Lets stop calling them terrorist attacks

[garion13a5]

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

So Timothy McVeigh hitting the federal building was a Muslim attack?

No. And no one suggested it was. No more than 9-11 or Brussells or Paris or a gazillion other muslim attacks were nondenominational secular anti-US government attacks.
Why do you go to such lengths the to protect muslim terrorism?

Can you factually demonstrate that I 'defend muslim terrorism'?

And I call acts of terrorism 'terrorism'.

Hello,

Sadly, the fact that almost all terrorist attacks are Jihad attacks carried out by adherents of the Mislim faith, they are Muslim attacks. Here, we should call them what they are...Muslim attacks.

garion13a5

Then by your logic, since almost all terrorist attacks are committed by men, they are Male Attacks. Here we should call them what they are: Male Attacks.

If not, why not?

Hello,

Because they are not attacking in the name of the male gender. They are attacking in the name of Islam. Hence, Muslim attacks.

garion13a5

 

[garion13a5]

No. And no one suggested it was. No more than 9-11 or Brussells or Paris or a gazillion other muslim attacks were nondenominational secular anti-US government attacks.
Why do you go to such lengths the to protect muslim terrorism?

Can you factually demonstrate that I 'defend muslim terrorism'?

And I call acts of terrorism 'terrorism'.

Hello,

Sadly, the fact that almost all terrorist attacks are Jihad attacks carried out by adherents of the Mislim faith, they are Muslim attacks. Here, we should call them what they are...Muslim attacks.

garion13a5

Then by your logic, since almost all terrorist attacks are committed by men, they are Male Attacks. Here we should call them what they are: Male Attacks.

If not, why not?

There are shahida's like the black widows, though fewer of them, so just Muslim terrorism would probably be better. I prefer Islamic terrorism.

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Hello,

No, you are attempting to pervert my argument. It is clear that I believe they should be called Muslim attacks because they are carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam.

garion13a5

 

[Tilly]

Hello,

Sadly, the fact that almost all terrorist attacks are Jihad attacks carried out by adherents of the Mislim faith, they are Muslim attacks. Here, we should call them what they are...Muslim attacks.

garion13a5

Then by your logic, since almost all terrorist attacks are committed by men, they are Male Attacks. Here we should call them what they are: Male Attacks.

If not, why not?

There are shahida's like the black widows, though fewer of them, so just Muslim terrorism would probably be better. I prefer Islamic terrorism.

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

 

[Skylar]

Then by your logic, since almost all terrorist attacks are committed by men, they are Male Attacks. Here we should call them what they are: Male Attacks.

If not, why not?

There are shahida's like the black widows, though fewer of them, so just Muslim terrorism would probably be better. I prefer Islamic terrorism.

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

Wouldn't calling it Theistic terror cover it just as thoroughly? You'd get the Christians and Hindus too.

 

[2aguy]

There are shahida's like the black widows, though fewer of them, so just Muslim terrorism would probably be better. I prefer Islamic terrorism.

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

Wouldn't calling it Theistic terror cover it just as thoroughly? You'd get the Christians and Hindus too.

Except Christians and Hindus aren't committing terrorist acts....

There is nothing in Christian teaching that tells it's followers to murder other people......not one thing.

Hindus.....ask them.

 

[IsaacNewton]

And the entire Northern Ireland conflict was Christian terrorism. As were Timothy McVeigh, and all the abortion clinic bombings and murders, and the attack on the black church in Charleston last year...

Damn Christian terrorists.

The real reason so many in the US want to couch this as 'Muslim' is because they want to feel good about their own religion. Isis no more are 'Muslims' than Eric Rudolph is a 'Christian'.

You can call yourself anything you like. If you don't follow the faith, you are a liar that likes to kill people and use the faith to justify it. Which is something all religion has been used for for millenium.

 

[Tilly]

There are shahida's like the black widows, though fewer of them, so just Muslim terrorism would probably be better. I prefer Islamic terrorism.

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

Wouldn't calling it Theistic terror cover it just as thoroughly? You'd get the Christians and Hindus too.

No, because terror attacks are usually carried out by Muslims. I don't personally have any problems with using terms such as Christian terrorism or Hindu terrorism when such acts are perpetrated, but I don't think it would be right to tarnish all religions by associating them day in and day out in with the literally incessant terror attacks perpetrated by Islam. What purpose would that serve? Apart from to deceive, I mean?

 

[2aguy]

And the entire Northern Ireland conflict was Christian terrorism. As were Timothy McVeigh, and all the abortion clinic bombings and murders, and the attack on the black church in Charleston last year...

Damn Christian terrorists.

The real reason so many in the US want to couch this as 'Muslim' is because they want to feel good about their own religion. Isis no more are 'Muslims' than Eric Rudolph is a 'Christian'.

You can call yourself anything you like. If you don't follow the faith, you are a liar that likes to kill people and use the faith to justify it. Which is something all religion has been used for for millenium.

Actually, no....again...which part of Christianity doesn't allow murder, do you guys fail to get? Islam not only permits murder, it preaches it.....

 

[2aguy]

Can anyone point to where Jesus said to commit murder in his name or in God, his father's name?

 

[2aguy]

Remember, the 10 Commandments...those the Christians follow, state that committing evil in God's name is the one sin God will not forgive.

 

[Tilly]

Islamic terrorists killed more people in 2 hours on 9/11 than the IRA - in their political conflict - killed in almost 40 years.

 

[Skylar]

There are, but they're quite rare. Almost all terrorists attacks are committed by men. Why then wouldn't 'Male Terrorism' be appropriate by the logic of the OP?

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

Wouldn't calling it Theistic terror cover it just as thoroughly? You'd get the Christians and Hindus too.

Except Christians and Hindus aren't committing terrorist acts....

So the 37 people that were killed and the 125 injured in the 2006 Malegaon bombings....that didn't happen? Neither did the 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, their 68 dead with 50 injured, huh? The 16 dead in the
Mecca Masjid bombing are still perfectly fine? And how many did the Lord's Resistence army kill? How many were shot by militant Christian Robert Lewis Dear?

Theistic Terrorism wraps it all in a bow and meets every standard of the OP.

There is nothing in Christian teaching that tells it's followers to murder other people......not one thing.

I guess the 'Army of God' didn't get that when they bombed the 96 Olympics.

 

[IsaacNewton]

And the entire Northern Ireland conflict was Christian terrorism. As were Timothy McVeigh, and all the abortion clinic bombings and murders, and the attack on the black church in Charleston last year...

Damn Christian terrorists.

The real reason so many in the US want to couch this as 'Muslim' is because they want to feel good about their own religion. Isis no more are 'Muslims' than Eric Rudolph is a 'Christian'.

You can call yourself anything you like. If you don't follow the faith, you are a liar that likes to kill people and use the faith to justify it. Which is something all religion has been used for for millenium.

Actually, no....again...which part of Christianity doesn't allow murder, do you guys fail to get? Islam not only permits murder, it preaches it.....

Ponderous...the bible is full of passages on killing people or enslaving them. Thankfully most Christians ignore most of the bible, as do most Muslims ignore most of the Koran. Otherwise the human population would be reduced to what is on Guam.

This is what I don't like, the lying from Christians who need to believe their religion is just dripping with golden honey goodness. Sorry, the bible isn't.

 

[Skylar]

Remember, the 10 Commandments...those the Christians follow, state that committing evil in God's name is the one sin God will not forgive.

Evil....according to who? That's the problem with a 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Islamic terrorists killed more people in 2 hours on 9/11 than the IRA - in their political conflict - killed in almost 40 years.

The Great Christian Battle Cry "we kill less than they do".

What an endorsement.

 

[2aguy]

Because they aren't blowing people up because of their gender?

The logic of the OP didn't say a thing about motivation. But numbers:

Hello,

Considering that well over 99% of terror attacks across the planet are committed by Muslims, why don't we call them Muslim attacks?

garion13a5

Almost all terrorist attacks are commited by men. Why don't we call them 'Male Attacks'? It would certainly be consistent with the logic of the OP

Referring to it as Islamic terror covers the issues perfectly adequately, IMHO, without needing to specify the gender. I'm sure the OP won't mind that my view on this doesn't mirror theirs precisely, lol.

Wouldn't calling it Theistic terror cover it just as thoroughly? You'd get the Christians and Hindus too.

Except Christians and Hindus aren't committing terrorist acts....

So the 37 people that were killed and the 125 injured in the 2006 Malegaon bombings....that didn't happen? Neither did the 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, their 68 dead with 50 injured, huh? The 16 dead in the
Mecca Masjid bombing are still perfectly fine? And how many did the Lord's Resistence army kill? How many were shot by militant Christian Robert Lewis Dear?

Theistic Terrorism wraps it all in a bow and meets every standard of the OP.

There is nothing in Christian teaching that tells it's followers to murder other people......not one thing.

I guess the 'Army of God' didn't get that when they bombed the 96 Olympics.

Again....what part of Christianity tells it's followers to murder innocent people....please site the biblical reference of Jesus ordering his followers to do any of those things....

Care to post all the times Muslims are commanded to murder infidels.....and Jews?

 

[2aguy]

Remember, the 10 Commandments...those the Christians follow, state that committing evil in God's name is the one sin God will not forgive.

Evil....according to who? That's the problem with a 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.

No....it is pretty well defined, especially in this thread. Committing murder is a sin, and it is evil....there is no sanction for murder coming from Jesus...can you point out where he commanded it?

 

[2aguy]

And the entire Northern Ireland conflict was Christian terrorism. As were Timothy McVeigh, and all the abortion clinic bombings and murders, and the attack on the black church in Charleston last year...

Damn Christian terrorists.

The real reason so many in the US want to couch this as 'Muslim' is because they want to feel good about their own religion. Isis no more are 'Muslims' than Eric Rudolph is a 'Christian'.

You can call yourself anything you like. If you don't follow the faith, you are a liar that likes to kill people and use the faith to justify it. Which is something all religion has been used for for millenium.

Actually, no....again...which part of Christianity doesn't allow murder, do you guys fail to get? Islam not only permits murder, it preaches it.....

Ponderous...the bible is full of passages on killing people or enslaving them. Thankfully most Christians ignore most of the bible, as do most Muslims ignore most of the Koran. Otherwise the human population would be reduced to what is on Guam.

This is what I don't like, the lying from Christians who need to believe their religion is just dripping with golden honey goodness. Sorry, the bible isn't.

Not in the part with Jesus......different time periods and Christians follow the word of Jesus.....

Again...please list all of the quotes of Jesus ordering his disciples to commit murder against unbelievers........or other Christians....

We Christians are patient...we will wait while you try to find them.....

We won't have to wait very long for Islamic commands for murder though....

 

[2aguy]

Still waiting.....

Where exactly did Jesus say, look behind the rocks and trees and murder the unbeliever........?

 

[2aguy]

Hmmm.....not a biblical scholar...but it seems to me Jesus tended to actually stop murder......you know..the stoning of the prostitute........he made the guy with the sword stop cutting people at his arrest......

Still waiting for those commands to commit murder.......