By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .
Sign up with Google
Sign up with Facebook
Q: So what do you think about...Muslims...now that you are in China?
Do you share the same opinions as Trump or Trudeau?
Are they all evil or is China really good at spinning the news? You know...like some un named US news networks?
Are you scared of them? Or do you buy BBQ food (the best) from them down the street?
Do you think China would ever accept Syrian refugees? Ok...would they come if they did?
I like the food in Muslim restaurants here and no, they are not all evil. Many of the Xinjiang muslims here are a good del friendlier and more trustworthy than their Han counterparts.
Syrian refugees? I guess they will work cheaply on the wrong visa so I guess some of them will come here.
I like the food in Muslim restaurants here and no, they are not all evil. Many of the Xinjiang muslims here are a good del friendlier and more trustworthy than their Han counterparts.
Syrian refugees? I guess they will work cheaply on the wrong visa so I guess some of them will come here.
You are supposing that I have had a change in attitude towards Muslims... I haven't.
They're people. Like most other people.
Some are crazy because they believe stuff that has been written in a book, while others... oh, wait... yeah, that's any religion!
But some are crazier than others... (again, that's any religion).
As for Xinjiang food... meh - I'm not excited by it. Fortunately for me, though, just around the corner are a couple of middle eastern restaruants opened up by some of the students around here!!! YUM!!!!
(I had a good long chat with one of the owners and his father and brothers a couple of weeks ago... quite sane-ish!)
I do not mind meeting new people ... outgoing folks, pretty much stick to myself and my family most of the time. I have met a quite a few muslims here.. all good... can't really understand the meat/pig thing, but whatever, to each his/her own.
GET THAT?
TO EACH HIS OWN!!!
and I honestly believe that 90-95% of the worlds people are good people.
What's your purpose in asking this question?
Evil is relative to your worldview. Killing people you believe are infidels is not evil. However, for most of us from a Judeo-Christian society, killing people based on a difference of belief is evil.
As for whether China will accept Syrian refugees, I think the better question to ask is would Syrian refugees ever assimilate into Chinese society? How can any Muslim who takes his faith seriously ever assimilate into Chinese society when they can't even eat pork or drink baijiu?
However I do think their food is delicious.
hi2u:
In short, China has nothing to gain by accepting any refugees, whether Muslim or not, but especially when they are Muslim because of the massive culture difference that, as shown countless times in other countries, causes ethnic/culture clashes.
I like Muslims. Being in China changes nothing about that.
Trump is just showing that American politics is just as much a joke as Chinese politics.
Now where is my flying car ?
You'll get tail by using certain words online.
''Allan's snack-bar'' is coded greeting for use 5 times a day, with hokey pads on.
If my time in Iraq didn't change my view of Muslims, then a few years in PRC certainly won't.
They are people, and Trump is a Saturday Morning Cartoon villian.
I treat all people like people, whatever their religion. I have had Muslim students who wear a headscarf and treat them just like everyone else. I'm not really sure how living in China should change my view about 1.6 billion people.
I cant get why we treat them as a minority and bend over backwards to apiece them
I have to play by Chinese rules in China and if i want to live in China i have to assimilate
So Muslims can do the same thing as the rest of us
Shining_brow:
Well, firstly, they're not a minority.... (except in certain parts of the world).
Unfortunately, another answer is that the US government is too busy trying to give more of their people's money to rich aresholes to make richer by starting wars and keeping the oil running - instead of spending those trillions of dollars on alternative energies (cos the rich aresholes don't get as much money that way!) So, we have to keep the Saudi's happy.
And, lastly - most Muslims DO integrate into society - except for a few exceptions which is no different from vegetarians and non-drinkers!
Our multi-cultural home has many different background represented... some keep their home ties (and that has, on occasion, been bad for the rest of us)_. but for the most part, Muslims are no worse than any other emigrant population in Australia!
philbravery:
You haven't been home for awhile? We dont have multiculturalism we have colonies The Saudi back Sunnies are the ones who cause the most trouble yet our government backs them over the shier because of Iran That asshole from Martin place was a sunnie convert And the grand muftee is one too He backs accused terrorists publicly overseas yet the Australian media dont report it and no government spokesman will mention it either because it would offended Muslims We are taking 12000 Syrians yet our Afghanistan inturpeters and families can't get a visa Pretty messed up huh
hi2u:
In Germany, the refugee centers often have fighting because of ethnic or culture clashes among the refugees, so the German government, who actively welcomes the refugees to ASSIMILATE into German society, suggests SEPARATING the refugees by COUNTRY OF ORIGIN to REDUCE RACIAL AND CULTURE CLASHES. You can't make this stuff up.
It would be nice of China, with all its wealth and ghost cities, to take a couple of hundred thousands of Syrians in need of help.
Flying time from Damascus to Ordos is probably not too different than flying time from Damascus to a European capital....
RiriRiri:
China? No, they wouldn't dare steal all those over-qualified surgeons and engineers from Europe, don't be silly.
Most of the Muslims who operate restaurants in Xinjiang are Hui. So it must be the case that most of the Muslim restaurants in the rest of China would be overwhelmingly Hui. Very few would be Uyghir/Xinjiang. Hui people aren't natives of Xinjiang, Uyghirs are. Hui people can be found all over China but some provinces are more of a traditional home for them. I'm thinking especially of Gansu and Ningxia.
Hui food is quite different from Uyghir food. Hui people can travel freely around China whilst Uyghir people cannot.
The Muslims I've met since living in Xinjiang have been terrific. Hui people value money even moreso than Han people. Uyghir people spend money like tomorrow won't come.
icnif77:
We had Uyghur baking naan near the Campus. He closed down few months ago. I asked students, where is Uyghur's naan bakery in the city. Nobody knew, where is it. One said, they travelling around the city, and selling naan off scooter. There are some Uyghurs here, dressed same as in Xin.
I walked off the bus stop close to the Uni last week, and ....new Han bakery with naan, displayed same as in Xin.
They're sucking on Progress at gunpoint like every other minority around. Not sure what being in China should change about my view on Muslims.
I'm out of China, in Germany with all the Turks here. The leather jackets are practically uniforms.
China treats Uighurs like human waste, and bad-mouths their behaviour, culture and cuisine every chance they get. The Uighur minority are quite decent actually.
Europe treats Turks with respect, and if anyone speaks up against Turks as a group, they are punished harshly. The Turkish minority responds by thinking they own the place.
The stick works better than the carrot, it seems.
AhmadKoudrah:
80% of the Turks you meet in Germany are actually Kurds not Turks.
I can't judge them all. But if the higher majority of them can't make correct choices, than yeah, ban them! For all the problems in China, none of the stuff here makes me feel unsafe, because there just little problems, at least in Shenzhen.
Having spent three amazing summers in Pakistan during the 90s, I had s new respect for Muslims. They were so welcoming and honest. The kind of country that didn't overcharge if anything they gave foreigners better prices. They truly believe that you're a guest in their country and to treat you well. Getting invited into people's homes nonstop , drinking tea with bank employees and border officials. It was one of the most relaxing countries I've ever been to and one of the most beautiful. Cross the border from India or China and breathe a sigh of relief. No more hassle.
My very first day in Pakistan friends and I hiked up to see the glacier near Passu. The whole area was stunning. The Japanese guys went done early and all got scraped up my the picker bushes that were everywhere. When I was walking down I saw woman jump up and yell woo hoo to get my attention . Then she did this in another area and repeated this until I was down the mountain without a scratch. I thanked her and she insisted on making tea. So there I sat with this lovely woman on a blanket at the base of a beautiful mountain . That set the tone for that summer.
Next summer crossing from India drinking tea with border again - they remembered me for some odd reason. Waiting to find out which bus to take to the guest house, a woman came up and touched my face and held my hand. I thought to myself I want to extend my visa as soon as we get to Islamabad. Back then you got a three month visa extension for free. That was a great summer too and so was the next. So many great people from Afghanistan live there too.
So has my view of Muslims changed ? Not one bit , I've since met many from Iran, Iraq , and from all over the Middle East. Great people. Christianity has crazy people too. You can't judge all Muslims the same and say they're all bad. They simply aren't .
icnif77:
I'm jealous .....!
Tourists matters in Muslim countries (surrounding China) changed a lot from 90-tis. Now, it's almost impossible to get tourist visa for any Muslim country out of Beijing.
I really want to see Gilgit, and I'm not sure if that will be achievable out of China, but I'll try to apply again for Pak visa soon.
Problem I have is, I must stay in Beijing at least a week, after I book the tour in N. Pak, and I can still get denied for some 'ben' reason.
I have to spend roughly 300 Eur for Bj's week stay, after I book the tour, the cheapest is around 600 Eur. That's 10k Rmb, and I'm not certain, if I'll get approved. Additional to that is cost for 10-days stay in Gigit.
India, Nepal, Tajikistan all have similar requirements. Only left is Kazakhstan, where I can enter without visa for short stay.
hunny797:
icnif is right..Pakistan has changed a lot since the 90's
but icnif getting a visa is still not very difficult from Beijing..
Can help you a little I guess..
Garbo:
I know. It's difficult to get a visa. I really miss people there .
icnif77:
@hunny: 'How can you help?'
I had an Invitation letter and (fake =) tour itinerary. I didn't book/pay for the tour. It cost me US$40 to get both letters from Gilgit Tourist Agency. I had Tourist visa filled form and passport with RP.
Ambassador said, he worry I purchased fake tour, and I'll lost my money. I told him, tour cost me 6000 Rmb. Then, he said 'tour itinerary' should be stamped by Pak Gov 'Gilgit' official stamp. Contact from Gilgit wasn't online all the time, so I should wait in Bj, when he comes online. I returned to Henan, and then Gilgit agent offered me to talk to ambassador. It was too late, and I didn't want to travel to Bj again. PIA.
However, I want to try with Bj Pak visa again, if you have any suggestions PM me, pls.
Shining_brow:
Might not help - but you never know...
I've heard entering into Tibet from India or Nepal is easy=peasey... going up through China is a PITA.
Perhaps the same here - maybe it's easier to get in via a different border. Can you get a insta-visa at a border??
Or when you return to Europe, pop home, and apply from there (unless you need fixed dates...). If you can get an open dated visa, could be a better option??
I bet only 0.1% of Muslims actually want to be terrorists or kill anybody...
anybody know how many people 0.1% of a billion people is?
Oh yeah
A million people...A million people want to kill everybody who isn't a muslim...
BUT YOU CAN'T SAY ALL MUSLIMS ALL TERRORISTS! YOU RACIST!
If your neighbor is willing to cut off your head over religion, but you're not willing to cut off his head over religion, which side is going to win?
Hotwater:
And 0.1% of gun-loving Americans are going to lose it and go on a rampage in a school/cinema/shopping mall, etc......
Yet they won't rationally discuss gun control.
fukciwt
rasklnik:
Oddly enough, violent crime, of all kind, in the USA is lower than it was 10 years ago...so why are shootings such big news?
hi2u:
It is absurd to say that all Muslims are terrorists. But 99.99% of all terrorists are Muslims, without fail. You'd have to be a fool for dismissing concerns over blindly accepting millions of them into your neighborhood as crazy. Mass migrations of Muslims into non-Muslim territories has always led to war throughout history.
But don't worry, this time will be different.
Lord_hanson:
@hotwater, Gun control should be rationally talked about but so should all other concerns such as the dangers of Muslim extremists. They are a legitimate threat and people shouldn't be instantly labeled an Islamaphobe just because they are trying to discuss a real problem.
rasklnik:
It's made up. I just wanted to point out that if a tiny minority of any group is bad, if the group is large enough that makes a huge problem...
For example, if 0.1% of airplanes crashed, they would be far too dangerous to use...even though the vast majority of planes are safe...in reality plane crashes are 0.00001% or even less.
Shining_brow:
So, how do we define 'terrorism'? Or a 'terrorist' activity?
Bombing a housing complex from a drone because it might have 1 or 2 'viable' targets inside, and ignoring the innocent kids and other families (who may have no knowledge of hte people there, or little choice in the matter).
Making excuses to invade and bomb the shit out of another country... terrorist action? Oh, you want to call it a 'war'? Well, I'm sure that makes it perfectly ok then!
Terrorists often use terror tactics if they don't like the local government... yeah, seems rather reminiscent of another country (non-Muslim) and it's interference in Central and South America.
You suggest there are 1 million terrorists - people who want to kill others... Pop onto most conservative boards regarding the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, possibly Iran and Syria - you have WAY MORE people wanting to kill others on there!
Recently - I've heard a few people actually suggest just nuking the place (the Middle East)... WTF is that about?????
The actions of a much smaller Christian group have caused FAR MORE terror and pain and suffering than those 1 million combined! Was it for religion. No. Was it for peace? No. Was it for stability? No. Freedom? No.
For money.... but somehow, that makes it ok!
Hi2U - BS! Where did you pull that 99.99% BS number from... cos it smells like it's straight from your arse! Not even a vague hint of any knowledge of the world and its recent history.... Did the Irish Catholics bring in Muslims for their bombings? Did the IRA only hire Muslims for their attacks? What about over in India, and the various attacks there? Eastern Europe? South America? Africa?? The gas attack on the Tokyo subway? Timothy McVeigh? Certainly, if we say the knife attacks in Kunming as a terrorist attack, we'd also have to categorise all the shootings in American schools as a terrorist attack... all of those are Muslims?? Mexico???
"...always led to war throughout history"... what a load of shite! Again, go look around the world at the population statistics, and try to justify that crap! You CAN'T!
Lord_H - yes, discussion and about extremists... Unfortunately, all I seem to see is knee-jerk reaction about everyone.
Hotwater:
@ Lord_Hansen. I agree, there must be rational discussions about how to deal with all types of extremists (ISIS Muslim ones, certain African Christian ones, "Real IRA" dissident ones, certain American Libertarian/Patriot groups).
What is not rational is claiming there are potentially a million Muslim extremists out there with nothing to back up such an outlandish statement.
@ Rasklnik. Violent crime has reduced in the USA in the last 10 years? Do you have data to back-up that statement? The numbers of mass shooting (4 people or more involved = a mass shooting). The frequency of these has increased over the years. There is data to support this but I'm supposed to be working so can't be bothered to back up my claim.
rasklnik:
Islamic Armies and the Ottoman Empire have been at War with European powers since well, the beginning of Islam, nearly. First the Seljuk Turks, Lepanto, Tours, the Moorish invasion of Spain, the seige of Malta, The Greek War of Independence, the various Balkan Wars,
Course most of these Christian European countries were ALSO at War with each other, but yes. It is a historical fact that Islamic Countries have been at war with the West for the last 1000 years...It is also true, that if Israel is the West, Arab nations have been at War with the West in this century...
-But eveybody has an axe to grind in this argument. I honestly don't think the West gets it. The US totally, 100%, broke the Middle East. It HAS TO BE FIXED but everything we do is making it worse...Again, if the PhD's and Presidents haven't come up with a solution, who can?
nzteacher80:
46.7% of all statistics on the internet are bullshit, this being one of them.
hi2u:
@shining_brow: Name one common motive behind every so called "terrorist" attack you mentioned. There is none. Now the common motive behind the rest of the 99.99% of terrorist attacks, that's something we should be paying attention to.
Shining_brow:
@hI2u... "But 99.99% of all terrorists are Muslims, without fail." You wrote that!
And it's complete BS!
As for 'common motive' - again, BS!!! Is the IRA's motive the same as the Tamil Tiger's motive (technically, yes - independence. Specifically, no. The IRA doesn't give a toss about Sri Lanka, and the Tamil Tigers don' give a toss about Ireland). Did Timothy McVeigh have the same motive as the drone bombings in Afghanistan?
When you come up with something close to a coherent argument, and with some semblance of data to support your ridiculous claims, let me know!
@Ras... you're painting a weird - and exceptionally biased - picture of history. You are confusion this idea of Islam being at war with 'the west', verses straight out imperialism and conquest - something that has been happening for FAR longer than Islam has been around.The Greeks did it, the Romans did it, Alexander did it, the Egyptians, the Persians, the Franks, the Normans. the Brits....All of the aforementioned had their own religion... but you pick out only the Muslim as being somehow worse than the others... NO! Cherry-picking your arguments!
RE: Israel...I'm totally on the side of the Palestinians on this one! Europe, feeling guilty after harrassing the Jews across various nations, and not helping them in any way (it NEEDS to be remembered that NO European country was particularly welcoming towards the Jewish people leading up to WWII), decided to just give them a big chunk of land out of another country... pretty rude, in my books! Losing about 70% of your country just because someone else says so???
rasklnik:
Let's take a look here, at wikipedia...which allows us to sort terrorism by ideology.
And sorted by Jihadism we get...the majority...also the most destructive...Also Chechen Seperatism is Islamic...so we really can include that...so if you still want to argue that Islam and terorism aren't related....you are either willfully obtuse, or being blind to reality.
You clearly just want to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "You are all racist." First, I'm 25% Syrian and honestly a Pan-Arabist in theory. I'm also pro-Palestinian. But Islamic crazies are not interested in assimilating into western society, and are killing people...and this is an ogranized ideology with press, websties, banking, oil, and yes, religion.
A crazy man shoots 7 people. How to fix this? Easy, don't let crazy people get so damn crazy. The US would be better off to have more public mental health care and less gun control, but too many American would call that socialist nonsense.
Saudi Arabia funds terror. Putin knows it. The US knows it. And we don't do **** about it.
hi2u:
@rasklnik nice find there. I calculated jihadism comprises about 70% of the terror attacks listed, 73% if including Chechen separatism.
@shining_brow yes my stated 99.99% was a hyperbole, but if your argument is just that a 70% majority is not the same as a 99.99% majority, well, you're really missing the point.
Shining_brow:
@Ras - I'm saying it's not 1:1. There's this stupid idea that's been thrown around - including on these boards, that if you're a muslim, then you're going to end up being a terrorist... And it's COMPELTE BS! Don't allow muslims into your country, because they just want to start war...
Alright - I just looked at your wikil link and it did what I expected - look at the first listing - 9/11. Of course, there's NO proof that was conducted or carried out by Jihadists, and there's no mention of CIA intervention etc... and yet, look at who's getting labelled with it!
Also, in reading through some selected bits, the term 'Jihadism' is very loosely applied. One of them - Gulf Air flight 771 has this at the bottom:
"The bomb was apparently planted by the Abu Nidal organization, to convince Saudi Arabia to pay protection money to Nidal so as to avoid attacks on their soil.[4] Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates paid the money soon after the bombin"
JIhadism??? No - that's about money!
Anything against Israel - 'jihadism'? No, that's people fighting back against their land being stolen from them.
Attacks against enemy troops on their soil - 'Jihadis'? Or fighting a war in a way that works?
2013 Iraq bombings - is somehow different to the problems in Ireland and Sri Lanka (and other countries - while tied to religion, not as clear-cut as simply only about religion - this is about control.
Am I saying Muslims aren't involved in terrorist activities? Of course not, I'm not an idiot. Is it as clear-cut as Muslim=violence - NO! If they were as well armed, and well supplied as the Israelies, I'm sure they'd be fighting a more conventional war.
Agreed - but not only Saudis... Putin has proof that the Turks have been aiding ISIS. And there's a damn good suggestion to say the US has as well... funny how they popped up just as Syria was being seen as a bad guy...
Politics is being disguised as religion (which is part of my point).
Another point - one man's war is another man's terrorist action.
One thing I notice about that Wiki list - nowhere does it mention any US actions. Q: has the CIA ever orchestrated a bombing to assassinate someone? A: Well, yes, of course... but we're not going to list that as a 'terrorist' action. What's the main difference? It's the US!!!
Has the US ever done 'false flag' events? Quite clearly, yes. Have they provided military aid to known terrorist groups? Yes. Have they, in all likelihood, committed terrorist activities - yes. (has the US done this, and blamed other countries or organsiations - hELL YESS!)
"Crazy person shoots 7 people"... So, don't let it be so damn easy to get guns!!! Sort of similar with terrorists - don\t let them get such easy access to explosives! Guns are being made, and wars are being fought... because people are making money from making and selling guns! Anyone see a problem here??
So - if the US is helping (or, at the very least, allowing) the funding of terrorist activities, if the CIA has helped train many of these people (we have the proof of this), why the bitch against the Muslims? If it's the CIA's intention to radicalise various elements in the Muslim community to help fight their battles in various countries, to keep the instability - then who should we really be blaming???
Yes - Islamic exteimists exist -and they blow things up (includign themselves) - but Islam in general has been made out to be the most evil thing on earth.
The fact is - there are over 2 BILLION Muslims on the planet as we speak... if they were all as evil and bent on taking over as some of you are suggesting, we'd be toast!t!
And that seems to be the argument on here - some are, so we'll defame EVERYONE!!!!! And that, Hi2U - is the point YOU'RE missing!
Don't take Syrian refugees - they're terrorists... Ummm - those people are trying to get away from the terrorists!!!! They want peace, they want their lives back! (they want the US to stop funding the civil war movement. And they want the Turks to stop helping ISIS). And, most of them just want to go back home!
So - 99.99&%... 70%... no! Go and read the individual entries, and see fi perhaps 'Jihadism' is better interpreted as 'act of war', or 'act of revenge for war'.
As well as - "you bastards have been putting us down, discriminating against us, not treating us as equals, not allowing us to live our own lives... so we'll fight back"... Jihadism? Wish for independence? (actually, just a wish to be treated fairer)....
The OBVIOUS solution is - let them have their own country (like Israel has) and let them deal with it as they want. and never interfere with it! (many reasons for the terrorist activities seem to be because of external interference).
hi2u:
@shining_brow: ok, first of all, as I have already said, it is absurd to think that most Muslims are terrorists, but most of the terrorists are Muslim, from the Boston bombers to the Santa Barbara shooters to the Charlie Hebdo shooters to the failed Paris train shooters to the recent Paris shooters, all were radicalized Muslims. In addition, the Quran calls for jihad which, although the majority of Muslims say is outdated, the radicalized Muslims still follow, and that is the point I am making and that everyone is making.
Second, yes the US and western countries messed up the Middle East. So if the people in the middle east want revenge against us, then that's an argument to refuse settling them in our backyard, not to support it.
Third, you accused me of talking out of my ass regarding the link between terrorism and Islam, and Rasklnik provided a fairly detailed wikilink which supported my position. You haven't provided any statistics to back up your claims that there is no link between terrorism and Islam, so I can accuse you of just cherry-picking a few examples to disprove my point.
Finally, while this does not support the link between terrorism and Islam, tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people, from France to Germany to Poland... are marching in the street to protest invasion of their homelands.
Shining_brow:
A) I've NEVER said there isn't a link between Muslims and terrorism. Please - go find it!
What I AM saying is - 2 billion Muslims in the world - not 2 billion terrorists!
And this seems to be the general consensus... don't let the Muslims in - they'll kill us all!
Most people are advocating punishing the majority of the 2 billion, because of the actions of a few hundred thousand (who, for the most part, are staying at home in their own backyard).
That's the problem here. You guys are full of angst towards a few arseholes (granted - a large number), but making the majority of people suffer.
B) the link of terrorist actions. Firstly, so incredibly incomplete!
Secondly - it mis-labels various actions. Some are labelled as 'Jihadism' which should actually go under independence movements, revenge, money, or something else. The mainstream media portrays Islam as a violent religion... rubbish! People are violent! (again, if Islam was a 'violent religion', those 2 billion would have screwed us over long ago!) Some of those people are Muslim, some are Christian. Why wasn't there a ban on Catholic Irish because of the acts of the IRA?
That wiki entry itself is cherry-picked! I provided examples of the cherry-picking in it.
The US government funds terrorism. The US and it's allies actively help terrorist organisations. And yet, you blame the terrorists alone. There is CLEARLY a political agenda going on here, and the truth is never going to be given to you. You are supposed to not want Islam in your local neighbourhood. (look at the 9/11 thread, and ALL the information provided to the FBI and CIA that was 'ignored' <cough>)
C) The west screwed over the Middle East - the US still is. (see my last point above).
Al Qaeda - sponsored, trained, funded, supplied by the US to help screw Russia over. Now comes back and bites them on the arse, because the Taliban decide they don't want to sell their oil to the US companies.. so now, they are the target for everyone to hate. (the very first political act after Afghanistan was declared 'free' was the signing of a new pipeline through former Taliban territory).
D) your last point - correct. It doesn't actually do much. You really don't want to go and look at history if you think that makes a point. You should, but you won't like it in relation to this argument.
Are there radical Muslim extremists who will go on to become terrorists? Yes! Why? Because, for the most part, they're being taught to hate 'western' governments, because of the interference that has gone on over there.
Is that the MAJORITY VIEW? No!
So - we (the US) starts up a war, destroys half the country... and then expects people to be grateful. If I was in that situation, I'd probably join up myself! (though, the suicide thing is a bit daft! You've got to be a right moron to buy into some of that crap! - but the world is full of morons!) Seriously - if the US really thought they were such a problem, they could easily do something about it - take out the leaders or whatever (in very quiet ways). In whose best interest is having these radicalised Muslims around??? Well, how about arms manufacturers, and security companies???
And, so - again.... should the majority of Muslims be punished because of the actions of the vast minority? No!
My opinion of Muslims has not changed, I don't have one. Except maybe about those scarves the women wear They're to keep the women from sharing their beauty with men other than their husbands, right? Well a lot of them look very pretty but if you see some of the heffalumps wearing them waddling round north London you kind of find yourself thinking "Sweetheart, you really don't need to bother."
icnif77:
I saw it in SF, just woman's eyes, and where other women walk on the street in mini and smoking fag.
First I thought about 'porn-torture-studio' nearby.....
I was in Morroco once, and women there aren't dressed that way. Not even Palestinians in Israel.
Am I with Trump or Trudueu?
Ugh...neither. But we should be taking them. As refugees and (especially) as international students. Every so often an American politician will try to stir up anti-immigrant sentiment for political gain. They did it with the Irish, then Southern Europeans, then Eastern Europeans, then Jews, more recently Hispanics, and now Muslims. The important thing to remember is that these reactionary forces all eventually lose and each of these immigrant are welcomed into the fold and eventually integrate. Case in point, can you think of a whiter dude than Ted Cruz, himself the son of Cuban refugees?
Is China really good a spinning the news?
Are Xinhua and CCTV one very anti-muslim? I only ask because I no longer live there. In any event imagine that Fox news were the only news outlet and were formally associated with the GOP, which somehow became the only American political party. Then the two would be the same. As bad as Fox can be, and I would argue that only their editorial is truly terrible, it's no where near as bad as the enshrined propaganda arm of a single party state.
Are you scared of them?
No, I'm more scared of the American political right. They're going to get thumped in the election next year, and I think it will be the one that causes them to implode. Given the far right's proclivity for walking around with automatic weapons when they protest I don't think it would take a lot to set these people off.
Would China accept Syrian refugees.
No. It never would.
Muslims are Normal Humans like other peoples and religions, but the( Western Media) wants to spread these bad ideas and Fear is being amplified of the individual acts do not belong to Islam or Arabs as a nation ,and not the ethics of Arabs ,this Genie (ISIS) who was Created By The west,to serve there Political Aims,and To Control The Middle East After the (Arab Spring),(The West now is Trading with the blood of innocent to solve their Failure of Solving financial Crisis,)Arabs and Muslims Civilization have made numerous contributions in various scientific fields to world civilization in many field ,we should not forget History 
Lord_hanson:
Arabs have made contributions. As you put it Muslims aren't a race.
Shining_brow:
@LH - I don't get your point.... the post doesn't mention anything about 'race'.
And the connections between Arab and Muslim in relation to inventions, knowledge, science, etc is a fairly direct link - during their age of enlightenment period, the religion of Islam was actively cultivating the sciences and arts - including religious and philosophical debate.
philbravery:
for the record the crusades were in response to the invasion of Europe by you guessed it .....Islamic army's from were Saudi Arabia is now
The Hui muslim minority are the rare people in this country who treat Foreigners as "normal" human beings, they don't talk in your back thinking you don't understand, neither do they see you as a zoo animal here for their entertainment, far more civilized than the Han majority.
@hi2u: please find my response for your last comment above...I have tried to mention your point first and provide an answer to that later...
1. “first of all, as I have already said, it is absurd to think that most Muslims are terrorists, but most of the terrorists are Muslim, from the Boston bombers to the Santa Barbara shooters to the Charlie Hebdo shooters to the failed Paris train shooters to the recent Paris shooters, all were radicalized Muslims”
Your memory is very sharp and you can remember all the attacks done by the muslims and I am sure if you had even bothered to read the news where non muslims were the culprits you would have definitely remembered them. But the problem with people is they are only interested when the term terrorism comes combined with Islam. In all other cases you just dismiss the news and incidents sayin “Oh that must be a lone crazy maniac, nothing to do with terrorism. Only muslims are terrorists”. Well proving you wrong is time taking but not difficult and since I have already decided to waste my day today as well on this forum so be it. You said that no one has provided any link to prove that terror incidents are not islam related. Well let me help you. Yeah, the link provided by Rasklnik shows almost all incidents done by jihadism and whatever. But they have not included a long long list of terror related incidents because as I said they don’t consider it as terrorism activity; they just consider it as a lone maniac’s actions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Weise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Harris_and_Dylan_Klebold
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thurston_High_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitchell_Johnson_and_Andrew_Golden
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego_State_University_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontier_Middle_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindhurst_High_School_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Iowa_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockton_schoolyard_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Elementary_School_shooting_(San_Diego)
http://www.michaelcorcoran.net/archives/1469
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/École_Polytechnique_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordia_University_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremen_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilno_school_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eppstein_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jokela_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kauhajoki_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnenden_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Moscow_school_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kampala_wedding_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsuyama_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashupatinath_Temple_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chongqing_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tian_Mingjian_incident
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zug_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chihuahua_shootings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Tatarstan_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaroslavsky_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Moscow_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Belgorod_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipendra_of_Nepal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Unek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woo_Bum-kon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Goldstein
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kandahar_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Aurora_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charleston_church_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulelani_Vukwana
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luby%27s_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Ysidro_McDonald%27s_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genildo_Ferreira_de_Fran%C3%A7a
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binghamton_shootings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Unruh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Edward_Pough
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_County_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Starkweather
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Silka
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_California_Street_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westroads_Mall_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthage_nursing_home_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Seal_Beach_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Troy_Sheley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Ratzmann
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Tucson_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynwood_Drake
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chai_Vang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Hill_massacre
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crandon,_Wisconsin_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkwood_City_Council_shooting
this list is in no way exhaustive.. In fact there are a lot more incidents of terrorism than the ones I could write...
point 2. "refuse settling them in our backyard"
Since you agree that US and West messed the situation, don't you think they should be a man and accept their mistake and do what they can to compensate the innocents? Maybe all those coming into your backyard are not innocents, but the majority is definitely of innocents. You don't need to blindly allow entry to everyone...a strict measure could be taken to ensure minimum threat.
third: You haven't provided any statistics to back up your claims that there is no link between terrorism and Islam
please refer to my list of incidents which I think should definitely be included in the list of terror activities. I would like to know do you think of the above mentioned people as terrorists? maybe they are not an organization but nevertheless they're terrorists. you ask proof of islam not related to terrorism I present incidents where terror is involved without any religious connotations. thus individual maniacs indulge in terror activities some of the perpetrators give it the name of religion because they are ignorant, you want to follow them, be my guest, but rationally you cannot prove islam has to do anything with terrorism. If a non muslim indulges in crime will all non muslims be labelled the same? I am sure no.. So get your facts straight. Islam is not related to terrorism. though muslims and non muslims alike do conduct terrorist activities.
fourth:marching in the street to protest invasion of their homelands
they are doing this because this invasion will result in higher unemployment, higher taxes, more useless mouths to feed, more burden on the tax payers. Also one reason is that the new comers have demands. If I had a say in this matter I would let them come in my country but their stay would strictly be based on my terms and conditions and not to be decided by the newcomers.
fifth: Quran calls for Jihad
that is a completely different and a full length topic which itself would require a big discussion. the necessity of jihad, terms and conditions of it, rules of jihad, situations of jihad, alternatives of jihad. I leave that to some other day.
P.S: I do not expect you to say "oh yeah now I believe all terrorists are not muslims. all terrorists are f***ing aholes nothing related to islam or anyother religion. they are all maniacs alike." I trust you and your like-thinkers would be intelligent enough to come up with some equally weigthful reply
EDITED..Details removed
hi2u:
Ok, of all of the examples you listed, what do you think is the common driving force behind them? You listed a bunch of shooting incidents in which generally speaking the shooter had an axe to grind with at least one of the victims, basically a bunch of homicides. By and large they were not ideologically driven.
Jihad has been the common driving force behind terrorist attacks in the west time and time again. It is an ideology in complete opposition to western values. And the fact that you think it is comparable to a guy going on a shooting rampage because of a bitter divorce or because he was being bullied in school really shows you're missing the point.
hunny797:
i get your point completely now. And I do agree since long ago that a certain retarded so-called muslims group should be dealt with strictly. But what I cannot agree with is that the punishment you decide for these retarded should be applied to all the muslim population.. what you state, is definitely a problem, I agree, a huge problem. But your approach towards it.. Not quite the best one. their could be other solutions. solutions where the west could apart from securing their borders also give a helping hand to those sane people who are trapped within the places where these maniacs are in power. Despite wanting to do so, the saner ones can't escape from there easily.
you say "Jihadism is a problem. Stop the influx, stop the muslims. no one comes. just let their oil come let the sane and insane die alike rather let's kill them ourselves"...
I say "Jihadism is a problem. Don't stop the influx, rather make your controls stricter so that only those can come who genuinely needs help and is willing to live according to your terms under your system while providing food and care for himself by contributing in the society. Anyone who bypasses such stricter laws and create problems after coming inside, make an exemplary punishment out of him to stop others"
Shining_brow:
(crap - don't you hate it when you type stuff up, and then the browser crashes???)
"Jihad has been the common driving force behind terrorist attacks in the west time and time again. It is an ideology in complete opposition to western values."
What a load of crap!
Statistically, I'm fairly certain you're way wrong!
Number of Muslims in the world - over 2 billions. Number of Jihadi terrorist attacks? - lots!
Number of Irish Catholics? About 4.7 million. Number of IRA terrorist attacks - lots!
Number of Basques? About 2-3 million. Number of Basque independence attacks? Lots.
Number of football fanatics in England? Lots. Number of hooligan attacks and violence? Lots... (yes, I'd put that into a similar category! it may not be a bombing, but it's clearly a type of terrorism - "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them" - one definition... and you'll see that it's a problem to define it!)
And - adding to that without the numerical comparisons -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Struggle#List_of_attacks - in Greece.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Neo-Nazi_attacks_in_Germany
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Cells_%28German_group%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Riga_bombing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_department_store_%22Centrs%22_bombing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Commandos_of_the_Armenian_Genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Secret_Army_for_the_Liberation_of_Armenia#Attacks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/For%C3%A7as_Populares_25_de_Abril
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarn%C3%B3w_rail_station_bomb_attack
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewolucyjni_M%C5%9Bciciele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Wednesday_%28Poland%29
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Nedelya_Church_assault
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Attack_on_Estonian_Defence_Ministry
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Muslim_bombings_in_Paris,_Cannes_and_Nice
(what the hell - let's just simplify this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nationalist_terrorism_in_Europe)
As I kept clicking links, I keep finding more stuff... ")
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_religious_terrorism#Since_1948 (you should also look further up, at the history bit)
(getting out of Europe - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_violence)
In general - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_terrorism#Definition and especially further down at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_terrorism#Criticism_of_the_concept, where I shall quote:
"
Robert Pape compiled the first complete database of every documented suicide bombing from 1980-2003. He argues that the news reports about suicide attacks are profoundly misleading — "There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions". After studying 315 suicide attacks carried out over the last two decades, he concludes that suicide bombers' actions stem from political conflict, not religion.[12]"
Yes, I do note the date on that one - 2005. So, perhaps in the last 10 years, things might have changed slightly...
Is Hezzbollah a Jihadi terrorist group? I'd say no... after all, they only came into existence once the state of Israel came into existence... and that, I think, is what's really started off all of these attacks.
Plenty of good Muslims. But I think every culture should be allowed a home. White Christian culture should not have to suffer large influx of migrants. This threatens us far more than terrorism. No deep emotional ties to a country by a larger group of its citizens is not good. Do you think they would be happy with a white takeover in Islamabad. No they would defend their culture. Polls have been extensive. Even if the percentages can be disputed, what is clear that a scary number of Muslims sympathize with extremist actions. Why would you allow an unprecedented number to come to our home countries
hunny797:
Good thought..I agree to most of it.. but let me ask.."every culture should be allowed a home" do you think west damaged the home for millions in Asia because of greed, money, oil, power etc? yes or no please. if yes, do the victims owe some form of compensation?? scond: "white takeover in Islamabad" why don't you say an influx of white migrants? you sound like if the white come to Islamabad they're gonna form their own government, be the ruler. while we will defend this sort of takeover but if an influx of war torn and persecution faced white migrants come to seek refuge in islamabad we may be open to them. But we will have to face some problems which migrants to west and their host do not have to face. some of these are for example over population. islamabad and the likes are already heavily populated unlike Europe. also the current rule does not support those unemployed or unfit to work. So who's gonna look after the new comers. thus in case of white migrants cultural take over won't be on the top of the problems we will have to face. third: "a scary number of Muslims sympathize with extremist actions" I do not think so. consider this example. a lunatic so called "muslim" kills a guy. there are 20 muslims who came to know about it. one or two of those muslims cheer loudly and praises highly the killer..on the other hand 18 or 19 of them are too embarrassed to voice their condemnation so they either condemn it keeping a low profile or they walk away from the scene. Now any of the neutral watchers watching this scenario will conclude what? he will conclude I witnessed a muslim terrorist, and he was so much appreciated by his fellows. oh that's scary. All those muslim terrorists. Of course, the behaviour of those 18-19 muslims who do not raise loud voices of condemnation is not ideal, nevertheless they do not in any way endorse these activities. But they feel themselves helpless in this sort of situation.
dokken:
No. The west had a vested interest in that part of the world because our lifestyle, including yours, demands oil. It would be a lot easier to buy it from them, which is what the west wants. But it is a really messed up region of the world, and has forced good intentions into policy missteps. The hard truth for Muslims is it is their religion which keeps them down. I don't think it is an accident that certain parts of the world are developing. Some region explode with potential, while others just explode. So no, I don't think historical injustices justify large scale immigration. The west should forever change its culture because of colonization in the past? That's a perverse argument. Feeling like another culture is superior and setting up whole communities is weird defeatist and a bit creepy
also the bbc survey says 7 percent support the views of the extremists. That probably means double because a lot of people would not share these views openly. 40 percent think Islam and the west will never be compatible. It is incredible we allow large scale immigration from Middle East.
Shining_brow:
Actually 'the west' doesn't NEED to have a vested interest in that region. We've had the technology to not rely so much on oil for decades... And, as I've said before, if the amount of money spent on 'securing' those (commercial) interests was spent on the research and development of alternative sources, we wouldn't have 90+% of the problems we currently have!
Taking wiki to be reasonably informative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_product - 85% of crude oil is used in fuels. With 46% used in our normal domestic (and sometimes commercial) vehicles. But - we now have electric! We have LPG, we have methane. We also have bio-diesel.
We do NOT need to be interfering in that part of the world! (oh, yeah, the US wants to control it, cos they don't like Russia! Why? Well, Russia also has lots of oil and other natural resources, and also doesn't just accept US controls (Monsanto...).
"No deep emotional ties to a country by a larger group of its citizens is not good" You mean, like when the Europeans went to the Americas? Or the Indies? Or into Asia? Or Africa?? We should DEFINITELY not have a "Little India" area in our cities, nor a "Chinatown" - terrible idea! Our cutlure is being destroyed!"
"Can you use chopsticks?" Nope - never even heard of them - I prefer to be a cultural inbred who doesn't give two shits about other parts of the world. They should stay there, and I will stay here!
Dokken - history is against you! The chances of you finding ANY culture that has not been in some way affected by ANY other culture will be extremely small (I believe there are still tribes in the Amazon who have remained safely untouched)
You say "White Christian"... completely ignoring what that statement actually means, in a historical context! You Christians are the invaders! Taking over our temples, our gods, our holy days.
@Hunny - I"m actually going to slightly disagree with you on a point. People hear of a terrorist attack (eg, 9/11) - some will actually think "great ! Woo hoo - get those sinful, barbaric Americans... oh, wait! FK - there were people on those planes and in those buildings... oh, no that's not ok!"
Meaning - it's one thing to support a certain ideology - and support the value it claims - but another thing to support the means used. So - yes, they support the general ideal, but perhaps not support the actual activity itself.
"Do you support Jihadism?" - "Yes - every Muslim should!"
"Do you support the fight against American and the imperialists?" - "Of course, we all should - it is our duty!"
"Do you support the bombing of innocent civilians in the name of Allah?" - "What?? Hell no! That's a stain upon the soul! That's just plain evil, and the people who do that should be condemned to hell for such evil crimes against humanity!!!"
Also - I'd suggest that in their minds, the first thing they think won't be "Woo hoo, another great strike for Islam"... It will be more like "Woo hoo - know you know how it feels here after what you bastards did to us!"
The response to 9/11... what so many choose to ignorantly ignore is that in the minds of many in the Middle East is that the US has been at war with them for decades. Many MANY innocent people going about their lives doing their own thing have been killed (intentionally). Now, the US knows what it's like to feel that loss and that pain. "Support" for 9/11 wasn't because of Islam - it was in 'revenge'.
I'd also suggest, similarly - Charlie Hebdo. If you ask most Muslims, they'd tell you doing those pictures is an 'evil' act. Should they be punished - yes! Should they die for it? Well, according to the Koran - yes. Should there have been a bombing and shooting as a way to enact this punishment? No! (Although, I'd also suggest, most Muslims would be - perhaps rightly - angered, but wouldn't actually support their killings either! I'm in that bunch - No, I don't think it's healthy to outrightly mock another's deeply held beliefs - sure, point out the stupidity of them, but not to mock them).
diverdude1:
SB,,, u are a horrible, horrible person.. If u know what u are saying, I don't know how u live with yourself. Did u see the beautiful young girl with her legs blown off at the Boston Marathon? But to u it's ok? Son, u are possessed by Lucifer. Simple, but true.
What a stupid question.
What do we thibk of muslims as religious practitioners or as people?
There is no debate on the fact islam is a religion of terror. Any semi educated person who knows anything of the war and acts of horror in the koran wouldnt for a minute make an attempt to defend it.
Muslims who dont follow the convert or kill mandates or any other acts of barbarism either advised or commanded or even influenced by that horrible religion either dont because of the social repercussions, law, or for the fact they are just decent people subscribed to a nonsensical plagiarism on christianity. Which itself just plagiarises and is copied from the judaic religion and so on.
Also this best bbq down the street remark. What an idiotic statement of opinion. Bbq is absolutely in no what whatsoever related to a persons religious affinity as it is the culmination of ones culinary skill.
Seriously.
Shining_brow:
Hmmm - interesting first post....
Partly, I agree... and partly you're speaking out of your arse.
To say the Koran is a religion of terror hasn't read much of the Old Testament. All 3 books (including the Christian's Bible) are full of incredible violence that is 'justified' as being part of the religion. Christians only get off slightly more lightly cos some JC dude came down and said "ah, guys, dad says that stuff was a bit.. you know... nasty. Perhaps we shouldn't do that any more...." (note: that 'God' never apparently said "I was wrong" - only that "things will be different now!" Oh, and never apologised to them either... wiping out how many cultures, towns, cities, etc??)
My argument is obviously fallacious - but given the number who come from a Christian background making such claims against a different religion - I think the point is deserved.
As to why the over 2 billion Muslims in general haven't wiped us all out already - I'd go with the last option you suggested - they're actually decent people! It's sort of like Christians who will say to non-Christians "oh, yes, you will go to hell for your sins against god - but for the time being, you're still ok and I'll talk to you".
retiredinchina:
when you find that decent muslim country that will let me attend a Catholic Church for Christmas mass or a protestant church for Easter Sunday. let me know which planet i need to move to for this impossible miracle.
http://www.dcstatesman.com/religion-peace-woman-beheaded-shopping/
the religion of peace is great for males, females, not so much.
diverdude1:
Thank you for pointing that out. All those who defend islam,,,,, gosh, they worry me.. They seem to say I will murder u into a bloody mess over,,,, over what? dress their women like,, I don't know what, hit women,, gosh,,, sooo sad. oh well, humanity is a frigtful mess.
Englteachted:
Watch (first have fun trying to find it) Death of a Princess
Shining_brow:
Ah... Taliban = ALL Muslims!
Well done!
Yes, I now totally believe everything you will ever say about Islam in the future (and completely ignore Islamic majority nations such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Egypt, Morocco, Kazakstan, Uzbekistan, Brunei, etc etc etc....
You know what this execution does remind me of? Leviticus in the Bible.... lots of killings for stupid things in that book too!
Englteachted:
This is what Arab Muslims generally believe, yes or no? Whether they are active participants or not.
Englteachted:
And Shining, are there a large amount of Christians practicing the barbaric crap in the Bible? nope, false equivalency. Why defend these acts of outright sexism and not attack the sexist practices? Whatever happened to liberal principles?
retiredinchina:
Shining, none of those countries listed has the tolerance for a christian to go mass at a catholic church, or jew to light a menora in his window. Most of the other churches have been destroyed. The only country with great tolerance that is not very developed is India, not muslim, if India becomes Muslim, all the buddhas would be torn down, Malaysia has managed to keep some buddhas, but i think its more for tourism and show than anything else.
