Mr Hammer
|
polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 6:41pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 6:31pm: mothra wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 6:27pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 6:20pm: Gordon wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 6:02pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 5:54pm: Gordon wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 5:48pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 5:38pm: mothra wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 5:13pm: cods wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 5:11pm: mothra wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 4:55pm: cods wrote on Mar 17 th, 2017 at 4:42pm: I think there has been as much Christian bashing as Muslim bashing on this thread..
thats what I mean about a "common goal"...
we just will never find it.. Not even close. The only person who has come close to bashing Christianity is Bigol, and he bashes everyone. The rest of us have been clear the target of our concern is terrorism, whomsoever commits it. there are many reasons given here that claim more terrorist acts are claimed by Christian groups than muslims groups... almost triumphantly ... so to speak.. divide and fall... sure as hell we wont find an answer this way.. anyway I am out of here.. I have no interest in america and all its issues.. let them worry about them... not for me... Nobody has claimed that. The claim is that there are more extreme right-wing terrorist attacks than Islamist terrorist attacks in the US. Christian terrorism is a part of that. To be fair though, the "extreme right-wing" demographic is a lot broader and larger than the demographic responsible for Islamist attacks. One would expect them to commit a larger number of attacks - and moreover they constitute a far broader spectrum of terrorists - pro-lifers, anti-government militias, ku klux clan style racists etc etc... Its probably not really accurate to lump them all into the one basket and say 'this is a single group of extremists' - and claim they are exactly equivalent to the very specific category of Islamist extremists. They aren't. And I would say exactly the same thing if people lumped say Islamic State inspired terrorists with terrorists who are Palestinian nationalists - just because they are both (nominally) muslim. Gandalf if you took the list of terrorist attacks in USA since 9/11 and factored in Muslims representing only 0.9% of the population, the figures would look horrendous. You may also want to check out the list of foiled attacks. [url] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unsuccessful_terrorist_plots_in_the_United _States_post-9/11[/url] And yet still if we stopped pretending terrorism was somehow worse than any other violent crime - and factored into the mix *ALL* violent crime in the US - the Islamists wouldn't even be a blip on the radar - and thats including 9/11. Crime is crime. Terrorism is trying to change society with violence. It's different. Very very different. If Malala Yousafzai was shot in the head in a robbery is it the same as her being shot in the head and warning other girls not to go to school? Its highly debatable to claim that all or even most of the so called "Islamist terrorists" were actually motivated by a desire to change society. If a psychological analysis was conducted on all those terrorists, In many if not most cases, I'd bet you'd end up finding the same psychological issues that led regular non-terrorist murderers to kill. And especially in this day and age of 'lone wolf' terrorists - where you have dropouts with all the typical issues like self-esteem, sexual inadequacy, can't get a girlfriend, shame over being closet gays etc etc - which drives them to kill, and then shout "Allahu Akbar" while they do it more or less as an afterthought. Yet dare suggest that perhaps Islam wasn't the cause of it all - and you best duck for cover. The Orlando shooting being a classic example of this. So does this apply to white racists with low esteem or just Muslims? Apparently opinion is divided as to whether or not Dylann Roof is considered a terrorist - but if he is, then I would certainly put him in the same "loser trying to compensate" category. Of course there are, what I would term "conviction terrorists" - the true believers if you will, on both sides. Anders Brievik springs to mind, as does Muhammad Atta of 9/11 fame. But they seem to be the exception. Of course I'm not talking about the organisations that recruit the terrorists - but as far as the actual footsoldiers go, more often than not they seem to be dumb schmucks either looking for an easy way out (and that includes the 'lone wolfs'), or have the psychological profile to be susceptible to recruitment. So would it be fair to say that say religion or personal political ideology is pushing fractured minds that little extra into doing mass murder. Say a fiery religion of sorts?
|