This week in Islam

[Omni]

5 hours ago, Argus said:

This week in Islam a brave warrior of Islam executed a transit police officer in Denver by walking up to him while he was talking with someone and shooting him point blank in the neck. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4180820/Man-shot-killed-Denver-contract-transit-officer.html

And another noble warrior of Islam attacked soldiers outside the Louvre in Paris.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38853841

Also, more than a thousand German police raided a variety of mosques and homes to thwart an impending terrorist attack.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r-german-police-raid-homes-and-mosques-arrest-tunisian-suspected-of-planning-attack-2017-2

In Canadian news, Aarron Driver, Canadian ISIS supporter, agreed to a peace bond - like those have proven so useful in the past.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/aaron-driver-peace-bond-terrorist-isis-1.3430287

 

 

Sorry to burst that xenophobic bubble.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/non-muslims-carried-out-more-than-90-of-all-terrorist-attacks-in-america/5333619

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omar-alnatour/muslims-are-not-terrorist_b_8718000.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/01/trump-immigration-ban-terrorism/514361/

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Omni said:

Sorry to burst that xenophobic bubble.

Progressives, arm in arm with Islam, desperately trying to protect the reputation of Islam and excuse and explain away their religious intolerance, hatred and violence, no matter how many alternate facts they have to try to cite. But the thousands killed in the name of Islam every year can't be denied. Over 30,000 terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam since the World Trade Center bombings, and still progressives frantically tell us it's the language of peace!

I think, ultimately, it's because progressives despise western nations and values even more than Islamists do.

This list of terrorist attacks committed by Muslims since 9/11/01 (a rate of about five a day) is incomplete because not all such attacks are picked up by international news sources, even those resulting in multiple loss of life. 

These are not incidents of ordinary crime involving nominal Muslims killing for money or vendetta.  We only include incidents of deadly violence that are reasonably determined to have been committed out of religious duty - as interpreted by the perpetrator.  Islam needs to be a motive, but it need not be the only factor.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2016

 

[Omni]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

I think, ultimately, it's because progressives despise western nations and values even more than Islamists do.

I think it's ultimately it's because progressives analyze facts much better as they are not hamstrung by xenophobic restrictive ideas.

[dialamah]

Just now, Omni said:

I think it's ultimately it's because progressives analyze facts much better as they are not hamstrung by xenophobic restrictive ideas.

It is true that studies demonstrate a difference in the way liberals and conservatives process information.   

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Omni said:

I think it's ultimately it's because progressives analyze facts much better as they are not hamstrung by xenophobic restrictive ideas.

I think if one gets to pick and choose the facts they analyze it makes it so much easier to ignore the stuff that bothers them. 

[Omni]

6 minutes ago, dialamah said:

It is true that studies demonstrate a difference in the way liberals and conservatives process information.   

Here's one theory. Hopefully I'm not being redundant.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/new-studies-show-liberals-and-conservatives-have-different-brain-structures

 

[Omni]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I think if one gets to pick and choose the facts they analyze it makes it so much easier to ignore the stuff that bothers them. 

I think ignoring facts is what leads to conspiracy theories. And they seem to be on the rise of late, perhaps owing to the increasing extent of fake news and those who are willing to believe it. "The pizzareia" and all those types of things that seem to be rearing their ugly heads. 

[dialamah]

11 minutes ago, Omni said:

Here's one theory. Hopefully I'm not being redundant.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/new-studies-show-liberals-and-conservatives-have-different-brain-structures

 

 

That was pretty interesting, too.   

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Omni said:

I think ignoring facts is what leads to conspiracy theories. And they seem to be on the rise of late, perhaps owing to the increasing extent of fake news and those who are willing to believe it. "The pizzareia" and all those types of things that seem to be rearing their ugly heads. 

Certainly a willingness to believe what isn't true is as bad as an unwillingness to believe what is. 

[dialamah]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Certainly a willingness to believe what isn't true is as bad as an unwillingness to believe what is. 

If you take the three links together, it suggests (not saying proven, cause this is all relatively recently studied) that actual difference in brain structure makes some people more prone to believing things that are not true, especially if they are threatening or scary.   So, for example, if two people are presented with a statement such as - "Killer Bees are heading toward Canada; 25% of the population anticipated to die" - people with one brain structure are more likely to believe and repeat it; people with a different brain structure are more likely to disbelief it and to do more research to find out if it's true.   

It's not a willingness/unwillingness, but more of a biological imperative.   Which makes these discussions about the relative threat of Muslims and Islam rather pointless, eh?   It is literally physically impossible for Argus and I to agree about the danger posed by Muslims because our brains are processing the same information very differently.

 

 

[Omni]

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

That was pretty interesting, too.   

At the risk of being scolded for going a little off topic, what I find interesting is how we, you or I and our mutual friends, end up on one side or the other of this political divide, i.e. right or left, conservative or liberal. Is it our parental guidance, is it our education, life experiences, or who knows what type of external influence, or all of the above? I guess I will go with all of the above, but will add that I have been lucky enough to have had a job that sent me to some rather remote corners of this world, and I had some very interesting educational, and overall positive experiences that have convinced me that the last thing I wish to do is build a little wall around my little community, and hide in there. I'm not afraid of people with different colored skin, different languages, different foods, and even different religions. The world is only so big, but the population is ever bigger. We should learn to hold hands.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, dialamah said:

If you take the three links together, it suggests (not saying proven, cause this is all relatively recently studied) that actual difference in brain structure makes some people more prone to believing things that are not true, especially if they are threatening or scary.   So, for example, if two people are presented with a statement such as - "Killer Bees are heading toward Canada; 25% of the population anticipated to die" - people with one brain structure are more likely to believe and repeat it; people with a different brain structure are more likely to disbelief it and to do more research to find out if it's true.   

It's not a willingness/unwillingness, but more of a biological imperative.   Which makes these discussions about the relative threat of Muslims and Islam rather pointless, eh?   It is literally physically impossible for Argus and I to agree about the danger posed by Muslims because our brains are processing the same information very differently.

 

 

I suppose one can blame brain chemistry for everything.  One can remove all responsibility from everyone for all actions. 

I don't agree with that, and I haven't read any of the studies. It wouldn't help, apparently...

[dialamah]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

I suppose one can blame brain chemistry for everything.  One can remove all responsibility from everyone for all actions. 

I don't agree with that, and I haven't read any of the studies. It wouldn't help, apparently...

 

 

Blame brain chemistry for everything?   And here I was thinking it could help me understand more conservative thinkers!  Perhaps if I understood them better, we would have better conversations.   I'd call that just the opposite of 'removing responsibility'. 

 

 

[dialamah]

14 minutes ago, Omni said:

At the risk of being scolded for going a little off topic, what I find interesting is how we, you or I and our mutual friends, end up on one side or the other of this political divide, i.e. right or left, conservative or liberal. Is it our parental guidance, is it our education, life experiences, or who knows what type of external influence, or all of the above? I guess I will go with all of the above, but will add that I have been lucky enough to have had a job that sent me to some rather remote corners of this world, and I had some very interesting educational, and overall positive experiences that have convinced me that the last thing I wish to do is build a little wall around my little community, and hide in there. I'm not afraid of people with different colored skin, different languages, different foods, and even different religions. The world is only so big, but the population is ever bigger. We should learn to hold hands.

 

I have lived my entire life in BC, have traveled very little (once to New Orleans, once to Mexico, once to Egypt, and a couple of times to Edmonton), so I don't know that exposure to different people/cultures is key given my acceptance of diversity.   My mother liked Steven Harper, but she also liked PET.   My 6 siblings and I range in terms of who we vote for in any given election, but we tend to be more progressive on social issues.   I think one of the articles mentioned the plasticity of the brain, so perhaps the physical brain provided by nature might be enhanced or offset by the experiences given us by life.

 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Blame brain chemistry for everything?   And here I was thinking it could help me understand more conservative thinkers!  Perhaps if I understood them better, we would have better conversations.   I'd call that just the opposite of 'removing responsibility'. 

 

 

That makes two of us that don't believe it. 

[dialamah]

Just now, bcsapper said:

That makes two of us that don't believe it. 

You're just being too clever for me tonite, sapper.

[Omni]

21 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I have lived my entire life in BC, have traveled very little (once to New Orleans, once to Mexico, once to Egypt, and a couple of times to Edmonton), so I don't know that exposure to different people/cultures is key given my acceptance of diversity.   My mother liked Steven Harper, but she also liked PET.   My 6 siblings and I range in terms of who we vote for in any given election, but we tend to be more progressive on social issues.   I think one of the articles mentioned the plasticity of the brain, so perhaps the physical brain provided by nature might be enhanced or offset by the experiences given us by life.

 

I find from time to time I have to step back and shine a light on perhaps what are not so well thought out assumptions, and allow that plasticity to do what it is meant to do, and then usually wake up refreshed the next day, and sit at this keyboard and relive those experiences that feed that plasticity, some of which occured in Islamic country's. So there, I'm back on topic.  

[Michael Hardner]

Sorry, this has been off topic for a page now.

If this topic is exhausted then we can lock it.  Otherwise, stay on topic please.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Sorry, this has been off topic for a page now.

If this topic is exhausted then we can lock it.  Otherwise, stay on topic please.

Exhausted?  Quite the optimist, eh?

Edited February 4, 2017 by bcsapper

[Michael Hardner]

30 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Exhausted?  Quite the optimist, eh?

I really don't think it is.  If Kimmy, Argus et. al. tell me that they have made their point and there's nothing to be said I would be more thann surprised.

[Argus]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I really don't think it is.  If Kimmy, Argus et. al. tell me that they have made their point and there's nothing to be said I would be more thann surprised.

I know how you and the others would love for all talk of Muslim extremism and the rigid moral and legal codes of Islam to leave this web site, but no, if you shut this topic down I'll immediately start another one. Just because people who refuse to accept that Islam has any bearing on international terrorism or world events, or that Islam is in any way involved in or responsible for terrorism don't want to hear otherwise that does not make it so.

I might add that instead of you mentioning how things have been off topic for a page and maybe you should close down the topic you should instead delete the off-topic posts, and maybe give warning points to the off-topic posters.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

I know how you and the others would love for all talk of Muslim extremism and the rigid moral and legal codes of Islam to leave this web site, but no, if you shut this topic down I'll immediately start another one.  

I would love it to leave the site, but I would only love it if you didn't want to talk about it anymore.  I reached out to you and the others, so no this topic isn't going anywhere.

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

Just because people who refuse to accept that Islam has any bearing on international terrorism or world events, or that Islam is in any way involved in or responsible for terrorism don't want to hear otherwise that does not make it so.

This statement belongs in a hyperbolic chamber.  "Islam has ANY bearing on...." "...is in ANY WAY involved" who would claim that is has NO bearing ?  Weather and bird migrations have bearings on things so why wouldn't Islam ?

I already offered (I think in this thread) to have people agree with a statement that Islam has somewhere between NO impact and ALL impact and lo-and-behold not many wanted to go for it.  It's easier to accuse the other side of extreme points of view, of course.  Also more interesting, I suppose, to some.

I would delete the posts but there are too many - I didn't catch the drift until it was up to a page or so...

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I really don't think it is.  If Kimmy, Argus et. al. tell me that they have made their point and there's nothing to be said I would be more thann surprised.

The thread is called This week in Islam. 

Islam isn't going away, so surely there will be more, relevant to the thread title, posts.

But hey, if you don't like it, get rid!

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, bcsapper said:

 But hey, if you don't like it, get rid!

Not about whether I "like" it.

[dialamah]

14 minutes ago, Argus said:

I know how you and the others would love for all talk of Muslim extremism and the rigid moral and legal codes of Islam to leave this web site, but no, if you shut this topic down I'll immediately start another one. Just because people who refuse to accept that Islam has any bearing on international terrorism or world events, or that Islam is in any way involved in or responsible for terrorism don't want to hear otherwise that does not make it so.

I might add that instead of you mentioning how things have been off topic for a page and maybe you should close down the topic you should instead delete the off-topic posts, and maybe give warning points to the off-topic posters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

We could discuss the effect Islamic terrorism has on world events, or that there are Islamic terrorists because that is the reality.  

Unfortunately, some take the position that "Islam is evil and has no redeeming value, and Muslims are almost universally backward, ignorant savages" and anyone who points out how false are those broad generalizations of Muslims is accused of 'defending barbarism' and 'unwilling to admit there are Islamic terrorists', 'avoiding reality', 'hating Canada', etc. 

There is no discussion to be had with those people.  There are only attempts to present some facts to offset rampant islamaphobia so that massacres such as happened in Quebec don't become common.

 

Edited February 4, 2017 by dialamah
Edited to make it general and not specific