BRAKING NEWS - blasts at brussels metro

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

Meghna Mathur wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

in a way, it's isis that made me more considerate towards islam in general. before that, I too used to associate terrorism with islam, and blame it on the religion, quran, whatever. but seeing isis craziness, it's so extreme, that you do sit back and think, knowing people you do know around you, 'islam can't be this bad'. I hope isis is what makes rest of the muslims and slightly more moderate countries denounce the fanatics among themselves more vociferously and fight it, something they have not been doing for decades.

hate how trump gets to say I told u... one bad thing leading to another worse thing.

Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

Kinnera wrote:

Meghna Mathur wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

in a way, it's isis that made me more considerate towards islam in general. before that, I too used to associate terrorism with islam, and blame it on the religion, quran, whatever. but seeing isis craziness, it's so extreme, that you do sit back and think, knowing people you do know around you, 'islam can't be this bad'. I hope isis is what makes rest of the muslims and slightly more moderate countries denounce the fanatics among themselves more vociferously and fight it, something they have not been doing for decades.

hate how trump gets to say I told u... one bad thing leading to another worse thing.

Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:It is not even funny that the Pseudo-eslamists on the board desperately trying to divert the brussels Blast into Trump, Drumps, Sanders, etc... but never even once criticized the bombing itself.

And the Pocatello Padre is right.

what criticism would you like to hear? where have you criticized the bombing on this thread? i don't expect you to criticize it because it is a moronic expectation; it is a truism that any act of terrorism is heinous.

europeans have been too hasty in allowing unbridled immigration from the middle-east when it is such an obvious route for terrorists.  i would have preferred a US like policy where the checks and balances on allowing asylum seekers in is highly non-trivial. they are now paying the price for their generosity.  having said that, many of the terrorists in the french/belgian attacks seem to have been born and raised in those countries and not recent immigrants. not an easy problem to solve.  

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

hey aren't you the guys who came up with the brilliant insight that violence cannot be committed without human agency by inanimate objects? islam is even one step removed from a gun which is inanimate. it is an abstract idea. how can it kill?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

hey aren't you the guys who came up with the brilliant insight that violence cannot be committed without human agency by inanimate objects? islam is even one step removed from a gun which is inanimate. it is an abstract idea. how can it kill?

Meghna Mathur wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

Meghna Mathur wrote:
hate how trump gets to say I told u... one bad thing leading to another worse thing.

Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

that wasn't my point. he was saying it the loudest, and he can say now he was right. Still doesn't mean he and his solutions to the problem are the right ones. Still doesn't mean that people should go voting for him. But he sure will spin it that way.

the man who incites his people to fight, and then says - 'I will try but I won't be able to stop them coz they are so angry', that kind of leader may not be the best answer to any world problem, definitely not a sensitive and volatile problem like this one. we need someone way more shrewd than that.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

hey aren't you the guys who came up with the brilliant insight that violence cannot be committed without human agency by inanimate objects? islam is even one step removed from a gun which is inanimate. it is an abstract idea. how can it kill?

Propagandhi711 wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

hey aren't you the guys who came up with the brilliant insight that violence cannot be committed without human agency by inanimate objects? islam is even one step removed from a gun which is inanimate. it is an abstract idea. how can it kill?

this is worthy of a meme: how can an abstract idea kill

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

Meghna Mathur wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

in a way, it's isis that made me more considerate towards islam in general. before that, I too used to associate terrorism with islam, and blame it on the religion, quran, whatever. but seeing isis craziness, it's so extreme, that you do sit back and think, knowing people you do know around you, 'islam can't be this bad'. I hope isis is what makes rest of the muslims and slightly more moderate countries denounce the fanatics among themselves more vociferously and fight it, something they have not been doing for decades.

hate how trump gets to say I told u... one bad thing leading to another worse thing.

Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

That isn't by Fox news, btw. Ask CNN and Ted Cruz who made the statement on CNN.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

Meghna Mathur wrote:

in a way, it's isis that made me more considerate towards islam in general. before that, I too used to associate terrorism with islam, and blame it on the religion, quran, whatever. but seeing isis craziness, it's so extreme, that you do sit back and think, knowing people you do know around you, 'islam can't be this bad'. I hope isis is what makes rest of the muslims and slightly more moderate countries denounce the fanatics among themselves more vociferously and fight it, something they have not been doing for decades.

hate how trump gets to say I told u... one bad thing leading to another worse thing.

Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

That isn't by Fox news, btw. Ask CNN and Ted Cruz who made the statement on CNN.

regardless, you parroted it here without examining its veracity.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

Radical islam doesn't kills people (indeed it does cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs has the ideology); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/ted-cruz-muslim-neighborhoods/index.html

hey aren't you the guys who came up with the brilliant insight that violence cannot be committed without human agency by inanimate objects? islam is even one step removed from a gun which is inanimate. it is an abstract idea. how can it kill?

this is worthy of a meme: how can an abstract idea kill

absolutely. here's another idea worthy of a meme: how can an inanimate object kill? ah but i forget, you guys already have that covered in, "guns don't kill people, people kill people".

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:
Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

That isn't by Fox news, btw. Ask CNN and Ted Cruz who made the statement on CNN.

regardless, you parroted it here without examining its veracity.

Regardless, you and Obama don't have the guts to say it for what it is: radical islam.

Hellsangel wrote:Il Professore, you are too coy even to truthfully answer about how you would feel in a West European airport with Arabic speakers around you.it shows your Libby hypocrisy that you act too dense about this.

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:
Whether Trump said it or not, this was inevitable. It was bound to happen. And more are yet to come...all the bomb blasts, mass shootings, molestation and rapes of women, etc

The way the libbies allowed the influx, possibly to increase the vote banks (as is the case of bangladeshi immigrants in india), this was to happen. And whether inborn or immigrants, muslims cannot integrate with the main stream and  they blame the 'alienation' to these acts of terror. they blame the country that housed them. So this problem is not going to go away for generations to come. It's only going to get worse. 

The libbies started that already:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-brussels-attacks-are-more-about-the-failures-of-belgium-than-a-global-isis-plot-a6945761.html

"There are the usual factors – unemployment, discrimination, split-identities  – which explain the alienation of young Muslims in other European countries." yada, yada...blame everything and everyone but the perpetrators and the common factor: their religion.

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

That isn't by Fox news, btw. Ask CNN and Ted Cruz who made the statement on CNN.

regardless, you parroted it here without examining its veracity.

Regardless, you and Obama don't have the guts to say it for what it is: radical islam.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:Il Professore, you are too coy even to truthfully answer about how you would feel in a West European airport with Arabic speakers around you.it shows your Libby hypocrisy that you act too dense about this.

as uncomfortable as i feel having urdu speakers around me at an airport.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:Il Professore, you are too coy even to truthfully answer about how you would feel in a West European airport with Arabic speakers around you.it shows your Libby hypocrisy that you act too dense about this.

as uncomfortable as i feel having urdu speakers around me at an airport.

Yeah and we know how you feel about Hindi/Urdu speakers.

Propagandhi711 wrote:[
oh so you switch to different sides of the same argument depending on who you're defending or fighting against. good to see it stated explicitly. I guess your argument in this case is, islam doesnt kill, humans do (only a bit more than other humans (in a statistically insignificant manner))

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:[
oh so you switch to different sides of the same argument depending on who you're defending or fighting against. good to see it stated explicitly. I guess your argument in this case is, islam doesnt kill, humans do (only a bit more than other humans (in a statistically insignificant manner))

my goal in making that analogy was to extract a pound of flesh from the NRA acolytes, namely, showing up the vacuity of "guns don't kill people, people kill people", and i believe i have achieved that goal.

now, coming to the issue at hand,  namely terrorism rooted in religious ideology -- do i think islam has something to do with terrorism? of course, i do. i don't care for any religion, but that doesn't mean i think all religions are equal when it comes to inspiring violence. i do think islam has a particularly warped world view which provides a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. but having said that, demonizing the religion does no justice to the 98% of adherents who just want to mind their own business and live their lives in peace like the vast majority of humanity. and what useful purpose is served by demonizing islam?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:Il Professore, you are too coy even to truthfully answer about how you would feel in a West European airport with Arabic speakers around you.it shows your Libby hypocrisy that you act too dense about this.

as uncomfortable as i feel having urdu speakers around me at an airport.

Yeah and we know how you feel about Hindi/Urdu speakers.

what language do you think the mumbai terrorists from pakistan spoke?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

earlier in the thread you made claim that obama did not call the perpetrators of the french attack terrorists and i showed you to be flat out wrong. will you have the decency to admit you were wrong?

That isn't by Fox news, btw. Ask CNN and Ted Cruz who made the statement on CNN.

regardless, you parroted it here without examining its veracity.

Regardless, you and Obama don't have the guts to say it for what it is: radical islam.

i called you out on a statement that was verifiably false and now you are moving the goal post. show some honesty and accept you were wrong.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:[
oh so you switch to different sides of the same argument depending on who you're defending or fighting against. good to see it stated explicitly. I guess your argument in this case is, islam doesnt kill, humans do (only a bit more than other humans (in a statistically insignificant manner))

my goal in making that analogy was to extract a pound of flesh from the NRA acolytes, namely, showing up the vacuity of "guns don't kill people, people kill people", and i believe i have achieved that goal.

now, coming to the issue at hand,  namely terrorism rooted in religious ideology -- do i think islam has something to do with terrorism? of course, i do. i don't care for any religion, but that doesn't mean i think all religions are equal when it comes to inspiring violence. i do think islam has a particularly warped world view which provides a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. but having said that, demonizing the religion does no justice to the 98% of adherents who just want to mind their own business and live their lives in peace like the vast majority of humanity. and what useful purpose is served by demonizing islam?

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

swapna wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

is that a bhenkat rao in the title of your post, or do you just not know how to spell "breaking?"

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:http://www.wnd.com/2015/11/obama-leaves-islam-out-of-paris-terror-statement/

there's a delicious analogy with the NRA's favorite second amendment defense here. i am sure you know what i mean. but since you'll act all coy, i'll spell it out:

islam doesn't kill people (indeed it cannot. it doesn't have hands and legs); people kill people.

that's why the president doesn't rage about islam after every terrorist attack.

brie wrote:

swapna wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

is that a bhenkat rao in the title of your post, or do you just not know how to spell "breaking?"

no i don't know how to espell breaking. lease halp!

swapna wrote:

brie wrote:

swapna wrote:

brie wrote:armed gunmen conducted twin blasts at brussels metro station. they were atheists for we are informed that terrorists have no religion. please do not hate islam for it has nothing to do with it.

is that a bhenkat rao in the title of your post, or do you just not know how to spell "breaking?"

no i don't know how to espell breaking. lease halp!

it is."spell," not "espell" your spelling will improve dramatically if you say "bhenkat rao, bhenkat rao, bhy are you bhandering in the bherandah like bhagabond?" a hundred times each night before going to bed.

southindian wrote:

brie wrote:i honestly think trump can change america AND THE WORLD. he will uproot islamist terrorism. well, he might castrate you but have you heard of "collateral damage?" c'mon be brave and look for the global good. vote trump!

Trump is a lot of hot air. That's all. 

He's feeding on insecurities of American people, promising them heaven. Another version of the same heaven is promised by lords of those terrorists blowing themselves in Brussels.

Americans are idiots. And I can say this again.

Americans are idiots.

With no agenda or plan whatsoever, Trump is getting support from so-called educated and informed Americans, who think Trump can weave a spell or by magic build a wall, throw 12 million migrants and bomb Syria/ISIS.

People voting for him have lost their mind.

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:[
oh so you switch to different sides of the same argument depending on who you're defending or fighting against. good to see it stated explicitly. I guess your argument in this case is, islam doesnt kill, humans do (only a bit more than other humans (in a statistically insignificant manner))

my goal in making that analogy was to extract a pound of flesh from the NRA acolytes, namely, showing up the vacuity of "guns don't kill people, people kill people", and i believe i have achieved that goal.

now, coming to the issue at hand,  namely terrorism rooted in religious ideology -- do i think islam has something to do with terrorism? of course, i do. i don't care for any religion, but that doesn't mean i think all religions are equal when it comes to inspiring violence. i do think islam has a particularly warped world view which provides a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. but having said that, demonizing the religion does no justice to the 98% of adherents who just want to mind their own business and live their lives in peace like the vast majority of humanity. and what useful purpose is served by demonizing islam?

2% of the muslim population is enough to create terror in the world and disrupt world peace. It didn't take the entire population of Germany, but only a small percentage of Germans to causing the 2nd world war which brought upon immense destruction to life and property. 

All humans are born good. What is it in that religion that causes the 2% of its followers to turn into deadly terrorists? That needs to be addressed. Calling out on the radical ideology that is derived from that religion doesn't amount to doing any injustice to the rest of the adherents.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:

Kinnera wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:[
oh so you switch to different sides of the same argument depending on who you're defending or fighting against. good to see it stated explicitly. I guess your argument in this case is, islam doesnt kill, humans do (only a bit more than other humans (in a statistically insignificant manner))

my goal in making that analogy was to extract a pound of flesh from the NRA acolytes, namely, showing up the vacuity of "guns don't kill people, people kill people", and i believe i have achieved that goal.

now, coming to the issue at hand,  namely terrorism rooted in religious ideology -- do i think islam has something to do with terrorism? of course, i do. i don't care for any religion, but that doesn't mean i think all religions are equal when it comes to inspiring violence. i do think islam has a particularly warped world view which provides a fertile breeding ground for terrorism. but having said that, demonizing the religion does no justice to the 98% of adherents who just want to mind their own business and live their lives in peace like the vast majority of humanity. and what useful purpose is served by demonizing islam?

2% of the muslim population is enough to create terror in the world and disrupt world peace. It didn't take the entire population of Germany, but only a small percentage of Germans to causing the 2nd world war which brought upon immense destruction to life and property. 

All humans are born good. What is it in that religion that causes the 2% of its followers to turn into deadly terrorists? That needs to be addressed. Calling out on the radical ideology that is derived from that religion doesn't amount to doing any injustice to the rest of the adherents.

Call your local congressman and senator today. Get the State Department to issue a formal statement calling Islam the *official* religion of terror and all Islamic nations as state sponsors of terror. That should turn the 98% against the 2%. Problem solved.

brie wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

my whole post is in a mocking vein in a THIRD WORLD voice. here the exchange rate currently is 1 european or american life = 1,000 indian lives and the euro and dollar will only get more firm. here's a taste of what you hypocrites preach! when you hypocrites are out of arguments, YOU WILL CORRECT THIRD WORLD ENGLISH!

southindian wrote:

brie wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

my whole post is in a mocking vein in a THIRD WORLD voice. here the exchange rate currently is 1 european or american life = 1,000 indian lives and the euro and dollar will only get more firm. here's a taste of what you hypocrites preach! when you hypocrites are out of arguments, YOU WILL CORRECT THIRD WORLD ENGLISH!

Right on. 

Correcting English on a thread is generally their way of throwing in the towel....meaning I have nothing else to say or do, so let us look at punctuation marks and grammar. 

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

southindian wrote:

brie wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

my whole post is in a mocking vein in a THIRD WORLD voice. here the exchange rate currently is 1 european or american life = 1,000 indian lives and the euro and dollar will only get more firm. here's a taste of what you hypocrites preach! when you hypocrites are out of arguments, YOU WILL CORRECT THIRD WORLD ENGLISH!

Right on. 

Correcting English on a thread is generally their way of throwing in the towel....meaning I have nothing else to say or do, so let us look at punctuation marks and grammar. 

you may think that if it makes you happy, but i have said plenty on this thread. i neither corrected his punctuation nor his grammar. But I corrected his spelling.

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

southindian wrote:

brie wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

my whole post is in a mocking vein in a THIRD WORLD voice. here the exchange rate currently is 1 european or american life = 1,000 indian lives and the euro and dollar will only get more firm. here's a taste of what you hypocrites preach! when you hypocrites are out of arguments, YOU WILL CORRECT THIRD WORLD ENGLISH!

Right on. 

Correcting English on a thread is generally their way of throwing in the towel....meaning I have nothing else to say or do, so let us look at punctuation marks and grammar. 

you may think that if it makes you happy, but i have said plenty on this thread. i neither corrected his punctuation nor his grammar. But I corrected his spelling.

*Fixed*

Hellsangel wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

southindian wrote:

brie wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

my whole post is in a mocking vein in a THIRD WORLD voice. here the exchange rate currently is 1 european or american life = 1,000 indian lives and the euro and dollar will only get more firm. here's a taste of what you hypocrites preach! when you hypocrites are out of arguments, YOU WILL CORRECT THIRD WORLD ENGLISH!

Right on. 

Correcting English on a thread is generally their way of throwing in the towel....meaning I have nothing else to say or do, so let us look at punctuation marks and grammar. 

you may think that if it makes you happy, but i have said plenty on this thread. i neither corrected his punctuation nor his grammar. But I corrected his spelling.

*Fixed*

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:to the op -- it's breaking, not braking btw.

ok..now that you have (indirectly) accepted that iSlam is the source of all evils and all terror acts ..... I have one question in English usage.

Why is the "Braking News" wrong?  looking at the nes item and the header, it makes sense. I had to put a brake to all my thoughts and views on reading this Brussels Bombing.

So it is indeed correct.  The high priests of English will recognize this and accept this in due course.