Shock title, I know.

Start with the definition of terrorist. Going off Dictionary.com:

 

ter·ror·ist

   /ˈtɛrərɪst/ Show Spelled[ter-er-ist] Show IPA

noun

1. a person, usually a member of a group, who uses or advocates terrorism.

2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.

3. (formerly) a member of a political group in russia aiming at the demoralization of the government by terror.

4. an agent or partisan of the revolutionary tribunal during the Reign of Terror in France.

 

adjective

5. of, pertaining to, or characteristic of terrorism or terrorists: terrorist tactics.

 

(emphasis mine)

 

ter·ror·ism

   /ˈtɛrəˌrɪzəm/ Show Spelled[ter-uh-riz-uhm]

noun

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

 

I'd say killing innocent civilians falls under the category of terrorism. Now, to the important study:

According to this study, A percentage (around 4-10%) of the World's Muslim population support harming US Citizens, among other things.

 

 

Not that the US has done much to help the World's perception of it in recent years, but the percentages are much higher than I'd expect or even want. Clearly we have a problem.

 

 

As a general principle, majorities take a negative view toward the use of violence to achieve political ends even when attacks on civilians are not highlighted. Respondents were asked a broad and explicit question: In general, how justified are violent attacks, such as bombings and assassinations, that are carried out in order to achieve political or religious goalsstrongly justified, justified, weakly justified, or not justified at all? Eighty-three percent in Egypt and 89 percent in Indonesia said these methods are not justified at all; 2 percent in Egypt and less than 1 percent in Indonesia called them strongly justified. In Pakistan, 67 percent said these methods are not justified at all; 12 percent called them weakly justified (6%) or justified (6%); and 13 percent called them strongly justified.

There have been some shifts in views on this question since 2007, but not in a unified direction. In Pakistan, those saying not justified at all have dropped 9 points, while those calling them strongly justified have grown from 1 percent to 13 percent. However, the percentage of Indonesians calling such attacks completely unjustified has grown (84% to 89%) and Egyptian responses have not changed significantly.

It should be noted though, that it is likely that respondents were thinking more in terms of attacks on civilians, because (as discussed below) attacks on US military forces are widely endorsed.

WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WAIT WHAT IS THIS?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

............

 

 

 

 

Carry on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I honestly don't see what to discuss here. The rednecks will call you a proud citizen, the hippies will call you a xenophobic bigot; this is all that can come from this. Maybe if you ended it with "do you agree? Disagree?"

 

Do you want us to fix this "problem?" Cure it? Kill it? What do you want us to do? This topic can't really go anywhere but the fallout zone, since all other possibilities have been shut down.

I honestly don't see what to discuss here. The rednecks will call you a proud citizen, the hippies will call you a xenophobic bigot; this is all that can come from this. Maybe if you ended it with "do you agree? Disagree?"

 

Do you want us to fix this "problem?" Cure it? Kill it? What do you want us to do? This topic can't really go anywhere but the fallout zone, since all other possibilities have been shut down.

I know in recent threads people have asked for reasonable estimates of the percentage of Muslim terrorists in the world. I've stumbled across a source. I'd also like to make it highly visible without necroing some dead thread.

I do believe there is discussion value here, at the very least its an interesting read from a reputable source.

rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/

[rey-siz-uhm]

 

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

:thumbup:

Lol.

rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/

[rey-siz-uhm]

 

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

:thumbup:

 

There is a very large difference between pointing out a group of people and intolerance of them.

Even though obviously 10% is a lot, it's still a small minority compared to the rest. It doesn't suprise me much, the states is basically a foreign occupier in several muslim countries (reasons irrellevant) so it makes sense that there's a lot of anger about that.

 

I'd warrant that 10% of christains at least harbour ill feelings towards other religions (although perhaps not such a large percentage wish them physical harm).

rac·ism   /ˈreɪsɪzəm/

[rey-siz-uhm]

 

noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

 

:thumbup:

 

I'm sorry that you can't have an intellectually honest discussion.

From a quick scan of the document they interviewed people in 8 countries, (Forgive me if I'm wrong, it was a quick scan). I didn't realise the the whole Muslim population of the world resides in 8 countries.

My point being, you can't make assumptions based off such a small sample size... :rolleyes:

From a quick scan of the document they interviewed people in 8 countries, (Forgive me if I'm wrong, it was a quick scan). I didn't realise the the whole Muslim population of the world resides in 8 countries.

My point being, you can't make assumptions based off such a small sample size... :rolleyes:

At the very least, they're the countries that we're in conflict with and also most worried about. The European Muslim population is just fine, I'm sure (as a matter of fact, I have three Bosnian friends who are pretty awesome).

Ignoring the Palestine Territory (which has a *relatively small* Muslim population of 4.1 million)

 

I see listed these countries:

Egypt (78.5 million)

Indonesia (203 million)

Pakistan (174 million)

Morocco (32.0 million)

Turkey (73.6 million)

Azerbaijan (8.77 million)

Jordan (6.20 million)

(bolded are top ten)

 

 

The other top ten countries with the largest Muslim populations, which missed:

India (161 million)

Bangladesh (145 million)

Nigeria (78 million)

Iran (73.8 million)

Algeria (34.2 million)

 

Represented in this survey is 576 million people, or about 36% of the worlds Muslim population.

 

 

I'd still say its significant.

Just like the "internet ancho-liberals" want to abolish the government. Will they ever attempt it? Hell no, its all small talk.

 

Its the same really. A small remark does not mean an actual danger.

Just like the "internet ancho-liberals" want to abolish the government. Will they ever attempt it? Hell no, its all small talk.

Hey, those 10% of Muslims are in good company :razz:

 

Though, take an average Muslim off the streets of any given country, chances are they won't support terrorism, and would probably be quite offended. The ones that do are probably just guys that would like their target of choice to go away, which the actual terrorists promise.

 

Now curious about whether or not you can take the same percentage from any other given political or religious group (Including atheist/agnostic) and find similar numbers. All groups are going to have their extremists, but the group isn't composed of them and it's foolish to judge them all that way.

Now curious about whether or not you can take the same percentage from any other given political or religious group (Including atheist/agnostic) and find similar numbers. All groups are going to have their extremists, but the group isn't composed of them and it's foolish to judge them all that way.

 

I'd love to see this from a study as well.

Someone heard this from Glenn Beck:

 

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201012060007

I'd say killing innocent civilians falls under the category of terrorism. Now, to the important study:

According to this study, A percentage (around 4-10%) of the World's Muslim population support harming US Citizens, among other things.

 

If killing innocent civilians = terrorism, then the US government is a terrorist organization. What percentage of the American population do you think would advocate for hurting, bombing, torturing, killing, invading, etc Muslims? I'm betting a lot.

 

Pretty logical for lots of Muslims to hate the USA and want them hurt after what the US has done to them

 

 

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201012060007

 

LOL owned

I'd say killing innocent civilians falls under the category of terrorism. Now, to the important study:

According to this study, A percentage (around 4-10%) of the World's Muslim population support harming US Citizens, among other things.

 

If killing innocent civilians = terrorism, then the US government is a terrorist organization. What percentage of the American population do you think would advocate for hurting, bombing, torturing, killing, invading, etc Muslims? I'm betting a lot.

 

Pretty logical for lots of Muslims to hate the USA and want them hurt after what the US has done to them

 

No, they hate us for our freedom:

 

No group of people is going to be enthusiastic about a foreign power dropping bombs on their countrymen, as the Pakistanis can attest. But a new poll from the Washington Post, ABC News and the BBC finds that 73 percent of Afghans say that U.S. air strikes are unacceptable. Thats an increase from the last survey, which found 66 percent opposition to the U.S. air war last December.

 

Back then, restrictions from General Stanley McChrystal, then the commander of the war, had all but stopped the air war entirely and two-thirds of Afghans still disapproved of it. So NATO might have a statistical warning sign, now that its planes recently tallied 2,600 attack sorties between June and October, a 50 percent increase over the same period in 2009. In October 2010 alone, as Danger Room was the first to report, the U.S. launched more than 1,000 air strikes. That carries a risk of reviving the public anger over the air war that led McChrystal to tamp down the strikes in the first place.

 

But while disapproval of the strikes is almost back to January 2009s level of 77 percent, not all Afghans consider the U.S. solely responsible for the civilian casualties they can cause. While 35 percent of Afghans blame the U.S. for deaths from above, nearly as many, 32 percent, blamed insurgents for getting civilians caught in the crossfire. Another 32 percent said both were to blame.

Afghans Fume as Petraeus Ramps Up Air War

heh

i have an issue with islam itself. i think the world would be a better place without it

i have an issue with religion itself. i think the world would be a better place without it

 

Fixed that for you

And I'm sure that 10% of Christians would state that they consider violent affirmative action an acceptable method of preventing abortion.

 

Religion is not founded on tolerance, but ignorance, xenophobia, fear, hate and violence. The size of the study is also questionable, and it bears to keep in mind that there is usually a fairly weak link between people's words and their actions.

And I'm sure that 10% of Christians would state that they consider violent affirmative action an acceptable method of preventing abortion.

 

Religion is not founded on tolerance, but ignorance, xenophobia, fear, hate and violence. The size of the study is also questionable, and it bears to keep in mind that there is usually a fairly weak link between people's words and their actions.

 

I'm glad to know a self-proclaimed atheist is pretending to be an expert on the founding morals of religion :rolleyes:

EVERYONE IS A COMMUNIST!!! THEY ARE EVERYWHERE! SPREAD THE FEAR!

 

Whoops...wrong government-defined enemy.

Religion is not founded on tolerance, but ignorance, xenophobia, fear, hate and violence.

As a very religious person myself, I'm going to call you on that and say throughout my entire life, throughout every bible study I've been to and throughout every church service I've been to, I have been taught to not fear god and not hate, but rather, "love your enemy". In fact my Christian instincts tell me I should forgive anyone who slurs our beliefs.

 

I'm confused why you could say religion is build upon such negativity, because I post here as true proof it's not.

EVERYONE IS A COMMUNIST!!! THEY ARE EVERYWHERE! SPREAD THE FEAR!

 

Whoops...wrong government-defined enemy.

Can I panic yet?