3 ms·

a comparable to "muslims" would be "all the christians". if you want some examples of christians blowing up the shit out of each other, try ireland. I dont thi

by wayn3 9y ago

a comparable to "muslims" would be "all the christians". if you want some examples of christians blowing up the shit out of each other, try ireland. I dont think that relatives of Eric Harris would have ever said "oh yea, that kids trouble. going to shoot up a school some day". pretty lame argument youve got. there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims.

freedomintruth 9y ago
>> there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims. It's not the Christians in Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, England, US and Egypt who are blowing people up and killing people. The violent conflict of the Middle East has spread to all these other places, and it coincides with the migration of Muslims together with the rise of Al Qaeda and ISIS. The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism we have seen in the past 10 years, and which can even become more significant. The pattern of the Irish Catholic-Protestant conflict was more limited in scope. What we are seeing with Islamic terrorism is much larger and more bloody to EVERYONE, not just between Sunni-Shiite, but extends to Jews, Kurds, Yazidis, Christians. So no, Islamic terrorism is not comparable to "all Christians". To do so is either blindness or pernicious propaganda on your part. Check out "ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape" at New York Times on the rape of Yazidis.[1] They are praying before they rape and after they rape. If this story is true, it indicates that ISIS is not a mere political movement, but is also bound to its theology. The BBC reported on the recent bridge attack of a witness who said the attackers said "This is for Allah."[2] edits: added links, fixed typo. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ens... [2] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737
- jimnotgym 9y ago
  >The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism... Seriously? When I was a child the Northern Ireland troubles were in the news every single day! At times it was a constant stream of bombings and executions. There were roadblocks in the street run by paramilitaries. Whole communities were controlled by these organisations and their fundraisers. The scope may have been restricted to England and the island of Ireland, but in these areas it was all out. The scale of Islamic terrorism in the UK does not even come close
  - reitanqild 9y ago
    Not wanting to defend IRA but often they warned in advance before attacking purely civilan targets, didn't they?
    - jimnotgym 9y ago
      Yes a lot of the time. I also deliberately didn't mention the IRA by name, as there were a number of groups involved on both sides. A counter example would be the 'Real IRA' and the Omagh bombing where it appears the telephone warning was designed to move more people into the path of a bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
      - reitanqild 9y ago
        Thanks for sharing. And thanks for being thoughtful in the way you present it.
  - freedomintruth 9y ago
    >> in the UK ... I did mention England, Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, USA, Egypt: so scale geographically ISIS wins. I didn't mention Canada, Sweden, Africa, Turkey. For if it's about numbers, would you say IRA has killed more people than ISIS? Did the IRA use sex slaves like ISIS did with Yazidi prisoners as in the New York Times piece I linked? These guys are targeting all different sorts of groups in almost all continents. And if nations security apparatus were not fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda, do you think there would be less or more violence? In other words, are they satisfied with sovereignty in some limited geographical area, or would they try to do as much damager wherever they could?

by wayn3 9y ago

freedomintruth 9y ago

>> there are clearly more radicalized general idiots out there than there are radicalized muslims. It's not the Christians in Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, England, US and Egypt who are blowing people up and killing people. The violent conflict of the Middle East has spread to all these other places, and it coincides with the migration of Muslims together with the rise of Al Qaeda and ISIS. The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism we have seen in the past 10 years, and which can even become more significant. The pattern of the Irish Catholic-Protestant conflict was more limited in scope. What we are seeing with Islamic terrorism is much larger and more bloody to EVERYONE, not just between Sunni-Shiite, but extends to Jews, Kurds, Yazidis, Christians. So no, Islamic terrorism is not comparable to "all Christians". To do so is either blindness or pernicious propaganda on your part. Check out "ISIS Enshrines a Theology of Rape" at New York Times on the rape of Yazidis.[1] They are praying before they rape and after they rape. If this story is true, it indicates that ISIS is not a mere political movement, but is also bound to its theology. The BBC reported on the recent bridge attack of a witness who said the attackers said "This is for Allah."[2] edits: added links, fixed typo. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-ens... [2] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40148737

jimnotgym 9y ago
>The IRA were not on the scale of Islamic terrorism... Seriously? When I was a child the Northern Ireland troubles were in the news every single day! At times it was a constant stream of bombings and executions. There were roadblocks in the street run by paramilitaries. Whole communities were controlled by these organisations and their fundraisers. The scope may have been restricted to England and the island of Ireland, but in these areas it was all out. The scale of Islamic terrorism in the UK does not even come close
- reitanqild 9y ago
  Not wanting to defend IRA but often they warned in advance before attacking purely civilan targets, didn't they?
  - jimnotgym 9y ago
    Yes a lot of the time. I also deliberately didn't mention the IRA by name, as there were a number of groups involved on both sides. A counter example would be the 'Real IRA' and the Omagh bombing where it appears the telephone warning was designed to move more people into the path of a bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omagh_bombing
    - reitanqild 9y ago
      Thanks for sharing. And thanks for being thoughtful in the way you present it.
- freedomintruth 9y ago
  >> in the UK ... I did mention England, Belgium, France, Middle East, Philippines, USA, Egypt: so scale geographically ISIS wins. I didn't mention Canada, Sweden, Africa, Turkey. For if it's about numbers, would you say IRA has killed more people than ISIS? Did the IRA use sex slaves like ISIS did with Yazidi prisoners as in the New York Times piece I linked? These guys are targeting all different sorts of groups in almost all continents. And if nations security apparatus were not fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda, do you think there would be less or more violence? In other words, are they satisfied with sovereignty in some limited geographical area, or would they try to do as much damager wherever they could?