It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: kaylaluv
Go back to cave man times when there was no social structure at all. I'll bet you still had some cavemen trying to control other cavemen. Hopefully, YOU will get it someday.
originally posted by: neformore
Secondly, because even the most stacked intelligence estimates of the numbers of Al Quaeda, ISiS and Taliban come to less than 200,000 people, which is 0.0125 percent of 1.6 billion.
The rest is your personal - and apparently skewed - opinion.
A new book by John Esposito and Dalia Mogahed, both of them professional pro-Islam propagandists, published by the Gallup organization, where Mogehed is executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. Satloff shows how, through fraudulent definition of the word “radical,” the authors make it appear that a multi-year study of Muslim opinion worldwide showed that only seven percent of Muslims are radical, when, in reality, by any fair reading of the authors’ own polling data, the correct number is 37 percent.
The authors define Muslim radicals as those who say the 9/11 attack was “completely justified,” which was seven percent of the sample. However, there were two other categories of respondents who said that the attack was at least partially justified, and they are labeled by the authors as “moderates.” The first of those groups comprises 6.5 percent of the sample, the second comprises 23.1 percent. Further, the respondents in that last category, making up 23.1 percent, also said that they hate America, want to impose Sharia law, support suicide bombing, and oppose equal rights for women. Yet Esposito and Mogahed call them “moderates.”
originally posted by: kaylaluv
So what is that you are suggesting we do? Abolish Islam altogether? What about those devout Muslims who are peaceful, and haven't hurt anyone? Don't you think they will feel this is unfair? Don't you think this might push them into the violent zone? Don't you think this will make them start to agree with the radicals - that the West wants to destroy their way of life and everything that is important to them?
What I think we should do is reach out to the peaceful Muslims and let them know we support their right to their religion - that we don't want to take it away from them. We just want to get along - to co-exist peacefully. Show them that we are not the evil non-believers that the radicals try to convince them we are. We have publicly bashed the Muslim religion time and again, and yet, there are still peaceful Muslims who haven't tried to kill us. There are many, many Muslims who have not spoken out publicly against us, even as we publicly speak out against them.
People keep saying that it is the peaceful Muslims' responsibility to publicly speak out against the terrorists. I think it is the non-Muslims' responsibility to publicly speak out in support of those Muslims who live in peace. The more we do that, the more they will join us in support. The more we bash them, the more they will separate themselves from us. More division is bad. Joining together is good.
originally posted by: neo96
I might have believe this nonsense.
Until a person reads this.
It's ok to lie to the 'non believers'.
originally posted by: Xtrozero
originally posted by: nonspecific
Would you not agree that intolerance is a two player game?
You seem to be somewhat intlerant of inolerance?
Maybe I missed something.
Not sure your question, but yes and no. It can be two way, but there isn't a formula that suggests two groups are needed for intolerance. Intolerance is also not just associated towards outside groups, it can be, and commonly is, internal too. The Muslin religion is very intolerant within and outside. We can debate that but intolerance leads to extremism and there really isn't another religion out there today that is showing the level of extremism as what the muslin religion is demonstrating today.
originally posted by: LittleByLittle
From my point of view you do have Zionism ideology "a corrupted form of Judaism" having exactly the same dual-listic thinking as the extremism that comes from Islam. And to be fair the Paul version of Christian faith can fall into the same trap if people are not careful. How many people in the west are not war mongering for more wars in the middle east while not questioning the news as propaganda and the politicians pushing war for economic agenda calling it bringing democracy?
As a Muslim, Sisi will not say that Islam, the “religion,” is responsible for “antagonizing the entire world,” but he certainly goes much further than his Western counterparts when he says that this “thinking” is rooted in an Islamic “corpus of texts and ideas” which have become so “sacralized.”
Recall that here in the West, Islamic terrorists are seen as mere “criminals” and their terrorism as “crimes” without mention of any Islamic text or ideology driving them.
The Egyptian president further invoked the classical Islamic teaching—the “thinking”—that divides the world into two warring halves: the Muslim world (or in Islamic/Arabic parlance, Dar al-Islam) which must forever be in a struggle with the rest of the world (or Dar al-Harb, the “abode of war”) till, in the Koran’s words, “all religion belongs to Allah” (Koran 8:39).
Both the newly elected President of Tunisia Beji Caid Essebsi and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi have recently made their voices heard loudly and clearly for the need to update Islamic doctrine to comply with a contemporary world. Of key importance is that both men specifically define the source of the problem as Islamist ideology.
We must also confront the fact that poverty is producing terrorism, a new phenomenon for Tunisia. The scourge of terrorism should have been addressed more decisively by Ennahda. Instead, the Islamist government allowed in radical foreign preachers who lured thousands of vulnerable young people to join al-Qaeda and the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The same extremist ideology motivates others to take up arms — made readily available by the turmoil in nearby Libya — against their fellow Tunisians. To fight extremism, we will need to pursue a two-pronged strategy: both “hard,” through stricter control of our borders and a more robust and technologically advanced security response, and “soft,” based on better intelligence-gathering, working to return our mosques to their spiritual function and barring entry to foreign preacher - See more at: downwithtyranny.blogspot.com...
originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
Charlie i see what you are trying to do here . The problem is that those /us in the western world feel threatened . More so now given the last couple of days . What we need are pictures like you posted but millions of them . We need mosques turning in would be terrorists . We need lots of things . That being said , who gets more airplay , the terrorist or those Muslims that speak out about it . You dont have to convince ATS , you have to beat the MSM .