Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Yeah, my brother looks a little like Santa Claus (a bit round and well bearded!) and has business in the US and Canada. He often crosses the border by road as its often quicker and cheaper than flying and the drive is about 3 hours. After 9/11, it was even harder to fly and so he drove almost all the time. He was stopped and put under the microscope every time he entered the US because:

a) He had been in and out 3 times in one month
b) He is not American
c) He has a beard



Knight

Compare and contrast. Facts vs Wishful thinking.

Cheers,
Shafique

Even if Iraq and Afghanistan were excluded, the number of dead from Islamic jihadists from 2004-2009 stands at:

Algeria 756
Bangladesh 173
Egypt 154
Gaza Strip 232
India 6,095
Indonesia 164
Iran 293
Lebanon 390
Nigeria 382
Pakistan 7,238
Philippines 1,399
Russia 1,875
Somalia 3,563
Thailand 2,804
Yemen 188
Total 25706 (19611 if India is excluded)

For countries where I assume the vast majority of terrorist fatalities were neither Islamic or Muslim, we find:

Burma 129
Burundi 379
Columbia 2,460
Congo, Democratic Republic 3072
Nepal 1,246
Sri Lanka 1,472
Uganda 535
Total 8047

dubai-politics-talk/most-terrorists-aren-islamic-t43765.html

The facts do indeed speak for themselves. Even after excluding Afghanistan, Iraq and India, Muslim and Islamic terror attacks are far higher than terror attacks carried out by non-Muslim terrorists in the entire world.

Facts vs Wishful Thinking

LOL - posting in the wrong thread again eh!

Amazing how the facts show that there were more terrorist attacks in the US carried out by Jewish Terrorists than there were those carried out by Muslims. They blew up civilians in the US - so this was no half-hearted terrorist attacks - but thankfully they have stopped that now and only blow up civilians closer to Israel (and murder the odd person in Dubai).

Cheers,
Shafique

They blew up civilians in the US - so this was no half-hearted terrorist attacks

Compare the fatalities - how many Americans were blown up by Jewish terrorists and how many Americans were blown up by Islamic terrorists.

I'm glad you are not disputing that the Jewish terrorists carried out more attacks on US soil (particular bombings) than were carried out by Muslims.

I totally agree that if you count 9/11 - the body count is greater than those killed by Jewish terrorists, but statistically speaking 9/11 is an outlier.

However, you are right - we should indeed look at body counts as well and should certainly do so if you want to look at global figures. The American born white religous terrorist Baruch Goldstein's body count (in Palestine) should be counted, but so should all the Muslim civilians killed by explosions - the fact that they were killed by people in uniform doesn't change the fact they are dead. So, American illegal actions in Cambodia and Kampuchea (where they bombed populations that they had not declared war on) are considered state terrorist acts - would you agree? I think those deaths alone outnumber your lists of Muslim civilians killed by Muslim violence - and that's before we get to the numbers killed by Israel in Palestine and Lebanon, America in Iraq and Afghanistan etc.

Oh, but wait - you probably didn't really want to look at stats did you - you just want to continue to believe Guru Bob's propaganda..!

In Europe the stats are even more stark - 99.6% of terrorist acts were not carried out by Muslims.

Cheers,
Shafique

You first mention that the Jewish terrorist attacks (I'm not saying Jewish Extremists, don't tell Tom Jones I'm bashing Jews now) were not half hearted terrorist attacks because they 'blew up' Americans.

So, how many Americans were blown up (killed) and how many of these terrorist attacks resulted in deaths or even fatalities - and if the attack did not result in death or injury, was that because of bad timing rather than intention and design of the Jewish terrorist attack?

Anyways, happy to compare the Muslim and Jewish terrorist attack to determine if the Muslim terrorist attacks were just halfhearted attempts to get attention or were assassination and mass murder plots.

In Europe the stats are even more stark - 99.6% of terrorist acts were not carried out by Muslims.

Sure, if you don't include countries where there is an Islamic insurgency raging on. Russia is in Europe.

But why not look at fatalities? Surely you....er, someone else has the good common sense to distinguish train bombings from a pipe bomb detonated in an open field after the authorities were notified by the terrorist group to evacuate the surrounding area?

are considered state terrorist acts - would you agree? I think those deaths alone outnumber your lists of Muslim civilians killed by Muslim violence - and that's before we get to the numbers killed by Israel in Palestine and Lebanon, America in Iraq and Afghanistan etc.

Good point, using your revised definition of terrorism, Muslim terrorist groups are second only to state actors.

But they are far ahead of other religious or political groups when we use the standard definition of terrorism.

Oh, and BTW, which definition did Danios (or the FBI) use when he created that thread you copy/pasted from?

This thread was listing the terrorist acts in the USA. That showed that only 4% of terrorist acts were carried out by Muslims and 6% by Jewish Terrorists.

Pretty amazing stat in itself. But both show that the majority of terrorist acts weren't carried out by religiously motivated terrorists.

However, eh decided to expand this and assert that terrorism world wide is mainly carried out by Muslims, and also to suggest that body counts should be looked at when looking at US stats.

I conceded that if we include 9/11 the tally of deaths by Muslim terrorists (of which 9/11 counts as an outlier) would indeed be more than of the bombings etc carried out by Jewish Terrorists in the USA.

But, if we are going to expand the body count comparison to the rest of the world, then we should include indeed the killings of civilians in illegal acts such as the bombings of Cambodia and Kampuchea. There are jurists who call these acts war crimes and state-terrorism - but let's not get hung up on labels. Let's just count the numbers of civilians killed around the world and compare and contrast. No need to worry about labelling those doing the killing (or even those who are being killed).

The only person on these forums who has justified the slaughter of civilians is event horizon - and that is what makes him the most extreme religously fanatic poster here. But let us not get hung up on that - I invite him to count the numbers of civilians killed by Muslims and those killed by non-Muslims. Heck, we can even round down to the nearest hundred thousand killed by non-Muslims in any decade he chooses to count.

Cheers,
Shafique

But, if we are going to expand the body count comparison to the rest of the world, then we should include indeed the killings of civilians in illegal acts such as the bombings of Cambodia and Kampuchea.

Except that you would be using different definitions for terrorism than the one you were working with when you started this thread - otherwise, Waco and Ruby Ridge would be considered terrorist acts.

Please try and keep up.

Though it speaks volumes that you need to change definitions as soon as it's shown that Muslims are overwhelmingly the biggest single contributor to worldwide terrorist fatalities.

'Nuff said.

No need to worry about labelling those doing the killing (or even those who are being killed).

Then why start a thread about terrorism in the US?

Why the sudden urge to compare deaths from people who died in war zones to people who died in a terrorist bombing?

You never included people who were murdered in the United States from gang violence and the like, but now all of the sudden you want to merge all deaths into one category as soon as it's shown that Muslims are globally the biggest terrorists in the world.

Funny that.

It would have been quicker to just say:

"No I won't count the bodies of civilians, because I know that will undermine my loon beliefs"

As I said many times before, loons and statistics don't make happy bedfellows - except when they are inventing stats or resorting to the old-faithful techniques of fanciful interpretations of selective quotes or stats.

That the stats show that 96% of terrorist acts were not carried out by Muslims in the USA is stark - as is the fact that Jewish terrorists carried out more acts.

Of course, you'd like to focus on outliers such as 9/11 (and Tim McVeigh is also an outlier) - but even if you do, the challenge is still there for you to pick up. Count the numbers of civilians killed in any period and see who has killed more civilians - Muslims or non-Muslims. A dead civilian is a dead civilian - their families don't really care what you call their killers. (I'm happy to exclude homicides and accidents from the stats).

But I suspect we'll only get the usual loon cries of 'not fair - don't confuse me with evidence'!!

Cheers,
Shafique

Why not count the bodies of Americans who have been killed in domestic quarrels, gang shootings and other acts of violent crime while you're at it?

It wouldn't be because those acts of violence generally do not meet the standard definition of terrorism, now would it?

A dead civilian is a dead civilian - their families don't really care what you call their killers.

Good argument. Homicide rates should be included in any report regarding terrorism.

After all - their families don't care.

Anyways, just let me know when you're ready to use the standard definition of terrorism then we can compare Muslim terrorism with non-Muslim terrorism.

Oh, and if we're talking of dead bodies, third world civil wars and border invasions killed far more people than the first and second world.

But hey, loons just don't do facts.

Sure, if you want to count those killed by homicide and accidents - go ahead. I'm suggesting we exclude these and only count the civilians killed otherwise.

Heck, if you want - why not just count the number of children killed - there's no ambiguity about them not being civilians (I'd say count the number of women and children, but I can anticipate a loon argument that women may not be civilians etc).

Why are you afraid to count the bodies?

I happen to agree with Tony Benn:
there is no moral difference between a stealth bomber and a suicide bomber. Both kill innocent people for political reasons.

Cheers,
Shafique

Sure, if you want to count those killed by homicide and accidents - go ahead. I'm suggesting we exclude these and only count the civilians killed otherwise.

Why? Do you think the family of someone murdered in a home invasion cares what you call their killers.

A dead civilian is a dead civilian, after all.

(and no, I didn't bring up accidents, I thought most had the functioning brain power to distinguish violent murders from falling down the stairs)

Why are you afraid to count the bodies?

Don't know, why don't you ask yourself since the definition of terrorism that was used for the article in this thread is the same as mine.

Try and keep up.

I happen to agree with Tony Benn:
there is no moral difference between a stealth bomber and a suicide bomber. Both kill innocent people for political reasons.

Regardless of whether Tony Benn believes an errant bomb is the same as someone who deliberately kills civilians face to face - and is so fanatical that he would kill himself just to kill others, there is this definition thingy.

And since we're talking about definitions, let me know the difference between a vigilante and a police officer.

Same thing, right?

What's the difference?

I don't know what to make of this stupidity that's been flourishing on the internet, but I'll be sure to ask the dumbest questions in response to the dumbest arguments I see.

Why are you scared of counting the bodies of children killed. You brought up body counts, after all.

But then again, you are the only poster here who has ever justified the mass slaughter of babies, women and children on the grounds that 'God told them to do it'

But at the end of the day - just another case of a loon writing cheques the facts can't support!

Cheers,
Shafique

Why are you scared of counting the bodies of children killed. You brought up body counts, after all.

Now hold on, don't you take issue if someone calls Muhammad a pedophile ?

Suddenly the definitions of certain words matters to you.

Funny that.

But tell me, if someone (other than Muhammad, of course), marries a six year old, aren't they a pedophile?

A little girl is a little girl - their families don't really care what you call their pedo husbands.

Young one.

Just count the bodies of the children - if you've got the cohones to test your loon theory against reality?

(And you seem to be responding to the fact that you're the only poster here who justifies the slaughter of children with a loon rant about something Guru Bob taught you at Bible camp... let's stick to your assertions about body counts, shall we?)

Cheers,
Shafique

I believe I am counting the victims of statutory rape - are Dirty Old prophets who marry six year old girls pedophiles?

A little girl is a little girl - their families don't really care what you call their pedo husbands.

Do you side with the families of these little girls that their 'husbands' are pedos?

Happy to look into your other weirdo 'Bible Camp' views later - but for now, let's stick with your suggestion to count bodies.

I said let's starting with children killed - there's no problem labelling children or mistaking them for 'combatants', 'terrorists' etc. (Although, I wouldn't put it past you to to try and justify the killings of children in the 20th/21st Century, like you justify the slaughter of babies in Biblical times)

So, over to you - let's compare the numbers of children killed in recent decades. You pick the decade and count the numbers killed by Muslims and I'll count the numbers killed by non-Muslims (we can also divide up the victims into muslims/non-Muslims for information).

Cheers,
Shafique

Shafique is a muslim preacher, she keeps repeating the same propaganda ignoring the facts.
5 fire crackers from jews in 25 years, 33 terrorist attacks from Mulsims in 10 years, but she looks the other way.
It has been documented that the Duke university report was flawed.
Shafique has no credibility, and I doubt anyone beleives in her posts. Any discussion with her is useless.

-- Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:37 am --

event horizon wrote:I believe I am counting the victims of statutory rape - are Dirty Old prophets who marry six year old girls pedophiles?

A little girl is a little girl - their families don't really care what you call their pedo husbands.

Do you side with the families of these little girls that their 'husbands' are pedos?

There is no such a thing as Statutory rape with Mulsims and their dark ages societies, a 14 years old Brazilian girl was sentenced to 6 months in prison in Abu Dhabi after a pakistani bus driver had Ses with her
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-mcg ... 79201.html

LOL - why is it that when faced with facts the people who hold dearly to Islamophobic beliefs launch ad hominem attacks?

Herve - your belief that I am a lady speaks volumes about your ability to assess information out there!


But, what's this about JDL pipe bombs being fire crackers??

Here's what I challenged eh to do in an earlier post. Perhaps you'll have better luck.

shafique wrote:Let me know what your checking throws up about the Jewish Defense League bombings etc and whether they are religous terrorists or not. (Note that I'm not saying they are a major problem in the US - they just carried out more terrorist bombings etc than Muslims did, but still only represented 7% of terrorist acts).


I totally agree that Trotsky would not be characterised as a Jewish terrorist - however, Baruch Goldstein and the other JDL members are - they are self-confessed Jewish religious 'nutters' who use violence to terrorise.

Let me know if you still have problems verifying the facts.

And as for the disinformation about the types of terror attacks listed by the FBI - this should help clarify the matter for you:


http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/not-al ... e-muslims/

Cheers,
Shafique