I've only just noticed the 99.6% figure That means that, if 9/11 counts as only two terror attacks (arguably at least 3), then there would have to be 4,998 terrorist acts by non Muslims in the US. I can only think of Oklahama City. There must be 4,997 terrorist attacks knocking about here somewhere. Also, the "in the USA" bit automatically discounts all attacks on soldiers overseas/embassies etc etc. Sounds like camel ****e to me.
Having not been educated in Islam apart from third party non Islamic sources you are quite correct that I am ignorant of the Surahs. I am ignorant of most things (maybe not the extent of my own ignorance) but one thing I am not ignorant of is that within fundamentalist Islam there seems to be a culture of death (the only dispute is surely how big or representative this culture is?) - it makes the news every other week from Pakistan. When a young man straps bombs to his chest and walks into a crowded marketplace to blow himself and others up there is almost certainly something very wrong with his mind, and that thing almost certainly stems from some part of his Islamic education. Many maniac Terrorist types from other territories still have the same inclination to murder and maim while retaining a basic desire to self preserve - murder and maim then get to hell out of there. Something in the Koran let's these people justify these acts - I might be ignorant enough not to able to find it, but these people seem to have enough knowledge of the scripture to warrant taking their own lives over it. Anyway Mutually Assured Destruction a.k.a. self preservation was probably the single biggest factor in preventing the world descending into Nuclear War during the Cold War - a government made from these same Religious Fundamentalists (who actively encourage their young men to fasten the process of death) may not see their own assured destruction as a good enough reason to not aim a Nuclear Weapon at me - and I like me - and it is a worry for me if these 'no fear of death' types get their hands on such weapons. So as ignorant as I am of the Koran I see empirical evidence all the time of people using it as an excuse to threaten or wage violence. If these threats were not made by the devout (or even government ministers of Pakistan) then I wouldn't really have much to base my spiel on - but since there is plenty of evidence of these types using religion as an excuse to use violence then I will always be naturally concerned by the same types getting their hands on much more powerful means of waging violence. P.S. the Yanks and the Israelis and the Pope and Newco Rangers all have many things wrong with them too, but they are subjects all of their own.
Not aimed at anyone in particular but this thread reeks of pseudo intellectual bullshit! Some people are: 1 - Very supercilious 2 - Up their own arses
About 10 years ago a burd called me supercilious ... I took it as a compliment! Then I looked it up ... ****in boot!
Where'd you copy and paste that from? I'm just sparring with Fan so that when I come across some pro-Islamic heavyweight I've got my argument well versed.
The history and nature of religious passages is irrelevant, as the ignorant twats that use them to justify violence have no interest in such things. As theists have consistently shown, you can make a case for virtually anything through the use of scripture. As for Fan's claim that 99.6% of terrorist attacks in the US are performed by non-Muslims, nobody at all will be surprised to hear that he's wrong. The Europol part of his answer should've tipped him off that it's for Europe, more specifically the EU, I believe: please log in to view this image please log in to view this image please log in to view this image As Fan likes those figures, then I'm sure he's happy with the stats from the same report that show that Islamic terrorism was responsible for 94% of terrorism related deaths between the years of 1980 and 2005.
