The problem with Islam.

[Cheese Mechanic]

p1stonhead said:

Thanks for answering I couldnt be bothered.
For the record Cheese Mechanic, im firmly in the atheist camp so not inconvenient at all - your book of 'facts' is just utter nonsence.

If its nonsense, then disprove it, because a lot of what it says rings big bells. As to whether you are an atheist or not is irrelevant.

[Cheese Mechanic]

p1stonhead said:

There is nothing to disprove! You are a scaredy little Daily Mail reading idiot. Disprove that! You cant disprove an opinion.
I can just as easily say 'every terrorist strangely has at least one pair of shoes'. Time to ban shoes in your opinion?

Course there is nothing to disprove, Islam is a peaceful tolerant religion, we see its peaceloving ways all the time,and they are no problem in Paris, Amsterdam etc, eh?

[Cheese Mechanic]

scherzkeks said:

I will, thanks. The content of the piece speaks for itself; that Breitbart is regurgitating it simply reinforces the fact that it's a bunch of nonsense.

Proof positive of how easy it is for people make themselves look stupid. If you actually read the article in its entirety in the Jordan Times you would find out firstly that you are wrong in your assumption, and that its really not a good idea to applaud your own ignorance publicly.

[Cheese Mechanic]

blindswelledrat said:

Just about everything you read, including these type of polls are complete bks.
All you need to do is read the tenuous wording that has spawned all these tabloid headlines(and yes, I do count the Telegraph in that sentence nowadays) to see that. These results are taken out of context and twisted for the benefit of frothing up the tabloid masturbators.
Lets take the headline versus the sentence in the poll:

Headline: Over a quarter of British Muslims have sympathy for the Charlie Hebdo terrorists. That is far too many

Derived from: "Presented with the statement “I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris”, 27 seven percent agreed with the statement"

The latter does not mean the former. In fact, absent context, it does not mean anything at all. Sympathy with motives? How vague could that be? Given that I have no idea what that question means, putting 1000 random muslims on that spot with a question phrased like, the answer means nothing. In fact, the question is so vague it must have been posed after more direct questions, the answers to which would make that statistic more relevant.

Eg:
Do you think the Hebdo terrorists actions were wrong? 100% Yes
Do you have a degree of sympathy with their motives? 25% yes

versus:

Do you think the Hebdo terrorists were wrong? 25% No
Do you have a degree of sympathy with their motives? 25% Yes

In the first example the answer to the question is categorically meaningless, where as in the second example it is meaningful and worrying. The fact that the taboids isolate it out of context like they have, and twist its meaning suggests to me that it is more likely to be the first, I just don't have the time to research every st tabloid story I see so am happy to assume its crap.


I don't think this means everything is fine. Far from it. IN fact, I think there is a worrying self fulfilling escalation of anti muslim feeling in turn spawning increasingly isolated/frustrated young muslims. It may be the other way round, it doesn't really matter but I do think we are starting to become a divisive nation.

Desperate attempt to shoot the messenger(s) and to cast doubt on inconvenient facts.

The poll was by the BBC, that rabid right wing racist xenophobic organisation.

Dan Hodges as well as being the son of a Labour MP (I think Glenda Jackson) is also in a senior position in migration matters, and of similar standing in Hope not hate. Again all extreme well known examples of hysterical xenophobic right wing nutterism.

Sigh>