Did you hear about another furniture related attack in Paris?

[benjimanbreeg]

Yup. And they actively look for that angle.

It's a bit like what Trump does in his speeches, he plays on people's fears.

He plays on people's thoughts, and who knows, maybe he shares those thoughts.  Again, it's a case of learning not to ignore the millions of people who will vote for them and understand why they have concerns. 

[odeon]

Yup. And they actively look for that angle.

It's a bit like what Trump does in his speeches, he plays on people's fears.

He plays on people's thoughts, and who knows, maybe he shares those thoughts.  Again, it's a case of learning not to ignore the millions of people who will vote for them and understand why they have concerns.

And you were doing so well for a little while.

[Al Swearegen]

Yup. And they actively look for that angle.

It's a bit like what Trump does in his speeches, he plays on people's fears.

He plays on people's thoughts, and who knows, maybe he shares those thoughts.  Again, it's a case of learning not to ignore the millions of people who will vote for them and understand why they have concerns.

And you were doing so well for a little while.

You have not been doing well for a while.

[benjimanbreeg]

Yup. And they actively look for that angle.

It's a bit like what Trump does in his speeches, he plays on people's fears.

He plays on people's thoughts, and who knows, maybe he shares those thoughts.  Again, it's a case of learning not to ignore the millions of people who will vote for them and understand why they have concerns.

And you were doing so well for a little while.

People are looking for answers, and Clinton is offering more of the same stuff that has caused all of this. 

['andersom']

Yup. And they actively look for that angle.

It's a bit like what Trump does in his speeches, he plays on people's fears.

He plays on people's thoughts, and who knows, maybe he shares those thoughts.  Again, it's a case of learning not to ignore the millions of people who will vote for them and understand why they have concerns.

And you were doing so well for a little while.

Sadly enough, I kind of agree with Benji here.

Trump, Wilders and others are better in transforming fears into votes than other politicians do. Yet they almost all seem to work on those fears lately. On the things they are opposed to, not the things they stand for. And the likes of Wilders and Trump are best in playing the game, because they have the least scruples. They also need the fear to be big and they play it well.

The old fashioned Anathema Sit.

It's not good for anyone in the long run.

[Queen Victoria]

Should we table this discussion or just couch surf?

[odeon]

Yes.

[Yuri Bezmenov]

Should we table this discussion or just couch surf?

[Walkie]

A lot pf people said it, in a lot of different ways: Religious Fundamentalism is, basically,  a  personality disorder.  And these terrorists are, first and foremost,  disturbed people such as you find in any culture.

But it doesn't follow that Islam isn't a threat.  You take away the terrorist attacks, and you're still left with instutionalised homophobia, institutionalised antisemitism, institutionalised  mutilation of young girls, etc.  And the scary thing is that a lot of this thinking is quite acceptable to relatively moderate Muslims.

Actually, I really think Islam is fundamentally different from the other major religions. The other major religions (with the possible exception of Judaism) were founded by men of peace. By contrast, Mohammed , himself was a Jihadist.  And he's supposed to be the "perfect" man . I don;'t how you could hold that view without approving of Jihad,

Similarly, Mohammed was a paedophile. He married a seven year old girl, and managed to contain himself until she was nine.  Again, if Mohammed was "perfect" , that has to be acceptable behaviour.   Did Jesus or Gautama Shakyamuni do anything remotely comparable? Not that we know of.

The Roman Catholic Church, for e3xample,  has been responsible for all kinds of atrocities. But if you read the gospels, you can easily see that it's attitude was totally counter to Jesus' teaching. You have to raid the Old Testament to find any kind of justification .   Jesus ' teaching about love and forgiveness was explicity said to displace the Old Testament stuff, so to override his teachings with an "Eye for an Eye and a tooth for a tooth" and all that,  is disingenuous to say the least. . Therefore, rabid christian fundamentalists really don't have much of a leg to stand on, if they were only open to reason.

Tjhe jews, bless 'em, have a nasty jealous bloodthirsty God (at  least, according to the Jewish books that the RC Church  selected as "inspired by God" i.e the Old Testament. i wouldn't be sure they are representative ) but also a very long tradidton of religious debate. Also, importantly,  they don't give a damn if you don;'t agree with em. They are never, ever  going to rampage all over the world trying to force the rest of us to convert

The Quran is a totally different kettle of fish. Muslim extremists can truly claim to be doing it "by the book" and that gives them a lot more persuasive power than the other extremists . It's bloody worrying. Some of the Muslims in my country (UK) want to have Sharia Law in the areas where they predominate .  And they've set up paedophilia  rings that target non -muslimn girls , because the Quran says they can do what they like to non-Muslim girls.

OK, OK, quite a lot of Muslims , the majority perhaps, are very civilised ; but I suspect these are mostly people who  don't especially believe in  Islam, it's just part of their cultural background.   Given the very nasty penaltuies the other Muslims  might impose on them, they're not likely to say so aloud, are they?

When Britons worry about the influx of Muslim immigrants, I really don't think most of us are worried about terrorist attacks so much as the chipping away of our secular culture, and the re-imposition of various  things that we thought we'sdd left behind in the Dark Ages, with a few extra horrors thrown in. 

[Al Swearegen]

It's a He'll of a lot to think about.
I wonder whether Open would call you a bigot for rationally confronting this head on and honestly, and whether he would give a false equivalency of the concern and threat you described as being the same as being hurt by falling furniture?

[odeon]

A lot pf people said it, in a lot of different ways: Religious Fundamentalism is, basically,  a  personality disorder.  And these terrorists are, first and foremost,  disturbed people such as you find in any culture.

But it doesn't follow that Islam isn't a threat.  You take away the terrorist attacks, and you're still left with instutionalised homophobia, institutionalised antisemitism, institutionalised  mutilation of young girls, etc.  And the scary thing is that a lot of this thinking is quite acceptable to relatively moderate Muslims.

Actually, I really think Islam is fundamentally different from the other major religions. The other major religions (with the possible exception of Judaism) were founded by men of peace. By contrast, Mohammed , himself was a Jihadist.  And he's supposed to be the "perfect" man . I don;'t how you could hold that view without approving of Jihad,

Similarly, Mohammed was a paedophile. He married a seven year old girl, and managed to contain himself until she was nine.  Again, if Mohammed was "perfect" , that has to be acceptable behaviour.   Did Jesus or Gautama Shakyamuni do anything remotely comparable? Not that we know of.

The Roman Catholic Church, for e3xample,  has been responsible for all kinds of atrocities. But if you read the gospels, you can easily see that it's attitude was totally counter to Jesus' teaching. You have to raid the Old Testament to find any kind of justification .   Jesus ' teaching about love and forgiveness was explicity said to displace the Old Testament stuff, so to override his teachings with an "Eye for an Eye and a tooth for a tooth" and all that,  is disingenuous to say the least. . Therefore, rabid christian fundamentalists really don't have much of a leg to stand on, if they were only open to reason.

Tjhe jews, bless 'em, have a nasty jealous bloodthirsty God (at  least, according to the Jewish books that the RC Church  selected as "inspired by God" i.e the Old Testament. i wouldn't be sure they are representative ) but also a very long tradidton of religious debate. Also, importantly,  they don't give a damn if you don;'t agree with em. They are never, ever  going to rampage all over the world trying to force the rest of us to convert

The Quran is a totally different kettle of fish. Muslim extremists can truly claim to be doing it "by the book" and that gives them a lot more persuasive power than the other extremists . It's bloody worrying. Some of the Muslims in my country (UK) want to have Sharia Law in the areas where they predominate .  And they've set up paedophilia  rings that target non -muslimn girls , because the Quran says they can do what they like to non-Muslim girls.

OK, OK, quite a lot of Muslims , the majority perhaps, are very civilised ; but I suspect these are mostly people who  don't especially believe in  Islam, it's just part of their cultural background.   Given the very nasty penaltuies the other Muslims  might impose on them, they're not likely to say so aloud, are they?

When Britons worry about the influx of Muslim immigrants, I really don't think most of us are worried about terrorist attacks so much as the chipping away of our secular culture, and the re-imposition of various  things that we thought we'sdd left behind in the Dark Ages, with a few extra horrors thrown in. 

You'd do well to remember that the Inquisition thought they were doing it "by the book", too. Does that mean that the current batch of Catholics are simply Catholics by culture and upbringing rather than religious in any actual sense of the word?

No. The priests change so what the book means changes.

There are some very vocal and visible nutjobs killing each other and outsiders in the name of Islam, but I'd say the vast majority of Muslims are just like the rest of us. Some are good, some are bad, some believe (among Muslims, I should probably say more), some don't.

And to them, the Quran does most certainly not advocate killing nonbelievers. In fact, it says that a Muslim should never be the aggressor.

But that kind of headline won't sell, not in the UK and not in anywhere else in the Western world. It's far better to write they all want you to live under Sharia Laws, even if the vast majority of the Muslims disagree with the idea, for themselves and for others. Fear sells, a fact used by the nutjobs to create more of the same.

By spreading that sort of thing, you are helping the nutjobs, enabling them, because some people will think you have a point and widen the gap between "us" and "them" far better than the nutjobs can.

[odeon]

It's a He'll of a lot to think about.
I wonder whether Open would call you a bigot for rationally confronting this head on and honestly, and whether he would give a false equivalency of the concern and threat you described as being the same as being hurt by falling furniture?

Rationally? There is little rationality involved when repeating easily disproved misconceptions. We live in an information age and finding actual facts is easy.

Independent thinking, unfortunately, is hard, regardless.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/23/youre-more-likely-to-be-fatally-crushed-by-furniture-than-killed-by-a-terrorist/

You'd do well to read the above.

[benjimanbreeg]

Pretty much every "terror attacks" are committed by Muslims who drink, use drugs and eat pork.  Some of them had "the Koran for dummies" books or whatever.  They are drunken and/or drugged up losers. 

Telling the truth seems to be "antisemitic" i'm afraid. 

[Al Swearegen]

It's a He'll of a lot to think about.
I wonder whether Open would call you a bigot for rationally confronting this head on and honestly, and whether he would give a false equivalency of the concern and threat you described as being the same as being hurt by falling furniture?

Rationally? There is little rationality involved when repeating easily disproved misconceptions. We live in an information age and finding actual facts is easy.

Independent thinking, unfortunately, is hard, regardless.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/11/23/youre-more-likely-to-be-fatally-crushed-by-furniture-than-killed-by-a-terrorist/

You'd do well to read the above.

No all his fears are completely rational and justifiable

[Walkie]

You'd do well to remember that the Inquisition thought they were doing it "by the book", too. Does that mean that the current batch of Catholics are simply Catholics by culture and upbringing rather than religious in any actual sense of the word?

Nope, I don't think that at all. I think that the RC Church is a big, powerful institution that went the same way as all big powerful institutions do: corrupt to the core and far more concerned about wordly power that about it's spitritual roots. For a very long time, it managed to rule by fear and brutality, but it's time is past. Nowadays, the genuinely religious people are coming to predominate in the RC Church, I think, so it's opposite to what you said., in my view.

Its much too soon for the same thing to happen with Islam, Islam's power isn't waning , is it? It seems to be on the rise.  People who are brought up as Muslim don't really have an effective choice about remaining Muslim. They're in a similar posituion to Christians at the time of the witch-trials.  Which is to say:  I fear that Isl;am is as dangerous and oppressive The RC church  used to be.  I didn't bother saying that cos I thought that much  was pretty obvious; but it also has a few additional reasons for being dangerous, as  I pointed out.

I should think that most of the Inquisition were cynical opportunists ln a similar mould  to our "Witch Hunter General" , but I don't know. I don't think it's especially relevant anyway

There are some very vocal and visible nutjobs killing each other and outsiders in the name of Islam, but I'd say the vast majority of Muslims are just like the rest of us. Some are good, some are bad, some believe (among Muslims, I should probably say more), some don't.

Of course. The vast majority of Catholics are just likethe rest of  us too. People are much of a muchness. .  But some  cultures do bring out the worst in people.   Islam, as an institution , is over-influenced by cultural mores that hacven't changed since  Jesus' time.  That is, it's being propagated out of backward little places where they still stone women to death for committing adultery etc.   Much of that stuff actually comes from the culture rather than the book, but you can't expect people to discriminate that closely. When you grow  up steeped in something like that, you usually don't think about it that deeply, especially not if you're illiterate.

But again , much  same ccan be said about many different cultures and religions, at many different junctures in history. I was focussing on the things that make Islam a tad more dangerous than all the others , IMO.

It's far better to write they all want you to live under Sharia Laws, even if the vast majority of the Muslims disagree with the idea

A "vast" majority of 75% disagree , according to one  credible (IMO) statistic.   That's not a very comforbable majority. And what they p[rivately state for  stastistical purposes and what they feel it's politic to say aloud in the Mosque might be two different things.  A Muslim can be pressured into fallimnng into line more easily than you or I can.

I do , personally know a few Muslims, you know?  including a Muslim academic who's been threatened by other Muslims just for having, and expressing moderate opinions, and for not wearing a Burka  OK, so nobody's physically attacked her as yet, but those kind of threats are far from uncommon. You've gotta sympathise with those kind of pressures.

That woman does not say that Islamitself  is a threat to her because she's actually a believer.  But I say it.