Is it safe to holiday in Muslim countries now?

[F. Sidebottom]

What?

 

Another thread with Cyclone endlessly arguing with everyone?

 

Another thread where there's no evidence to back up his claims?

 

Who'd have guessed!

 

[Cyclone]

Well, apart from the foreign office assessment of course. But yeah, ignore that. Just like Berberis wants to. Except when he wants to quote it.

 

If it's okay I'm going to imagine you both sat at home, fingers in your ears going "lalalalala" to avoid having to see the evidence that causes you discomfort.

[runningman1]

Well, apart from the foreign office assessment of course. But yeah, ignore that. Just like Berberis wants to. Except when he wants to quote it.

 

If it's okay I'm going to imagine you both sat at home, fingers in your ears going "lalalalala" to avoid having to see the evidence that causes you discomfort.

 

You are claiming though that Islamic countries are just as dangerous on the whole, as other countries. This is incorrect. A few pages ago I pointed out that deaths due to terrorism are higher per capita in Muslim countries. Of the 10 countries in the world that suffer most from terrorism, 7 are outright Muslim and 1 (Nigeria) is roughly 50/50 split between Christianity and Islam. However, delve further into Nigeria and you will find that it is the Islamic North that experiences the vast majority of terrorist incidences.

 

Now you can claim that you can't tar all Muslim countries with the same brush, I would contest this. Islam is not just a religion, but a political entity. I encourage you to read the Quran (it's about the size of a standard novel) and educate yourself.

 

When discussing the merits of say, communist countries, it is ok to group communist countries together and compare them to the control group (non-communist countries). In the same way, it is acceptable to group Muslim countries.

 

Usually, when everyone else disarmed with you, it is you that is in the wrong.

[Jukes]

12 posts into the forum and you're bored with me.

You made it easy to get bored when you attempted to discuss religion without knowing what religion is. You should look up Dunning-Kruger Effect on a reliable website that explains it in very simple terms.

 

Jukes x

[foxy lady]

Perhaps we should wait and see what happened to that plane rather than speculating about it.

 

Oh you think it could still be flying around awaiting instructions to land?:huh:

[Cyclone]

Oh you think it could still be flying around awaiting instructions to land?:huh:

 

Do you think that terrorism is the only cause of plane crashes?

 

---------- Post added 19-05-2016 at 13:44 ----------

 

You made it easy to get bored when you attempted to discuss religion without knowing what religion is. You should look up Dunning-Kruger Effect on a reliable website that explains it in very simple terms.

 

Jukes x

 

And yet you can't stop coming back to post some more.

 

---------- Post added 19-05-2016 at 13:46 ----------

 

You are claiming though that Islamic countries are just as dangerous on the whole, as other countries.

No, I'm not so stupid as to make sweeping generalisations like that.

This is incorrect. A few pages ago I pointed out that deaths due to terrorism are higher per capita in Muslim countries. Of the 10 countries in the world that suffer most from terrorism, 7 are outright Muslim and 1 (Nigeria) is roughly 50/50 split between Christianity and Islam. However, delve further into Nigeria and you will find that it is the Islamic North that experiences the vast majority of terrorist incidences.

 

Now you can claim that you can't tar all Muslim countries with the same brush, I would contest this. Islam is not just a religion, but a political entity. I encourage you to read the Quran (it's about the size of a standard novel) and educate yourself.

How will that make Gambia more dangerous?

 

When discussing the merits of say, communist countries, it is ok to group communist countries together and compare them to the control group (non-communist countries). In the same way, it is acceptable to group Muslim countries.

 

Usually, when everyone else disarmed with you, it is you that is in the wrong.

 

Anyone who claims that "all communist countries are x" is probably an idiot.

 

I'm not currently armed, so can't be disarmed.

Edited May 19, 2016 by Cyclone

[alchresearch]

Aren't we still in the dark about what happened on MH370, and a few others:

 

http://www.theweek.co.uk/mh370/57683/the-mystery-of-mh370-egyptair-flight-ms804-and-7-other-planes-that-vanished

[runningman1]

Do you think that terrorism is the only cause of plane crashes?

 

---------- Post added 19-05-2016 at 13:44 ----------

 

 

And yet you can't stop coming back to post some more.

 

---------- Post added 19-05-2016 at 13:46 ----------

 

No, I'm not so stupid as to make sweeping generalisations like that.

How will that make Gambia more dangerous?

 

Anyone who claims that "all communist countries are x" is probably an idiot.

 

I'm not currently armed, so can't be disarmed.

 

But anyone who says you are more likely to experience x in communist countries is not an idiot if the facts are there to support the statement.

 

Of course not all Muslim countries have high levels of terrorism. However, Muslim countries, on average do have higher levels of terrorism than non Muslim countries.

[foxy lady]

Do you think that terrorism is the only cause of plane crashes?

 

Well the plane either crashed because of...

 

.. technical problems. It is a plane operated and maintained by an Egyptian carrier.

 

.. brought down deliberately..It is a plane operated and maintained by an Egyptian carrier.

 

...the pilot forgot where he was supposed to land ....It is a plane operated and maintained by an Egyptian carrier.

[flamingjimmy]

Can't be much more secular than being officially atheist.

 

Yes you really can that sentence represents a significant misunderstanding. You can be infinitely more secular than that by officially having no religion intwined with the state, that's what secularism means.

 

For examples look to the classic secular states, the one's founded on and in some ways because of the principle: USA and France.

 

Being officially atheist and not letting people practice religion is completely incompatible with secularism.

 

So many people these days confuse secularism with atheism, it makes me sad that you're amongst them. Secularism is much bigger and more important than atheism, and doesn't even have to include or make reference to it.

 

For example the US was set up as a secular state primarily because all the different denominations of Christians were afraid of people from the other branches of Christianity taking over and persecuting them, had nothing to do with atheism.

Edited May 19, 2016 by flamingjimmy