To all those Brexiters who had championed Switzerland as a role model

At least the Guardian doesn't promote pedophilia and think that a celebrity getting a breast implant is more important news than a suicide bombing where 300+ people die.

the daily mail might be one thing, but the guardian pedals islam acceptance, radical feminism and economically backwards socialism a lot - how is anybody meant to take it seriously?

The Guardian sells to tell the news and raise discussion.

The Daily Mail sells for money.

I think its pretty obvious which one should be worth trusting. And for the record, peddling Islam acceptance is better than peddling Islam hatred.

We would be in a world with dozens more groups like ISIS and many more hateful crimes against Muslims if we lived in a world where all of the mainstream news called out on Islam, regardless of whether it is violent or not.

it sells information for money. it can't make things up for money.



why?



you literally couldn't be more wrong. do you think political correctness has correlated with more or less terrorism?

*Let me ignore all the facts just because the story was presented in a source I personally deem unsatisfactory*

Regardless of whether or not Islam is violent, actively encouraging people to hate it is worse than encouraging people to tolerate it.

Unless of course you're a violent sociopath who enjoys seeing innocent people killed because of their beliefs.

So because May went on holiday to Switzerland and had a bad experience now Brexit is a bad thing?

what about the westboro baptist church? what about the KKK? what about nazis? why shouldn't we hate them if we shouldn't hate islam? the one thing these things all have in common is that they themselves spread hatred for innocent groups (gays, blacks, jews, or a mixture)

44% of Britain's exports go to the EU. 8% of the EU's exports go to Britain. It isn't hard to figure out which side really needs a deal, and which can afford to play hardball.

Because Islam contains 1.5 billion good, peaceful, non-violent people.
The KKK and the Nazis contain a much larger proportion of hateful, destructive individuals.

In Islam, the majority are peaceful. With the Nazis and KKK, the majority are hateful and destructive.

*sigh*

facts exist - why can't you search for them? why do I have to find them for you?

What facts are you trying and failing to emphasise?

inb4 some vague ambiguous poll about x% of 1000 Muslims thinking z

so you won't listen to facts? :| how are they "ambiguous"?

Yet another pointless thread.

You lost the referendum. Deal with it.

the daily mail might be one thing, but the guardian pedals islam acceptance, radical feminism and economically backwards socialism a lot - how is anybody meant to take it seriously?

show me the facts in question because I could answer this 10 different ways.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/nov/05/ben-shapiro/shapiro-says-majority-muslims-are-radicals/

this page has the stats and references their origins

You've made a fool out of yourself and you don't even know it.

This article is refuting Ben Sharpiro's claims, and therefore your claims. Idiot.

"Shapiro said that a majority of Muslims are radicals. To make his numbers work, he had to cherry-pick certain results from public opinion surveys. Given the choice between two possible percentages, he chose the higher one. Shapiro also relied heavily on the idea that anyone who supported sharia law is a radical.Some of the best polling work shows that Muslim beliefs are much more nuanced. Some countries where high percentages of Muslims support Sharia law show low support for suicide attacks on civilians. Large fractions of Muslims that endorse sharia law do not want it imposed on others. The meaning of Sharia law varies from sect to sect and nation to nation.Shapiro’s definition of radical is so thin as to be practically meaningless and so too are the numbers he brings to bear.

We rate the claim False."

I put that link there originally but that's not the link I've got in that original message now
but I'll respond to you anyway:

if he cherry picked the results, and this is why he concludes that there isn't a "tiny" radical minority, where is he getting the results that he supposedly cherry picked?! from thin air?! why is he even able to cherry pick? because there are muslims out there who DO say radical things and they represent "one possible" percentage - would this be the case when you ask non-muslims these questions concerning terrorism and honour killings?! where is the "one possible percentage" of non-muslims saying that sharia law should be implemented in every country, for instance?!

Hahahahah you accidentally linked the page which refuted the very claims you were trying to purport.

As the article said, sharia law =/= radicalised Muslim extremist terrorist.

You've probably just got a **** life and it feels good to blame it on a foreign entity, why else would you spend hours daily ranting about Islam on a student forum?