Machine gun attack on Paris magazine office

Some do indeed mean all Moslems. But the easy approach for people like you and me, who know otherwise, is to just say radical Islam (as you did). But there are quite a few who actually don't see the distinction, or who erroneously believe that large numbers of Moslems are in that radical camp.

On a related note:

WND EXCLUSIVE
Bachmann is 2014 'Lawmaker of the Year'
'An exceptional talent and extraordinarily quick study'

. . . .
----------------
I don't think anyone needs to be subjected to the rest of the piece. I'll just say that on matters relating to islam, Dinner is, by his own source's standards, "an exceptional talent and extraordinarily quick study."

Mean and not at all true. Comparing one to Bachmann us fighting words.

Who? It is put up or shut up time. You need to stop your garamet levels of lying. Quote it or admit you are full of shit.

Don't go away mad because your statement relied on a number that was told to you by someone else who might have read it in an article somewhere. Why the fuck would you bother to bring that sort of shit up at all. That is not informative or productive, and it was only meant to influence people one way or another based on complete bullshit. Do not get pissed off at me because I called you on your crappy figures and you cannot be botherted to do any real research to back it up. You should have never said it if you cannot back it. Oh, and I do not need your permission to go fuck myself so even that was pointless and stupid. Now go back and massage your butthurt and the next time you pull a number out of your ass remember how much fun it was to get it crammed back in. Oh, and yes I am glad you are pissed because that is the reaction I desired.

So let me just get this strait for future reference. You are saying that you recognize there is a small group of radicalized muslims who do not represent the whole of the religion. Because it seems that you have implied that the large part of the religion is at fault for what is going on.

The numbers are pretty solid and easily researched, because a ton of countries, including Muslim countries, have polled the heck out of that question as a matter of both war-fighting, anti-terrorism measures, the Arab Israeli conflict, and a host of other conflicts. Middle Eastern governments had to keep an eye on how much sympathy the terrorists have among their own populations (which might turn on them, as happened in Libya and elsewhere), while the West needed to understand what levels of popular support various terrorist organizations had, as it profoundly affects recruitment and fundraising.

The terrorists have found themselves unable to conduct accurate polling because when they ask who supports them, everyone says "I support you! Death to the infidel! Death to America! Free Palestine! Allahu Akbar!"

You are an insufferable twat.

Have you been on the booze tonight? Don't you think your reaction is a tad over the top?

There have been polls of the kind @Forbin mentions. Quite a few of them, and yes, there are plenty of Muslims who are prepared to turn a blind eye to some (not all) of the violence carried out by Islamists. They aren't a majority and they also aren't terrorists, but they do exist as a minority between opponents of Islamic extremism and Islamists themselves. Denial of that serves little purpose.

The ugly truth of why the Christianity vs Islam argument is a total nonsense.

The real fight is Sanity and Intelligence vs Bonkers Dogma.

Polling on that kind of a subject matter is particularly suspect. It is far too easy to get the results you want to get by phrasing your questions appropriately. Just like you can get different results by asking whether Americans support drowning and resuscitating prisoners in order to extract false confessions and asking whether they support the use of enhanced interrogation techniques against terrorist suspects. It's the same question either way, but one way you get a strong majority of Americans to support torture and the other way you get a small minority to support torture.

Because as we all know, false confessions make us safer! Honestly, where do you come up with this stuff?

Do we think this tereidiot is old enough to booze?

Dunno, thought he used to be some self claimed big bad internet warrior? Figured he'd have some years on him.

Ok, so the polls are easily found, but none are actually produced. They are unreliable because it is hard to get numbers from people ion the middle east. So forbin should be able to just pulkl a number out of his ass and not at least cite any of it or rationalize it? Well, if because forbin says is good enough for you that is fine, but I do not recognize his omnipotence. I also do recognize shitty arguments even though many of his friends may find him fabulous. He can do a websearch like any other person and cite his numbers. Otherwise because forbin says is weak sauce meant to fuck with the argument. Don't get pissed at me because your friend pulls numbers out of his ass and expects me to just believe them without any source or idea of where that number came from.

Link?

If that is not your position, then why do you support mass deportation of all Moslems? You don't need to say "all Moslems are terrorists," when you refer to them all with pejorative terms, calling them sub-human, and calling for their forceful removal from Western countries. To use one of Garamet's favorite phrases, it speaks for itself.

Indeed. Collective punishment is universally recognized as a human rights violation by those not currently conducting it. It certainly violates all the well known human rights conventions and treaties. Collective punishment is a particularly vile form of bigotry and Dinner is, if anything, being given too much credit in this thread. He's advocating apartheid and shouldn't be treated merely as someone offering an ignorant opinion.

I don't and I have said as much multiple times which is why it is angering to see someone get it wrong. I said deport noncitizens (refugees, temperary workers illegals, etc...) and change immigration laws to keep people from muslim countries out.

Pope Francis on responding violently to blasphemy:

"It's normal [to violently strike a person]. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. . . . There are so many people who speak badly about religions or other religions, who make fun of them, who make a game out of the religions of others. They are provocateurs. And what happens to them is what would happen to [anyone] if he says a curse word against my mother. There is a limit."

So, same basic mentality as a radical islamist, just believing the violence should be somewhat toned down. I guess he must not be a real christian, or maybe we should just round up and deport all the catholics, just to be safe.

Fuuuuuck you, Francis.

Yeah, there's your fucking reformer, dipshit public.

Bill Clinton gave his opinion

“You read the profile of the two guys most prominently involved in the killing and how they got sucked into this by somebody essentially using religion and religious politics to advocate the world’s greatest double standard,” Clinton told the late night host. [Seth Meyers - ed]

“If you come to our country, we won’t let you worship the way you want. We won’t let you say what you want. They won’t let you do what you want to do,” Clinton continued. “However we have come to your country, therefore we have a right to do whatever we want to do, including kill you if you make us mad.”

“It’s just madness,” the former president said. “I think it can be rooted out if, and only if, the modernizing Muslims, the Arab Emirates, for example, Oman, which has tried to be a force in moving away from this, will do what they should do.”

Huh, whatever happened to turning the other cheek?

You no doubt realize that the Daily Caller, a wing nut blog, has an extremely long history of lying and just making shit up, right? Find decent sources if you want people to bother reading it.

Liet: You are so full of shit. No one had a right to immigrate and tightening immigration laws sure as hell isn't apartheid.

Your statement is so full of fail it is unbelievable. To paraphrase: "Unless we let anyone and everyone in the world to move here on demand then that is APARTIHEID!"

Allowing a foreigner to move to America and live a better life is a privilage, not a right, and we sure as hell do have the right to say we only want people we think will make our country better and who will be culturally compatable.

It really does look like Liet doesn't even know what apartheid was if he thinks tightening immigration laws is the same thing.

I am now on post #360. A tough road lies ahead, full of winged monkeys.

Only 537 to go!

Okay Garamet. It's not like anyone would know where to find a Seth Meyer's clip.

D'oh!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-30870062