

im sorry to bring this news to you americans and the rest of us, but as you talking about isis

its on cnn news now that the american young girl they held kaylan cant remember her second name is dead,

sorry for bringing this news,,, god bless her

jake

[pigeonjake]

isis are saying she was killed by a jordanian air strike,,,, yeh

[boomerangutang]

I was there from early 1978 until the day after the Shah left.

The Shah was not a brainless puppet.

Carter was the idiot without a brain.

A lot of good people were killed because of Carter, and his ahole ambassador (Sullivan).

Perhaps mistakes were made by Carter and his advisors re; Iran. However, Iran's people have to take responsibility for themselves. They can't go and blame their troubles on the US or its president. The Shah had his faults, but the replacement, Ayotollay Kohmeini, was 100x worse for Iranians, and for Iran's relations with other countries.

[Publicus]

If you want a reasonable estimate as to how many Muslims support the radicals, either directly, or otherwise it would be useful to determine how many are in favour of Sharia law taking precedence over the law of the land. Sharia law by the way would take an axe to the constitution and its amendments, though it would appear the advanced party in the Whitehouse has already set about amendments 1 and 2 with some gusto.

Edit: Statistics, here you go. In Europe the situation is frightening, over 50% in favour. They might not support radicals directly, but let it be remembered Sharia is the political aim of the radicals too.

http://chersonandmolschky.com/2014/04/07/support-sharia-law-world/

People who have irrational concerns might do well to read the Q&A at the following link which discusses the following questions.....

Is Sharia compatible with American law and values?

How do American Muslims follow Sharia?

Do American Muslims want to replace the U.S. Constitution with Sharia?

Is taking into account Muslim practices in U.S. courts an example of what some are calling “creeping Sharia” in the American legal system? How do you explain U.S. courts interpreting contracts based on Sharia law?

How would state laws barring any consideration of Sharia or other religious laws in courts affect American Muslims and other religious groups?

http://www.tolerance.org/publication/sharia

Anyone who thinks or believes President Obama is anti-American, anti Western, supports Islamic jihad, has radical Muslims advising him in the White House etc etc as some have posted here is plainly nuts.

The Obama appointments are radical loons or Islamist sympathizers or both. The clownish utterances they make are hilarious if they weren't so damn serious. The tone was set early on when James Clapper characterized the Muslim Brotherhood as 'Mostly secular', this is the same Muslim Brotherhood who are designated a terrorist organization by the UAE and Egypt. Naturally the POTUS had a closed doors meeting with members of the Brotherhood and the names of attendees was initially hushed up. All from a president absent from Paris when the civilized world showed solidarity against Jihad.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/02/07/the-muslim-brotherhood-comes-to-the-white-house/

Then we have to consider the Obama aid who had to resign shortly after opining that a Caliphate was inevitable. Then there's Chuck Hagel being elbowed for warning that ISIS was a great danger to the U.S.

The list is endless.

There is indeed a long list and it is the long list of the loony right.

President Obama is a natural born American who is 100% loyal to the United States and our Constitution, he is a patriot and he is a 100% American sworn to preserve, protect, defend the Constitution of the United States. He is the government's chief executive officer, the commander in chief of the armed forces, the nation's chief diplomatic officer, its chief legal officer, chief financial officer, and is the head of state.

Those are the six titles the president of the United States has and those six only and exclusively. They are his and his alone which only a small percentage of nutcases fail to recognize as his or to respect as such.

[boomerangutang]

Very well articulated, Publicus. If any of the comments here are any indication, the right wing of the US should never, ever be in power again. Because if their rhetoric ever becomes a reality, it will be the death of us all.

I was just 12 at the time, but in the early 1960's, when Goldwater (a hard-right conservative from Arizona) was runnng for US prez, he puportedly claimed he would use N bombs on North Vietnam, if elected. Am glad he lost (and by a large margin).

[Publicus]

im sorry to bring this news to you americans and the rest of us, but as you talking about isis

its on cnn news now that the american young girl they held kaylan cant remember her second name is dead,

sorry for bringing this news,,, god bless her

jake

Yes it is true...I'm watching it on the news now.....Kayla Jean Mueller, 26, a humanitarian volunteer from Prescott, Arizona.

RIP.

[chuckd]

Let us work off some reasonably reliable data from intelligence agencies of Western governments rather than make assumptions which originate from out of one's bottom side.

The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Yet however, Angel Rabasa, who is a senior political scientist at the RAND corporation and while conducting research for his latest book, "Euro Jihad," found that Western European intelligence agencies estimate that less than one percent of the Muslim population living within their borders are at risk for becoming radicals.

The key terms here are of course "radicals" and "are at risk for becoming."

The quote below is from an article about this that appeared recently in the Christian Science Monitor.

Speaking of staring down btw....

The Christian Science Monitor reported in September that the top European Union counter-terrorism official estimated that roughly 3,000 Europeans had gone to fight in Syria, although this figure also counted the dead and was later reduced to 2,000. American officials originally said there were more than 100 Americans who had gone to Syria. But the FBI chief has since reduced it to 12 confirmed people.

Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/terrorism-security/2015/0113/How-many-Muslim-extremists-are-there-Just-the-facts-please

One Muslim radical is too many whether in Europe alone or elsewhere as well, but one in a thousand comes at us from completely out of the blue.

Edited by Publicus for spacing

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

There seems to be a new offensive from the right here tonight.

You're regardless going to have to cite your figures because I don't trust your all Muslims are bad and evil people calculator.

The anti-Muslim campaigner Ms Gabriel claimed 180 million to 300 million Muslim radicals in Europe which is debunked by Western European intelligence agencies.

The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating.

Check the news article again that I cite in my post then get back to me without any wild figures in the eyes.

Your welcome.

I know you want this to go away, but it just won't.

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

In your post made at 19:02 today, you make this ridiculous claim:

"The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Why do I call it ridiculous? For one reason you state there would be 180 million to 300 million terrorists dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. There are only 56.19 million Muslims in all of Europe, including Russia, so how could there possibly be 180 million to 300 million Muslims of any sort?

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

Then you make the following claim in your post made at 20:34 today:

"The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating."

The problem you have with this post is comparing apples to oranges. The magical 3,000 number you seem so proud of are only those who have gone to Syria to engage in the war...not people who are potentially dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.

Then you go on to claim this 3,000 represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe. If there were only 30,000 Muslims in all of Europe your statement would be correct. However since there are some 28.92 million (not counting Russia) your "tenth" of that total quickly becomes 2.892 million...not 3,000.

You now have three choices.

1. You can accept the "tenth of all Muslims" you earlier quoted as being terrorists. If you do that you are left with 2,892,000 terrorists in Europe alone.

2. You can stick with your figure of 3,000 terrorists in all of Europe, which would then represent 0.0001% of the 28.92 million Muslims in Europe.

3. Or you can go with another figure you threw out which is 0.01%. That means the Europeans are only facing some 289,200 terrorists.

Which is it?

[chuckd]

<snip>

May I comment on your post?

You are correct that the CIA was instrumental in over throwing the rule of Mossadegh and installing, as you call him a "brainless Puppet", back into his office.

That "brainless puppet" was Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran.

The Shah was placed again, on the Peacock Throne in 1953 and very effectively ran his nation until the Islamic revolution in 1978 drove him into exile again.

I lived in Tehran and traveled quite a bit around the country from 1974 to 1979. During that nearly five year period I saw Iran move from a country where sliced bread was unavailable into a full grown partner of the west, with a growing and thriving middle class.

The government was largely secular, the economy was good and people were prosperous, free and happy.

If you feel like blaming the US for the Iranian situation, go for it. But don't blame the CIA. Blame Jimmy Carter who, on 1 January 1978 convinced the Shah to permit more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media.

The Shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to rule. The rest is history.

There are many of us who disagree with your characterizations and we note that you ignore or sidestep many aspects of the shah's dictatorial madness and fierce opposition to democracy.

The Iranian people did not fight to replace the Shah's regime with the current dictatorship in 1979. They fought to death for freedom and democracy, but the Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, had already destroyed most of the political organizations in Iran, including the nationalists. The current regime was the only untouched organization in the Shah’s dictatorship, with the head quarter in Qom and thousands salaried members in the mosques all over the cities and villages throughout the country. They easily came to power during the aftermath of revolution and assembled a new semi-monarchy Islamic constitutionfor themselves.

http://www.angelfire.com/home/iran/

I know very well about Savak. Were you in Iran and what did you personally find out about them?

Savak was the brutal state police of the shah that were charged with keeping dissension within the ranks, so to speak, manageable.

We had several employees, US types, who made verbal slips criticizing the Shah and found themselves on a one way airplane out of Mehrabad airport within 24 hours. Savak was everywhere and you never knew who was an agent and who wasn't an agent.

Those of us that had our heads screwed on right simply never found cause to complain about the Shah or his policies and there was no problem. I agreed with him and the way he ran his country so I had no threat from Savak. They were scattered through all government offices and private companies and one never knew who the plant was.

The Iranians were even more concerned about Savak but everybody knew about it.

You do know the Ayatollah absorbed Savak and some of their leaders into his Islamic Republic as his own personal secret police? He called the survivors of his purge SAVAMA and they turned into what they have today...agents driving around with portable cranes looking for people to hang.

PS: Who are the "many" and "we" you describe so eloquently?

"There are many of us who disagree with your characterizations and we note that you ignore or sidestep many aspects of the shah's dictatorial madness.."

[Publicus]

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

There seems to be a new offensive from the right here tonight.

You're regardless going to have to cite your figures because I don't trust your all Muslims are bad and evil people calculator.

The anti-Muslim campaigner Ms Gabriel claimed 180 million to 300 million Muslim radicals in Europe which is debunked by Western European intelligence agencies.

The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating.

Check the news article again that I cite in my post then get back to me without any wild figures in the eyes.

Your welcome.

I know you want this to go away, but it just won't.

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

In your post made at 19:02 today, you make this ridiculous claim:

"The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Why do I call it ridiculous? For one reason you state there would be 180 million to 300 million terrorists dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. There are only 56.19 million Muslims in all of Europe, including Russia, so how could there possibly be 180 million to 300 million Muslims of any sort?

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

Then you make the following claim in your post made at 20:34 today:

"The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating."

The problem you have with this post is comparing apples to oranges. The magical 3,000 number you seem so proud of are only those who have gone to Syria to engage in the war...not people who are potentially dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.

Then you go on to claim this 3,000 represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe. If there were only 30,000 Muslims in all of Europe your statement would be correct. However since there are some 28.92 million (not counting Russia) your "tenth" of that total quickly becomes 2.892 million...not 3,000.

You now have three choices.

1. You can accept the "tenth of all Muslims" you earlier quoted as being terrorists. If you do that you are left with 2,892,000 terrorists in Europe alone.

2. You can stick with your figure of 3,000 terrorists in all of Europe, which would then represent 0.0001% of the 28.92 million Muslims in Europe.

3. Or you can go with another figure you threw out which is 0.01%. That means the Europeans are only facing some 289,200 terrorists.

Which is it?

These posts are getting rather lengthy and unwieldy, not to mention convoluted so this post will be made in the interests of brevity and clarity.

I am quoting the news article I cited which has concrete data from the European intelligence agencies. I was prompted to do this because you gave guesstimate numbers pulled out of somewhere I won't mention specifically in public. My first reply to your out of the blue post was met by your response that asked me for my own guesstimate, which I categorically declined to do.

I posted specific data, not guesswork. Your posts mix, mangle and mingle your guesswork and guesstimates with my data from the intelligence agencies that are presented in the news story.

That is where the matter stands and will remain.

[Publicus]

<snip>

May I comment on your post?

You are correct that the CIA was instrumental in over throwing the rule of Mossadegh and installing, as you call him a "brainless Puppet", back into his office.

That "brainless puppet" was Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, also known as the Shah of Iran.

The Shah was placed again, on the Peacock Throne in 1953 and very effectively ran his nation until the Islamic revolution in 1978 drove him into exile again.

I lived in Tehran and traveled quite a bit around the country from 1974 to 1979. During that nearly five year period I saw Iran move from a country where sliced bread was unavailable into a full grown partner of the west, with a growing and thriving middle class.

The government was largely secular, the economy was good and people were prosperous, free and happy.

If you feel like blaming the US for the Iranian situation, go for it. But don't blame the CIA. Blame Jimmy Carter who, on 1 January 1978 convinced the Shah to permit more freedom of the press and relax his control of the media.

The Shah was forced to leave Iran in January 1979 and Ayatollah Khomeini returned to rule. The rest is history.

There are many of us who disagree with your characterizations and we note that you ignore or sidestep many aspects of the shah's dictatorial madness and fierce opposition to democracy.

The Iranian people did not fight to replace the Shah's regime with the current dictatorship in 1979. They fought to death for freedom and democracy, but the Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, had already destroyed most of the political organizations in Iran, including the nationalists. The current regime was the only untouched organization in the Shah’s dictatorship, with the head quarter in Qom and thousands salaried members in the mosques all over the cities and villages throughout the country. They easily came to power during the aftermath of revolution and assembled a new semi-monarchy Islamic constitutionfor themselves.

http://www.angelfire.com/home/iran/

I know very well about Savak. Were you in Iran and what did you personally find out about them?

Savak was the brutal state police of the shah that were charged with keeping dissension within the ranks, so to speak, manageable.

We had several employees, US types, who made verbal slips criticizing the Shah and found themselves on a one way airplane out of Mehrabad airport within 24 hours. Savak was everywhere and you never knew who was an agent and who wasn't an agent.

Those of us that had our heads screwed on right simply never found cause to complain about the Shah or his policies and there was no problem. I agreed with him and the way he ran his country so I had no threat from Savak. They were scattered through all government offices and private companies and one never knew who the plant was.

The Iranians were even more concerned about Savak but everybody knew about it.

You do know the Ayatollah absorbed Savak and some of their leaders into his Islamic Republic as his own personal secret police? He called the survivors of his purge SAVAMA and they turned into what they have today...agents driving around with portable cranes looking for people to hang.

PS: Who are the "many" and "we" you describe so eloquently?

"There are many of us who disagree with your characterizations and we note that you ignore or sidestep many aspects of the shah's dictatorial madness.."

Were you in Iran and what did you personally find out about them?

No, not ever...personally nuthin.

I have been reading your posts for about 10-11 years and an active poster for about 8 years regularly replying to your posts, so I know a lot about your political and other views and have read a lot of your long and extensive experience abroad, in the ME and south central Asia in particular.

I integrate that with my own experience of several years in the People's Republic of China where Chinese Communist Party plants, agents, spies are in every office, factory, shop, store, cinema, classroom, local restaurant, popular KFC, McDonalds, also every hotel, bus, subway car, many taxis, barber shops, night clubs etc etc etc.

It is eerie to be in the PRChina under such circumstances because every workplace is a silent place. No one will speak to co-workers or colleagues throughout the day, each day. People do not speak to others for one of two reasons. Either they don't know who the spy is or they do know who the spies are.

Your experience in Iran and abroad in the dictatorship kingdoms of the ME is not unique nor is it your kind of experience alone.

[canuckamuck]

"Even if that figure was 3,000 and even if that represented only a tenth of all the Muslims in Europe "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization," that would put the figure at 0.01 percent of Europe's Muslims, not between 15 and 25 percent as Gabriel claims."

% as being radical, the total is

Using your link, and the figures you have quoted, that means that 0.01% of Europe's Muslims are as Gabriel claims.

There are an estimated 28.92 million Muslims residing in Europe...not counting the 27.27 million in Russia.

We find that in Europe, using the figure of 0.01% of the total you arrive at 289,200 terrorists in Europe alone.

Looking at my earlier guesstimate that there could be a potential 6,670 terrorists out of the total US Muslim population of 6.67 Million.

With your new found proof, that would mean my guesstimate was under estimated by 60,030 potential terrorists in the US.

The total number becomes 66,700 potential suicide bombers in the US alone.

I assumed 1 in 1,000. Your link shows the true estimate to be 1 in 100.

That's a ten fold increase over my assumption.

Thank you for your contribution pointing out an even greater danger to the US than I imagined.

http://www.muslimpopulation.com/World/

There seems to be a new offensive from the right here tonight.

You're regardless going to have to cite your figures because I don't trust your all Muslims are bad and evil people calculator.

The anti-Muslim campaigner Ms Gabriel claimed 180 million to 300 million Muslim radicals in Europe which is debunked by Western European intelligence agencies.

The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating.

Check the news article again that I cite in my post then get back to me without any wild figures in the eyes.

Your welcome.

I know you want this to go away, but it just won't.

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

In your post made at 19:02 today, you make this ridiculous claim:

"The right winger Brigitte Gabriel did a video resurrected by the far right after the Charlie Hebdo slaughter in which she said 15 to 25 percent of Muslims in Europe are "radicals." Ms extreme Gabriel said completely erroneously that Western intelligence agencies said so. Which, according to Ms Gabriel, would mean that in Europe alone, "You're looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization..."

Why do I call it ridiculous? For one reason you state there would be 180 million to 300 million terrorists dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. There are only 56.19 million Muslims in all of Europe, including Russia, so how could there possibly be 180 million to 300 million Muslims of any sort?

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

Then you make the following claim in your post made at 20:34 today:

"The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating."

The problem you have with this post is comparing apples to oranges. The magical 3,000 number you seem so proud of are only those who have gone to Syria to engage in the war...not people who are potentially dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization.

Then you go on to claim this 3,000 represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe. If there were only 30,000 Muslims in all of Europe your statement would be correct. However since there are some 28.92 million (not counting Russia) your "tenth" of that total quickly becomes 2.892 million...not 3,000.

You now have three choices.

1. You can accept the "tenth of all Muslims" you earlier quoted as being terrorists. If you do that you are left with 2,892,000 terrorists in Europe alone.

2. You can stick with your figure of 3,000 terrorists in all of Europe, which would then represent 0.0001% of the 28.92 million Muslims in Europe.

3. Or you can go with another figure you threw out which is 0.01%. That means the Europeans are only facing some 289,200 terrorists.

Which is it?

These posts are getting rather lengthy and unwieldy, not to mention convoluted so this post will be made in the interests of brevity and clarity.

I am quoting the news article I cited which has concrete data from the European intelligence agencies. I was prompted to do this because you gave guesstimate numbers pulled out of somewhere I won't mention specifically in public. My first reply to your out of the blue post was met by your response that asked me for my own guesstimate, which I categorically declined to do.

I posted specific data, not guesswork. Your posts mix, mangle and mingle your guesswork and guesstimates with my data from the intelligence agencies that are presented in the news story.

That is where the matter stands and will remain.

Pathetic response, you got busted posting random contradictory data, so you blame they guy that showed you up. Just admit Google failed you.

[NeverSure]

There seems to be a new offensive from the right here tonight.

You're regardless going to have to cite your figures because I don't trust your all Muslims are bad and evil people calculator.

The anti-Muslim campaigner Ms Gabriel claimed 180 million to 300 million Muslim radicals in Europe which is debunked by Western European intelligence agencies.

The 3000 Muslim radicals figure of European intelligence agencies represents a tenth of all Muslims in Europe so your calculator needs recalibrating.

Check the news article again that I cite in my post then get back to me without any wild figures in the eyes.

Your welcome.

"Western European intelligence agencies."

[NeverSure]

-snip-

These posts are getting rather lengthy and unwieldy, not to mention convoluted so this post will be made in the interests of brevity and clarity.

So why doesn't someone clean them out once in a while so you can have free access to unlimited ranting?

[canman]

You really should try and educate yourself a bit more before spouting bigoted nonsense.

Try following your own advice.

- Tens of thousands of women have been executed in Iran since 1979, when the mullahs took power. They were executed on political grounds, for their opposition to the policies of the ruling government. Among those executed were tens of pregnant women.

- The worst kinds of torture are inflicted on woman prisoners who oppose the regime. These include repeated sexual assaults, amputation of body parts and...

http://www.wfafi.org/laws.pdf

Dont ignore this post or try to make it seem unrelevant by talking in circles or using a smart way of putting together your sentences Ulysses. G

Mohammad Mossadegh were a democratically elected leader in a Iran with no religious laws. He was as left-leaning as the average swedish government.

He nationalised the oil which anyone would understand cause Iran had made a very unfair deal with UK a long time ago.

UK wanted to topple him. Instead of doing it themselves they played the US and put communist paranoia into the US which then arranged a coup and toppled Mossadegh. CIA did this. Its public information. Not classified anymore.

They installed a brainless Puppet Shah that were doing everything he was told by his foreign masters.

Iran was considered the most modern and west-oriented country in the middle east.

What if USA never toppled Mossadegh?

If he wasnt toppled there would never have been an islamic revolution in Iran 1979.

The Americans installed the shaw puppet government because they needed radio and radar observation of the soviet ICBM launch test sites at Tyuratam 600 miles north of the Iranian border. Nothing to do with the UK as such, rather it was seen as a critical SIGINT at the height of the cold war.