I didn't used to believe they were too exact either until I started reading excerpt comparisons between religions then to check in the actual book to see all the excerpts were spot on

If some of us are hung up on the issue of whether this is/isn't racism, can we at least all agree that the comments from certain people here do show shocking

bigotry?

Surely that can't be denied/avoided/disguised/dodged?

Even if the two were not mutually exclusive (which in a lot of cases they are as we can clearly see weather people want to deny it or not)

That doesn't mean they aren't problems on which we should have a platform of discussion

Idk about platforms built on false assumptions.

You can find out what ever you want about these country's, saying ''what else do we know about them'' is a strawman argument when the sole topic of current discussion is Islam within those country's

the reality of the situation is that while there is certainly an issue within the muslim religion, holding every single follower of said religion accountable is nonsensical.

i think all belief systems are equally foolish, but to equate the CURRENT STATE of radical islam with "christian" terrorism is most definitely a false equivalency. the idea that because christian's did some bad **** back in the day other religions get free reign is absolutely sickening.

this is definitely an interesting read for those interested, a little bit more valid and honest in their research than the website Ziggy shared imo: Muslim Beliefs About Sharia | Pew Research Center

i think it is very clear that there are issues not simply with the muslim religion, but with the situation they are in within the more dangerous muslim countries.

Terrorism and mass undocumented immigration whether it be from the middle east or not have always been a problem when conducted, it depends on what sub-topic of the main conversation you want to discuss in order to assume anything regarding false assumptions if the main conversation has justifiable statistics to back it up (which it does imo)

I agree

The focus is still wrong.

It's not the religion. The religion is a convenient way to cloak political rhetoric in a way that is culturally ingrained in people from birth. Again, study the history of the Salafis. These are POLITICAL actors, seeking justification through the dominant religious ideology of their region to motivate followers to engage in POLITICAL acts to further TEMPORAL power. You can't get a 16 year old shepherd to strap on a bomb by saying "we're engaged in a territorial dispute with the warlords across the way, go kill a bunch of moms at the market". You tell him "Allah wills this, see this page of the Quran? That says kill the Sunni. Oh, and you'll get 72 virgin brides when you get to heaven".

True believers among the upper echelons of these groups are exceedingly rare. How do I know? Because I read books, written by experts, that a) interview these people b) rely on captured documents and manifestos and c) I can apply basic logic to the situation. The Quran says to kill or convert the infidel (if you skip over a bunch) just like the Bible says to beat your plowshares into swords (if you skip over a bunch). The commonality is MEN with POLITICAL AMBITION convincing the POOR and IGNORANT to die in their place.

It's truly shocking that this is such a hard concept for many in the West to understand.

right, i totally agree. but at the core of what you're saying there is still the element of religious devotes engaging in extremist behaviors because of their beliefs, whether or not there is someone pulling the strings above them or not.

again, i don't think it is simply an issue of religion, and clearly the idea that we have a "muslim" problem is bigoted and quite frankly incorrect, but i also believe it is important that people acknowledge that there is a subsection of the religion that engage in this behavior.