It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What muslims really think about Terrorism, Democracy and the West

page: 10
39
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by old_god

What a load of crap, I know which book you are referring to by Gilbert Hanz, nothing but racial and prejudicial rhetoric - no different to the books bashing Christianity and other religions.


In respect of Muhammad ordering people who hadn't come to prayer to be burnt to death:-

My source is the Holy Hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari (Arabic: صحيح البخاري‎), as it is commonly referred to, which is one of the six canonical hadith collections of Islam.

en.wikipedia.org...

Bukhari (11:626) -



"The Prophet said, 'No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the 'Isha' prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves (in the mosques) even if they had to crawl.'

The Prophet added, 'Certainly I decided to order the Mu'adh-dhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses.'"

Muhammad orders his men to burn alive those who do not present themselves at the mosque for prayer.


shawuniversitymosque.org...
www.quranexplorer.com...
www.usc.edu...

There we have it. Muhammad ordering people burnt to death, in a Holy Hadith, for not coming to prayer.


edit on 29-6-2011 by ollncasino because: add links




posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by operation mindcrime
 

So your source says that the accuracy is on the order of a few %. That is pretty accurate to me, and it is no surprise with thousand+ respondents.


My source?? It's the full PDF report of PEW global survey, that is the OP's source!!

The fact that the people who produce these statistics claim a few % error margin really shouldn't be surprising as it is bad for business to claim otherwise......right??

First ask yourself this:

-who did the study that came up with the statistics.
-what exactly are the statistics measuring.
-how were they asked.
-who was asked.

-The Pew Research Center based it statistics on interviews conducted by the Princeton Survey Research Associates International. I checked, it's a company.
-From the OP: What Muslims really think about Terrorism, Democracy and the West.
-Face-to-face via a probability sampling scheme. What are the characteristics of such a scheme? 1. Every element has a known nonzero probability of being sampled and 2. involves random selection at some point.
-A selection of people over the age of 18.

If soft science statistics proof anything it's that soft science statistics can't be used as a basis for any conclusion. Only if you can repeat the process and get the same results.....it's called accuracy.

Peace



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
Oh PS:

From that same PDF....


The table below shows the margin of sampling error based on all interviews conducted in that country. For results based on the full sample in a given country, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling and other random effects is plus or minus the margin of error. In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.


Again the definition of accurate:


ac·cu·ra·cy
   /ˈækyərəsi/ Show Spelled[ak-yer-uh-see] Show IPA
–noun, plural -cies.
1.
the condition or quality of being true, correct, or exact; freedom from error or defect; precision or exactness; correctness.


......hmmmm

Peace


edit on 29-6-2011 by operation mindcrime because: ???



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by operation mindcrime
 





2. involves random selection at some point.


And what is your point? Where is the problem?




If soft science statistics proof anything it's that soft science statistics can't be used as a basis for any conclusion.


No, it can very well be used to form a conclusion, just factor in some margin of error, in this case a few %.

You have yet to present any evidence that the poll does not reflect reality.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
You have yet to present any evidence that the poll does not reflect reality.


I was going on about your claim of accuracy in statistics. (which is invalid or inaccurate
)

The poll reflect reality alright, reality from a certain perspective!! The perspective of 9664 Muslims willing to be interviewed by a Washington based company.....

Peace



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_slide
I also need to point out to you that many of your thoughts about Islam and Muslims are simply incorrect, and seem to be based on nothing more than the sensationalist propaganda that people read in the papers and see on tv.


My views are based on the Koran, Hadiths, surveys of what Muslims believe and also on what Muslims actually do.

I have also largely avoided giving my own thoughts but rather have posted passages from the Koran and Hadiths documenting that Muhammad burnt people for not praying, pronounced death for homosexuality, beheaded 800 Jews and enslaved their women and children.

and

Surveys, including one that shows that 0% of 500 British Muslims surveyed thought that homosexuality was acceptable (penalty of death according to Muhammad) , while only 3% of British Muslims surveyed felt that sex outside marriage (penalty of 100 lashes) was acceptable

www.guardian.co.uk...

Another worrying survey that shows that

83% of Pakistani Muslims support stoning adulterers

80% Support the cutting of hands of thieves

78% of Pakistani Muslims support the death penalty for leaving Islam

pewglobal.org...

Nothing to worry about of course. There are only 170 million Pakistanis with 1 million living in the UK...

Oh, and a link documenting Muhammad as a warlord. He fought 8 major battles, led 18 raids and planned another 38 military operations carried out by others.



Following Muhammad's own practice, a jihadi may execute, enslave, ransom, or release enemy captives. Although captured women and children were not supposed to be killed, they could be enslaved, and Muslim men could have sexual relations with female slaves acquired by jihad (any marriage was deemed annulled by their capture).


www.historynet.com...

Here is a video of some poor unfortunate getting stoned under Sharia law.

www.apostatesofislam.com...

According to Hadith Sahih
Volume 9, Book 92, Number 432:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:



The Jews brought a man and a woman who had committed illegal sexual intercourse, to the Prophet and the Prophet ordered them to be stoned to death, and they were stoned to death near the mosque where the biers used to be placed.


According to Hadith Sahih
Volume 7, Book 63, Number 195:
Narrated Jabir:



A man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to the Prophet while he was in the mosque and said, "I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." The Prophet turned his face to the other side. The man turned towards the side towards which the Prophet had turned his face, and gave four witnesses against himself. On that the Prophet called him and said, "Are you insane?" (He added), "Are you married?" The man said, 'Yes." On that the Prophet ordered him to be stoned to the death in the Musalla (a praying place). When the stones hit him with their sharp edges and he fled, but he was caught at Al-Harra and then killed.


from Sahih Muslim
Book 017, Number 4212:



Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) stoned to death the Jews, both male and female, who had committed adultery. The Jews brought them to Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him). The rest of the hadith is the same.


So you see, Muhammad wasn't just a fan of sentencing people to death by stoning, he enforced that law on non-Muslims.

In two of the above cases on Jews.

Here is a link documenting a women sentenced to death for adulatry in Nigeria. God bless that Sharia court. They decided to hold off the stoning until she had finished breast feeding.

www.guardian.co.uk...

Islam is not just another religion.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

Originally posted by Maslo
You have yet to present any evidence that the poll does not reflect reality.


I was going on about your claim of accuracy in statistics. (which is invalid or inaccurate
)

The poll reflect reality alright, reality from a certain perspective!! The perspective of 9664 Muslims willing to be interviewed by a Washington based company.....

Peace


Yes, the sample was a bit biased to urban populations (which may be more liberal), and participants were willing to be interviewed by western company in the first place, so if anything, there is a probability that actual percentage of extremists is even higher!

And even if the margin of error was twice the reported one, that still means at least 70% of them want to stone adulterers. Even that would be enough to conclude that majority of them are violent brainwashed extremists.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
The fact that the people who produce these statistics claim a few % error margin really shouldn't be surprising as it is bad for business to claim otherwise......right??


There is no mystery to any of this.

If a poll says 20% with a margin of error of +/- 3%, that means you can be 95% certain that the true figure for the population as a whole lies between 17% & 23%.

You can be 99% certain that the true figure for the population as a whole lies between 14% & 26%.




edit on 29-6-2011 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
Yes, the sample was a bit biased to urban populations (which may be more liberal), and participants were willing to be interviewed by western company in the first place, so if anything, there is a probability that actual percentage of extremists is even higher!


And so....again....what is the value of these statistics?

Peace



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
There is no mystery to any of this.


Before I entered this thread I would have agreed....


If a poll says 20% with a margin of error of +/- 3%, that means you can be 95% certain (one standard deviation from the survey's mean average) that the true figure for the population as a whole lies between 17% & 23%.


Of course, simple logic.......what formula gives us the 3% error margin? Where did the Princeton Survey Research Associates International get this percentage from?


You can be 99% certain (two standard deviaitions) that the true figure for the population as a whole lies between 14% & 26%.


What's 99% certain? Is that like 99% pregnant? Or 99% dead?

I know, I'm being silly but I like it that way....


Peace
edit on 29-6-2011 by operation mindcrime because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

Originally posted by Maslo
Yes, the sample was a bit biased to urban populations (which may be more liberal), and participants were willing to be interviewed by western company in the first place, so if anything, there is a probability that actual percentage of extremists is even higher!


And so....again....what is the value of these statistics?

Peace


Whats the value? Its like saying "whats the value of an information that asteroid is going to hit us with 80% certainty in 2050"?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
Of course, simple logic.......what formula gives us the 3% error margin? Where did the Princeton Survey Research Associates International get this percentage from?


Its just a statistical allowance for error based on the size of the sample. It isn't neccessarily 3%. It could be higher (smaller sample) or lower (a larger sample).

www.westgroupresearch.com...



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Athee


I said the PEOPLE of the UAE, not the government. The government is partly Sharia yes, and therefore enforces laws like these, but that was never my point. Everyday people like you and me, that you meet on the street, do not think like that, far from it.


Everyday muslims certainly dont think like that. Its sad to see all of these threads overrun by Ideologies. It is these ideologies that keep people from discerning friend and foe. When it is no longer clear who is friend and foe, chaos ensues.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
Whats the value? Its like saying "whats the value of an information that asteroid is going to hit us with 80% certainty in 2050"?


You see, that is statistical information based on hard science. The asteroid nor the people involved are polled for their opinion!!

There is a difference, believe me.


Peace



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ShadowZion
 




You don't realize that the muslim God "Allah" and the christian God are one and the same. because Allah literally translates to God.


Thanks for the reply and for be civil .... appreciated. Yes I do realise that it is the one and same God the "Abrahamic" religions refer to. I personally don't subscribe to their views as I am agnostic.

Cheers



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Even though I clearly made the point that Muslims and radical Islam are separate, you willingly ignore that. That pretty much defines you does it not?


Ignorance is bred by lack of discernment. If people become too lazy to study and discern, WWIII will be the result.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheButcher23
Anyone can produce a few tables with numbers representing anything they wish.

It means nothing. Every survey, statistic that is offered by different government or civilian departments can be made to look one way or another.



I strongly object to the "nothing means anything" stance. " All the people polled are lying. I never talked to any muslims asking their opinion. All the non-partisan polls which come to similar conclusions are skewed".

This type of thinking muddles the brain, clouds facts and reality and does not prepare us for the times ahead.

What is the point of all of these posts saying "statistics are lies", "statistics dont mean anything"? And why dont you offer your version of events in their stead?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by briantaylor
Hey Sky, you know I respect you and all, but stats can be said to prove anything.
80% of people know this.



This is about the 5th posts that simply pops in and says "stats prove nothing" or "stats are lies" or "stats dont mean anything" without offering their own version of what they think is true. If this information doesnt prove anything, what does mean something to you?



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Everyday muslims certainly dont think like that. Its sad to see all of these threads overrun by Ideologies. It is these ideologies that keep people from discerning friend and foe. When it is no longer clear who is friend and foe, chaos ensues.


If you want to put your finger on who is your foe, look no further than the Wahhabi school of Islam.

Most terrorists come from that school. It wants the whole world to live its life as Muhammad (blessed be his name) did and appears to be happy to follow in Muhammad's footsteps and use violent Jihad to do so.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Saudis have spent over $87 billion spreading Wahhabism around the globe and apparently 80% of mosques in the West are paid for with Saudi Wahhabi money.

I have read that moderate Muslims in the West are aghast that Western governments allow the spread of such an extremist ideology. Many left to get away from such violent extremism.

Yet Wahhabism is allowed to spread under the guise of religious freedom.

Every time you fill your car up with petrol, you are helping to fund Wahhabi Islamic extremism.



posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Two other important aspects I think people forget, related to Muslims who live in Western societies, are these:

1) Taqiyya – the Islamic concept of deceit in the cause of furthering their religion. It’s very difficult to ascertain how many Muslims queried in such polls would tell the absolute truth, whether consciously or unconsciously. What I mean by that is this: most young Muslim males who live near to me, in a one-on-one conversation, seem to be very amicable and respectful of my views and all differing views. However, the same Muslim, when put amongst members of their own community – other Muslims, show a different demeanour and are less tolerant. I don’t know whether this means that some lie when singled out, are insincere when in numbers, or submit to the family/peer pressure of their own communities. But my own observation suggest one of the three must be true. Either way, are all Muslims going to be honest when answering ‘official’ questionnaires? If they want their religion to expand within the West then they would be smart to play down the extremity of their views.

2) I suspect many young ‘Western’ Muslims tend to use Islam as an excuse for tribal/gang type behavior. I see young Muslim males smoking, drinking and leading hip-hop type ‘street’ lifestyles in England. Yet the same ones will group together against perceived threats to their community, defining themselves by their Islamic background. They probably don’t believe in the religion, and certainly don’t act like fundamentals, but display gang-like tendencies in the name of their religion. This is a tribal/cultural thing with Islam as an excuse to unite. So they are enacting classic displays of ‘Islamic Fundamentalism’ whilst not actually being traditional Muslims. This suggests that some extremists who are mistaken for Muslims might not actually be Muslims, adding further complication to our understanding of the problem.

I don’t like Islam, but I don’t actually see the religion itself as the problem or the threat. Almost everything we perceive as problems caused by Islam are actually just cultural conflicts or state-propaganda. Cultural conflicts hide behind Islam rather than be honest about what they really are: tribalism. The unfortunate truth is that some cultures just aren’t compatible, and multiculturalism can only spell the annihilation of Western democracy. Multiculturalism/Liberalism can be summed up like so: We think we’re flying but we’re actually falling.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join