Igorveni, I do see what you are saying, that it’s a damn shame that 1-2% of any group can stain the entire group;
Jive T: I also see your point, that why is it that the 1-2% of “bad” Muslims seem to have caused so much havoc, when the “bad” 1-2% of these other groups seem so harmless?
I hope that helps you both. 
This is a good discussion…let’s keep working on it.
peace
Back on topic
He’s been deemed “radical”…maybe
thesun.co.uk/article/0,2004 … 94,00.html
[quote]UK snubs banned radicals
RADICAL clerics barred by America will automatically face bans on entering the UK too.
All extremists applying to come to Britain will have their cases sent to the Home Secretary Charles Clarke if they have already been turned away elsewhere.
Ministers are also stepping up efforts to agree deals with North African countries so people granted asylum here can be sent home if suspected of terrorism.
Tony Blair wants swift new anti-terror laws.
His official spokesman said last night:
Well, if you consider the pedophile priest harmless, the white men who kidnaps rape and kill young children harmless, the doctor who willingly mispractice his science for his own good harmless, the scientist who invents weapons so powerful that they can oblitarate the whole of us harmless and the list goes on…then yeah, maybe I am blind!
However you are right, this thread IS interesting.
Well, if you consider the pedophile priest harmless, the white men who kidnaps rape and kill young children harmless, the doctor who willingly mispractice his science for his own good harmless, the scientist who invents weapons so powerful that they can oblitarate the whole of us harmless and the list goes on…then yeah, maybe I am blind!
However you are right, this thread IS interesting.
[/quote]
LOL
OK Igor, you got me there…however, I doubt that these sickos are as organized as that 1-2% or Muslim badies.
back to you. 
Well, if you consider the pedophile priest harmless, the white men who kidnaps rape and kill young children harmless, the doctor who willingly mispractice his science for his own good harmless, the scientist who invents weapons so powerful that they can oblitarate the whole of us harmless and the list goes on…then yeah, maybe I am blind!
However you are right, this thread IS interesting.
[/quote]
LOL
OK Igor, you got me there…however, I doubt that these sickos are as organized as that 1-2% or Muslim badies.
back to you. [/quote]
You are right there are not, but that ain’t the point i was making in my first post, I was merely pointing out that it was a shame to condemn a whole group while only an extreme minority was destructive and I was giving some examples.
[quote=“igorveni”]
You are right there are not, but that ain’t the point I was making in my first post, I was merely pointing out that it was a shame to condemn a whole group while only an extreme minority was destructive and I was giving some examples. 
[/quote]
OK, fine. But, don’t those other groups police themselves much better than the Muslims seem to do? Or is it all bad press.
Pedophiles are caught, convicted and registered upon release; preists are defrocked; doctors stripped of their liscenses, scientists ridiculed…
Tell me, how are these 1-2% of muslims policed by their own?
And no, they do not represent the whole but still…something is wrong here…
Even the KKK in the US, after being “legitimate” for years, was shut down, isolated and alienated and totally discredited…do you see this happeneing to the terrorists in the future?
I sure hope so.
[quote]Tell me, how are these 1-2% of muslims policed by their own?
And no, they do not represent the whole but still…something is wrong here… [/quote]
You are right something IS horribly wrong.
[quote]do you see this happeneing to the terrorists in the future?
I sure hope so.[/quote]
I hope so too, and in the meantime we should be merciless against these people.
[quote=“igorveni”][quote]Tell me, how are these 1-2% of muslims policed by their own?
And no, they do not represent the whole but still…something is wrong here… [/quote]
You are right something IS horribly wrong.
[quote]do you see this happeneing to the terrorists in the future?
I sure hope so.[/quote]
I hope so too, and in the meantime we should be merciless against these people.[/quote]
well holy shit…after all of this, we completely agree. Beer’s on me!
Maybe because the other 99 or 98 % support the 1 or 2 % to some degree just because they are Muslim even though they abhor the method?
My teacher used to keep us all back after school because of one or two idiots in the class.
Same rules apply here. Tough luck.
It’s a shame because the chap a very commendable history and he is 82 years old (or thereabouts). I’m sure the US has it’s reasons and while I think the attitude of the US customs department is little short of disgusting, these are touchy times.
This is the absolute scariest possibility as I see it.
as for the 98 innocents and 2 baddies geting in
think of it as 50 innocents not being dead…and please dont misread me…people getting blown up because other people exploit democracy is disgusting…whats a country to do??? accept the losses or appear paranoid?
this is a no win situation…period
[quote=“jdsmith”]This is the absolute scariest possibility as I see it.
as for the 98 innocents and 2 baddies geting in think of it as 50 innocents not being dead…and please dont misread me…people getting blown up because other people exploit democracy is disgusting…whats a country to do??? accept the losses or appear paranoid?[/quote]
A vector of only slightly different magnitude, for any of you who support Bush’s decision to wage war in Iraq. Please allow me to slightly change Shin Gua’s words, like:
Only in Iraq the percentage of “baddies” is quite likely higher. I think this is due to the way the war in Iraq was pursued. If we had gone in with overwhelming force - a force large enough to allow the Iraq armed forces to stand whole - and sealed the borders, established security, built out Iraqi infrastructure while guarding both the effort and the result, done it all on a budget not exclusively American, allowing the Iraqis a valid incubator for democracy, and thus perhaps see the white of the light at the end of the tunnel by now, then the civil war we’re now seeing wouldn’t have taken root.
And I note that the Bush administration and its allies have been exhorting moderate Iraqis to stand up and take charge. I also think that this is quite likely the line that we cannot force anyone to cross, not even at rifle point. In other words, Bush supporters can argue till they’re blue in the face (and they have) that “look at Japan, look at our success with democracy in post-war Germany,” but the fact of the matter is that if a conquered people don’t cross this line on their own then we can’t make them. (and why should they if it’s overwhelmingly unsafe to do so?)
By not going in with allies, Bush in effect gave us only until 2006 to make his utterly daisy-headed and idealistic “plans” succeed.
Granted, it’s not religion. But patriotism is similar to religion, and by all accounts the peoples who make up Iraq have always been a proudly independent lot.
Bingo. It’s also why - if my change to Shin Gua’s words is valid, and if Bush’s idealism was truly a pragmatic solution (I do not believe it was) - we needed the nations of the UN no matter what. We are simply too resource-poor without them.
This whole situation is not only Iraqi, but is international involving all muslims. Check out the nationality of the London bombers.
I think it ivolves ALL Muslims only by association…the terrorists are primarily proponents of Wahibist Islam.
Profiling is an effective tool in crime prevention.
Wahibist?
Maybe, but I haven’t heard of any condemnation of the bombers by Iran, and they’re not Wahibist.
I still think there is a propensity for Muslims to support other Muslims, no matter what the sect or nationality.