The Student Room Group

Man stabs 4 women for dressing immodestly in France

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Lujubi
Tut tut. You've shown that you are not an expert on Islam therefore your claims about Islam are irrelevant.
Read above post. Apologies for the late reply, I was too busy replying to your other post. :redface:



No you claim I'm not (there is a difference here)

But it seems I am more knowledgeable than you (I have about 20 years reading of Islam\Muslim related issues so how much do you have)

It also seems you are unable to comprehend how people can reference others knowledge and present it to other people to help prove a point or argument. This tells me you are still at school so it is understandable as they are skills you still have to learn yet.

But you do suffer from a well-known issue some posters on TSR exhibit
Original post by Lujubi
Islamic Terrorism is no growing threat, especially in the US. I'd like to add that less than 2% of terrorism has been committed by Muslims.

According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%).

So 2% or 6%? :cool:


They counted only the number of attacks (1980-2005) without considering the number of casualties, so that 9/11 is just one of them..
Original post by admonit
So 2% or 6%? :cool:


They counted only the number of attacks (1980-2005) without considering the number of casualties, so that 9/11 is just one of them..


I think data from this century is more relevant than anything from the 80s :smile:
Original post by 1010marina
I think data from this century is more relevant than anything from the 80s :smile:

Right. But I mean that presented old data actually is manipulative.
What a week. Are we all feeling sufficently culturally enriched yet?
Reply 445
Original post by swiss_cheese
meanwhile 300 Muslims die in Baghdad because of terrorism, but you're getting all teary about something as small as this? certainly just because it fits your islamphobic (note I say islamphobic as fear of Islam, not islamophobia) agenda.

So you think that just because less people died it is less important? It is just as bad, because the act of terrorism is there - be it 1 casualty, or a thousand. Thus, this isn't ''small'', and the fact that this has happened in a peaceful country like France is actually more shocking, perhaps, than in cities embroiled in conflict.
Original post by Achaea


Talking of the Yazidis and the regressive left, I saw someone on Twitter not long ago with one of the worst displays of moral and cultural relativism I've ever seen. She/he said that we in the west have no moral grounds for opposing the mass enslavement and rape of the Yazidi women and children because some western women go and live in the Playboy mansion, and therefore are sex slaves, and therefore the west is no better than ISIS. I wish I was making this up.


Reply 447
Original post by 1010marina
Out of 7 terror attacks since the start of 2015, 4 have been Islamic extremism. 2 of the other 3 because of white-black racial tensions and BLM/white south, and the last, an attack on Planned Parenthood (evangelical Christianity).

What timescale is your data from?
I have looked into this, and it seems to be composed of mostly on attacks (including non-fatal) on family planning providers by right-wing Christian groups, of which there have been many.
Reply 448
Original post by BaconandSauce
and the moon and the stars as well.
The moon cannot be, because Muhammad split it in two, and that would have been an unprovoked act of aggression against a brother. And Muhammad cannot have committed such an act because he is perfect and everything.
So the moon is obviously kuffar, or perhaps munafiq.
Original post by QE2
I have looked into this, and it seems to be composed of mostly on attacks (including non-fatal) on family planning providers by right-wing Christian groups, of which there have been many.


Not sure if these are recent but Wikipedia doesn't seem to consider them terrorism.. :O
Reply 450
Original post by 1010marina
Not sure if these are recent but Wikipedia doesn't seem to consider them terrorism.. :O
The arbiters (self appointed) of US terrorism certainly seem to think that they are.
Original post by QE2
The arbiters (self appointed) of US terrorism certainly seem to think that they are.


That's US laws. They think that anyone who causes damage to a place and people is a terrorist. That's why they're so strict about weapons. DUH.
Reply 452
Original post by 1010marina
Not sure if these are recent but Wikipedia doesn't seem to consider them terrorism.. :O
Just looked on Wikipedia and it does indeed list attacks on planned parenthood providers as terrorism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Anti-abortion_violence
Original post by QE2
Just looked on Wikipedia and it does indeed list attacks on planned parenthood providers as terrorism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States#Anti-abortion_violence


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States

Ahhh I see, I've been using this link and so only saw the one major attack it lists since 2015.
Original post by admonit
So 2% or 6%? :cool:


They counted only the number of attacks (1980-2005) without considering the number of casualties, so that 9/11 is just one of them..
not only that, but by choosing accurately your period, you can get to quite different results

for Pete's sake. in the 1980s, one of the most serious problems in the US were Puertorican independentists....

Quick Reply

Latest