ISIS

[Bruce1]

Many on this board continue to say that the US is different than Europe and other areas and that our Muslim population has been and is integrating well with our culture and freedoms. I am sure that most have assimilated. I am also sure that most Muslims wanting to immigrate to the US are peaceful. However, if only 1% are radical that would be over a million radicals in the world.

People on this board who think that this is a non problem for the US or that it is insignificant compared to other issues....like gay rights, gun control, etc should think again. Brownsburg is not In Europe or Syria.

http://wishtv.com/2016/06/21/fbi-conducting-investigation-in-brownsburg/

Here is very telling data Pew Research about Muslims.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

In Raqqa, they beheaded a little girl and made the mother wash her hands in the blood because the mother said the equivalent of "I swear to god I'm going to kill you" to the little girl when she was misbehaving. A week before, they crucified people. You won't find this in the maintstream news in order to protect the witch running for president. Syria's civil war has now killed 280k. I wonder how many of those people will forever hate us?
Jihadists of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant drove Syrian regime troops out of Raqqa province on Monday, killing dozens of fighters in a lightning counter-attack, a monitoring group said. The attack was mounted late on Sunday in response to a regime offensive in the Isil stronghold of Raqqa that began on June 3 that advanced about 12 miles toward the town of Tabqa, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. It came as John Kerry, US Secretary of State, said he had read a memo from a group of frustrated diplomats urging strikes against the Syrian regime and found it "very good". Liberals want this group to exist. The “dissent cable” became public last week after 51 serving US officials signed a call for direct US military action to force Bashar al-Assad’s regime to negotiate for peace. The memo was seen as a criticism of President Barack Obama’s cautious approach, but the “dissent channel” is an approved mechanism for diplomats opposed to official policy. The US State Department has already said the dissident mid-level staff will not face retribution for speaking out, and on Monday their boss Kerry appeared to signal support for their views.

 

[lbodel]

Many on this board continue to say that the US is different than Europe and other areas and that our Muslim population has been and is integrating well with our culture and freedoms. I am sure that most have assimilated. I am also sure that most Muslims wanting to immigrate to the US are peaceful. However, if only 1% are radical that would be over a million radicals in the world.

People on this board who think that this is a non problem for the US or that it is insignificant compared to other issues....like gay rights, gun control, etc should think again. Brownsburg is not In Europe or Syria.

http://wishtv.com/2016/06/21/fbi-conducting-investigation-in-brownsburg/

Here is very telling data Pew Research about Muslims.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

I think people are talking about two similar but very different problems.

1. People from European countries who leave their country to go fight for ISIS/extremists that then attempt to return home.

2. People who are radicalized online via social media, Twitter, propaganda, etc.

The terrorists in the Paris/Brussels attacks were people who themselves left the country they were from in Europe, went to fight in Syria then returned home, or were close friends of people who did. While there ARE people who left the US to do this, the US has what is regarded as a pretty good grip on who those people are. Part of the problem in Europe was the sheer quantity. The other part of it is you can make your way back to a Belgium from Syria fairly under-the-radar, especially as a citizen of a European country. You have to fly commercially to get back to the US - not under-the-radar.

That being said, our intelligence only matters so much. If Belgium lost track of one of their citizens who went to Syria and came back and then that person then flies to the US - we're also relying on other countries to be doing well with intelligence. Keep in mind - on the no fly list, there's over 80,000 people and only around 1,000 of them are Americans.

Now, onto problem #2 - that is a much harder problem to control. ISIS has done a very good job in branding itself, promoting itself, putting out propaganda, etc. It's very influential and very modern in its abilities. This is obviously much harder to track and pin down people. This is the biggest problem for the U.S. at this time.

Looking at the Orlando attack, it's hard (at least at this point) to figure the details out. He mentioned three different groups - all of which do not get along and are actually enemies of each other.

 

[qazplm]

Many on this board continue to say that the US is different than Europe and other areas and that our Muslim population has been and is integrating well with our culture and freedoms. I am sure that most have assimilated. I am also sure that most Muslims wanting to immigrate to the US are peaceful. However, if only 1% are radical that would be over a million radicals in the world.

People on this board who think that this is a non problem for the US or that it is insignificant compared to other issues....like gay rights, gun control, etc should think again. Brownsburg is not In Europe or Syria.

http://wishtv.com/2016/06/21/fbi-conducting-investigation-in-brownsburg/

Here is very telling data Pew Research about Muslims.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

Sorry, but I'm not going to be all that concerned about an idiot kid. If your standard for integration is zero point zero percent radical idiots, then not only are Muslims in the US going to fail that standard, so our white supremacists, or a host of other fringe folks that will occasionally produce someone who is a threat to others. In a nation of 330+ million people, having one or two folks like this is to be expected regardless of how assimilated a group is.

So yes, compared to other issues that affect a lot more people, a lot more often, this is much less significant.

 

[Bruce1]

Sorry, but I'm not going to be all that concerned about an idiot kid. If your standard for integration is zero point zero percent radical idiots, then not only are Muslims in the US going to fail that standard, so our white supremacists, or a host of other fringe folks that will occasionally produce someone who is a threat to others. In a nation of 330+ million people, having one or two folks like this is to be expected regardless of how assimilated a group is.

So yes, compared to other issues that affect a lot more people, a lot more often, this is much less significant.

I always find it interesting that you always reduce the discussion down to tiny percentages that in your mind indicate that the radical Islam problem is no different that other fringe hate groups. You would be concerned about that idiot kid if he happened to walk into a mall where you or your friends and neighbors were shopping. The reason for the low % was to indicate that small % of a very large number is still a big number, but you knew that.

There are 1.7 Billion Muslims in the world and about 3 million in the US. Is you read the Pew study you would have seen that a survey of 100,000 US Muslims said that 7% said they could see some situations where suicide killings were justified.

As far as I know radical Islamists are the only ones who, as a group, have a goal of killing all Americans regardless of their religion, gender, or age. And, they are targeting Christians all over the world. And their activity in the US is growing rapidly. And....

 

[qazplm]

I always find it interesting that you always reduce the discussion down to tiny percentages that in your mind indicate that the radical Islam problem is no different that other fringe hate groups. You would be concerned about that idiot kid if he happened to walk into a mall where you or your friends and neighbors were shopping. The reason for the low % was to indicate that small % of a very large number is still a big number, but you knew that.

There are 1.7 Billion Muslims in the world and about 3 million in the US. Is you read the Pew study you would have seen that a survey of 100,000 US Muslims said that 7% said they could see some situations where suicide killings were justified.

As far as I know radical Islamists are the only ones who, as a group, have a goal of killing all Americans regardless of their religion, gender, or age. And, they are targeting Christians all over the world. And their activity in the US is growing rapidly. And....

I would be concerned about ANY idiot kid who walks into my AO with an intent to hurt folks...I am not concerned about it in general since I don't tend to get concerned about things that almost never happen:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-terrorism-statistics-every-american-needs-to-hear/5382818
Some things more likely than dying from a terrorist attack:

187 times more likely to die of starvation
22 times more like to die from a brain parasite
110 times more likely to die from contaminated food
9 times more likely to die from cops

You are more likely to have been struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist.

There were over 350 mass shootings in the US in 2015 (four or more victims), take a guess at what percentage of those mass shootings involved a Muslim perpetrator. Go ahead, pick a number. But make sure it's a single digit number, and make sure it's closer to 0 than 10.

So take your whimpering fear somewhere else.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

I would be concerned about ANY idiot kid who walks into my AO with an intent to hurt folks...I am not concerned about it in general since I don't tend to get concerned about things that almost never happen:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-terrorism-statistics-every-american-needs-to-hear/5382818
Some things more likely than dying from a terrorist attack:

187 times more likely to die of starvation
22 times more like to die from a brain parasite
110 times more likely to die from contaminated food
9 times more likely to die from cops

You are more likely to have been struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist.

There were over 350 mass shootings in the US in 2015 (four or more victims), take a guess at what percentage of those mass shootings involved a Muslim perpetrator. Go ahead, pick a number. But make sure it's a single digit number, and make sure it's closer to 0 than 10.

So take your whimpering fear somewhere else.

article is from 2014 bro and most of the stats from 2011. get a clue.

 

[qazplm]

article is from 2014 bro and most of the stats from 2011. get a clue.

LMAO yes because the stats have totally changed now...bro. I mean there have been hundreds of terrorist attacks in the US since then.

But hey, maybe you can answer the question about how many of the 350+ mass shootings in 2015 (see, there's a number from just last year) were done by Muslims.

I'm sure you can do it, right...bro?

 

[Bruce1]

article is from 2014 bro and most of the stats from 2011. get a clue.

Top Secret, I have decided that having a dialogue with Qaz is like talking to our politicians. It is impossible to really discuss things with him. He has his pat reponse for each topic and has no ability to see anything going on outside is small world immediately around him. Sad because I like to discuss things with people who I disagree with in order to see both sides.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

LMAO yes because the stats have totally changed now...bro. I mean there have been hundreds of terrorist attacks in the US since then.

But hey, maybe you can answer the question about how many of the 350+ mass shootings in 2015 (see, there's a number from just last year) were done by Muslims.

I'm sure you can do it, right...bro?

In your article, 8 Americans died from terrorist attacks world wide that year. Your reading comprehension sucks. A "mass shooting" isn't a terrorist shooting and your definition of "mass shooting" is made up bullshit propaganda. Go use the FBI number and get back to me. Actually, you are such a child, don't bother. I already know it. Nothing but LWNJ propaganda from you. THINK FOR YOURSELF and quit being a shill.

 

[qazplm]

In your article, 8 Americans died from terrorist attacks world wide that year. Your reading comprehension sucks. A "mass shooting" isn't a terrorist shooting and your definition of "mass shooting" is made up bullshit propaganda. Go use the FBI number and get back to me. Actually, you are such a child, don't bother. I already know it. Nothing but LWNJ propaganda from you. THINK FOR YOURSELF and quit being a shill.

lmao 4 or more killed IS the definition of the FBI for a mass murder.

So how many "non-mass shooting" terrorist murders have there been in the last 2 years in the US?
How does that compare to the total number of non-Muslim, non-terrorist murders in the last 2 years in the US?

Let me help you:

2014 there were approximately 13,984 murders in the US according to the UCR, that's the latest year for which the FBI has numbers because the report comes out at the end of the fiscal year
2015 let's assume it's bumped up slightly to 15K

So across a two-year period we are talking roughly 29K murders giver or take.

I went to "thereligionofpeace.com" a clearly anti-Muslim website that lists every Muslim attack in the world. Good enough source for whether an attack was a "Muslim attack" yes? Agreed? Do you have a better source?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2014

Total? 7 attacks, 8 dead, 6 wounded.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2015
Total? 5 attacks, 19 dead, 26 wounded.

Grand total: 27 dead, 34 wounded over the last two years in 12 attacks.

Now, compare 27 dead to 29K murders.
That's not even 1/10th of 1 percent.

But hey let's add in all the 2016 attacks just cuz...we'll even ignore comparing the total number of murders for 2016.

3 total attacks, 49 dead 58 wounded.
New grand total: 76 dead, 92 wounded.

Compare to the 29K murders from 14 and 15?
1/4 of one percent.

So, if you are an American, who lives in America, and you get murdered in the next two years...there's a 99.925% chance that it's NOT going to be by a Muslim terrorist.

Whether it is mass shooting or not mass shootings, the numbers show that worrying about being killed by an Islamic terrorist in the US is pretty much the definition of fearful idiocy.

But you do you.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

lmao 4 or more killed IS the definition of the FBI for a mass murder.

So how many "non-mass shooting" terrorist murders have there been in the last 2 years in the US?
How does that compare to the total number of non-Muslim, non-terrorist murders in the last 2 years in the US?

Let me help you:

2014 there were approximately 13,984 murders in the US according to the UCR, that's the latest year for which the FBI has numbers because the report comes out at the end of the fiscal year
2015 let's assume it's bumped up slightly to 15K

So across a two-year period we are talking roughly 29K murders giver or take.

I went to "thereligionofpeace.com" a clearly anti-Muslim website that lists every Muslim attack in the world. Good enough source for whether an attack was a "Muslim attack" yes? Agreed? Do you have a better source?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2014

Total? 7 attacks, 8 dead, 6 wounded.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=2015
Total? 5 attacks, 19 dead, 26 wounded.

Grand total: 27 dead, 34 wounded over the last two years in 12 attacks.

Now, compare 27 dead to 29K murders.
That's not even 1/10th of 1 percent.

But hey let's add in all the 2016 attacks just cuz...we'll even ignore comparing the total number of murders for 2016.

3 total attacks, 49 dead 58 wounded.
New grand total: 76 dead, 92 wounded.

Compare to the 29K murders from 14 and 15?
1/4 of one percent.

So, if you are an American, who lives in America, and you get murdered in the next two years...there's a 99.925% chance that it's NOT going to be by a Muslim terrorist.

Whether it is mass shooting or not mass shootings, the numbers show that worrying about being killed by an Islamic terrorist in the US is pretty much the definition of fearful idiocy.

But you do you.

The 2015 350 "mass shootings" is not the FBI number.
So the black on black inner city shootings should somehow count towards my risk, but not the terrorist ones...ok got it. nitwit.

 

[qazplm]

The 2015 350 "mass shootings" is not the FBI number.
So the black on black inner city shootings should somehow count towards my risk, but not the terrorist ones...ok got it. nitwit.

no idiot, assume they all "count towards your risk" just like lightning strikes "count toward your risk" just like dying in a car accident "counts toward your risk" and then do what people with a functioning brain do, prioritize based on the degree or risk how much time/attention/money/concern you pay towards them.

And maybe you don't waste time on something that is less than one percent of whatever "risk" you are concerned with.

Or you could be a fearful imbecile.

We already know which one you'll pick don't we?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

no idiot, assume they all "count towards your risk" just like lightning strikes "count toward your risk" just like dying in a car accident "counts toward your risk" and then do what people with a functioning brain do, prioritize based on the degree or risk how much time/attention/money/concern you pay towards them.

And maybe you don't waste time on something that is less than one percent of whatever "risk" you are concerned with.

Or you could be a fearful imbecile.

We already know which one you'll pick don't we?

omg...so please describe the probability of a non black person being involved in black on black shooting/murder. Statistics in the hands of a nitwit. See you trot this out and you don't understand it. You believe these outcomes have equal probabilities for a given person? Your analysis is ridiculous and ne respondeas stulto iuxta stultitiam suam...therefore adios.

 

[qazplm]

omg...so please describe the probability of a non black person being involved in black on black shooting/murder. Statistics in the hands of a nitwit. See you trot this out and you don't understand it. You believe these outcomes have equal probabilities for a given person? Your analysis is ridiculous and ne respondeas stulto iuxta stultitiam suam...therefore adios.

the probability is only slightly smaller than being killed by an evil muslim. Weak sauce. You've got nothing, so you grasp at the silliness of your first sentence. You're wasting everyone's time. I'd give you points for the saving effort, but it's silly.

But do tell us, what are the REAL odds of someone dying at the hands of an Islamic terrorist.

Should be easy, right? Teach us all. Even us "fools" as you quote Proverbs, which shows exactly where your head is at doesn't it?

 

[patj11288]

I always find it interesting that you always reduce the discussion down to tiny percentages that in your mind indicate that the radical Islam problem is no different that other fringe hate groups. You would be concerned about that idiot kid if he happened to walk into a mall where you or your friends and neighbors were shopping. The reason for the low % was to indicate that small % of a very large number is still a big number, but you knew that.

There are 1.7 Billion Muslims in the world and about 3 million in the US. Is you read the Pew study you would have seen that a survey of 100,000 US Muslims said that 7% said they could see some situations where suicide killings were justified.

As far as I know radical Islamists are the only ones who, as a group, have a goal of killing all Americans regardless of their religion, gender, or age. And, they are targeting Christians all over the world. And their activity in the US is growing rapidly. And....

I am always curious whether someone like you has actually met or has a personal relationship with a Muslim beyond "he pumped my gas once."

 

[Bruce1]

I am always curious whether someone like you has actually met or has a personal relationship with a Muslim beyond "he pumped my gas once."

Yes I have. I worked with two Muslims for years and have a Christian from Pakistan at my Churcn. I had a Muslim Dr operate on my grand daughter.
Pump my gas? Really?

These people abhor the situation too. The Christian told me he didn't want the US to allow these immigrants in because "they would kill Christians"

 

[patj11288]

Yes I have. I worked with two Muslims for years and have a Christian from Oakistan at my Churcn. I had a Muslim Dr operate on my grand daughter.
Pump my gas? Really?

These people abhor the situation too. The Christian told me he didn't want the US to allow these immigrants him because "they would kill Christians"

A Christian from Pakistan (I assume you mean Pakistan) is not a Muslim...... And really? A doctor who operated on your granddaughter? I am sure you are close personal friends. If it wasn't for him "being a Muslim" you probably would not even remember who he was. I sure cannot remember who my Dad's oncologist was. As for the co-workers... Sure.. you work with them. Great, I work with a lot of people. Have you gone to their houses for dinner, socialized with their families/know anything about their families, or tried to learn anything about their respective cultures? This country has 3.3 million Muslims and all you can say to me, throughout the entire course of your life, is that you have worked with two, know a christian from a predominantly Muslim country, and one performed a surgery on your granddaughter. That is sad. Really sad. Until you do yourself a favor and step out of your lily white suburb for a second why should any of us really care what you have to say about immigration or the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism?

That said, I always like to pose this question to people. What circumstances would be awful enough to justify you and your family to pack up what few of your belongings you can carry on your back, walk all the way to the Canadian border, and potentially cross one of the great lakes on a raft. That is the point these Syrians are at. Let that sink in for a moment.This is the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War and it is not even close. Moreover, the vast, and I mean VAST, majority of these people are not savages looking to wet their knives with your oh so sacrosanct white Christian blood. They are people. People who are looking to escape the misery that is their home country and make a better life for their children. Not so unlike like your damn ancestors however many years ago that was.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

They are people. People who are looking to escape the misery that is their home country and make a better life for their children.

While I don't care for the combativeness of the rest of the post, there are many points with which I agree. This one is "nail-meet-hammer". In my ignorant 20s, I was a "glass carpet" conservative as it pertained to the Middle East, like a lot of people in my enormous gun club called the US military. Then I had the opportunity to live in Bahrain, deploy to Iraq and work with their Navy, plan exercises and events with Pakistanis, as well as multiple visits to the UAE, Kuwait, and Oman. It really first struck me in my time in Pakistan that while there are cultural differences which make it so we won't always see eye to eye, to the vast, vast majority of people - regardless of creed, color, etc. - what you said is exactly what it's all about: they're trying to carve out the best lives for themselves and their families as they can. Some tiny percentage of them think the best way to do that is by forcing fundamental change within their own countries, and that means attacking the outside influences they view as "evil". The overwhelming majority do not see it that way.

And no, supporting Sharia is not equivalent to "Death to America". People really need to stop posting that Pew poll and viewing its results in a vacuum, in my opinion. (I post that here because I anticipate that's the coming response to these two posts...)

 

[patj11288]

While I don't care for the combativeness of the rest of the post, there are many points with which I agree. This one is "nail-meet-hammer". In my ignorant 20s, I was a "glass carpet" conservative as it pertained to the Middle East, like a lot of people in my enormous gun club called the US military. Then I had the opportunity to live in Bahrain, deploy to Iraq and work with their Navy, plan exercises and events with Pakistanis, as well as multiple visits to the UAE, Kuwait, and Oman. It really first struck me in my time in Pakistan that while there are cultural differences which make it so we won't always see eye to eye, to the vast, vast majority of people - regardless of creed, color, etc. - what you said is exactly what it's all about: they're trying to carve out the best lives for themselves and their families as they can. Some tiny percentage of them think the best way to do that is by forcing fundamental change within their own countries, and that means attacking the outside influences they view as "evil". The overwhelming majority do not see it that way.

And no, supporting Sharia is not equivalent to "Death to America". People really need to stop posting that Pew poll and viewing its results in a vacuum, in my opinion. (I post that here because I anticipate that's the coming response to these two posts...)

Perhaps it was overly combative. I am, however, tired of just patting these insular xenophobes on the head and telling them that their opinions are okay. They are not. What ever happened to "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breath free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, the tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" That is one of the fundamental principles that has historically made this country great.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

A Christian from Pakistan (I assume you mean Pakistan) is not a Muslim...... And really? A doctor who operated on your granddaughter? I am sure you are close personal friends. If it wasn't for him "being a Muslim" you probably would not even remember who he was. I sure cannot remember who my Dad's oncologist was. As for the co-workers... Sure.. you work with them. Great, I work with a lot of people. Have you gone to their houses for dinner, socialized with their families/know anything about their families, or tried to learn anything about their respective cultures? This country has 3.3 million Muslims and all you can say to me, throughout the entire course of your life, is that you have worked with two, know a christian from a predominantly Muslim country, and one performed a surgery on your granddaughter. That is sad. Really sad. Until you do yourself a favor and step out of your lily white suburb for a second why should any of us really care what you have to say about immigration or the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism?

That said, I always like to pose this question to people. What circumstances would be awful enough to justify you and your family to pack up what few of your belongings you can carry on your back, walk all the way to the Canadian border, and potentially cross one of the great lakes on a raft. That is the point these Syrians are at. Let that sink in for a moment.This is the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War and it is not even close. Moreover, the vast, and I mean VAST, majority of these people are not savages looking to wet their knives with your oh so sacrosanct white Christian blood. They are people. People who are looking to escape the misery that is their home country and make a better life for their children. Not so unlike like your damn ancestors however many years ago that was.

why don't they go to all those other nice muslim countries? too many enlightened white people? racist prick.

 

[patj11288]

why don't they go to all those other nice muslim countries? too many enlightened white people? racist prick.

What does that even mean?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

What does that even mean?

really? jesus...
The Enlightenment (also known as the Age of Enlightenment;[1] in French: le Siècle des Lumières, lit. 'the Century of Lights'; and in German: Aufklärung, 'Enlightenment')[2] was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals such as liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government, and separation of church and state.[3][4] In France, the central doctrines of the Lumières were individual liberty and religious tolerance in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.[5] The Enlightenment was marked by an emphasis on the scientific method and reductionism along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.[6]

French historians traditionally place the Enlightenment between 1715, the year that Louis XIV died, and 1789, the beginning of the French Revolution. Some recent historians begin the period in the 1620s, with the start of the scientific revolution. Les philosophes (French for 'the philosophers') of the period widely circulated their ideas through meetings at scientific academies, Masonic lodges, literary salons, coffee houses, and through printed books and pamphlets. The ideas of the Enlightenment undermined the authority of the monarchy and the Church, and paved the way for the political revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries.[5] A variety of 19th-century movements, including liberalism and neo-classicism, trace their intellectual heritage back to the Enlightenment.[7]

The Age of Enlightenment was preceded by and closely associated with the scientific revolution. Earlier philosophers whose work influenced the Enlightenment included Francis Bacon, René Descartes, John Locke, and Baruch Spinoza.[8] The major figures of the Enlightenment included Cesare Beccaria, Voltaire, Denis Diderot, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, David Hume, Adam Smith, and Immanuel Kant. Some European rulers, including Catherine II of Russia, Joseph II of Austria and Frederick II of Prussia, tried to apply Enlightenment thought on religious and political tolerance, which became known as enlightened absolutism. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson visited Europe from America during this period and contributed actively to the scientific and political debate, and later incorporated the ideals of the Enlightenment into the United States Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.[9]

 

[patj11288]

really? jesus...
The Enlightenment (also known as the Age of Enlightenment;[1] in French: le Siècle des Lumières, lit. 'the Century of Lights'; and in German: Aufklärung, 'Enlightenment')[2] was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centered on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, and came to advance ideals such as liberty, progress, tolerance, fraternity, constitutional government, and separation of church and state.[3][4] In France, the central doctrines of the Lumières were individual liberty and religious tolerance in opposition to an absolute monarchy and the fixed dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.[5] The Enlightenment was marked by an emphasis on the scientific method and reductionism along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.[6]

French historians traditionally place the Enlightenment between 1715, the year that Louis XIV died, and 1789, the beginning of the French Revolution. Some recent historians begin the period in the 1620s, with the start of the scientific revolution. Les philosophes (French for 'the philosophers') of the period widely circulated their ideas through meetings at scientific academies, Masonic lodges, literary salons, coffee houses, and through printed books and pamphlets. The ideas of the Enlightenment undermined the authority of the monarchy and the Church, and paved the way for the political revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries.[5] A variety of 19th-century movements, including liberalism and neo-classicism, trace their intellectual heritage back to the Enlightenment.[7]

The Age of Enlightenment was preceded by and closely associated with the scientific revolution. Earlier philosophers whose work influenced the Enlightenment included Francis Bacon, René Descartes, John Locke, and Baruch Spinoza.[8] The major figures of the Enlightenment included Cesare Beccaria, Voltaire, Denis Diderot, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, David Hume, Adam Smith, and Immanuel Kant. Some European rulers, including Catherine II of Russia, Joseph II of Austria and Frederick II of Prussia, tried to apply Enlightenment thought on religious and political tolerance, which became known as enlightened absolutism. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson visited Europe from America during this period and contributed actively to the scientific and political debate, and later incorporated the ideals of the Enlightenment into the United States Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.[9]

Thank you for the copy and paste from Wikipedia. I am well aware of the Age of Enlightenment, but how does that pertain to anything that I said? Although I respect your right to shoot off a couple of semi-coherent sentences, you can understand that such blathering can sometimes be difficult to interpret.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Thank you for the copy and paste from Wikipedia. I am well aware of the Age of Enlightenment, but how does that pertain to anything that I said?

It is sarcasm related to the honest question in front of it.

 

[patj11288]

It is sarcasm related to the honest question in front of it.

I understand now. Thank you for clearing that up. Why are these waves of immigrants not gravitating toward other Middle Eastern countries? First, the largest Syrian refugee populations are in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Moreover, there are thirteen countries who have accepted more than 100,000 refugees. Eight out of those thirteen are predominately Muslim, Middle Eastern countries. That said, many countries in the Middle East, even the more secular ones, are relatively unstable still following the Arab Spring. While others, such as Jordan, already have enormous refugee populations that they can barely handle in the form of the Palestinians. Again, the basis for leaving, for the VAST majority of these people, is to find a better life for themselves and their children in the form of consistent well-paying work, acceptance into the larger community, and political stability. The United States, at least until Trump's deport Mexicans and ban Muslims movement, fits all of those criteria.

If you cannot wrap your head around that, perhaps this would be more obvious. Lets say, hypothetically, that the United States as we know it ceases to exist. You are being persecuted, many of your family members have been killed, your job is gone, and you do not have reliable sources of sustenance or shelter. Where do you go? Canada (the United States) or Mexico (other Middle Eastern countries) to make a better life for yourself and your remaining family?

Also, for future reference, the Age of Enlightenment, which is a noun describing a period in European history that was particularly enlightened, has absolutely nothing to do with how you used it in the initial sentence i.e. whether someone has an enlightened state of mind, an adjective. Next time that comes up, I would suggest using the definition of enlightenment to mockingly point out something that you think is obvious rather than the historical period........

 

[qazplm]

Also, for future reference, the Age of Enlightenment, which is a noun describing a period in European history that was particularly enlightened, has absolutely nothing to do with how you used it in the initial sentence i.e. whether someone has an enlightened state of mind, an adjective. Next time that comes up, I would suggest using the definition of enlightenment to mockingly point out something that you think is obvious rather than the historical period........

Yes, but doesn't it make him look smart?! Kinda like spouting off a bible quote in Latin.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Yes, but doesn't it make him look smart?! Kinda like spouting off a bible quote in Latin.

There's a lot of that with that dude. But at least he's not quoting newsmax... yet.

 

[patj11288]

There's a lot of that with that dude. But at least he's not quoting newsmax... yet.

RACISM!!!!!

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

I understand now. Thank you for clearing that up. Why are these waves of immigrants not gravitating toward other Middle Eastern countries? First, the largest Syrian refugee populations are in Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan. Moreover, there are thirteen countries who have accepted more than 100,000 refugees. Eight out of those thirteen are predominately Muslim, Middle Eastern countries. That said, many countries in the Middle East, even the more secular ones, are relatively unstable still following the Arab Spring. While others, such as Jordan, already have enormous refugee populations that they can barely handle in the form of the Palestinians. Again, the basis for leaving, for the VAST majority of these people, is to find a better life for themselves and their children in the form of consistent well-paying work, acceptance into the larger community, and political stability. The United States, at least until Trump's deport Mexicans and ban Muslims movement, fits all of those criteria.

If you cannot wrap your head around that, perhaps this would be more obvious. Lets say, hypothetically, that the United States as we know it ceases to exist. You are being persecuted, many of your family members have been killed, your job is gone, and you do not have reliable sources of sustenance or shelter. Where do you go? Canada (the United States) or Mexico (other Middle Eastern countries) to make a better life for yourself and your remaining family?

Also, for future reference, the Age of Enlightenment, which is a noun describing a period in European history that was particularly enlightened, has absolutely nothing to do with how you used it in the initial sentence i.e. whether someone has an enlightened state of mind, an adjective. Next time that comes up, I would suggest using the definition of enlightenment to mockingly point out something that you think is obvious rather than the historical period........

It has EVERYTHING to do with how I used it since the founding principals of the country were primarily based on it. You just can't see how it's related to muslim immigration because you're so blinded by your hate for lily white people.

 

[patj11288]

It has EVERYTHING to do with how I used it since the founding principals of the country were primarily based on it. You just can't see how it's related to muslim immigration because you're so blinded by your hate for lily white people.

LOL you are one of the most hilarious posters I have yet come across. Congratulations. By the way, I am a lily white person. Albeit one who is well-educated, possesses a general understanding of history, and has the ability to rationally debate policy. Please, by all means though, return to your cave to ponder conservative talk radio, conspiracy theories, and your antiquated world-view.

 

[Bruce1]

A Christian from Pakistan (I assume you mean Pakistan) is not a Muslim...... And really? A doctor who operated on your granddaughter? I am sure you are close personal friends. If it wasn't for him "being a Muslim" you probably would not even remember who he was. I sure cannot remember who my Dad's oncologist was. As for the co-workers... Sure.. you work with them. Great, I work with a lot of people. Have you gone to their houses for dinner, socialized with their families/know anything about their families, or tried to learn anything about their respective cultures? This country has 3.3 million Muslims and all you can say to me, throughout the entire course of your life, is that you have worked with two, know a christian from a predominantly Muslim country, and one performed a surgery on your granddaughter. That is sad. Really sad. Until you do yourself a favor and step out of your lily white suburb for a second why should any of us really care what you have to say about immigration or the dangers of Islamic fundamentalism?

That said, I always like to pose this question to people. What circumstances would be awful enough to justify you and your family to pack up what few of your belongings you can carry on your back, walk all the way to the Canadian border, and potentially cross one of the great lakes on a raft. That is the point these Syrians are at. Let that sink in for a moment.This is the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War and it is not even close. Moreover, the vast, and I mean VAST, majority of these people are not savages looking to wet their knives with your oh so sacrosanct white Christian blood. They are people. People who are looking to escape the misery that is their home country and make a better life for their children. Not so unlike like your damn ancestors however many years ago that was.

What an idiot! Did you read the original post where I said i believe that most Islamic immigrants who want to come to the US are seeking peace? Did you? The point was based on the sheer numbers an extremely small % is still a major concern. Yes, with less than 1% of our population being Islamic, it is fair to say that the typical American does not have a lot of contact on a daily basis with Muslims There are a few people that I can call friends who happen to be Muslim and peaceful AMERICANS. and yes, I got to know Dr Khan pretty well if even if briefly as he operated on my Grandaughter for thyroid cancer twice in two years so yes, I learned a lot about his love of people and compassion.

 

[patj11288]

What an idiot! Did you read the original post where I said i believe that most Islamic immigrants who want to come to the US are seeking peace? Did you? The point was based on the sheer numbers an extremely small % is still a major concern. Yes, with less than 1% of our population being Islamic, it is fair to say that the typical American does not have a lot of contact on a daily basis with Muslims There are a few people that I can call friends who happen to be Muslim and peaceful AMERICANS. and yes, I got to know Dr Khan pretty well if even if briefly as he operated on my Grandaughter for thyroid cancer twice in two years so yes, I learned a lot about his love of people and compassion.

So you want to temporarily (whatever that means -- only about 4k have entered the country) ban Muslim immigration (I am not sure how you define "Muslim" since you categorized a Christian Pakistani as Muslim) during the worst refugee crisis since the Second World War, despite the fact that the VAST (Germany -- out of approximately 600k admitted Syrian refugees there has not been a single terrorist attack by any of them) majority of them have no interest in harming anyone, because a few might be a concern? Aren't you being a little callous? Isn't our duty, not only as Americans, but as global citizens, to provide sanctuary in these types of situations, whether they are Muslim or not? I for one think it is.

 

[qazplm]

What an idiot! Did you read the original post where I said i believe that most Islamic immigrants who want to come to the US are seeking peace? Did you? The point was based on the sheer numbers an extremely small % is still a major concern. Yes, with less than 1% of our population being Islamic, it is fair to say that the typical American does not have a lot of contact on a daily basis with Muslims There are a few people that I can call friends who happen to be Muslim and peaceful AMERICANS. and yes, I got to know Dr Khan pretty well if even if briefly as he operated on my Grandaughter for thyroid cancer twice in two years so yes, I learned a lot about his love of people and compassion.

I think he read the post where you called a Christian Pakistani a Muslim.

 

[Bruce1]

I think he read the post where you called a Christian Pakistani a Muslim.

It's too bad he can't read. I said I worked with two people who were Muslim and also had a Pakistani Christian friend at my church. Thanks.

 

[patj11288]

It's too bad he can't read. I said I worked with two people who were Muslim and also had a Pakistani Christian friend at my church. Thanks.

So what does a Pakistani Christian have to do with my original question then? Why would you lump him in to the category of Muslims you know? When you find yourself in a hole it is always better to stop digging.

 

[qazplm]

It's too bad he can't read. I said I worked with two people who were Muslim and also had a Pakistani Christian friend at my church. Thanks.

Even if I give you that's what you meant... doesn't really help you.

 

[ecouch]

Anyone who argues 350+ mass shooting last year and 100+ this year isn't arguing in good faith.

No need to address an obvious shill.

 

[qazplm]

Anyone who argues 350+ mass shooting last year and 100+ this year isn't arguing in good faith.

No need to address an obvious shill.

lol so recognizing that the VAST majority of mass shootings and deaths and killing in this country aren't done by muslims isn't arguing in good faith?
lol gotcha

 

[ecouch]

lol so recognizing that the VAST majority of mass shootings and deaths and killing in this country aren't done by muslims isn't arguing in good faith?
lol gotcha

Everyone knows the VAST majority of shootings are black men killing other black men, black women, and black children. I assumed that was obvious. Democrats don't care. There has never been a congressional sit in for blacks. Gays yes. Blacks no. There was an Orlando slaughter the weekend of Father's Day in Chicago - total number. No one cares. It is bangers killing bangers. That was all a stunt.

The real problem is the 75% illegitimacy rate. Which also didn't garner a sit in.

Your 350 number, literally, comes from Reddit. A snarky sub at that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/how-many-mass-shootings-are-there-really.html9

The founder of the “shooting tracker” project, who currently goes by the handle “Billy Speed,” told me it was his choice: “Three years ago I decided, all by myself, to change the United States’ definition of mass shooting.” It’s also not clear how many of those stories — many of them from local outlets, including scant detail — are accurate.

Perhaps I shouldn't have said good faith. Academic is more appropriate.

I addressed a shill.