MongGrel
Lifer
Many people here are well aware of it, and are a bit pissed off about that whole ordeal to begin with.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
If you believe in Islamophobia...
Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Many people here are well aware of it, and are a bit pissed off about that whole ordeal to begin with.
MongGrel
Lifer
Thank you, leave me there would ya.
The main thing that scares me about Muslims living in the West is that they put their Religion before their Western Country of residence.
With that said, TWO of the Muslim terrorist scum were converted to "radical Islam" within six months after leading a Western lifestyle (alcohol, rampant sex, clubbing, drugs etc.) to the fullest. One of them actually owned a BAR that was recently closed down due to drugs or related reason.
Think about this for a second. Two Westernized Muslims in almost no time decided to turn their backs on their Western Country and become a terrorist.
Any Country that has a significant increase in it's Muslim population will become a target for Muslim betrayal and terrorist acts. The chances will increase significantly.
You can argue civil rights and Religious freedoms all you want but brace yourselves for more attacks from Muslims within your Countries.
With that said, TWO of the Muslim terrorist scum were converted to "radical Islam" within six months after leading a Western lifestyle (alcohol, rampant sex, clubbing, drugs etc.) to the fullest. One of them actually owned a BAR that was recently closed down due to drugs or related reason.
Think about this for a second. Two Westernized Muslims in almost no time decided to turn their backs on their Western Country and become a terrorist.
Any Country that has a significant increase in it's Muslim population will become a target for Muslim betrayal and terrorist acts. The chances will increase significantly.
You can argue civil rights and Religious freedoms all you want but brace yourselves for more attacks from Muslims within your Countries.
mikeymikec
Lifer
It's funny how many people are afraid of Muslims yet hardly anyone shows similar nervousness around say an Irish person, or assume that a Jewish person is going to suddenly want to find the nearest Palestinian to kill, or that an American is going to pick a random target to start bombing, or if someone claims they believe in animal rights that they're going to start doing horrible things that some animal rights activists have done, or that if a British person visits that they'll soon declare that the purpose of their visit is to conquer your country and nick your resources, or that German people are probably Nazis or at least hold some related fascist views...
Prejudices however are pretty easy to spot.
Last edited:
JEDIYoda
Lifer
)Only an ignorant person would think this....
mikeymikec
Lifer
You're absolutely right. Some people cover their prejudices up pretty well.
buckshot24
Diamond Member
Your ignorance of the bible doesn't make you right.
I understand what you are trying to say but all of that is on a minor scale compared to what organized Muslim radicals could accomplish or have done.
All those lone gun men or SMALL radical groups are nothing as compared to what Muslim radicals on a global scale could accomplish or have done in the past.
I am focusing on the BIGGER threat here and not that naive to think that other smaller threats by different groups are not possible.
Don't you watch the news? France, Russia, Kenya, Nigeria, Somalia, Mali, USA, Belgium, Iraq, Syria etc. are all being attacked or threatened by Muslim terrorists as we speak. This is a serious threat on a global scale being financed by serious funding. Only an ignorant and naive fool (you?) would not take this serious and make some flippant remark.
Am I mad? You God damn right I am mad and upset about what is going on globally. Can you blame for being mad? Am I the evil one now for being mad at terrorists?
mikeymikec
Lifer
No, the only difference is that you're disparaging ~1.5 billion people based on the actions of about 0.3% of them. I can't think of any scenario where that sounds even remotely fair or reasonable.
How many of those 1.5 billion ideologically support the horrific actions though?
How many Christians feel that sex slaves are okay?
How many Jews feel that its okay to kill homosexuals?
How many Buddhists believe its okay to bring down a plane full of innocent people?
The answer to all of those is far less then the average Muslim. Are all Muslims bad people, no. Does the average Muslim when polled have some scary beliefs, yes. Does the average non Muslim have scary beliefs, yes. Do Muslims commit terrorist acts at a disproportionate level, yes.
While the actions might be done by few, the ideological support is far far greater than 0.03%. If you want data, it can be found easily, so its not just talking out of my ass. The OP linked that already, but there is more.
So, if your argument is that only a few actually do the bad things, then what about all those who support them?
You still don't get it do you? By the way, Islam on a whole have always been passive aggressive concerning the global threat of radical Islam but that is a WHOLE other topic right there.
The ISIS ideology is on the RISE globally. A "good" Muslim can turn quickly and MANY are turning as we speak. Only a fool would focus on percentages because a well financed and organized minority can wreck terrible havoc on a global scale. Do I need to list examples now?
A million man strong and GROWING (the key word here is that it is spreading fast) well financed and organized Muslim terrorist group or groups is reason for concern so to God damn hell with your silly stat numbers. Tell that to the dead victims.
Like I said, Islam on a whole has always been passive aggressive concerning "radical" Islam and terrorists groups. Many Muslims secretly share some sort of sympathy or support (financially or other) towards these global threats.
How does one stop a fast spreading ideology? Only a fool would try and down play the global threat by saying it is only a small minority and pose no threat. A lot of dead people would disagree with them.
mikeymikec
Lifer
Who knows. I certainly wouldn't trust a survey on such a hot topic as there are so many agendas and angles to consider, here's a quick explanation why:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
Here's a real-life example of how statistics are manipulated on this topic:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/no-one-in-five-muslims-do-not-support-isis-a6745206.html
There are plenty of parties supposedly on both sides that a large figure of favourable responses to ISIS would suit. For starters plenty of press outlets would love a shocking headline that they don't have to make up themselves.
What about them? How would you define support in the context of Remobz's statement? Is, for example answering a survey question a threatening action to your welfare? How different is answering a survey to say handing out leaflets that advocate the cause, to say funding the organisation, to say assisting in its organisation, to holding the gun one's self? How large a survey do you think a reasonable person would require in order to fairly represent the views of ~1.5 billion people? In how many countries do you think it would be problematic for an ordinary citizen to openly declare their support for ISIS?
I found these two surveys:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...ant-muslim-populations-much-disdain-for-isis/
https://newrepublic.com/article/120...-truce-means-us-arming-rebels-syria-will-fail
I'm not going to claim that the ones I found are in any way a reasonable enough representation of "the truth" for the reasons I already specified, I'm just pointing out that things aren't as a lot of people make them out to be. On topics like this I have a rule of thumb that basically says "if you're making a sweeping statement, the more likely it is to be inaccurate as the number of people it covers increases". I can't even think of a sweeping statement that accurately represents an opinion of myself and all of my siblings, let alone 1.5 billion people (or whatever size percentage of that number that one would deem to be enough to be fairly supporting one's fear of Muslims).
Something interesting I heard on the news a while ago that I think is worthy of some consideration here. Apparently Al-Qaeda tried to create an alliance with ISIS, but they believed that the views of ISIS were too extreme for them. The best they could manage was a truce. To an outsider, they look like they have the same objectives, wouldn't you think?
I'll file this under "yet another excuse why disparaging so many people is OK".
I should also point out that ISIS will absolutely freaking love the idea of people like you disparaging Muslims en masse. What they very likely want is for as many people as possible to be extremists, otherwise they're the only arseholes who are trying to start a fight, whereas most people want an easy life, and people who threaten that are the enemy.
Last edited:
runzwithsizorz
Diamond Member
A little piece of interesting trivia here; The first director of NASA *was* a Nazi. -----carry on😎
While I have no doubt that many are stupid and would say yes to something they feel should be no, that is not typical. Also, your 2nd link is simply about how the conclusion drawn was not logical. Are you trying to say that you think that was done with the OPs links? My guess is that because it was done that time, it must be a big problem. Also, that has nothing to do with stats. It has to do with people drawing illogical conclusions from stupidity or a desire to mislead. Unless you are saying that PEW did that in their poll, your point has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
I don't. I think the west has dont lots of terrible shit.
So Ill give you Iraq, but what was the other country we invaded that was not about 9/11?
Hitler did not bolster the German economy. He simply ignored the constraints that had been placed on Germany post WW1 which had been the reason for the collapse. If you attribute anything, its just that he lifted those constraints imposed, nothing more.
runzwithsizorz
Diamond Member
You really needn't worry, There are only about 200 million muslims that want to kill, or enslave you now, and only another 500 million that would do so later. Feel better?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7TAAw3oQvg
I first found sympathy for Islam when I began to learn a little about it and a little about it is as far as I ever got, but the reason was that I could never be a good Christian. I was never 'good enough' to turn the other cheek. I had to much ego and too much self hate. I leaned more toward tough, hard, and vengeful, which only made me hate myself even more.
Then I read this about Islam. In Islam, you don't turn the other cheek if you are attacked by evil. You go after your opponent mercilessly and without compromise to destroy your opponent. Yeah, baby. That's more like it. Where the Christian part come is later, if and when your enemy surrenders and asks to end the conflict by a willingness to give up on his evil ways. Then, you have to turn on a dime and forgive and forget and accept him as a friend.
Christianity is great except that nobody ever really practices as preached. How rare is it that a Christian really turns the other cheek. How much more likely is a Muslim to do the same. I would say a lot more likely because if he does and your his enemy then it means he's already beaten the crap out of you.
In a world full of evil a Christian country would go extinct because evil doesn't cure itself, generally. So with the Jews everybody in the world will wind up with their eyes poked out and in a world with real Christians they will all be blinded by evil people, but with Islam those who seek to do evil can be taken out or if they show a change of heart, shown mercy. It just makes so much more sense.
Islam is in part the just answer to terrorism. Destroy the evil makers unless they change their ways. This requires intelligence and a capacity for restraint.
As with all things that make sense, of course, there are those who have no sense or intelligence and they take the part of destroy mercilessly and without compromise only and apply it to people who are not engaged in evil. They use the good sense of their religion, to defend against terrorism, to perpetrate it against others.
They must be opposed mercilessly and without compromise and only them, right up to when they are willing to mend their ways. Without compassion and the understanding of what is really good and what is really evil, it's just the world we have, one terrorist against another, the blind trying to kill the blind, a world of indiscriminate rage caused by pain and fear.
Then I read this about Islam. In Islam, you don't turn the other cheek if you are attacked by evil. You go after your opponent mercilessly and without compromise to destroy your opponent. Yeah, baby. That's more like it. Where the Christian part come is later, if and when your enemy surrenders and asks to end the conflict by a willingness to give up on his evil ways. Then, you have to turn on a dime and forgive and forget and accept him as a friend.
Christianity is great except that nobody ever really practices as preached. How rare is it that a Christian really turns the other cheek. How much more likely is a Muslim to do the same. I would say a lot more likely because if he does and your his enemy then it means he's already beaten the crap out of you.
In a world full of evil a Christian country would go extinct because evil doesn't cure itself, generally. So with the Jews everybody in the world will wind up with their eyes poked out and in a world with real Christians they will all be blinded by evil people, but with Islam those who seek to do evil can be taken out or if they show a change of heart, shown mercy. It just makes so much more sense.
Islam is in part the just answer to terrorism. Destroy the evil makers unless they change their ways. This requires intelligence and a capacity for restraint.
As with all things that make sense, of course, there are those who have no sense or intelligence and they take the part of destroy mercilessly and without compromise only and apply it to people who are not engaged in evil. They use the good sense of their religion, to defend against terrorism, to perpetrate it against others.
They must be opposed mercilessly and without compromise and only them, right up to when they are willing to mend their ways. Without compassion and the understanding of what is really good and what is really evil, it's just the world we have, one terrorist against another, the blind trying to kill the blind, a world of indiscriminate rage caused by pain and fear.
mikeymikec
Lifer
I saw only some stats with regard to sharia law in the OP's links, which has zero to do with supporting ISIS.
I wrote "in the context of Remobz's statement" because that's what I originally responded to.
See my YT link about leading questions. I bet it would be possible to manipulate Muslims in a similar manner with regard to your question given the right circumstances. Alternatively the survey company might just manipulate the wording of the question and/or the data to suit their sponsor's interests.
That's the reason I responded to Remobz, so yes, that's the issue I was responding to.
In the context of 1.5 billion people, what possible value is the response? What does vastly higher gun crime in the US have to say about American people? Or modern Zionism say about Jews? Or the subjugation of black people in America in the 20th century say about Americans? Or a million other examples.
So what if there is a statistically higher chance that a terrorist picked at random claims to be a Muslim?
Should I have treated my Irish relations differently while the IRA was bombing the UK?
That doesn't make any sense. Admittedly some people say and do things that don't make sense, but still. Posing a hypothetical scenario that makes no sense doesn't really give it any credence.
Apropos of nothing apparently, unless you think that "not having an opinion" is somehow similar to supporting a cause.
Btw, you screwed up the quoting in your last response, so if I've missed anything it's probably the result of that.
Last edited:
mikeymikec
Lifer
A couple of posts ago it occurred to me that what worries me at least an order of magnitude more than ISIS are the reactions and consequences of the opposing military responses to them.
1) Russia is mainly interested in bolstering Assad's regime in Syria, and while they're bombing some ISIS targets, they've mostly bombed political opponents to Assad.
2) Putin has been acting pretty belligerently in Europe lately, Russian bombers have been sighted off the coast of the UK several times and fighters were scrambled to intercept them. IIRC also Sweden has seen some similar action. There's also the Ukraine situation obviously.
3) America does not have an international reputation for being calm and level-headed, nor has its recent military manoeuvres shown much in the way of foresight (e.g. the fallout from the farce that was Iraq II, which obviously played a part in the formation of ISIS in its current form).
4) American and Russian forces (and others) are going to be in striking range of each other in Syria.
5) Lots of vested interests regarding Syria, oil, and the balance of power in the Middle East.
6) If some fucktard with a general anti-Muslim agenda gets into power of an influential country.
7) Can anyone else remember the numerous reports of "friendly fire" during Iraq II?
8) So far international involvement in Syria hasn't shown in the way of cooperation in planning.
One misstep could significantly escalate tensions between a superpower such as Russia and the rest of the world, and/or cause say 10x extra followers for ISIS.
1) Russia is mainly interested in bolstering Assad's regime in Syria, and while they're bombing some ISIS targets, they've mostly bombed political opponents to Assad.
2) Putin has been acting pretty belligerently in Europe lately, Russian bombers have been sighted off the coast of the UK several times and fighters were scrambled to intercept them. IIRC also Sweden has seen some similar action. There's also the Ukraine situation obviously.
3) America does not have an international reputation for being calm and level-headed, nor has its recent military manoeuvres shown much in the way of foresight (e.g. the fallout from the farce that was Iraq II, which obviously played a part in the formation of ISIS in its current form).
4) American and Russian forces (and others) are going to be in striking range of each other in Syria.
5) Lots of vested interests regarding Syria, oil, and the balance of power in the Middle East.
6) If some fucktard with a general anti-Muslim agenda gets into power of an influential country.
7) Can anyone else remember the numerous reports of "friendly fire" during Iraq II?
8) So far international involvement in Syria hasn't shown in the way of cooperation in planning.
One misstep could significantly escalate tensions between a superpower such as Russia and the rest of the world, and/or cause say 10x extra followers for ISIS.
blastingcap
Diamond Member
Even if you dispute the Pew poll you should note that the results didn't even include the really horrific states like KSA so the average may actually be even worse than what they report. Also, if you have better data, show it. It's easy to criticize. And even if you disbelieve most Muslims are that hardcore (perhaps due to contact with Westernized Muslims who are unrepresentative of the great majority of Muslims), there has got to be a point where a rational person accepts the general truth. E.g., if a state had 80% polled supporting death for apostates, even if you figure there are large error bars and that the real number is between 70 and 90%, does 70% supporting death for apostates change the conclusion much, compared to 80%? Be honest. I mean for fuck's sake even if "only" 30% said yes, think about what that means for a moment.
Also you completely ignore the many other sources. It's not just the Pew poll. You can see how people react on social media (and from what I understand it's even worse if you can read Arabic), and how secularist Muslims are treated in Muslim-majority countries... the few that remain get beaten or killed (literally hacked to death by angry mobs), and most of the ones who flee will describe how Muslim-majority states have become ever more fundamentalist and vicious over the last several decades. https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/3tx26w/ahmadi_place_of_worship_set_ablaze_in_jhelum/ I left several links to such secular Muslims, to get you started. http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=37852365&postcount=37
Relatively secular Muslims living in, say, the USA, are not representative. They are 3-4 million out of 1.6 billion. Most Muslims in the world live in places like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. This is why I object to the term "moderate Muslim" because the reality is that the secular Muslim is the extremist. Most Muslims do not want a Reformation. They want Sharia law, and would brand authors like Ali (I linked to her article in my other post) a heretic or worse. Secular Muslims are in the minority and get shunned, beaten and/or killed in many Muslim-majority countries.
Btw my OP and second post aren't about any particular group of insurgents. That is correct. It's a more holistic view of what the source of the problem is. Daesh is a symptom of a much larger disease.
Last edited:
FerrelGeek
Diamond Member
People post things like that because they're sick and tired of the 'you're just an x-phobe' (homo, xeno, islamo, etc) whenever someone raises even a mild issue with a lib cause du jour. Saying that there are potential issues with an open southern US border doesn't automatically make one a xenophobe. Saying that there are potential issues with vetting refugees from the ME coming here doesn't automatically make one an Islamophobe. Bear in mind, I'm not accusing you of this; I'm just stating that people get tired of this stuff and are going to push back It's the same with the average white person being excoriated for being a racist when the person making that accusation may have nothing to base that accusation on but their own prejudice.
I freely admit that I've been guilty of sending off a testy response or two based on the above, as to me the above shows a complete unwillingness to engage in a constructive dialog.
How do you feel about this?
As for the issues about Americans, that is easy. Racial slavery was about racism being used to justify a horrible institution. It was immoral and evil. Those who turned a blind eye were doing a horrible thing to millions of people.
Higher gun crime in the US says we have more access to guns and are more willing to use them. Sad.
Zionism is bullshit supported by Christians that want to help trigger the end of the world I have no problem with a Jewish state, but its bullshit to allow them to expand over a people like they are. The US formed because of tyranny that was far less then what is going on there.
I have no idea what those things have to do with Muslims being a higher representation of terrorism vs other religious groups.
Again, easy. If something has a higher statistical significance, then there is likely something there as a cause. Science uses this idea all the time. If every time I see fire I feel heat, then it might be worth investigating a connection. If smokers get lung cancer more than any other group, then maybe its worth looking into.
Further, if the difference is as drastic as it is, then why call someone bigoted for looking and saying there is likely something there?
Depends on if the Irish in the UK were in support of the bombings. I would bet that the support was well bellow double digit support in terms of %. Muslims that say that honor killings are never justified is pretty scary.
What scenario? Millions of Muslims support the actions of ISIS. There is a reason that ISIS has over 50,000 fighters in its ranks.
Not having an opinion on the actions of ISIS is only justifiable if you dont know about ISIS. If you know just a little of ISIS, then how can you not think ISIS is horrible? Is your argument really that taking an agnostic stance on ISIS is rational for a moral person?
What did I mess up on quoting you? I dropped the part that was not talking to me, but that was it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
