Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Bombings In Brussels


One Post

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

The movie idiocracy becomes real life? Great film btw if you haven't watched it.

 

 

Except now for probably the 20th time that's never what I said or advocate for. It's not even worth repeating if you haven't surmised it yet.

 

There's a line in that movie where Luke Wilson's character says "Maybe things got like this because of people like me." A critique of all the people who think they're smarter than all the other idiots out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't mean to come of so mean but I have a right to. I had a close family member die in Afganistan. The war on terrorism is different for the ones who lost family. You think the muslims give a shit really?

 

Fuck them all and what they might bring in and get pissed about it whatever. If you're not with us you're against us.

 

See an idiot just told you what the fuck is up.

 

I'm a third generation military family member. My father served in the first Gulf War and saw the same type of stuff. My graduate work has centered on student veteran's transition back into society (great presentation if you're interested). Specifically, I work with student veterans with disabilities and how universities can better gives resources to the population such as mental health and disability services.

 

You know who the director of this process has been on our campus? A proud, practicing, dark skin Muslim-American. I understand why people feel the way they do, I really do. I would be lying to you if I said things like yesterday don't rustle me and make me second-guess things. But, my friends, terrorism at its core is a mechanism to divide people into an us v. them mentality. Feeling that way is exactly what terrorism hopes to achieve, and profiling only exacerbates the problem further. When you think of this way and then back up the observation with the fact our vetting process for Islamic folks is United States is clearly working its time to step of the ledge with crazy policies that wouldn't work.

 

It's probably a good time for me to say the funny part is I'm a registered independent. I didn't vote for Obama in either election, but I try to see everything at face value. When I see as a nation that in essentially 15 years this imminent threat to America has claimed less lives than lightning strikes, we are clearly doing something right which doesn't entail hardcore racial profiling. IF, and I mean IF, attacks were common place I'd hear your argument. But they aren't, plain and simple and millions of practicing Islamic people are in this country today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a third generation military family member. My father served in the first Gulf War and saw the same type of stuff. My graduate work has centered on student veteran's transition back into society (great presentation if you're interested). Specifically, I work with student veterans with disabilities and how universities can better gives resources to the population such as mental health and disability services.

 

You know who the director of this process has been on our campus? A proud, practicing, dark skin Muslim-American. I understand why people feel the way they do, I really do. I would be lying to you if I said things like yesterday don't rustle me and make me second-guess things. But, my friends, terrorism at its core is a mechanism to divide people into an us v. them mentality. Feeling that way is exactly what terrorism hopes to achieve, and profiling only exacerbates the problem further. When you think of this way and then back up the observation with the fact our vetting process for Islamic folks is United States is clearly working its time to step of the ledge with crazy policies that wouldn't work.

 

It's probably a good time for me to say the funny part is I'm a registered independent. I didn't vote for Obama in either election, but I try to see everything at face value. When I see as a nation that in essentially 15 years this imminent threat to America has claimed less lives than lightning strikes, we are clearly doing something right which doesn't entail hardcore racial profiling. IF, and I mean IF, attacks were common place I'd hear your argument. But they aren't, plain and simple and millions of practicing Islamic people are in this country today.

I'm not saying they're all bad I'm saying there is bad connected to them. And there is racial profiling going on and it's common sense. If you weren't born here get out now. That's where I stand. After all a terrorist isn't going to tell you he is one but he's going to look like the last one did. Common sense.

 

That's just the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I try to see everything at face value. When I see as a nation that in essentially 15 years this imminent threat to America has claimed less lives than lightning strikes, we are clearly doing something right which doesn't entail hardcore racial profiling.

 

What do you think all those cameras they have at airport security lines are for?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What do you think all those cameras they have at airport security lines are for?

 

Yes, I'm fully aware profiling occurs right now to a degree. BUT, there's a strong difference between that and "ban all muslims from entering" which has been stated here several times.

 

I'm not saying they're all bad I'm saying there is bad connected to them. And there is racial profiling going on and it's common sense. If you weren't born here get out now. That's where I stand. After all a terrorist isn't going to tell you he is one but he's going to look like the last one did. Common sense.

 

That's just the way it is.

 

Just like there is bad connected with white people who are domestic terrorists but we shouldn't ban all white people should we? I mean I look like the dude who shot up a movie theater (actually minus the hair it's pretty close).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I'm fully aware profiling occurs right now to a degree. BUT, there's a strong difference between that and "ban all muslims from entering" which has been stated here several times.

 

 

Just like there is bad connected with white people who are domestic terrorists but we shouldn't ban all white people should we? I mean I look like the dude who shot up a movie theater (actually minus the hair it's pretty close).

Well actually, and I'm sure you knew it when you wrote it, we're not talking about all people of the same color as Muslims. We are talking about members of a religion that seems to have an interest in blowing up westerners. For example if there were a burning cross in East Akron and five or six black people hanging from trees I would expect that you wouldn't profile the synagogues, mosques, Korean Presbyterians or African Methodist churches.

If there were Baptist Churches with a large number of skinheads attending...

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I'm fully aware profiling occurs right now to a degree. BUT, there's a strong difference between that and "ban all muslims from entering" which has been stated here several times.

 

 

Just like there is bad connected with white people who are domestic terrorists but we shouldn't ban all white people should we? I mean I look like the dude who shot up a movie theater (actually minus the hair it's pretty close).

 

Yeah, I agree with you in that I don't really see the point in banning all Muslims. I'm only pointing out how we'd actually do it, if it was to be done.

 

What I don't want is to take large numbers of refugees from areas where Sharia law is the norm. Not all of them are terrorists, but taking huge numbers of people from that particular culture is an issue for me. That culture has no respect for gays, no respect for women, no respect for Western culture, and it's causing problems outside of the terrorist attacks that we're seeing in Europe. And these problems are documented and serious enough that it's gotten to the point that European state media has covered it up for fear of looking to be politically incorrect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well actually, and I'm sure you knew it when you wrote it, we're not talking about all people of the same color as Muslims. We are talking about members of a religion that seems to have an interest in blowing up westerners. For example if there were a burning cross in East Akron and five or six black people hanging from trees I would expect that you wouldn't profile the synagogues, mosques, Korean Presbyterians or African Methodist churches.

If there were Baptist Churches with a large number of skinheads attending...

WSS

 

See, it's just a misnomer that their religion and the people who practice it have an interest in killing westerners. Yes, the Quaran has some tense verses that we've all seen 100 times. But we also all know the Bible has crazy verses too. Mainstream Muslims just like mainstreams Christians don't condone, support, or practice the extreme views of the faith. Put simply, the 99% of people shouldn't be defined by the crazy 1%. That's true from everything to religion from fandom for a movie series like Star Wars.

 

 

Yeah, I agree with you in that I don't really see the point in banning all Muslims. I'm only pointing out how we'd actually do it, if it was to be done.

 

What I don't want is to take large numbers of refugees from areas where Sharia law is the norm. Not all of them are terrorists, but taking huge numbers of people from that particular culture is an issue for me. That culture has no respect for gays, no respect for women, no respect for Western culture, and it's causing problems outside of the terrorist attacks that we're seeing in Europe. And these problems are documented and serious enough that it's gotten to the point that European state media has covered it up for fear of looking to be politically incorrect.

 

Right, but the point is that policy is in place and won't change for a long time. the United Stated has arguably the strictest policy in the world for letting refugees in the world short of the "no one can come in" policies. Even then there's a whole can of worms of if the people committing terrorist acts were/are refugees at all. It's just not gonna happen. The problem for Europe goes beyond the fact that they have more lax policies, but also the issue is at their front door. The solution for refugees would be A LOT harder for America if say Canada was in the situation Syria is right now. I think that makes it much more challenging than the PC aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...okay, but even if you hold a favorable view of a terrorist organization doesn't mean you support their actions. The questions are worded vaguely intentionally that way. LOTS of people held favorable views of mobsters because they helped the community out. That doesn't mean they supported their nefarious actions to get the money in the first place or helped them or would ever murder people. These studies have also come under scrutiny for intimidation bias (i.e. say good things or they will find out). Even though this is largely untrue, I think it's a fair point to consider. Hell, look at the reason for the forum of the Browns. We all love football and have favorable opinions of it as a sport but Goddell's actions have sucked nuts and I don't support it.

 

I'm sure if the question was instead asked "do you directly support the terrorist bombings and other violence by these groups" the response would be much lower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes, I'm fully aware profiling occurs right now to a degree. BUT, there's a strong difference between that and "ban all muslims from entering" which has been stated here several times.

 

 

Just like there is bad connected with white people who are domestic terrorists but we shouldn't ban all white people should we? I mean I look like the dude who shot up a movie theater (actually minus the hair it's pretty close).

Again nobody including trump is calling for banning all muslims. Temporary ban on immigration does not equal total ban.

 

Also black white muslim all of them have committed mass shootings. I know it fits a convienent narrative to pretend like they're all white. It would be helpful to your position if it were true, but it's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whites committed about 64% of mass shootings. Not coincidentally whites make up about 63% of the population. Blacks committee about 16% of the shootings at around 13% of the population. Asians committed 9% of shootings at about 5% of the population. So based on those numbers mass shootings fall by percentage roughly along the overall racial percentages of the population. So, you know, your argument is wrong.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/27/us/mass-shootings/

 

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/13/18934111-census-white-majority-in-us-gone-by-2043

 

Cal's dreaded illegal aliens seem to be the good guys in the Mass shooting world, well under their population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

...okay, but even if you hold a favorable view of a terrorist organization doesn't mean you support their actions. The questions are worded vaguely intentionally that way. LOTS of people held favorable views of mobsters because they helped the community out. That doesn't mean they supported their nefarious actions to get the money in the first place or helped them or would ever murder people. These studies have also come under scrutiny for intimidation bias (i.e. say good things or they will find out). Even though this is largely untrue, I think it's a fair point to consider. Hell, look at the reason for the forum of the Browns. We all love football and have favorable opinions of it as a sport but Goddell's actions have sucked nuts and I don't support it.

 

I'm sure if the question was instead asked "do you directly support the terrorist bombings and other violence by these groups" the response would be much lower.

 

Eh, Pew is pretty respectable and likely accurate when it comes to the favorability - I wouldn't say it's vaguely worded.

 

Probably like:

"What is your view of Al-Qaeda?" : very unfavorable, unfavorable, no opinion, favorable, very favorable.

 

Your last point may be fair - but still what's your view of al-qaeda is a pretty straight forward question. I saw a video/documentary type of thing a while back of people over there who were telling everybody "don't talk favorably about al-qaeda in front of the cameras" or something like that.

 

The way I see it (probably the same for all religions - at least the abrahamic religions), you get 3 groups of people:

- Pluralists, believers who don't literally interpret their holy texts and generally agree with western society and the traditional human "moral code" - understand/respect differing world views

- Fundamentalists, believers who are strict adherents to their text - everyone else is wrong.

- Fundamentalist Extremists - literal interpreters, do anything necessary as long as it's "god's will"

 

No doubt Islam is a violent, brutal religion - if you read the texts. Though so is Judaism and Christianity. (Not all parts, but many parts are brutal and intolerant in Islam/Judaism/Christianity)

 

You look at rural USA and you get a lot more fundamentalist Christians than in more densely populated, urban areas. Probably the same type of situation in the middle east - where you have more poor, less educated areas (in war) you get a lot more fundamentalism. Coupled with the extremists like Al Nusra, Isis, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, the FSA (yea I said it).

 

Your fundamentalists may not be willing to commit acts of violence themselves, but they still support what Al Qaeda/Isis/Al Nusra/Boko Haram (and others) are doing. Even to the extend that those able to, will fund and support their cause *cough* Saudis *cough*. They believe in a caliphate and sharia and all of that stuff because their book says so.

 

Anyway, long way to explain that the Pew poll isn't wrong or misleading - it's more than likely pretty accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again nobody including trump is calling for banning all muslims. Temporary ban on immigration does not equal total ban.

 

Also black white muslim all of them have committed mass shootings. I know it fits a convienent narrative to pretend like they're all white. It would be helpful to your position if it were true, but it's not.

 

Did you read this thread?

 

I'm really not sure what your point is about mass shootings is. First off, if you actually chose to read the article (which I'm sure you didn't) you plainly see it says " which looked at mass shootings in the United States since 1982". ALL of my sources have been since after 9/11/2011, so unless you find 20 years of history not important it's a totally different statistical comparison. Second, mass shooters are domestic terrorists. To use the term "mass shootings" is a joke when they are, in fact, committing acts of terrorism. Third, even if the data follows that trend it still falls into what I'm saying that American born domestic terrorists are posing a more serious threat than Islamic terrorism has in 15 years. Keep trying though, at least you have links for data which I'll give you credit for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is you are claiming whites are more likely to be mass shooters which is demonstably not true. They are responsible for a percentage of the mass shooting incidents roughly correlating to their percentage of the population. Want to take this further and see what percentage of terrorism incidents are committed by muslims?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is you are claiming whites are more likely to be mass shooters which is demonstably not true. They are responsible for a percentage of the mass shooting incidents roughly correlating to their percentage of the population. Want to take this further and see what percentage of terrorism incidents are committed by muslims?

 

Although I've never alluded to that, according to your very source 63% of mass shootings are white people. That's the majority, so wouldn't that, by basic statistics, mean that white people are more likely to be the mass shooters? Population ratios or not, the statement is not demonstrably untrue as it is literally accurate.

 

First off, it's domestic terrorism and calling it a mass shooting is stupid. Second, my argument has been and always has been that you're more likely by a long to be killed by a domestic terrorist since 9/11/2011 who are often white. If you aren't going to consider a guy going into a church and shooting people worshiping an act of terrorism it's not even worth the time to talk about it to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/4-surprising-facts-from-the-2015-global-terrorism-index/

 

It's a tough issue to pin down any hard data on but this seems particularly relevant

 

"Overall, terrorist attacks are heavily concentrated geographically just five countries accounted for most terror-related deaths in 2014. Afghanistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan and Syria saw 78 percent of the deaths and 57 percent of all attacks.

 

Even among these grim outliers, Iraq stood out with nearly 10,000 fatalities, the highest ever recorded in a single country. In 2014, acts of terror in Iraq alone claimed three times as many lives as they did in the entire world in 2000."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Although I've never alluded to that, according to your very source 63% of mass shootings are white people. That's the majority, so wouldn't that, by basic statistics, mean that white people are more likely to be the mass shooters? Population ratios or not, the statement is not demonstrably untrue as it is literally accurate.

 

First off, it's domestic terrorism and calling it a mass shooting is stupid. Second, my argument has been and always has been that you're more likely by a long to be killed by a domestic terrorist since 9/11/2011 who are often white. If you aren't going to consider a guy going into a church and shooting people worshiping an act of terrorism it's not even worth the time to talk about it to me.

You'd think that if you didn't know anything about statistics. Statistically speaking they're no more likely to be mass shooters than blacks or asians and actually a little less likely, but being that there's many more whites there are more numerical incidents. Second off if you want to bitch about what they're called take it up with the FBI or whoever is responsible for collecting the data. Not me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just like there is bad connected with white people who are domestic terrorists but we shouldn't ban all white people should we? I mean I look like the dude who shot up a movie theater (actually minus the hair it's pretty close).

You implied it even if you didn't directly say that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal's dreaded illegal aliens seem to be the good guys in the Mass shooting world, well under their population. Cysko.

*************************

the point is, not to let them in unless they've been vetted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal's dreaded illegal aliens seem to be the good guys in the Mass shooting world, well under their population. Cysko.

*************************

the point is, not to let them in unless they've been vetted.

Don't worry cal, according to loonwatch which is an organization which attempts to deflect blame away from muslims for terrorism all your favorites are heavily involved in terrorism.

 

{This is supposed to represent the perpetrators of all terrorist attacks from 1980-2005}

piechart2.jpg?resize=491%2C491

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Eh, Pew is pretty respectable and likely accurate when it comes to the favorability - I wouldn't say it's vaguely worded.

 

Anyway, long way to explain that the Pew poll isn't wrong or misleading - it's more than likely pretty accurate.

 

Yeah all fair points. I don't disagree and won't argue the results on that, I just think that "being favorable" and "directly supporting" garner two completely different levels of answers. I could be wrong about that for sure.

 

Out of those five countries how many of them do you figure were committed by white (or black or Latino whatever) lone wolf types?

 

Honestly not as a joke, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. Yes, those areas also heavily suffer from domestic terrorism by its people like we do here in much higher numbers. I agree that's a serious issue, but I've never once been talking about anything outside of United States policies and actions.

 

You'd think that if you didn't know anything about statistics. Statistically speaking they're no more likely to be mass shooters than blacks or asians and actually a little less likely, but being that there's many more whites there are more numerical incidents. Second off if you want to bitch about what they're called take it up with the FBI or whoever is responsible for collecting the data. Not me.

 

Again, this has never been my point which I've made about 10 times more than I should have to. the FBI does in fact have a definition https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition.The media calls this stuff a mass shooting but it's just not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah all fair points. I don't disagree and won't argue the results on that, I just think that "being favorable" and "directly supporting" garner two completely different levels of answers. I could be wrong about that for sure.

 

 

Honestly not as a joke, I have no idea what point you are trying to make here. Yes, those areas also heavily suffer from domestic terrorism by its people like we do here in much higher numbers. I agree that's a serious issue, but I've never once been talking about anything outside of United States policies and actions.if you don't get it you are a jackass

 

 

Again, this has never been my point which I've made about 10 times more than I should have to. the FBI does in fact have a definition https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition.The media calls this stuff a mass shooting but it's just not.if you want to call it domestic terrorism and thus terrorism it makes the numbers of deaths by terrorist attacks and overall attacks perpetrated by muslims even more damning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a copy and paste from reddit that has a compilation of relevant polls.

 

Pew Research (2013):

  • Only 57% of Muslims worldwide disapprove of al-Qaeda.
  • Only 51% disapprove of the Taliban.
  • 13% support both groups and 1 in 4 refuse to say.

http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/09/10/muslim-publics-share-concerns-about-extremist-groups/

Wenzel Strategies (2012):

  • 58% of Muslim-Americans believe criticism of Islam or Muhammad is not protected free speech under the First Amendment.
  • 45% believe mockers of Islam should face criminal charges (38% said they should not).
  • 12% of Muslim-Americans believe blaspheming Islam should be punishable by death.
  • 43% of Muslim-Americans believe people of other faiths have no right to evangelize Muslims.
  • 32% of Muslims in America believe that Sharia should be the supreme law of the land.

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2012/10/31/sixty-percent-of-us-muslims-reject-freedom-of-expression

ICM Poll:

  • 40% of British Muslims want Sharia in the UK
  • 20% of British Muslims sympathize with 7/7 bombers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

Pew Research (2010):

  • 82% of Egyptian Muslims favor stoning adulterers
  • 70% of Jordanian Muslims favor stoning adulterers
  • 42% of Indonesian Muslims favor stoning adulterers
  • 82% of Pakistanis favor stoning adulterers
  • 56% of Nigerian Muslims favor stoning adulterers

http://pewglobal.org/2010/12/02/muslims-around-the-world-divided-on-hamas-and-hezbollah/

WZB Berlin Social Science Center:

  • 65%% of Muslims in Europe say Sharia is more important than the law of the country they live in.

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4092/europe-islamic-fundamentalism

Pew Global (2006)

  • 68% of Palestinian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
  • 43% of Nigerian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
  • 38% of Lebanese Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.
  • 15% of Egyptian Muslims say suicide attacks against civilians in defense of Islam are justified.

http://cnsnews.com/node/53865

World Public Opinion (2009)

  • 51% of Egyptians approve of groups that attack Americans
  • 44% of Indonesians approve of groups that attack Americans
  • 33% of Pakistanis approve of groups that attack Americans
  • 32% of Moroccans approve of groups that attack Americans
  • 62% of Jordanians approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (21% oppose)
  • 42% of Turks approve of some or most groups that attack Americans (45% oppose)

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

NOP Research:

  • 62% percent of British Muslims say freedom of speech shouldn't be protected
  • 1 in 4 British Muslims say 7/7 bombings were justified
  • 78% of British Muslims support punishing the publishers of Muhammad cartoons

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06

People Press Surveys

  • 31% of Turks support suicide attacks against Westerners in Iraq.

http://www.people-press.org/2004/03/16/a-year-after-iraq-war/

Belgian HLN

  • 16% of young Muslims in Belgium state terrorism is "acceptable".

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/1275/Islam/article/detail/1619036/2013/04/22/Zestien-procent-moslimjongens-vindt-terrorisme-aanvaardbaar.dhtml

ICM Poll:

  • 25% of British Muslims disagree that a Muslim has an obligation to report terrorists to police.

http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/reviews/2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Poll%20Nov%2004/Guardian%20Muslims%20Nov04.asp

Pew Research (2007):

  • 26% of younger Muslims in America believe suicide bombings are justified.
  • 35% of young Muslims in Britain believe suicide bombings are justified (24% overall).
  • 42% of young Muslims in France believe suicide bombings are justified (35% overall).
  • 22% of young Muslims in Germany believe suicide bombings are justified.(13% overall).
  • 29% of young Muslims in Spain believe suicide bombings are justified.(25% overall).

pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf#page=60

Al-Jazeera (2006):

  • 49.9% of Muslims polled support Osama bin Laden

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

Populus Poll (2006):

  • 16% of British Muslims believe suicide attacks against Israelis are justified.
  • 37% believe Jews in Britain are a "legitimate target".

http://www.populuslimited.com/pdf/2006_02_07_times.pdf

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/07/more-survey-research-from-a-british-islamist

GfK NOP:

  • 28% of British Muslims want Britain to be an Islamic state

http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf

NOP Research:

  • 68% of British Muslims support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who insults Islam;

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/14/opinion/main1893879.shtml&date=2011-04-06

MacDonald Laurier Institute:

  • 62% of Muslims want Sharia in Canada (15% say make it mandatory)
  • 35% of Canadian Muslims would not repudiate al-Qaeda

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-canada

http://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/much-good-news-and-some-worrying-results-in-new-study-of-muslim-public-opinion-in-canada/

al-Arabiya:

  • 36% of Arabs polled said the 9/11 attacks were morally justified; 38% disagreed; 26% Unsure

http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2011/09/10/166274.html

Gallup:

  • 38.6% of Muslims believe 9/11 attacks were justified (7% "fully", 6.5% "mostly", 23.1% "partially")

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

Policy Exchange:

  • 1 in 4 Muslims in the UK have never heard of the Holocaust;
  • Only 34% of British Muslims believe the Holocaust ever happened.

http://www.imaginate.uk.com/MCC01_SURVEY/Site%20Download.pdf

http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

piechart2.jpg?resize=491%2C491

Cysko, I am also very much against all illegals crossing the border. Which includes any of the above.

Obamao wants a hundred or more... more SYRIAN ILLEGALS to come here, and there isn't time

to background check them. Now, what group above, do you think those terrorists who also come here

from Syria... come from?

 

And their criteria for making the graph is apparently nonsense, as far as attacks by "Muslim terrorists"

in Belgium, and France.... and Germany... and here on 9/11.... Again, we are talking about not letting terrorists into our country.

And Isil and al qaida are non of the above, except one. Can you tell which one that is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...