Anyone know why Muslims hate being photographed?

Why on earth are you folks arguing about numbers? Is anyone on this site not an accountant? Terrorism is horrible, throughout history people have done horrible things in the name of whatever grand wazoo had the shoes, rice and blankets and we don't keep count. The thread really just asks why they.(this is the problem word) don't like being photographed.

 

First, that doesn't have one single thing to do with what we've been arguing about.

Second, that poll doesn't mean shit. My guess is that someone simpathetic to the Muslim cause wrote those questions.

Osama Bin Ladin was a civilian that killed 3000 American civilians. Why the hell wouldn't a large number of Americans say it's ok to kill that fuck? Same for the second question, only it asks if it's ok for a Seal team to go kill OBL. What the hell point do you think that poll makes?

Additionally, a sign of the times is that our civilian enemies commonly cross national borders, so they can take sanctuary in a country we don't lightly to go into. The way Bush, and now Obama, have dealt with that tactic is to use drones and hellfire missiles to send our enemies to meet their maker. Again, why wouldn't Americans say it's ok to kill civilians that have killed lots of their fellow citizens, and will undoubtedly kill many more?

How about if the pollsters ask a question that would actually demonstrate the difference between how Muslims and Americans feel about the issue? How about a question that asks:

"Do you believe it is a legitimate tactic to purposely kill women and children to further political and/or religious agendas?"

What stats did I cherry pick? You disputed the WikiIslam stats (or my interpretation of them), so I went to John Esposito's stats, since you quoted him first. Your expert says it is understated to say that only 7% of Muslims are radical. That's 100M. Is 7% not what Esposito said in his book? Is my math wrong? Where is the cherry picking?

If anything, it's you doing the cherry picking. The first time I quoted your expert, I didn't even run the numbers out, because they are shockingly high. So, I said it was a lot. Then, when you kept trolling me, I ran the numbers out to make my point. I would like to think those numbers are way to high, but they are the numbers your guy has in his book. Are you saying Esposito's 7% figure can't be trusted? I've tried to find numbers from someone we could agree on, even if your guy has a pro-Muslim bias. Seems like you are the one doing the cherry picking.


Go Blazers

 

You ask the difference in opinions of Muslims and Americans? There are Muslim Americans you know

 

Yeah, fort Hood was the work of one as I recall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

 

Yes. I work with two Muslims. Both pretty good guys.

Given that they are less than 1% of the population, it didn't seem too relevent.

Go Blazers

 

Interesting stuff you push Denny. With all these good Muslims about you would think one would have turned in some of these bad guys. But no, They jailed the one that did in Pakistan.
Hell with all these do gooders they should be able to stomp out the terrorist is a matter of days, if the wanted to do it. Lot of ink use by them with no action though.

How long do you think it will take for them to bring those bastard that kill the guys in Benghazi to justice? Two years and counting now, but it will likely be just like they did something
about the guys that did the USS Cole and the bastards that brought down the Embassy in Nairobi.

No I don't think we can count on them to do shit. They harbor the bad guys with impunity. If they harbor the guys that declare themselves to be our enemy, what does it make them?

 

I take it your opinion is, all these good Muslims will do zilch about ridding the world of the terrorist in their house? Not the Pirate either? Well, I suppose the day will come when the will wish they had.

Here is a map of some more culture these good Muslims bring us"

http://www.icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/live-piracy-map

http://sv-totem.blogspot.com/2013/09/pirates-in-south-china-sea.html

Sort of gives me an idea for a new business, A Pirate Sport Shooting Voyage. Where you arm your paying clients well with long range
stuff like, 264 Winchester Magnums and go looking for Pirates. Want to Join a cruise?

 

Really? Who reported that fact?

No to the Pirate hunt?

Here is a little statement to ponder, Notice the part about the rise of Islam.

"Historians recognize that piracy is a land-based crime which is manifested at sea. Pirates
have always needed access to sanctuary, safe areas where they could escape their pursuers, and
which more often than not were protected politically and legally rather than because they were
located in remote regions. The pirates of Barbary were working in the service of recognized states
and the United States treated them as such. Whilst the pirates of modern-day Somalia are not
working in the service of any part of the Somali state directly they can find sanctuary behind
inviolable borders and internally through political protection. Because the rise of Islamism has
added a new layer of turbulence to the political situation within Somalia, and if allowed to gain a
firmer foothold could spread regionally, the solution to Somali piracy is linked ineluctably to
political dynamics ashore."

http://www.csbaonline.org/4Publicat...17.Somali_Piracy/B.20090417.Somali_Piracy.pdf

 

I heard that Allah's tears taste like bacon...

 

That article is a tad old to be useful to your forgiving view of Islam.

"there are sweeping generalizations that reduce any social or political problem anywhere to a “Muslim problem” as long as there are Muslims involved. Take this description by Mark Steyn: “There are many trouble spots around the world, but as a general rule, it’s easy to make an educated guess at one of the participants: Muslims vs. Jews in ‘Palestine,’ Muslims vs. Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims vs. Christians in Africa, Muslims vs. Buddhists in Thailand, Muslims vs. Russians in the Caucasus, Muslims vs. backpacking tourists in Bali.”

Yep, Muslims raising hell far and wide. But since the article was written the Chechnya Muslims have expanded their role from Russia to the US. In Boston a number of Americans were killed and many maimed by a couple of Chechnya Muslims. The you can also add the US Muslim shooting up Fort Hood, killing many soldiers.

The rotten apples in Korea in no way let the Muslim off the hook as the leaders of terrorist violence around the world. Violence they justify as followers of Islam, Soldiers of Allah.

I will have to give the writer credit for getting this close to correct though; '

"This is not to say that there is no trouble with Islam today. By and large, it has not adjusted to modernity as well as the other major faiths. All religions have their fundamentalists and extremists, but as the Muslim reformer and feminist Irshad Manji has pointed out, it is only in Islam today that the fundamentalist, extremist strain is a large part of the mainstream. At its fanatical worst, this extremism can turn to deadly violence. Even in milder forms, its misogyny and rejection of pluralism make it incompatible with a liberal society."

If you read the Koran I can see where the radical Islamic soldier of Allah finds his justification for the despicable acts they commit way to often. What I can not find is how the so called good Muslims can say, "Islam is a religion of peace." Really! Islam is the only religion that calls for in tolerate treatment of non believers. Buddhism does not teach this, The Hindu religion does not do this. The Christian religion does not do this and it is a mistake to take the Old Testament
tales of intolerance in the Hebrew history to be the teachings of Christianity So the writer is misinform in his suggesting Christianity teaches violence.

The Christian Churches of many year ago were not so tolerant but I do believe they have corrected that error for quites some time now. Now it is way past time for the leaders of Islam to update their teaching to join the modern era.