Donald Trump

[Renegade]

The Trump machine continues. A true Conservative, it is what we need to eradicate Muslim extremism.

They murder westerners so we should go back twice as hard. We need them to know who's boss and have them killed.

Oh dear, reactionary leftie bullshit. There's a surprise.

Islam obviously has more problems as a religion than most you fool.

 

[JaseTheVillain]

Stole what I was about to post...

 

[epic73]

We have a Donald Trump thread now? What's gone wrong?

 

[SALTIRE]

He's a massive tit and not the good kind, am I right Salty my man?

Absolutely he's the type of tit that's like an older woman's in that they looks good and big but when you get your hands on them there is no substance to them!

 

[johnnytodd]

We have a Donald Trump thread now? What's gone wrong?

yanks?

 

[Red]

As soon as he wins the nomination he will steadily move to the centre. I would not be surprised if he actually went quite progressive in some senses, like going after the banks and money in politics.

Yes, you're right, he'll probably move towards the centre. I don't think he'd go after his financier pals though.

 

[Alty]

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/11/18/muslim-nations-hate-isis-too

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-than-western-deaths/articleshow/49821761.cms

http://www.mintpressnews.com/conservatives-ms-are-muslims/211385/

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...t/map-isis-attacks-around-the-world.html?_r=0

Muslim extremism, especially at the moment with the main belligerents being Daesh, is mainly directed at Muslims. A few attacks in the west and it's headline news, how much did you hear of the attacks in Turkey, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt (funnily enough, all MUSLIM COUNTRIES) compared to the few in the west?

Stop listening to the rhetoric given by mainstream news making you believe that Islam is a horrific religion. Muslims themselves are the ones currently fighting and dying against Daesh as we speak. Wake up, you fool. You, and the rest of the blind idiots around the world.

Those numbers are pretty alarming though. A very quick scan over them and that looks like around 100 million people with a favourable view of ISIS...

Fuck.

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

Interesting that more people support ISIS in Israel than Lebanon. I suppose that's well within the margin of error though.

 

[Aber gas]

Yes, you're right, he'll probably move towards the centre. I don't think he'd go after his financier pals though.

You're back man !

 

[Red]

You're back man !

Hey up mate. How's it goin'?

 

[Aber gas]

Hey up mate. How's it goin'?

It's going ok, what you been up to ? You've been missed.

 

[Aber gas]

Oh, get Twitter ya dinosaur

 

[Red]

Oh, get Twitter ya dinosaur

Steven passed your message on about Twatter. I might succumb. What's transpired on here while I've been away?

 

[JaseTheVillain]

Those numbers are pretty alarming though. A very quick scan over them and that looks like around 100 million people with a favourable view of ISIS...

Fuck.

Absolutely, but 100million supporters vs 1billion against....

 

[The Fack]

I have a hard-on for idiots.

 

[Womble98]

The number of IS supporters isn't an accurate measure of militant Muslims though is it? IS has targeted many Muslims. There are many hundreds of millions of Muslims who condemn IS but support stoning gays, support blasphemy laws, support intolerance and bigotry on crazy scales.

 

[Renegade]

The number of IS supporters isn't an accurate measure of militant Muslims though is it? IS has targeted many Muslims. There are many hundreds of millions of Muslims who condemn IS but support stoning gays, support blasphemy laws, support intolerance and bigotry on crazy scales.

ISIS (maniacal fundamentalists) cloud over the other problems with an ideology that can be interpreted in a deeply oppressive fashion. That there are 1 billion against ISIS and 100 million for is used as a defence reminds me a bit of a Father Ted quote:

Niamh Connolly: I hope this island isn't some hideaway for paedophile priests.
Ted: well Niamh, we're not all like that, say there are 200 million priests in the world and 5 per cent of them are paedophiles, that's still only 10 million.

I doubt many of those defending the religion realise how many are in favour of enacting Sharia Law.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

It's a religion of peace if you interpret it as such, unfortunately there is a huge portion of the world population who do not. I've seen a lot of hearty defence of religion in general on here the past week, I don't really understand why. I understand the value it has brought to the world to get us to this point, it is a huge part of our evolution and enabled the creation of mass civilisation. However, at this point, any ideology that is so vague that it can be interpreted in such a damaging way by a large chunk of the earth isn't really worth defending.

 

[johnnytodd]

Let's stay on topic please lads...thanks.

 

[Womble98]

ISIS (maniacal fundamentalists) cloud over the other problems with an ideology that can be interpreted in a deeply oppressive fashion. That there are 1 billion against ISIS and 100 million for is used as a defence reminds me a bit of a Father Ted quote:

Niamh Connolly: I hope this island isn't some hideaway for paedophile priests.
Ted: well Niamh, we're not all like that, say there is 200 million priests in the world and 5 per cent of them are paedophiles, that's still only 10 million.

I doubt many of those defending the religion realise how many are in favour of enacting Sharia Law.

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-overview/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

It's a religion of peace if you interpret it as such, unfortunately there is a huge portion of the world population who do not. I've seen a lot of hearty defence of religion in general on here the past week, I don't really understand why. I understand the value it has brought to the world to get us to this point, it is a huge part of our evolution and enabled the creation of mass civilisation. However, at this point, any ideology that is so vague that it can be interpreted in such a damaging way by a large chunk of the earth isn't really worth defending.

To paraphrase Ricky Gervais, if Islam is a religion of peace I'd fucking hate to see what a religion of war looked like.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

It's a religion of peace if you interpret it as such, unfortunately there is a huge portion of the world population who do not. I've seen a lot of hearty defence of religion in general on here the past week, I don't really understand why. I understand the value it has brought to the world to get us to this point, it is a huge part of our evolution and enabled the creation of mass civilisation. However, at this point, any ideology that is so vague that it can be interpreted in such a damaging way by a large chunk of the earth isn't really worth defending.

If 100 million Muslims worldwide support ISIS it's probably because foreign policy is messy as fuck and not because they're all mad for crucifixions (100m is nearly double even the most wing-nut interpretation of the poll btw).

I mean, there are plenty of people who would blanket give their support to anyone fighting the US - and tbqh, if you're a Pakistani living in Waziristan where drone strikes have killed thousands in the past decade, it's not an unreasonable position to do that. The vast majority of Muslims in the world are unlikely to be particularly well-informed about the Syrian Civil War (I don't think the majority of people in the UK are either) - the fact that two thirds of Pakistanis don't know one way or the other is telling.

Anyway, it's good that there's another Muslim bashing thread. I would suggest the fact that so many clearly intelligent people on here are swallowing and regurgitating vile reactionary islamophobic views might provide useful context for that poll that suggests that a large number of Muslims hold vile reactionary views.

 

[smat]

To paraphrase Ricky Gervais

no

 

[Renegade]

If 100 million Muslims worldwide support ISIS it's probably because foreign policy is messy as fuck and not because they're all mad for crucifixions (100m is nearly double even the most wing-nut interpretation of the poll btw).

I mean, there are plenty of people who would blanket give their support to anyone fighting the US - and tbqh, if you're a Pakistani living in Waziristan where drone strikes have killed thousands in the past decade, it's not an unreasonable position to do that. The vast majority of Muslims in the world are unlikely to be particularly well-informed about the Syrian Civil War (I don't think the majority of people in the UK are either) - the fact that two thirds of Pakistanis don't know one way or the other is telling.

I'm not disregarding the massive influence foreign policy has had in empowering extremists, but it is still disconcerting that this many people support a militant jihadist group. My point was that 1 billion vs 100 million wasn't a very good defence in favour of the 1 billion, I was simply nitpicking.

I didn't do the number crunching, I just took Alty for his word above, perhaps it is an overblown estimate.

Anyway, it's good that there's another Muslim bashing thread. I would suggest the fact that so many clearly intelligent people on here are swallowing and regurgitating vile reactionary islamophobic views might provide useful context for that poll that suggests that a large number of Muslims hold vile reactionary views.

It's a Donald Trump thread, the Islam debate is going to come up.

What part of my post was vile, reactionary or Islamophobic? The bit where I criticise any ideology (many religions) that can lead to oppressive mandates or the bit where I cited how many people are in support of Sharia Law (something that goes completely against basic liberal values)? Geopolitics are a large reason for the proliferation of bad ideas, yes, but I don't think there is any bigotry involved in pointing out damaging/oppressive ideologies.

 

[Jockney]

we're arguing over polling data, i'm guessing done over the phone? i'm surprised the numbers aren't more favourable to isis, if i'm honest. a larger number of people will spite the establishment in favour of extreme upstarts in times of political turmoil. ukip went from a joke party to receiving the third largest share of the popular vote in the last election. front national came second in france's GE a decade or so back. it does not represent an ideological shift.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

I'm not disregarding the massive influence foreign policy has had in empowering extremists, but it is still disconcerting that this many people support a militant jihadist group. My point was that 1 billion vs 100 million wasn't a very good defence in favour of the 1 billion, I was simply nitpicking.

I didn't do the number crunching, I just took Alty for his word above, perhaps it is an overblown estimate.



It's a Donald Trump thread, the Islam debate is going to come up.

What part of my post was vile, reactionary or Islamophobic? The bit where I criticise any ideology (many religions) that can lead to oppressive mandates or the bit where I cited how many people are in support of Sharia Law (something that goes completely against basic liberal values)? Geopolitics are a large reason for the proliferation of bad ideas, yes, but I don't think there is any bigotry involved in pointing out damaging/oppressive ideologies.

Agreed. In answer to the question, nothing whatsoever. There are perhaps a few posters who are a bit like a dog with a bone when it comes to Islam, but anything genuinely "vile, reactionary or Islamophobic" (unconvinced as to whether there's an awful lot of this) tends to come from obvious trolls. A belief is of no greater merit just because it's sincerely held or divinely inspired so it seems perfectly permissible to ask why a fairly substantial number of people are in some way supportive (or are unsure as to whether they're supportive) of a fanatical death cult, renowned for their gruesome executions. I'm not sure that "it's geopolitics" (although no doubt a factor) serves as a sufficiently good rebuttal.

 

[Alty]

Not sure comparing ISIS to the UK Independence Party is particularly helpful either, notwithstanding the very different political landscapes in which the two operate.

 

[Alty]

Happy to admit 100m was the roughest of rough estimates, btw. Was just going by the Pakistan and Nigeria figures adding up to a third of that on their own.

 

[Womble98]

If 100 million Muslims worldwide support ISIS it's probably because foreign policy is messy as fuck and not because they're all mad for crucifixions (100m is nearly double even the most wing-nut interpretation of the poll btw).

I mean, there are plenty of people who would blanket give their support to anyone fighting the US - and tbqh, if you're a Pakistani living in Waziristan where drone strikes have killed thousands in the past decade, it's not an unreasonable position to do that. The vast majority of Muslims in the world are unlikely to be particularly well-informed about the Syrian Civil War (I don't think the majority of people in the UK are either) - the fact that two thirds of Pakistanis don't know one way or the other is telling.

Anyway, it's good that there's another Muslim bashing thread. I would suggest the fact that so many clearly intelligent people on here are swallowing and regurgitating vile reactionary islamophobic views might provide useful context for that poll that suggests that a large number of Muslims hold vile reactionary views.

Foreign policy doesn't account for extremist Muslims calling for death penalties for blasphemers, apostates, and Sharia Law. Islam does though.

There is also a massive difference between the actions of myself and others in condemning extreme Islamic values and the condoning of IS's barbarism and murder.

Agreed. In answer to the question, nothing whatsoever. There are perhaps a few posters who are a bit like a dog with a bone when it comes to Islam, but anything genuinely "vile, reactionary or Islamophobic" (unconvinced as to whether there's an awful lot of this) tends to come from obvious trolls. A belief is of no greater merit just because it's sincerely held or divinely inspired so it seems perfectly permissible to ask why a fairly substantial number of people are in some way supportive (or are unsure as to whether they're supportive) of a fanatical death cult, renowned for their gruesome executions. I'm not sure that "it's geopolitics" (although no doubt a factor) serves as a sufficiently good rebuttal.

Aside from Benito who is either a fascist neo-Nazi or a troll, I don't think anyone is "vile, reactionary or Islamophobic", and as usual, Ian is using it to brush aside criticism.

 

[madvillainy]

Hopped in on this thread to read them quotes and saw that face, absolutely buckled.
Love a bit of blind contradiction.

Interesting views in here to be honest, on Trump and obviously ISIS which was bound to crop up in any discussion about Trump. Personally, as many do, think the guy is a complete balloon. He's not got the interests of America at heart, he wants to take it straight back into Reagan days it seems. But just to see what he's came out with in the past and present is remarkable, seeing the remarks he made about the Japanese in the 90s and seeing him make an almost identical speech about the Chinese in his presidency run. When he claimed he had no idea about David Duke or the KKK rallying for him last month then blamed it on a dodgy earpiece was just laughable, he was asked the question 3 times.

Think he even tried to claim Obama was not born in America at one point didn't he? Guy is an absolute joke, definitely not as far right as he's claiming to be though. Always labelled himself as a centrist for years, it's just to drum up the votes in the gosh dang deep South.

 

[Dr Mantis Toboggan]

Not sure comparing ISIS to the UK Independence Party is particularly helpful either, notwithstanding the very different political landscapes in which the two operate.

both c*** though innit

 

[Jockney]

Not sure comparing ISIS to the UK Independence Party is particularly helpful either, notwithstanding the very different political landscapes in which the two operate.

as a broad point of comparison, it's fine. a large chunk of ukip's support comes from disenfranchised protest-voters, not because people seriously think they're politically sound.

of course the situation is more complex than that, but then the polling data on its own doesn't mean too much. my point is that a large proportion of isis sympathisers probably support them out of spite for established political powers and nation-states rather than any serious engagement with their ideology.