Islam in Europe: perception and reality

[Marsellus Wallace]

that's really why I don't discuss serious shit in this forum, I speak my mind and say the truth and I get hated for it.

I don't hate you. I do think you're a dumbass, though.  Your inability to mount a cogent defense of your overgeneralizations, instead preferring to impute attitudes to others whom you don't know, certainly does not engender my respect.

If you want respect, earn it. If you don't care for earning it, quit whining about not having it.

fuck it, let's go mainstream herd mentality, islam is nice, not all muslims are bad, muslim immigrants are gonna make europe a great place, muslim terrorists are not even muslims. Bin Ladin, ISIS, boko-haram and taliban are all CIA made. muslims are sweet ppl, I have a muslim friend and he's nice.

Now you look like a dishonest idiot.

at least i'm not as aggressive as you are when replying to someone making a point of view. and who says i'm whining about anything ? 

and I certainly am not looking to earn any respect from you.

[Minimalist]

Studies have been done.  Do you think it is possible to characterize nutty xtians in Alabama but not nutty muslims in Germany?

https://www.wzb.eu/en/press-release/isla...ely-spread






https://www.wzb.eu/en/research/migration...igrant-int

I'm confused as to what you're arguing.

It was in reply to the concept of "broad-brushing" which can be done.  If 3-4% of a population are 11th century assholes who want to cut off hands for theft or stone women for adultery then suggesting that the rest of the group are 11th century assholes would be unsuportable.  But when 50-60% of a group express those attitudes then it is time to start looking for root causes.

In the case of islam it is not hard.

[abaris]

If 3-4% of a population are 11th century assholes who want to cut off hands for theft or stone women for adultery then suggesting that the rest of the group are 11th century assholes would be unsuportable.  But when 50-60% of a group express those attitudes then it is time to start looking for root causes.

Source? Or is that just your little hommage to Trump?

[Minimalist]

See Post #29.

[Thumpalumpacus]

at least i'm not as aggressive as you are when replying to someone making a point of view. and who says i'm whining about anything ? 

It's not that you're opining, but that you're doing so in such a shitty manner. As for your whining, I'll let the readership sort that.

and I certainly am not looking to earn any respect from you.

You've hit your mark in one column, then.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm confused as to what you're arguing.

It was in reply to the concept of "broad-brushing" which can be done.  If 3-4% of a population are 11th century assholes who want to cut off hands for theft or stone women for adultery then suggesting that the rest of the group are 11th century assholes would be unsuportable.  But when 50-60% of a group express those attitudes then it is time to start looking for root causes.

In the case of islam it is not hard.

... he said, ignoring the fact that cherry-pickers are present in all religions.

[Mudhammam]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicde...y-chart-15

Europeans regard Islam as more threatening to their national cultures than other faiths (or indeed atheism), according to a 2013 poll by the Bertelsmann Foundation, a non-profit organisation in Germany. Many across the continent see Islam as incompatible with the West. Yet perceptions can easily run ahead of reality. European publics wildly overestimate the proportion of their populations that is Muslim: an Ipsos-Mori poll in 2014 found that on average Belgian respondents thought 29% of their compatriots were Muslim. The actual figure is closer to 6%.

Should I also take comfort in the thought that the target of violent jihad is mostly other Muslims?

[Marsellus Wallace]

at least i'm not as aggressive as you are when replying to someone making a point of view. and who says i'm whining about anything ? 

It's not that you're opining, but that you're doing so in such a shitty manner. As for your whining, I'll let the readership sort that.

and I certainly am not looking to earn any respect from you.

You've hit your mark in one column, then.

you just didn't like what I said, there was nothing shitty about what I wrote, at least I didn't insult you in my posts, at least that is my standard for a non-shitty post, how about you ?

readership sort wot m8 ? with no reason you just say i'm whining, when all I did explain a serious problem.

I still don't care about your respect towards me.




I really regret discussing anything here.............., seriously man , WTF ??!

[Heat]

I'm confused as to what you're arguing.

It was in reply to the concept of "broad-brushing" which can be done.  If 3-4% of a population are 11th century assholes who want to cut off hands for theft or stone women for adultery then suggesting that the rest of the group are 11th century assholes would be unsuportable.  But when 50-60% of a group express those attitudes then it is time to start looking for root causes.

In the case of islam it is not hard.

Isnt that like saying "if 40% of people want to kill the other 60% then thats not okay, but if 60% want to kill the other 40% then we should come in and kill 100%."

Obviously im exaggerating but still, it seems as though you're implying that if a majority percentage of a group of people commit a crime; that means we should prosecute the remaining percentage for the same crime, as if they had committed the crime, even though they didnt commit it, solely because they are in the minority.

[abaris]

Should I also take comfort in the thought that the target of violent jihad is mostly other Muslims?

It's not about taking comfort. It's about not broadbrushing the whole group when the majority of the victims actually come from that particular group.