sadoldgit

Oh and even with my rudimentary maths, 9 in 10 is a much huger number than 1 in 10 n'est pas?

You are an intelligent man CB Fry I believe. You will know that there are certain ways of presenting stats to get a certain response. If the post had said that 73% of Muslims polled were against the terrorists and 90% were against the attack on Charlie H do you think it would have had the same effect? I have not put any spin on the figures at all. They are as they stand.

I don't know. I am not the one spinning the figures here though am I? The majority of people in both cases are against the attack. Is that not correct?

black

So 73% didn't sympathise with the terrorists and 90% thought it was wrong to attack the cartoonists?

No, if you read what I say I said that you don't have to go back to the Middle Ages. Earlier I cited atrocities committed by Christian Americans in the Vietnam War - late 60 early 70s. There were plenty of atrocities committed by Christians against Christians in Northern Ireland in the 70s. And actually, what is wrong for bringing those NAZIs convicted of war crimes to justice?

You sound like you have spend a lot of time in the Middle East?

Absolutely.

We were talking about one religion being violent. Many are violent at times and you don't have to look as far back as the middle ages to find Christians behaving savagely. It isn't exclusive to Muslims.

Hi Verbal, perhaps we should help to distance them from that religion by calling them Daesh?

I think it means God Is With Us

For clarification Guan (and Hypo although I know you wont be interested) it was a tongue in cheek response to what had gone before. Someone said that there were 6 million Muslims living in France and it was a remark aimed at what had gone before in terms of what was said about the Koran and their supposed religious beliefs. Perhaps I should have added a smiley face! In fact I don't think I even referred to Griffo but I am sure Hypo will find evidence if I did!

Where is anyone apologising for the action of anyone carrying our terrorist attacks?

But it is written in their Holy Book and if they follow that book religiously does it not follow that they all pose a threat? That seems to be his point.

I said that Christianity was no more or less a violent religion than Islam and was told I was bonkers because of what is written in their Holy Book. Apparently those who follow Islam are supposed to kill all of us non believers.

The beheading carried out by exremists is also medieval and backward. It wasn't uncommon for GIs to cut off the ears of the dead VC and hang them around their necks. They also cut off breasts from Vietnamese women. That also was medieval and backward. Perhaps it has more to do with man's own basic instincts rather than an allegiance to any religion?

Government minister on the news just now. Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam and it is not a state. There you go then, this from over very own Government.

Yep, apparently God was on the side of the Nazis too!

What did I make up mate? I confused one post from you with a post made by someone else. I did not make it up. By the way, I apologised for the error to you twice but you chose not to accept my apology for my mistake.

Indeed! I have had several messages on Facebook recently asking me to support the banning of the Burka because apparently it is a security risk? Is it really anymore a risk than hoodies. balaclavas, raincoats? I might want it banned because it is a hideous fashion but really, isn't this just another way of saying we don't like these people, they are different. I don't know how many people wearing burkas have carried out terrorist acts in the west but I am willing to suggest that it isn't many.

I haven't made up stuff and I haven't made myself look silly. It is just how you like to try and score points. If you took off your point scoring blinkers are read what has been said perhaps you would understand a bit more. Both religions have holy books which have been interpreted in various ways over the centuries. We were told here earlier that Muslims are a threat because their holy book tells them to kill the Infidel. The vast majority of Muslims seem either not to interpret their book in that way or they are just rubbish Muslims because out of the 1.6 billion of them, most of them do not kill non believers. It is simplistic in the extreme to say that this is a Muslim problem. It is a global problem, not helped because of the reliance of the West on oil from the Middle East. There I have said it. This is not just about religion. This is not happening because one religion is more bloodythirsty than another.

The trouble is Hypo that you get yourself worked up and misunderstand what is being said.

Isnt that most followers of Islam chose to live peaceful lives though? Just because some factions chose to interpret something in one way (and they are clearly in the minority) doesn't mean to say that the whole religion and ideology is tainted. It just isn't true to say that Islam is more violent than Christianity. We have only just worn poppies in remembrance of some of the most barbaric wars in history perpetrated in the main by people who say they are Christians.

What am I making up? We are talking about religions and what those religions supposedly preach, It has been said on this thread that Muslims are a threat because part of their Holy Book says that they must kill non believers. To say that Muslims are more dangerous than any other religions is a nonsense. What is happening now is down to a number of extremist factions. That is not all of Islam just as the "Troubles" in Northern Island was all Christians. If what you say is true why do we have so many peaceful Muslim communities in the West, why aren't they all on the streets killing and maiming. We are talking about a small % of people who are using a religion as a front.

Very interesting and very worrying. And it does highlight that the problem goes much further than the interpretation of a few lines from their holy book.