I had explained above. Here again.[b]Burning Ghost[/b] wrote:ALSO ... I am still waiting for an explanation as to what e above statistics refer to?? 90% what? What are you referring to? You need to present this is with a clear use of language because I only have the most vague of ideas what these statistics refer to. Also one says [followers] where the others don't? This looks like a deliberate misrepresentation of data.
Earlier I started with degrees [1% -Low to 100% high] of evilness/violence in religions in terms of evil in their holy texts.
The Islam=90% in my first listing denote Islam has a high degree of evilness, i.e. 90/100, 90%.
Then you asked me how I arrive at 90%.
I explained we can infer from the evidence of actual evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone. This stats [justifiable] is obtainable from the TROP site.
I don't have stats on the total of all evil/violence act committed by believers in all religions.
But a good guess based on what we read from the News, the 31,100++ fatal incidents by Islamist terrorists [based on religious duty] since 911 is most likely to be 90% of the total.
That is how I got my [appx.] 90% rating of evilness/violent for Islam in contrast to all other religions. It could be more or lower but definitely at least in the 80%++ range.
Wake Up!
Btw, I did not say you must wake up to believe me to wake up to the evilness of Islam [part] based on what I have presented. I admit I have not presented an objective complete presentation yet.
Note Woodart seem to agree with me in respect on the evilness and violence in Islam but he did not do so based on what I have presented. I believe Woodart must have done his own research and readings from elsewhere and the evidence on hand to "wake up" to this reality of the evils of Islam [partly].
So "wake up" meant a greater realization of the seriousness of the problem of Islamic evil as a threat to humanity. If you have woken up to this, you would be doing your own research objective and not waiting for me to convince you.
As part of my research [literature review] I have listened to Douglas Murray and Christopher Hitchen. Both lack the depths I have dug into. I have also read from hundred+ authors [Muslims and non-Muslims] on the subject - they lack the "bite" that I am trying to establish.
-- Updated Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:05 pm to add the following --
@ZoneOfNonBeing
I wonder how much do you know about Islam and its inherent evil ethos within?ZoneOfNonBeing wrote:2). Terrorism is a hatred produced by a greater hatred. The attackers in Boston, Orlando, and Ohio all argued their violence was a reaction to bombings in the Middle East. Studies show that 90-95% of all suicide bombings in the world are responses to foreign [typically American] military occupation. Terrorists are not radicalized by Islam, they are radicalized by Western foreign policy.
3). The War on Terror only breeds more terrorism. Every time a bomb is dropped on the Middle East, a bunch of people join ISIS to commit more acts of unconscionable evil for the sake of evil. The War on Terror reproduces what it claims to eradicate; and is the most powerful form of recruitment.
4). If Western governments are truly interested in ending terrorism, they will stop terrorizing the Middle East with its imperialist agendas. Instead of implementing a travel ban and criminalizing refugees, the West should address the primary reasons people leave their countries to begin with: poverty and war. When this happens, there will be no need to fear refugees as potential terrorists
5). The U.S. and U.K. support Saudi Arabia with arms deals, etc. They also support Israel - an open air prison and colonial regime oppressing Palestine. The question should be less about why do liberals support Islam - the question should be: why does the West support Saudi Arabia and the Zionist agenda being implemented in Israel? (*calling out Zionism is not the same as being anti-Semitic).
'Foreign Policy' seem to be the obvious but it is not the underlying proximate root cause.
Note Boko Haram is motivated to terrorism in hating Western Education. Malala was shot by the Taliban because of Western Education. The cultural genocides has nothing to do with foreign policies. The killing of atheists and those who critique Islam has nothing to do with arms sales. Note the drawing of cartoons.
The unilateral imperialism of Islam [starting from ~620 AD] conquering lands from Spain to India accompanied by evil, violence and hundreds of million of death has nothing to do with foreign policies and arm sales.
If you focus on foreign policy and the above reasons, you will be merely fire-fighting.
Here is the proximate root cause of why they hate from the horses mouth.
I know the Mirror is a tabloid but in the case, the credibility is the Mirror referred and cited from I SIS' site and their newsletter.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news ... ns-8533563
According to I SIS, 'foreign policy' is not the most critical reason why they fight and kill non-Muslim. They gave 6 reasons and the most critical is this;
If you have a full grasp of the Quran and ethos of Islam, this is exactly what is reflected in the ethos of the Quran and I SIS is merely echoing Allah's words and obey Allah as a divine duty to ensure of a place in Paradise.[b]I SIS[/b] wrote:"What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list.
"The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam."
The point is the very existence of non-Muslims and their beliefs is an inherent threat to Islam as the superior and only religion that must prevail on Earth. Muslim apologists will refer to some odds and ends verses re tolerance of other religions but these are merely pseudo [window dressing] views.
If you want to express any views on Islam, you have no choice [imperative re intellectual integrity] to read and understand [not necessary agree with] Islam fully.
The LEFT vs Right dichotomy is stretch on a continuum.
I believe the liberals overlap with the Left in many ideas.
Say the degrees are 1-LEFT.. 51/50[centrist]... Right-100.
People like Trudeau [liberal] would be rated at '25' toward the left/liberal
-- Updated Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:21 pm to add the following --
@ZoneOfNonBeing
The War on Terror is necessary given the current situation, i.e. I SIS must not be given the opportunity to reinforce their "beachheads" in Iraq and Syria. But I assert the 'War on Terror' is not effective to get rid of Islamic-based evils and violence. It can only be done when we address the proximate causes effectively.ZoneOfNonBeing wrote: The War on Terror only breeds more terrorism
To get rid of Islamic-based evils and violence humanity must move on to an Ideological War.
For this, we need to identify the proximate causes that drive the evil.
The proximate causes are definitely not 'foreign policies' and the other secondary reasons I have listed above. While the secondary causes must be addressed the focus and main attention must be on the primary reasons.
As from the horses mouth, why Islam hate non-Muslims is basically their disbelief and this is driven by the Quran and Ahadith. There are other critical factors re psychological ones which I have discussed in this thread.
Thus to eliminate Islamic-based evils, terror and violence we address these proximate causes on an Ideological War basis.
-- Updated Wed Jul 12, 2017 10:57 pm to add the following --
Someone has done a rough analysis and the evil and violent materials in the Old Testament [Torah] and Talmud are much more and worse in description that those in the Quran. But the fact is there are minimal aggression and violence from Jews.[b]Burning ghost[/b] wrote:My point was to say that the Talmud has equally evil passages throughout (many say it openly lifted passages from here!). We do not see as much aggression and violence from Jews. Why is this? What are the differences between these societies? Is there possibly more to this than the religious text?
Since the evils and violence from the Jews are not critical I have not done a thorough into the Torah and Talmud.
I read the evil and violent elements in the Torah and Talmud are taken as stories and examples rather as a religious duty and commanded by God to act upon non-believers. I think this is the main reason why Jews in general are not inspired to commit evils and violence on non-believers.
The Quran on the other hand give sanctions and exhort Muslims [as a religious duty] to fight [kill] non-Muslims within certain conditions which are vague, ambiguous and open-ended. On top of that Muslims who are martyred in battle against infidels are accorded special rewards.
- 2:216. Warfare [l-qitālu] is ordained [kutiba: prescribed] for you [Muslims], though it is hateful unto you [Muslims]; but it may happen that ye [Muslims] hate a thing which is good [Khayr] for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad [ShaRR] for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.
22:39. Sanction [udhina: permission authorised] is given unto those [Muslims] who fight because they [Muslims] have been ẓulimū*[ZLM; by infidels and hypocrites]; and Allah is indeed Able to give them [Muslims] victory [naṣrihim];
*zulimu can be any offense by non-Muslims including drawing of cartoons
In addition, there are very less Jews, i.e. 10+ millions compared to 1.5 billion Muslims at present. In addition Judaism do not proselytisize nor simply accept Tom, Dick or Harry into the religion. But I think quantum is not a factor, rather it is the ideology of a religion that matter.
In contrast any one who had declared the Sahada [a two sentences oath] is accepted as a Muslim.