If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Who was responsible for the bombing of a shopping centre in Omagh, killing 29 and injuring hundreds
1. The Real IRA
2. Muslim extremists
Who was responsible for the murder of 16 schoolchildren and a school teacher in Dunblane
1. Former Scout leader Thomas Hamilton
2. Muslims
Who was responsible for the truck bomb in Oklahoma that killed 168 people
1. Right wing extemists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols
2. Muslims
Between 1979 and 1989 who did the USA back in the conflict in Afganistan
1. Muslims
2. Russia
Who was responsible for 16 letter bombs that killed 3 and injured 29 between 1978 and 1996
1. Theodore Kaczynski, from his shed in the woods
2. Muslims
On March 20, 1995, who was responbile for a nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway, killing 12 and injuring 1000s
1. The Aum Shinrikyo cult
2. Muslims
In 1974 who was responsible for trying to hijack a plane to crash into the white house to kill Richard Nixon - and who killed a police officer and the two pilots in the attempt
1. Samuel Byck - unemployed tire salesman
2. Muslims
Who was responsible for the hijacking of Malayasia airlines flight 653 and the crashing of the plane killing 100 people in 1977
1. Japanese Red Army
2. Muslims
Who was responsible for the bombing of Manchester on Saturday June 15 1996, injuring 206 and destroying most of the shopping centre
1. IRA
2. Muslims
Who was responsible for a series of bombings across the south of the USA killing three people and injuring 150 others, including the bombing of the Atlanata Olympic Park in 1996, during the Olympics
1. Eric Robert Rudolph, who was linked to extreme right wing, anti-semetic (and in their words) christian group - Christian Identity movement - in order to 'stop the 'homosexual agenda' of abortion'
2. Muslims
Who was responsible for a 12-day nail bombing campaign against black, gay and asian communities in London in April 1999, killing 3 - inlcuding Angela Dykes who was four months pregnant with her first child.
1. Former member of British neo-Nazi National Socialist Movement David Copeland
2. Muslims
Btw, in case anyone is uncertain the answer isn't Muslims expect for one - can ya spot it?
right *breathe* feel better now
If you read carefully I said in most places referring to this discussion and the consternation caused by the reference to Muslims when I suspect that Muslim extremists was what was meant, or did you not bother to read the pages of bickering caused by that?
Do try and be mature and take things how they were intented (to try and calm the bickering) rather than looking for a further fight on the subject.
In a thread where many people won't read the whole thing and where both the general muslim population and muslim extremists are being discussed, it isn't an acceptable solution to take the word muslim to mean muslim extremists.
This is in partiuclar because of the issue Saeed raises. If Muslim means Muslim extremists then that means if you want to describe an average Muslim or Muslim community you'd have to start saying - 'peaceful Muslims' 'non-extremists Muslims' as if this was something uncommon or different.
Since the vast, vast majority of Muslims are not extremists I see no reason they should be a group who need to define that within this thread. So if people are using the term Muslim then it should be seen as describing the vast majority of Muslims in this world - not just extremists. If people are talking about extremists then that is how they should describe them.
I see no reason for anyone, and especially Muslims reading this thread, to read that their religion is now shorthand for extremism. It don't take more than a second to write what you mean, and I'd expect people to spend the time to do that - if only out of basic human decency to their fellow man. This thread certainly is a good enough reason to ignore that.
Hear Hear!
After all, bickering is far better, because without the narrow minded argumentative attitudes that lead to it we wouldn't have had this whole problem in the first place. The press could have done some fair reporting and 'those Muslims who are angry' (that clear enough) could have the decency to respect free speech especially as part of an academic lecture.
This is why I try and point out the difference between Islam and Islamism.
Terrorism is defined by the US Department of Defense as "the unlawful use of -- or threatened use of -- force or violence against individuals or property to coerce or intimidate governments or societies, often to achieve political, religious, or ideological objectives." That will do for me.
Acting in the name of your religion is fine by me. Such as not having sex before marriage.
Wait a minute... I have never said that Christanity is all good and never does anything wrong. Both religions are as bad as each other. However, Isam is currently in the limelight that is why I prefer to talk about it right now.
It is basically high lightning Islamic terrorism as it does exist you know.
Well in that case, the US and the UK are guilty of terrorism. Should we arrest anyone who expresses support for the war in Iraq or US torture camps for "glorifying terrorism"?
Errr.....
*genuinely baffled*
The principles of demcoracy don't support Saddams actions therefore my point is stronger than yours. Whereas your point states that UK/US intervention was wrong, getting rid of Saddam Hussien was wrong, preventing him from murdering his own people was wrong. Democracy doesn't support that.
Christanity and Islam both have history of terrorism but majority of the current terrorism are Muslim.
Yes, you could do. However Iraq was a sovereign country with its own laws, so I'm not sure if your argument would hold any water.
This makes no sense to me.
I'm pretty sure the inhabitants of Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Vietnam and countless other nations would have their own definition of terrorism.
One that might perhaps involve an illegal foreign aggresor dropping thousands of tons of high explosives on them.
Democracy doesn't support terrorism, hence why we're in Afganistan and Iraq.