Switzerland appears to have backed minaret ban

Your point was that Islam is not to blame for as many atrocities as I claimed. Here we see Islamic people repeatedly bombing Russia so I'd say it does have something to do with Islam.

Why don't you go and open some churches in Afghanistan or Pakistan and see how they react when your spires start to impose on their buildings. I'm quite sure they'd probably be knocked down without any sort of vote or debate from their people. Such is the Middle Eastern world, they are stuck in the dark ages.

In addition to my previous reply to your previous post, let me also see if your head can comprehend the fact that in the Middle-Eastern world, where countries are normally run as pseudo-dictatorships, the general population will be knocked down without a vote or debate when they want something for themselves.

If they are stuck in the Dark Ages, it is not because of Islam. Islamic parties in these countries are even more repressed and persecuted a la Algeria and Egypt.
 
Ireland is primarily a Christian state, not to mention the fact that many Irish terrorists where Christian .

Yes, Tefal, I understand that, But Acid's argument was that the IRA were committing terrorist acts which I agree were atrocities, but they were not geared purely on religious acts, such as the muslim beheading's and honor killings, stoning people to death and other barbaric acts that are carried out.

The IRA were protesting in an admittedly appalling way, but they were protesting at the fact their country had been split into two parts. If there was an England and a Northern England then how do you think the English would feel?

I certainly think some nutjobs like the BNP would have an idea on what kind of action they would take on the country that is claiming the northern area of it's island.
 
Yes, Tefal, I understand that, But Acid's argument was that the IRA were committing terrorist acts which I agree were atrocities, but they were not geared purely on religious acts, such as the muslim beheading's and honor killings, stoning people to death and other barbaric acts that are carried out.

which aren't religious but cultural.

And the debate was not ideology. The argument was that 99% of terrorist attacks in western countries are Islamic. Which is pure rubbish.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Tefal, I understand that, But Acid's argument was that the IRA were committing terrorist acts which I agree were atrocities, but they were not geared purely on religious acts, such as the muslim beheading's and honor killings, stoning people to death and other barbaric acts that are carried out.


The Chechen rebels are protesting in an admittedly appalling way, but they are protesting at the fact their country has been occupied by a foreign power, and faced with brutal oppression.

If England had had huge number of it's population deported and civilians slaughtered, how do you think the English would feel?
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/8387110.stm

Muslim Conservative peer attacked in Luton for "not being a proper Muslim". I presume by that they mean that she doesn't wear another symbol of Islamic dominance, the headscarf.

Way to paraphrase that article - the people who pelted her mentioned here support for the illegal invasion of Afghanistan. Not that that excuses their behaviour. Your post is nonsense without evidence, basically.
 
Way to paraphrase that article - the people who pelted her mentioned here support for the illegal invasion of Afghanistan. Not that that excuses their behaviour. Your post is nonsense without evidence, basically.

The Afghanistan invasion was not illegal :confused:
 
The Afghanistan invasion was not illegal :confused:

I think the point went that way --->

The people attacking her cited her support for the 'illegal' war in afghanistan. That is, the people who attacked the MP thought it was illegal... In other words they already gave the reasons for their attack, and it had nothing to do with the reasons you made up, sorry 'presumed'.
 
Doesn't stop people saying it though or thinking it.

Especially if they want the Taliban and Al-Queda to win.

no it was because she supported the war in Afghanistan.

From your own quite it was because they didn't view her as a proper Muslim and because she supported the killing of Muslims (the Taliban I presume) by in Afghanistan. I was speculating on what they would see as a proper Muslim, hence the headscarf was mentioned.
 
You posted what looks to be biased sites.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of nine books on Islam and jihad, including the New York Times bestsellers The Truth About Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades). Spencer is a weekly columnist for Human Events and FrontPage Magazine, and has led seminars on Islam.

In addition to the seminars on Islam and jihad that Spencer has led for the United States Central Command, United States Army Command and General Staff College, a Department of Homeland Security task force, the FBI, branches of the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and the U.S. intelligence community, he has discussed jihad, Islam, and terrorism at a workshop sponsored by the U.S. State Department and the German Foreign Ministry.

Spencer (MA, Religious Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) has been studying Islamic theology, law, and history in depth since 1980. As an Adjunct Fellow with the Free Congress Foundation in 2002 and 2003, he wrote a series of monographs on Islam that are still available from the Foundation: An Introduction to the Qur'an; Women and Islam; An Islamic Primer; Islam and the West; The Islamic Disinformation Lobby; Islam vs. Christianity; and Jihad in Context. More recently he has also written monographs for the David Horowitz Freedom Center: What Americans Need to Know About Jihad; The Violent Oppression of Women In Islam (with Phyllis Chesler); Islamic Leaders' Plan for Genocide; and Muslim Persecution of Christians.

The guy obviously has no clue about Islam. :rolleyes:

Which even says 63% is political and nothing to do with the religion.

Islam is not a religion. It is a complete system. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic and military components.
 
It's not a religion that is evil or doing the killing though - it's individual people.

I disagree. I think it's both. Religion enables the people to do these things. Religion is oppressive and controlling. It's whole basis is "you don't need evidence, what we tell you is true, ignore the rest" - how can anyone with some reasonable amount of intellect take something like that seriously?

Oh yes, I am sure there are plenty of scientists, philosophers and ordinary people who go around questioning and yet still believe in a particular religion but that doesn't change the fact that religion is a negative influence on our society.

Especially when it promotes violence. Fundamentalist Christianity and Islam to name two. That and the outdated, backwater beliefs. Yes, I'm sure homosexuals are going to be burning in Hell. :rolleyes: Yes, women are inferior to men. :rolleyes: Yes, the Jews are less than dirt. :rolleyes: Yes, soldiers dying abroad are murderers and burning in Hell. :rolleyes:
 

To clarify because I don't understand, you want proof that some Muslims living in Britain support the Taliban/Al-Queda in Afghanistan? Shouldn't be too hard.

many English people think the war was illegal, does that make them supporters?

Iraq may well have been illegal based on the evidence presented at the inquest going on at the moment. The legality of the Iraq war is at best, unclear. However I'm not aware of any suggestion that the war in Afghanistan is anything other than 100% legal.
 
Back
Top Bottom