back to article Enraged Brits demand Donald Trump UK ban

Enraged British citizens in their thousands are rushing to sign an e-petition demanding US presidential wannabe and blow-dried rabble-rouser Donald Trump be barred from darkening the UK's doors. As won't have escaped your notice, Trump has got himself into a bit of bother by suggesting "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims …

Page:

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Thumb Up

        Re: Note to El Reg:

        Hear hear! But don't mention the word "hair" in the charge, since no such substance actually resides on his head. At least I hope not...

      2. Triggerfish

        Re: Note to El Reg: @Ledswinger

        That feels like a nice British response, I'd sign that.

      3. Munzly The Hermit

        Re: Note to El Reg:

        It's not a body-hair transplant then? I've been wondering what species the donor was?

  1. The Axe

    Jeez

    Some people like to be offended by anything and everything. Trump wants to do something in his own country and has chosen the perfect way to get the message out without having to spend millions of dollars in advertising. Yet people want to stop him from coming to this country, a country where he hasn't called for a Muslim ban or anything like it.

    He doesn't hate Muslims, as shown by the fact that he does business deals with them, just that the ISIS issue needs to be sorted out. And yes, ISIS is a Muslim terrorist organisation.

    As for Trump saying that our police are scared of Muslims, well the top brass might deny it (but then they're lily livered apologists & useful idiots for Islamists), but the normal policemen & women are saying he's right.

    1. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: Jeez

      Well.. the media is to blame for much of this... consider what he said and the bit at the end that no one mentions: .... until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on".

      They totally ignore that part which actually the way it should work. Congress has to decide.

      Disclaimer: I'm not a Trump supporter or a Billary supporter. Just a voter who's following along at this point and trying to sort out the rhetoric. We have a situation here much like chocolate bars in a cesspool... Sorting out the chocolate from the crap is a tough job.

      1. Someone Else Silver badge

        @ Mark 85 -- Re: Jeez

        A chocolate bar in a cesspool is still inedible....

        1. Mark 85 Silver badge

          Re: @ Mark 85 -- Jeez

          Just like our candidates. Even if you separate them, both are unpalatable to normal human beings. Not one good one in lot.

      2. abit

        Re: Jeez

        Muslims are hostile extra-terrestrial - and their God is a hostile extra-terrestrial too.

        If God is not an extra-terrestrial then there is no such thing. And if blowing yourself up in a middle of a leisure crowd is not hostile I do not know what hostile is.

        It will take congress until the American continents cross the Pacific and reach Africa - to reach the same conclusion though

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Jeez

      "Trump saying that our police are scared of Muslims, well the top brass might deny it (but then they're lily livered apologists & useful idiots for Islamists), but the normal policemen & women are saying he's right"

      I've seen constables quoted that there are areas where they take care but not any statement that it's because of Muslims.

      1. Ilmarinen
        Big Brother

        Re: Jeez

        AC bleated "I've seen constables quoted that there are areas where they take care but not any statement that it's because of Muslims." A voice at the back piped up "well they wouldn't, would they? Even if it were true. Nobody wants to be accused of a 'HATE CRIME' and lose their job!"

    3. sisk Silver badge

      Re: Jeez

      He doesn't hate Muslims, as shown by the fact that he does business deals with them, just that the ISIS issue needs to be sorted out.

      His many lies about Muslims, his call to ban Muslims from entering the US and impose a Nazi-like* registration scheme for the ones already here, and his general attitude towards Muslims bear out the fact that, yes, he does hate Muslims. Or at the very least he behaves in a hateful manner towards them. He just happens to love money more than he hates Muslims.

      *For once the Nazi comparison is realistic. What he's asking for is pretty much the exact same thing Hitler did to Jews at the beginning of that mess. I don't think he'd advocate rounding them up, but at this point I'm not surprised by anything that comes out of the man's mouth anymore.

      1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

        Re: Jeez -He just happens to love money more than he hates Muslims.

        Individual Nazis did in fact do deals with individual Jews. Towards the end of WW2 Himmler was busily engaged in selling German Jews in concentration camps to foreign Jewish organisations, but the varying conflicts of interest in Germany meant that he was less successful than he hoped. A nastier person never managed to commit suicide before he could be put on trial.

        In any case if Trump is doing deals with Wahabis or Salafists, they consider most US Muslims beyond the pale.

    4. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

      Re: Jeez

      Do you remember the Monty Python "Hilter fuer ein besseres Minehead" sketch?

      You probably thought it was a documentary and went around saying "He's talking a lot of sense, you know."

    5. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Jeez

      "He doesn't hate Muslims, as shown by the fact that he does business deals with them, just that the ISIS issue needs to be sorted out. And yes, ISIS is a Muslim terrorist organisation."

      The thing is, you only need to travel back in time 40 years and repeat all these rants and "discussions" but swap out "Muslim" for "Catholic" and maybe consider where a lot of the IRA funding came from.

      I don't remember being especially scared of Catholics in general or even Irish people in general back then. And the weird thing is, they looked just like "us".

  2. JustNiz

    All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

    I actually agree with Trump. Maybe if Europe could stop blindly hugging trees for a moment and look at whats really going on, they'd be keeping Muslims out too.

    The Qu'ran clearly says (multiple times) that in order to be a good Muslim you must (not just should, MUST) conduct Jihad, Its not even open to interpretation.

    This study: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/07/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/ found that 7% of all muslims already in the US say that suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified.

    It also found that in several countries, a quarter or more of Muslims say that these acts of violence are at least sometimes justified, including 40% in the Palestinian territories, 39% in Afghanistan, 29% in Egypt and 26% in Bangladesh.

    Those percentages equate to a friggin large number of people that think killing innocent US/EU civilians is justfied, and right now they can pretty much walk right into the EU and US.

    Maybe if you morons who are all morally outraged by Trumps suggestion would just stop being led by the nose by the hippie leftist media, and actually checked for yourselves how big the scope of this problem actually is, you might agree that doing something tangible to protect yourselves is actually more important than inadvertently offending some illegals. If people worried more about their own safety than some ridiculous sense of political correctness then maybe the next Paris-like terror attack might actually be stopped before it happens.

    1. Triggerfish

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      "'If you reject my commands and abhor my laws you will eat the flesh of your own sons and the flesh of your own daughters"

      "‘If two men sleep with each other they will both have to be killed"

      "I do not allow for a woman to teach. You will have to cut off her hand. Do not forgive her."

      Thats all from the bible, consider yourself a good Christian go read Leviticus and give up the bacon and shellfish.

      Cherry picking from one religous book to justify predjudice?

      Whats the statistics on racist white power groups who think people should be killed for x reasons, or do they get away with saying shit like that because they are fashionably pale?

      Maybe if you were not so fearful of your safety (and lets be honest your more likely to be killed by all sorts of things than terrorists) you could enjoy some liberty. But your fears drive you to fascism.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        Triggerfish, FYI....

        The Old Testament of the Bible and the Koran are effectively considered the same story and cover most of the same topics and characters.

        Only the New Testament is considered the work that the "Hippie Jesus" (IE Modern Christianity) is responsible for.

        However, I wouldn't think that all you Brit atheists, numpty's and Muslims would quite understand the difference.

        Trump is not old testament fundamentalist Christian. However, ALL Muslims are old Testament fundamentalist Muslims. There is no Hippie Allah.

        On the other hand, you P.C. numpty's are all bent out of shape and you don't even comprehend that Donald Trump actually said the ban on new muslims entering this country would be temporary like the ban that ex President Jimmy Carter did when he was president.

        You wouldn't know that because YOUR news outlets conveniently left that out of many of their broadcasts.

        1. Triggerfish

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          Actually I would say I was an Agnostic numpty with a leaning towards atheism.

          OK some questions.

          1. If the old testament is crock, why? what justification did you have for ignoring that bit of the word of god? Surely you shouldn't select what suits you?

          2. How do you know all muslims are following that fundamentalist bent from the Koran? have you interviewed them all? I ask this because from my limited sample of muslims I have met, a lot don't.

          3. Do you think that other religions can't grow an adapt?

          4. What makes yours the best religion?

          5. I didn't think Jews followed the new testament either and that it is also effectively the same, how comes we are not running from them?

          Also I know he said temporary until they sort out whats going on, first start would be realising that this is sort of what ISIS want, polarising people to cause conflict. So not only do I think it's a bit racist but I think its also not very astute on a world stage, (works fine though if appealing to a certain mindset to get the votes though).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

            Can't answer all your questions, but the answer to 5) is probably something along the lines that they fit in with their neighbors and aren't known for the slicing folks heads off bit or any suicide bombing.

            Also interested to know that not all of your sample of muslims you have met, aren't "following that fundamentalist bent from the Koran" - what percentage are, do you think? Enough to worry about?

            I don't think we should stereotype, or be "Islamophobic" but I think we might have a bit of a problem and I don't know what the solution is...

            A/C because...

            1. Triggerfish

              Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

              Aaah clever yes of course good answer, growing up in the part of London I did just down the road from Green Street a.k.a Little India I do remember all the beheadings and bombings, how I laughed that one day as I walked down the road my Indian friend shouted "Dr Livingston I presume?", its memorable for the massive mob that tried to run me down and give me a good stoning for being kaffir. I may be lying there but it's a good story, (The Dr Livingston bits true though).

              Percentage dunno mate and I am guessing you don't really either. But considering the school I went to had a fair mix, and not just Indian and Pakistani persuasion, Libyan, Iraqis, Phillipinos, Afro-Carribean etc, and having my drinking years around places like there, Bethnal Green etc I can tell you the most dangerous demographic was drunk young white guy.

              I've worked with people from various faiths, hell joked with Muslims about being kaffir when they go for their Friday prayers, still not gonna turn down their wifes cooking for fear of poisoning. Stayed on mostly mulsim islands in Asia, never felt they were trying to kill me either.

              There's only one I worked with who I thought was fundamentalist and frankly they were pretty mentalist about a lot of things.

              As a percentage I dunno, from those I have met 1 out of a lot, probably less than 1% then I guess.

              I think really your answer should be, 5)some of them are known for this and it makes it less complicated for me to fear them all, tell me do you equate all Christians with the Westbro Church?

              Not A/C in the slightest....

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

                tell me do you equate all Christians with the Westbro Church?

                You'd be shocked how many people do that. The number of times I've been told that the only difference between me and WBC is that they say what I supposedly believe but won't say is astonishing. I kid you not, I've actually had people get in my face and tell me what I believe, and what they say usually has no resemblance to what I thought I believed.

                AC because religion bashing is all too common here.

          2. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers. - OK some questions.

            @Triggerfish

            You won't get sensible answers from these guys. They are to the study of religions as a script kiddie is to a Chinese government approved computer espionage specialist.

            Religion may be a load of hot air, but so are a lot of human activities. Look at all the fuss over football, or the plots of the average Hollywood movie. The difference is that over the world as a whole more people follow one or other religion than follow most other activities.

            There's a billion and a half people who call themselves Muslims, ranging from the Kurds who have helped start a State which has a constitution guaranteeing tolerance and equality, to the Wahabis who have grafted the tribal beliefs of Arab slavers onto Islam. Anyone who pretends they are some sort of homogeneous mass may be equally misgudied about Christians and Jews and perhaps Buddhists; it's just that for some reason we don't usually conflate the Stamford Hill Chassidim with the majority of British Jews or ask the local vicar what goes on at the Kingdom Hall. Nor do most of us think that Richard Dawkins is a typical scientist (well, I hope not anyway).

            I agree with your last paragraph, but I would add this. I don't think there is any utility in asking whether the sacred books of a religion are "true" or not any more than it's useful to ask whether the flute in Mozart's opera really is magical. The big question is, does a religion give a structure to people's lives which enables them to live together, and with other people, more successfully, given that human kind cannot bear very much reality? If it does, it has at least a temporary use until psychology and neurology enable us to fix our social problems. If not, as Kipling wrote, "Holy State or Holy King-- Or Holy People's Will-- Have no truck with the senseless thing. Order the guns and kill!"

            1. Triggerfish

              Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers. - OK some questions. @ Voyna i Mor

              Ah I know man, I'm just bored and TV is crap.

              Personally I really couldn't care if someone was religious or not, worked with plenty of people from various religions and as long as they don't try and force their beliefs on me (had some good discussions though), then I am fine back. (Not a fan of Dawkins myself because of this), never bothered me to socialise with them either. People are either arses or they ain't really never thought colour, creed or sexual prevalence made much difference to that.

              I asked about which book was more true because the poster seemed to think that one was better than the other whilst also saying they were fundamentally the same, it becomes a silly argument, I was curious as to how they would justify it.

              Never quite got the apple v android thing either though tbh.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          > "You wouldn't know that because YOUR news outlets conveniently left that out of many of their broadcasts."

          But those outlets have names like "New York Times" and the "Nightly News"! They aren't "lefty progressive media"! The real lefty progressive media is calling for indictment of anyone denying AWG or disrespecting any minority, gender, blood type or PH level.

        3. Pompous Git Silver badge

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          ALL Muslims are old Testament fundamentalist Muslims.

          Some peoples have shit for brains don't they? Here's a Sufi Muslim singing about a real motor bike:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5V0RkCIaXo

          1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.- @Pompous Git

            "Here's a Sufi Muslim singing about a real motor bike:"

            Vincent owners are the real fundamentalists in my experience.

            1. Pompous Git Silver badge

              Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.- @Pompous Git

              Vincent owners are the real fundamentalists in my experience.

              I had a girlfriend in the 70s who owned a Triumph Bonneville. She was a lot of fun :-)

          2. Alan Brown Silver badge

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

            "Here's a Sufi Muslim singing about a real motor bike"

            Not to mention that Muslims know a lot about Jesus. His mother is a major figure in islam.

            They'll agree with the Messiah bit and the important prophet part, they just don't necessarily go along with the "son of god"(*) bit.

            It's worth doing a bit of research. Whoever Jesus may have been, all the original stuff was in tightly rhyming amaraic and its a lot easier to see what got nailed on or bent around to suit later politics.

            (Examples: A better translation of "Our father" is "Daddy!" and the Son of god bit was "we are all children of god". The heretical part about the teaching was the "God loves everyone" bit vs "God only loves Jews, must be obeyed, has temper tantrums when ignored and everyone else can be killed with impunity". And the whole "For thine is the kingdom" bit? Nailed on later in Greek, probably by Paul.)

            Getting back on topic, this whole religious fundamentalism shizdoggle is the last gasps of the Cold War. Fundamentalism was one of the things encouraged to ward off the Godless Commies and like many other cold war policies it's developed a bit of a life of its own long after the reasons for it died off.

            Trump should be banned for the sake of consistency. He's promoting Hate Speech and a bunch of lesser-known people have already been barred for that. If he's not then there's a major issue (selectively enforced laws are corruption writ large) and if he is it may well force a reexamination of the laws themselves.

            1. sisk Silver badge

              Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

              probably by Paul

              Paul was long dead by the time that bit got tacked on. IANA theologian, but if memory serves the earliest manuscripts with that bit in them that we have were written in the 3rd century.

          3. Dan Paul

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

            No, your inability to read what I said and comprehend it is pretty disappointing. I would say you have

            There is ONLY a NEW Testament in Christianity, not the Koran.

            Therefore, there are only old testament FUNDAMENTALIST Muslims who believe in Jihad. Refuting the actions of their murderous brethren has not happened so they are all guilty of complicity. Those so called "Peaceful Muslims" have not issued a fatwa against terrorism and the murders and rapes of non Islamic peoples.

      2. JustNiz

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        Sorry but I'm not a Christian either. Go take your mistaken preconceptions elsewhere.

      3. JustNiz

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        Your argument is stupid. Not that I'm a christian either, but if you can't see the significant difference in actual behaviour today between proponents of christianity and proponents of Islam, then you must be incredibly stupid.

        1. Triggerfish

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          Didn't mean to imply you were although reading it I guess it did, I was making a point about similar laws being ignored in one book and not the other. Sampling bias and a cognitive disconnect between one religion being able to ignore certain laws and another being seen as not ever being able to.

          I live in the UK, I have lived in many areas with muslims and no I can't. I can see there are some fundamentalists that are causing every muslim to be tarred with the same brush but I haven't seen any massive uprising going on from our native populace, have you then?

          I also grew up in London during the eighties, you would not believe the amount of times as a kid I have been evacuated from a shop because of a bomb scare, it got boring, (although I do feel uncomfortable if I see a left bag at a train station, all those signs you'd see on the underground gets to you) By your reasoning I should fear the Irish.

        2. BenR

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          You mean differences in actual behaviour between Christians and Muslims like this:

          http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/dec/03/planned-parenthood-shooting-doj-domestic-terrorism-abortion

          Or these:

          http://www.occupydemocrats.com/the-top-five-attacks-on-america-committed-by-christian-terrorists-not-muslims/

          Or perhaps these groups of people:

          http://aattp.org/here-are-8-christian-terrorist-organizations-that-equal-isis/

          Just for a few examples. Your comparison is absolutely inane. Tarring an entire group - be it racial, theological, by country of origin, hair colour, whatever - because of the actions of a few is one of the highest forms of idiocy, beaten only by attempts to justify whatever bigoted nonsense has just spewed forth from your face-hole.

          1. Alien8n Silver badge

            Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

            For those who seem convinced that terrorists aren't Christian, I have only this to say. The IRA still exists. I also don't recall anyone calling for a ban on all Irish Catholics during the 70s and 80s.

            1. Voyna i Mor Silver badge

              Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

              "I also don't recall anyone calling for a ban on all Irish Catholics during the 70s and 80s."

              That's because the IRA was supported by a number of US politicians - and, as we now know, Trump.

      4. P. Lee Silver badge

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        >Cherry picking from one religous book to justify predjudice?

        Easy to do, although presenting sentences from different books as a single quote may be more than just cherry picking. "Take the text out of context, you're left with a con." Cut off her hand? Well, if she tried to forcibly castrate someone in the heat of someone else's fight (Deut 25), maybe that was considered appropriate. For teaching? Probably not, but that wasn't the context.

        There is more merit to the argument than you are admitting though. While putting together the odd quote is dangerous, we do seem to be very surprisingly shy about evaluating beliefs. "What Would Jesus Do?" bracelets were popular at one time. I see no reason why we should not ask, "What Would Mohamed Do?" As the chief exponent of Islam, how did Mohamed behave? Why not apply IT or business analyst skills to the problem? If we take the life of Mohamed and the Quran as "architectural governance" what sort of HLD or detailed design for life do we end up with? If we take the Bible and the life of Jesus, what sort of principles do we apply to come up with a detailed design for living? If we take the Hindu, Buddhist, Communist, Nazi or Atheist writings, what sort of values can we derive from them?

        I'm not talking about taking any old person as an example of their value system. The question is, who is considered the best model of that belief system? Did they live up to the values they espouse? Were their actions compliant with their beliefs? If we did a traceability matrix what would be the result?

        When we look at the follower's actions, are they compliant with their beliefs? Westboro Baptist church for example, is probably out of compliance with their nominally stated belief system. If I follow the humanist manifesto or the communist manifesto or Buddhist scripture or Mein Kampf or Donald Trump, is there a logic, stated or implied which governs (or fails to govern) my actions?

        We need to stop pushing religion into the "private only" sphere because it is really about what drives us and like it or not, it has a public effect. Religions certainly re-badge "values" as "religion." Put aside reservations about the supernatural, re-badge "religion" as "values" if that makes the analysis easier.

        All religions are not the same. They logically contradict each other. Lumping them together is about as sensible as putting the Taliban leaders and the Swiss government in one category, on the basis that they are both political. We need to evaluate the content of value systems and the compliance of our leaders to the value systems they espouse, not just take a sound-bite and get back to watching "The Good Wife."

        1. Triggerfish

          Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

          Ah have I misquoted that's my bad an error of poor research on my part rather than an attempt to be disingenuous. I stand corrected.

      5. Schlimnitz

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        Straw man, and I'm not ever sure you're informed enough to know it.

        Can you reproduce the Pew statistics, but with Christians currently supporting (let alone implementing) the recommendations your are quoting (or misquoting, for the third)?

      6. Alan Brown Silver badge

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        "Whats the statistics on racist white power groups who think people should be killed for x reasons"

        Or the statistics on terrorist acts committed within the USA by white christians(*) vs evil brown people.

        (*) Oh yes: "They're not terrorists, they're just misunderstood loners with anger issues."

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      Some of those studies cited by that organization are already 4 or more years out of date.

    3. graeme leggett

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      I'll leave lefty progressive media alone if you'll stop taking everything the reactionary conservative press feeds you as gospel.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    4. sisk Silver badge

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      Good idea. Let's look at the numbers, shall we?

      There are approximately 1.5 billion Muslims in the world.

      There have been an estimated 25,000 terrorist attacks in the world since 9/11.

      Let's assume for the sake of argument that each of those terrorist attacks took 100 people to plan and execute (a blatantly ridiculous number, I'm sure you'll agree, especially since most terrorists work alone), that each attack was a completely separate group of 100 terrorists (again blatantly ridiculous) and that all of them are alive today. That would mean that there are approximately 2,500,000 terrorists in the world today. Now lets go a step further and assume that all of them were Muslim (which we know isn't the case).

      Using those numbers we get that 0.16% of all Muslims are terrorists. IF there were 100 people involved in every single terror attack in the last 15 years, IF they were each a unique group of 100 people, IF they were all alive still, and IF each and every one of them were Muslim. All of those are obviously ludicrous assertions to inflate our estimate of how many Islamic terrorists there are in the world and we still arrive at a percentage so small that it's barely even a statistical blip.

      When you drop those ridiculous assertions and start working with real world data the figure drops to 0.00005% (an estimate, admittedly, but an estimate from people who know what they're talking about).

      Perhaps YOU should be looking at numbers before you go throwing around insults.

      1. Dan Paul

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        The fact that almost all Terrorists are Muslims and that almost all terrorist acts are committed by those of Islamic beliefs, seems to have escaped your rapier like wit.

        You are promoting the same BS and expecting different results.

    5. Someone Else Silver badge
      FAIL

      @Just Niz -- Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      This study: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/07/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/ found that 7% of all muslims already in the US say that suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified.

      I'm sure you could conduct a poll in the hinter regions of the Southern United States where 7% of the respondants state that lynchings of black folk are sometimes justified, and 1% say they are often justified.

      1. This post has been deleted by a moderator

    6. the spectacularly refined chap

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      This study ... found that 7% of all muslims already in the US say that suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified.

      Which means absolutely nothing, 1% is the sort of figure you'll get for any position in any survey. As for the 7%, is "sometimes" really an outrageous position?

      Consider the Black Buck missions in the Falklands War: these are often portrayed as a heroic story of British derring-do, certainly not dishonourable in any way. One of the bombers only got a fraction of the fuel it needed in the final air-to-air refuelling before the strike. Radio silence was in play so clarifying the situation was out. The crew's decision? Proceed with the strike and ditch in the South Atlantic. From that point on it was a suicide bombing mission.

      You can argue about whether the strikes were justified, that is the realm of politics. However, it's difficult to argue the strikes were not justifiable. You only need to show it once for "sometimes" to be valid.

      For completion, yes the crew got home safely. The tanker crew were aware of the situation and another tanker sent further forward than originally planned to pick them up before they had to ditch. The bomber crew didn't know that when carrying out the strike.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

        > "...1% is the sort of figure you'll get for any position in any survey. As for the 7%, is "sometimes" really an outrageous position?"

        Okay then, let's see you provide counterpoint polling from non-Muslim areas. You know, the kind where 7% of all Christians believe it's sometimes okay to slaughter innocent men, women and children via suicide bombing, if the cause is just. Tell you what, just show us where 7% of any tiny backwoods population wants blacks to be lynched. We'll wait.

        Psst: I bet you can't...

    7. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: All you treehuggers need to look at the numbers.

      "The Qu'ran clearly says (multiple times) that in order to be a good Muslim you must (not just should, MUST) conduct Jihad, Its not even open to interpretation."

      I suggest you acquiant yourself with the meaning in that book, vs the meaning that various extremist idiots have given it in conjunction with an overly pandering western press.

      Jihad as mentioned is a mental struggle to vanquish the bad parts within yourself (ie, self examination and criticism) It's only more recently that it's been subverted to be any kind of violent war on other people.

      Modern Religion generally consists of the crooked leading the gullible and the extremist are cases in point.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019