Updated Europol Data: Less Than 1% of Terrorist Attacks by Muslims

Pray tell, what ideology aside from Islam were the Muslim suicide bombers advocating? Breivik was just a Christian who happened to be involved in a far right ideology. (Or should I stick to the standard Muslim approach - waaa waaa, he isn't a real Muslim. Or alternatively should I take your position that he did it because of something that happened to someone he didn't know on the other side of the world )

If that was a Muslim and I was trying to say Islam doesn't justify such acts, you'll downright refuse to believe instead pointing to some BS circumstantial evidence. I love in the last thread as well how I completely destroyed your point about the Vietcong and you ran away. Oh and "WAAA WAAA HE'S NOT A REAL CHRISTIAN"

Not that I expect you to see the reality but one can only hope: http://www.federationpress.com.au/pdf/IslamicLawsonWarPeace.pdf

If the Muslims who commited 7/7 were doing it for right wing or left wing ideologies that would be a different story. They were doing it solely for Islam. That's the difference. If they are killing in the name of a different ideology and just so happen to be Muslim that wouldn't be Islam's fault. And in regard to your point with the Vietcong: lol. You're sure that if America was full of Vietcong then you're sure they would have gone around killing innocents on the mainland? You're probably right - but if it was full of Buddhists, it wouldn't be the same story. Really you've just provided an argument as to why it's not a good idea to have a lot of Muslims in this country or the West in general.

You can't just cover your barbaric cult's ass by saying that a Christian has done bad things in the name of a completely different ideology.

Past your ramblings about Islam in which you absolutely and utterly refuse to believe anything above "Islamz evil" here's my post:

Well, it's relatively clear you will continue to simplistically blame everything on religion rather than looking underneath the surface for the whole story. Crusades, Inquisition, Holocaust, all motivated partially or almost completely by Christianity and yet I'am intelligent enough to notice that although the ostensible cause was Christianity, there were other forces at play which were far more important and used religion as a scapegoat. And to answer my own question, 7/7 would never happened without the invasion of Muslim countries and the murder of innocent people (purposely or by accident) by Western troops in those countries. You are effectively the only person (amongst professional analysts, TSRians... pretty much everyone I have heard voiced an opinion on this) who somehow believes there to be a zero correlation between the threat of terrorism in the West (all overall the world infact) and the unwanted interference of countries such as the United States in foreign countries.

Each conflict is unique and although there are few examples of people committing terrorism and murder in a foreign country based on what's happening to their co-believers (etc.) in another part of the world, there are plenty of examples of religions such as Judaism and Christianity being used to justify the most atrocious crimes that have ever been committed against humanity. That you remain blind to this and blind to the fact that religion is only an ostensible reason for all these crimes is a pity. Finally as to your completely inaccurate representation of the Vietcong which you keep putting forward... they were hardly some kind of romanticist freedom fighters who did their upmost to protect civilians and only took out military targets. They were responsible for the torture and murder of hundreds of thousands of South and North Vietnamese men, women and children who they even suspected of being sympathetic to the Americans and their cronies. If they had had a chance to attack the US mainland, only a fool would believe they wouldn't have taken it. I implore you to brush up on your history before embarrassing yourself in front of us in the future.

I did already say I wouldn't get involved in the debate circle again with you did I not? Nevertheless here is the last post I will ever make to you:

Of course the Vietcong would have attacked the US mainland given the chance. So would the Taliban, but I expect that. However, would a normal Buddhist from Thailand take it upon themselves to attack the US mainland on behalf of their fellow believers? I think not. Furthermore, you are just making an argument as to why we shouldn't have Muslims in the West - because it stops us from going to war with who we judge necessary. This directly undermines our sovereignty. We have already gone over the other things like the inquisition; which I admit were wrong. But the deaths during those conflicts, and murders, were a drop in the ocean compared to what Islam is responsible for today. Islam will also never change. You can put forwards as many liberal interpretations as you want, but you ignoring the violent side of Islam is worse than the islamists who ignore the peaceful side. I like how you conviniently ignore my position on Breivik - he was a Christian who did bad things under the guise of a different ideology, and not Christianity directly. Whereas Islamists are just hardline Muslims - doing what they do in the name of the ideology that is Islam. They are in the same boat as you. You trying to validate their actions repeatedly is just disgusting, but then I expect no better from someone trying to reconcile their belonging to a barbaric cult with their overall liberal mindset.

Done.

This has always been the case the reason Muslim terrorists get more press coverage is they are better at it. They always seem to have much higher success rates, just look at the real IRA it always seems to be bomb found and defused.... or bomb gone off 1 injured... but for Islamic terrorists it is 200 dead.

Err.... Irish nationalists have a far better track record of successful attacks in the UK and Ireland than Muslims, really.

Err.... Irish nationalists have a far better track record of successful attacks in the UK and Ireland than Muslims, really.

I'll just leave this here...



Yes, I realize that 'not all Muslim are terrorists' but what people insinuate when posting what you have, is that the connection between Islam and terrorism has been 'fabricated' by the West for the sake of propaganda to serve as a pretext for Western colonialism or imperialism whatever you bellends want to call it. Whilst it is true that very few attacks in Europe are carried out by Muslims, the threat of terror is very real and you can generally thank intelligence, security, logistics (in the sense that carrying out a serious attack is rather difficult) and appeasement (abstaining from issues regarding topics 'sensitive' to terrorists etc) for preventing attacks. To my knowledge, the few attacks that have been carried out have always been deadly, let's not even talk about Islamic terror elsewhere where 50-200 die at a time.

WHAT! and we have been wasting our time invading the middle east? invade Ireland 2012 come on join the cause!

I'd suggest you go take a look at just how many innocent civilians they killed.

Don;t get me wrong, I hate the IRA and everything they did, but I;ve said it before and I;ll say it again, their campaign of terror was nothing like the Islamic one. Islamic terror focusses on killing as many innocents as they can in any single attack. They don;t pick targets to cripple the economy, or figures of power, embelems of the country, they pick to target and kill scores of innocents. The IRA, whilst being scum, did for the most part phone in their bombs so innocents were not killed, they targetted buildings and symbols, not people. Of course, this was not always the rule, there were lots of killings, but the point remains, the campaigns really were not of the same aim. And I would rather suffer an IRA terror attack than an ISlamic one.

....


Yeah. The British forces have never been involved in Ireland.






The death tole is still far higher for Irish related incidents. And I don't doubt that people are more 'scared' of Islamic terrorists, but people are idiots. The guys involved in the London bombings got pretty lucky.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Great_Britain#2000-present


....


If you're gonna be injured or killed by an attack, I really don't see how it matters who it was that carried it out.

But IRA is the ideology - non-Irish people funded and were involved in the IRA because they believed in the ideology. The IRA is the equivalent of Islam in this scenario. There were members who were never involved in a violent struggle and merely just provided vocal support. They weren't however being duplicitous by saying that the IRA's ideology was peaceful, like Muslims are. Most people were in universal agreement that the IRA had to be done away with. The equivalent of your Irishmen argument is that Arabs aren't fundamentally peaceful, and we know that isn't the case. They just adhere to a violent ideology.

This is the problem; Islam is not inherently violent as an ideology. Militant Islamic Fundamentalism is. Not all people for Irish independence support the IRA just like not all Muslims support violent extremists. I'm not arguing with the fact that fundamentalism needs to be checked, but I do think it's an issue when this leads to people thinking that Islam is simply violent in nature. Many violent acts have been inspired by Christianity but we don't blame the religion itself because most people who follow it do not in any way support violence. Islam and Christianity both advocate peace, and that doesn't stop being true just because a few crazies twist the ideology into something it's not.

I'm sure this thread will give the likes of T-ros, Steevee, Pax Amerifaun and tufc etc a bit of a heart attack



http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/11/updated-europol-data-less-than-1-of-terrorist-attacks-by-muslims/

I don't think a few even care about terror attacks that happen in Iraq, Afghanitstan and Pakistan. I also would love to have a piechart about how many NATO and drone attacks have occured on innocent civillians in Yemen, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq and NW Pakistan.

I would also liek you to educate yourself on the thousand of Asian Christians who are murdered every year. Most of the time whilst in mass. Don't debate semantics. This is a UK forum for one. The Uk does not use drones in any substantial quantity for your post to be relavent.

1. Learn to spell "like" before talking about education.
2. He was referring to the post he quoted which was about worldwide attacks. Just because it is a UK forum does not mean we can only discuss matters which affect the UK.