SURVEY: Should followers of Islam be allowed to work in Airport Security?

[mopar71]

Ban followers from any religion from working in security position, as any follower is by definition not fully connected to reality

Er - if you only employed atheists and agnostics, you'd be running short of employees.

You could give them fewer holidays off.

[mopar71]

Islam isn't a race. Jihadist isn't a race. Muslim isn't a race.

It's gotten so handy to call anyone you disagree with a racist or bigot or some kind of 'phobe...

Islam is a religion and a very nasty one at that. 9/11. Never forget.

There have also been many nasty things done in the name of Christianity. Let us not forget that all members of any religion are neither good not bad. They are people and subject to all human divergences.

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence, and hereins the rub. The notion that current religious actions are divorced from scripture is patently false and this is the underlying premise in all Islamic false logic. This is why jihadi terror attacks have an Orwellian Groundhog Day quality about them when reported. They're always divorced from their source.

Perhaps if western leaders actually studied what they parrot the world would not be shocked that once again Johnny converts and blows himself up or kills parents.

In any event where Christians did this or that they did so without scriptural injunction. Effectively no different then bob the postman, who also robbed a bank. Bob didn't rob a bank because he was Christian. Bob robbed the bank and he's Christian.

I am no apologist for religion but an argument in defense of Islam that appeals to Christianity for its defense, leaks like a sieve.

Posts as on this OP and responses above- let us not forget moral relativity counseling- are a direct result of western leaders offering vacant stares and no narrative as to why Muslim terrorists consistently kill us, each other, particularly hate cars, planes, and even buildings. Insisting it's climate change no jobs or offering no connecting dots at all, people are left to form their own narrative. Islamic State and Islamic terrorism have nothing to do with Islam is a bold lie, and this is the State back stop narrative- denial.

" God furiously commands the chiefs of Israel be impaled in the Sun as means of quenching anger"

"Moses commands his subordinates to kill anyone who has married a pagan"

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

OK, people, listen up. As we all know, there are a couple old religious texts that contain a lot of violent things you should do to people who don't believe as you do.

What everyone also knows but a few choose to ignore for whatever mysterious reasons is that Muslims take theirs very seriously and go out on a regular basis and try to follow it word for word. Christians on the other hand do not.

So trying to draw some sort of equivalence between the two does not work with anyone with any sense.

[Oxx]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

[Rancid]

Well, they will be in Muslim countries anyway. That aside PC would never allow the discrimination.

I may have read wrong but seems Israeli security have been in charge in several bombing attacks including Paris, and they aren't Muslim last I heard.

[RuamRudy]

Up to 90% of Europe born muslim youths support the islamic terror against infidels. There is no place for any of them in any sensitive or security job. To have the enemy policing itself is foolish beyond words.

What a remarkable statement. Whilst I appreciate, of course, that even if the true number was closer to 0.5%, your statement is still technically correct, I would very much like to see some evidence to back up your claim.

[Berkshire]

Just curious: If airports were to ban Muslims from working airport security, couldn't a Muslim person just not admit that he's a Muslim? He could say that he used to be a Muslim, but converted. Just saying...

We could probably narrow it down a bit by only employing Caucasian people.

Interesting answer. I wonder who does airport security in Muslim countries? Do they employ Caucasian people? Correction, non-Muslim Caucasian people?

[Koosdedooes]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed

782 - 4500 Saxons killed

1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax

1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum

Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ

And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

[F4UCorsair]

Considering that most mass murders in America are committed by Christians, I'd say in general we'd be safer having Muslims take care of security.

Seriously? The Christians in America killing people aren't doing so out of some warped sense of duty to Jesus.

The ONLY group currently committing mass murder in the name of religion are muslims. That is indisputable!!!

No Methodists, no Hindus, no Buddhists, no Catholics, etc.

Let me say it again. Islamic state is following the true islam doctrine. The so called moderate muslims are a thorn in the side of true muslims, i.e., those following the true islamic doctrine as is islamic state.

[Fookhaht]

Considering that most mass murders in America are committed by Christians, I'd say in general we'd be safer having Muslims take care of security.

[luk AJ]

Should Catholics, Jews and people of other religions also be barred ? Very few Muslims are fanatics and members of Islamic groups. Muslim peoples will be your neighbors all over the world very soon if they are not already. Get over it and welcome them as friends and neighbours.

Only people with narrow views and paranoia will disagree with me. Some of my best friends are Muslims, I was brought up as a Catholic. People are people, religion should not divide us.

But if you read or get out at ALL, you know that it does. Get over it? No. You deal with it! Muslims pass these "screenings", and then get turned/recruited/homegrown/whatever. It's not equitable that they should have to be scrutinized and treated differently, but it IS the world we live in. Those of us who AREN'T Muslims are certainly being treated differently by THEM! Apologists are quite fond of quantifying the miscreants as "very few", but somehow this violence is occurring everywhere, and in some countries groups like the Muslim Brotherhood win elections! Very few? Apparently not quite so few. No one ever wants to talk about what more "mainstream" Muslims should be doing to eliminate this scourge. It's not "PC". Well, too bad. Here and around the world they should be standing up to their clerics & screamers, and demanding, not asking, not pleading, not recommending, DEMANDING that the violence STOP, and refuse to set foot in any mosque or participate in any religious gathering where the monsters and Islamist leaders aren't loudly and openly condemned or where terms like "unbelievers" or "infidels" are even used. Until then, they should pay some price for turning a blind eye to what goes on in the name of their so-called "religion of peace".

Very well put. Couldn't add anythong.

Indeed excellent!

[Credo]

Considering that most mass murders in America are committed by Christians, I'd say in general we'd be safer having Muslims take care of security.

Yes, but this topic is about terrorism, not mass murderers.

[luk AJ]

When I arrived in the airport of Mashhad (Iran ) there was a huge billboard hanging on the ceiling of the arrival hall with the fllowing text quote : " the future Islam will destroy the sovereignity of the west" I wanted to take picture but was immediately stopped by security.

[Oxx]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed

782 - 4500 Saxons killed

1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax

1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum

Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ

And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

You are confusing the actions of supposedly Christian individuals with Christian teaching. Christian teaching does not condone any form of violence. In this it is radically different from Islamic teaching which, based upon Mohammed's actions and Allah's words in the Koran, clearly condone and nay, demands, such violence.

Putting it differently, for Christians, Christ is a role model, and he was a completely non-violent man. However, for Moslems, Mohammed is the ideal man, and he was a bloody war mongerer who, amongst many other things, ordered the slaughter of all men in a Jewish village because they wouldn't accept him as a prophet in the Jewish tradition. So, when Christians commit acts of violence, they fall short of their role model and do wrong, but when Moslems murder non-Moslems they are following their role model.

I also find it amusing that all the examples you (mistakenly) suggest are Christian violence are hundreds of years ago. Too difficult to find comparable examples in the 20th or 21st century?

[Koosdedooes]

Considering that most mass murders in America are committed by Christians, I'd say in general we'd be safer having Muslims take care of security.

Yes, but this topic is about terrorism, not mass murderers.

I read somewhere that 90% of all terrorists acts in the US were committed by non muslims, therefore following the premise of this thread, there are other groups of people who should be banned from becoming airport security workers over "the muslims"

What is certain this thread is like an episode of Fox news for sure reading a lot of these comments

[thai3]

where did you read that the isis monthly digest

[Thorgal]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed

782 - 4500 Saxons killed

1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax

1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum

Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ

And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

You are confusing the actions of supposedly Christian individuals with Christian teaching. Christian teaching does not condone any form of violence. In this it is radically different from Islamic teaching which, based upon Mohammed's actions and Allah's words in the Koran, clearly condone and nay, demands, such violence.

Putting it differently, for Christians, Christ is a role model, and he was a completely non-violent man. However, for Moslems, Mohammed is the ideal man, and he was a bloody war mongerer who, amongst many other things, ordered the slaughter of all men in a Jewish village because they wouldn't accept him as a prophet in the Jewish tradition. So, when Christians commit acts of violence, they fall short of their role model and do wrong, but when Moslems murder non-Moslems they are following their role model.

I also find it amusing that all the examples you (mistakenly) suggest are Christian violence are hundreds of years ago. Too difficult to find comparable examples in the 20th or 21st century?

[Koosdedooes]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed

782 - 4500 Saxons killed

1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax

1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum

Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ

And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

You are confusing the actions of supposedly Christian individuals with Christian teaching. Christian teaching does not condone any form of violence. In this it is radically different from Islamic teaching which, based upon Mohammed's actions and Allah's words in the Koran, clearly condone and nay, demands, such violence.

Putting it differently, for Christians, Christ is a role model, and he was a completely non-violent man. However, for Moslems, Mohammed is the ideal man, and he was a bloody war mongerer who, amongst many other things, ordered the slaughter of all men in a Jewish village because they wouldn't accept him as a prophet in the Jewish tradition. So, when Christians commit acts of violence, they fall short of their role model and do wrong, but when Moslems murder non-Moslems they are following their role model.

I also find it amusing that all the examples you (mistakenly) suggest are Christian violence are hundreds of years ago. Too difficult to find comparable examples in the 20th or 21st century?

I am not confusing anything

"Christian individuals" like various Popes who incited much mayhem and murder throughout the ages all over the globe ?..my sunday school indoctrination is a little shakey these days but isnt the Pope, The Bishop of Rome, sucessor to St Peter to whom jesus gave the keys of heaven ?...ergo a mouth piece for Jesus and and and God and his highest represetative on Earth ?

if you belive those fairy stories of course

All the crusades to the middle east were papal sanctioned initally by Pope Urban II

As regards your question about the 20th and 21st century, google is your friend, but to give a few example..

the Catholic churches involvment in the genocide in Rwanda in 1994..and one catholic "holy" man who ordered the bulldozing of his own church with 2000 tutis inside

The catholic nazi state in Croatia during WWII - estimated 700,000 serbs and others were killed with support of the catholic church and the vatican, even monks, RC priests and nuns are rumoured to have participated in the killings

Edited May 23, 2016 by Koosdedooes

[SABloke]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed
782 - 4500 Saxons killed
1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax
1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum
Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ
And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

You are confusing the actions of supposedly Christian individuals with Christian teaching. Christian teaching does not condone any form of violence. In this it is radically different from Islamic teaching which, based upon Mohammed's actions and Allah's words in the Koran, clearly condone and nay, demands, such violence.

Putting it differently, for Christians, Christ is a role model, and he was a completely non-violent man. However, for Moslems, Mohammed is the ideal man, and he was a bloody war mongerer who, amongst many other things, ordered the slaughter of all men in a Jewish village because they wouldn't accept him as a prophet in the Jewish tradition. So, when Christians commit acts of violence, they fall short of their role model and do wrong, but when Moslems murder non-Moslems they are following their role model.

I also find it amusing that all the examples you (mistakenly) suggest are Christian violence are hundreds of years ago. Too difficult to find comparable examples in the 20th or 21st century?

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1463989017.464967.jpg

Well considering that a large percentage of western soldiers identify as Christian that's quite possible HOWEVER your chart shows people killed by people of a certain religion NOT people killing people in the name of a certain religion. The difference is subtle, but the ramification is not

[Thorgal]

Wrong! Christianity no where mandates violence

Yes yes...those peace loving christians have no references to inciting violence in their little book called the Bible

The Bible is filled with refernces to insite violence, kill/maim people and commit genocide, your just as blind as the the muslim extremist

You clearly have no understanding of Christianity. Christianity is defined by the New Testament - not the Old. All the verses you quoted are from the Old Testament.

Jesus taught a doctrine of complete non-violence. For example, "But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also" (Matthew 5:39).

There is not a single verse in the New Testament that incites violence, maiming, murder or genocide.

Until you have even a modicum of understanding about Christianity I humbly suggest you refrain from commenting on it from a position of ignorance and bigotry.

It appears your speaking for all Christians, the same way radical muslims speak on behalf of all muslims ?

Lets look at some proven facts to support Christians are "nonviolent", this is not a fully incluesive list as the violence committed in the name of christ is that extensive starting in 315 right through to the 20th century

315 to 6th century - thousands of pagans killed
782 - 4500 Saxons killed
1234 - 11000 men women an children killed for not paying church tax
1099 - 60000 killed in jerusalum
Battle of Askalon 200,000 "heathens" killed by followers of Christ

Estimates from all the crusades put the number of deaths at christian hands at 20 million, jews, muslims and anyone else who wasnt a follower of christ
And lets not get into the carnage the christians caused among the native peoples in many countries and continents

Yes those followers of Christ are so non violent and peace loving and turn the othet cheek !

You are confusing the actions of supposedly Christian individuals with Christian teaching. Christian teaching does not condone any form of violence. In this it is radically different from Islamic teaching which, based upon Mohammed's actions and Allah's words in the Koran, clearly condone and nay, demands, such violence.

Putting it differently, for Christians, Christ is a role model, and he was a completely non-violent man. However, for Moslems, Mohammed is the ideal man, and he was a bloody war mongerer who, amongst many other things, ordered the slaughter of all men in a Jewish village because they wouldn't accept him as a prophet in the Jewish tradition. So, when Christians commit acts of violence, they fall short of their role model and do wrong, but when Moslems murder non-Moslems they are following their role model.

I also find it amusing that all the examples you (mistakenly) suggest are Christian violence are hundreds of years ago. Too difficult to find comparable examples in the 20th or 21st century?

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1463989017.464967.jpg

Well considering that a large percentage of western soldiers identify as Christian that's quite possible HOWEVER your chart shows people killed by people of a certain religion NOT people killing people in the name of a certain religion. The difference is subtle, but the ramification is not

You can't deny the facts...

[Tony125]

The reason entire world has airport security, which costs billion each year not to mention

infringement of personal rights and inconvenience, is because of one group only, muslims.

As far as I am concerned they should be barred from flying.

I checked through Krabi security recently, and to my astonishment, all muslims running security. Like having

foxes guard the hen house.

And the bigoted paranoia runs wild...now lets see

1. World first in flight terrorist attack - 1976 - Cubana flight 455 - anti-castro exiles with links to the CIA

2. Air India flight 182 - 329 killed -1985 - Sikh extremists

3 1972 Japan Red Army - Lod Aitport massacre

Yes yes all this bloody security was put in place because of muslims

It is certainly, 100% without any doubt whatsoever the reason we have increased airport security to this day. Hijackings used to be common, but hostages were taken and set free in almost all cases. Muslim hijackers and bombers since 9/11 have changed that. Open your eyes.

Could we suggest the increase in muslim terrorist attacks may have something to do with the US bombing multiple muslim countries and killing various dictators who kept the more extereme elements in Check ?

Lets suppose 9/11 hadnt of happened, it follows then that Afghsnistan wouldnt have been invaded, Iraq wouldnt have been invaded and the crap wouldnt have bombed out of Libya...

so would be see the same level of extremism today if those events hadnt have happened ?...i would suugest we wouldnt have nowhere the problems that exist today

Your 2nd line says it all --- " IF " 9-11 didn't happen blah, blah,blah but 9-11 DID happen and the US wasn't attacked by blue eyed blonds from some Scandinavian country or Europeans, Russians or Chinese but by radical "Muslim " extremists . If they hadn't attacked the USA we wouldn't have attacked them.

[Koosdedooes]

Your 2nd line says it all --- " IF " 9-11 didn't happen blah, blah,blah but 9-11 DID happen and the US wasn't attacked by blue eyed blonds from some Scandinavian country or Europeans, Russians or Chinese but by radical "Muslim " extremists . If they hadn't attacked the USA we wouldn't have attacked them.

But you didn't attack them, you attacked Afghanistan, the vast majority of the alleged hijackers were Saudis, so why not attack Saudi ?

You also attacked Iraq on the back of false information about WMD's and Bushes continued insistence that Uncle Sadam was involved with 9/11 he wasn't involved

And it seems there are plans afoot that will allow 9/11 victims family's to sue Saudi Arabia, this is conclusive that there was no justification to invade Afghanistan to start with...it should have been Saudi which was invaded in retaliation against 9/11

Edited May 23, 2016 by Koosdedooes

[Oxx]

ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1463990370.005615.jpg

You can't deny the facts...

From the dictionaries: "a long and determined attempt to achieve something that you believe in strongly", " a major effort to change something", "A vigorous campaign for political, social, or religious change". Nothing to do with Christianity.

[neverdie]

Let's ask a much more important question.

Should airport security be entrusted to unskilled, unmotivated, minimum wage workers,

or highly trained, well qualified, well paid security professionals?

How much are hundreds, or even thousands of lives worth?

Best comment here!

[HenryB]

It seems that at least in Europe, there is probably a good reason to limit security access for Muslims. In addition to airports, I think there has been a problem at one of the nuclear plants.

I think that only fools will fly out of certain European Airports

Remember the the flying public is needed by the airlines

[Scott]

A post with no acknowledge source has been removed along with replies. Also off-topic posts removed.

[7by7]

(some quotes removed to comply with forum software)

so far all the acts of modern recent terror have been carried out by Muslim men between the ages of around 22-40.

So the Irish Republicans who murdered Michael McGibbon and Adrian Ismay in two separate incidents this year, and have carried out many other attacks since 2009, are all Muslims?

I don't think so!

What about events in the Central African Republic?

Central African Republic convoy of terror

CAR cannibal: Why I ate man's leg

I have yet to see much in the way of condemnation of these atrocities by Christians.

So were I to follow the twisted logic of many members here I would have to conclude that the majority of Christians support, or at least condone, them!

My bad, you know for a moment I thought we were writing on a thread relating to aircraft bombings and aviation terrorism incidents, it seems you consider I was accounting for every murderous event on the planet.

I appear to have misunderstood.

When you said "all the acts of modern recent terror" I thought you meant ALL the acts of modern recent terror!

Not just those which you can use to advance your prejudice.

[Oxx]

Oh you poor misguided soul you. Apparently, you've neither read the bible--Matthew 10:34 "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

You are blatantly (willfully?) misrepresenting that verse by taking it out of context. Putting it in context from the same chapter.

16 “Pay attention, now! I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. So be as cunning as serpents and as innocent as doves.

17 Watch out for people who will hand you over to the local councils and whip you in their synagogues. 18 You will be brought before governors and kings because of me, to testify to them and to unbelievers

21 “Brother will hand brother over for execution, and a father his child. Children will rebel against parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of my name.

34 “Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword!

35 I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.

36 A person’s enemies will include members of his own family.

In other words Jesus was talking about violent persecution of his followers, not his followers being violent towards others.

Jesus never, ever advocated any form of assault or murder.

[Credo]

Your 2nd line says it all --- " IF " 9-11 didn't happen blah, blah,blah but 9-11 DID happen and the US wasn't attacked by blue eyed blonds from some Scandinavian country or Europeans, Russians or Chinese but by radical "Muslim " extremists . If they hadn't attacked the USA we wouldn't have attacked them.

But you didn't attack them, you attacked Afghanistan, the vast majority of the alleged hijackers were Saudis, so why not attack Saudi ?

You also attacked Iraq on the back of false information about WMD's and Bushes continued insistence that Uncle Sadam was involved with 9/11 he wasn't involved

And it seems there are plans afoot that will allow 9/11 victims family's to sue Saudi Arabia, this is conclusive that there was no justification to invade Afghanistan to start with...it should have been Saudi which was invaded in retaliation against 9/11

Without trying to get further off topic, the US did attack Afghanistan where the terrorist training camps were operating. They did consult with the Afghan government and they refused to turn over the offenders or to shut down the camps. That was the reason for attacking Afghanistan.

The majority of those in the attacks were Saudi, but there was no evidence that the Saudi government was involved and there was no evidence that Saudis were giving aid and comfort to the attackers or their terrorist network.

There was one thing that all the attackers had in common and that was a religious ideology.

Are people of other religions terrorists, certainly, but what makes the current wave is the indiscriminate manner in who/what and where they attack.

I certainly do not hold anything against Muslims and have had a fair amount of exposure to their religion and culture. Even if they want nothing to do with terrorists or terrorism, I think it might be difficult for them to 'just say no'. They may face repercussions and pressure from those who are involved. They may not have to do much, just turn a blind eye and keep their mouth shut, in return they or their family will be safe.

[7by7]

Oh you poor misguided soul you. Apparently, you've neither read the bible--Matthew 10:34 "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."

You are blatantly (willfully?) misrepresenting that verse by taking it out of context. ..........

In exactly the same way that others have quoted snippets from the Koran out of context to 'prove' that all Muslims support violence towards and oppression of non Muslims?

[7by7]

<snip>

Are people of other religions terrorists, certainly, but what makes the current wave is the indiscriminate manner in who/what and where they attack.

This is, and always has been of course, the methodology of all terrorists, whatever their ideology and cause. That's what makes them terrorists!