"The peaceful majority are irrelevant"

[Horse Style]

A Muslim student asked this panel a question about Muslims and ideology and Brigitte Gabriel gave her quite an earful:



Yes, the majority aren't radicals but so what? Constantly pointing that out every time something bad happens does nothing to address the problem.

 

[voxom]

a simple video that shows that the "not all muslims" or "not all feminists" etc lines are completely retarded and can be dangerous. it's just a way for scum bags to excuse shitty behaviour of groups they support.

 

[berimBOWLoh]

you dont have to be a murderer to be a radical/fanatic.

these terrorists, these murderers, gain safety, protection, funding, moral support from average Muslims, all the time. They arent called out daily as a scourge on their society. They are held in esteem. They can safely live amongst the ppl. They know who these ppl are. They arent stupid. They just dont care enough to do anything about it. Its not that they are scared. Its that they believe the shit their book says about other ppl being lower than them so its OK to do these things.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Yes, the majority aren't radicals but so what? Constantly pointing that out every time something bad happens does nothing to address the problem.

i think it does. i mean, we can all turn to awful periods in history when people felt that it was OK to lump all people of a certain group together into something that was to be hated. when making policy to try to attack this problem, you must acknowledge those that are not violent because:

1. You don't want to tyrannically employ collective punishment.
2. They could be valuable allies against the radicals if you do not ostracize them.
3. That is the same pool of people that the radicals are trying to recruit from....so it makes great sense to not help them along.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

A Muslim student asked this panel a question about Muslims and ideology and Brigitte Gabriel gave her quite an earful:



Yes, the majority aren't radicals but so what? Constantly pointing that out every time something bad happens does nothing to address the problem.

The ones who are not "radical" support those that are. Period. Jihad is a central belief of Islam. It is like charity and forgiveness and love is in Christianity.

 

[Horse Style]

i think it does. i mean, we can all turn to awful periods in history when people felt that it was OK to lump all people of a certain group together into something that was to be hated. when making policy to try to attack this problem, you must acknowledge those that are not violent because:

1. You don't want to tyrannically employ collective punishment.
2. They could be valuable allies against the radicals if you do not ostracize them.
3. That is the same pool of people that the radicals are trying to recruit from....so it makes great sense to not help them along.

No one is talking about lumping all of them together. This seems to be a knee-jerk reaction any time radicals or the doctrine of Islam are criticized. People come up with this strawman that everyone is being lumped together. They aren't.

When people talk about how violent the doctrine is, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. When people talk about how terrible the violent radicals are, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. Cut the strawman out and focus on the real problem.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

a simple video that shows that the "not all muslims" or "not all feminists" etc lines are completely retarded and can be dangerous. it's just a way for scum bags to excuse shitty behaviour of groups they support.

Not all white people shoot up schools, not all men rape, not all feminists are cunts so on so forth.

I actually never got the animosity for the "not all" argument. Feminists hate the term not all men, but it's clearly true and it's often brought up when people are making sweeping generalizations.

The ones who are not "radical" support those that are. Period. Jihad is a central belief of Islam. It is like charity and forgiveness and love is in Christianity.

Fucking weird, the Yemeni Muslims I know hate radical Islamists and Saudi Arabia far more than anyone I've ever met.

Also how fucking stupid are the ISF fighting Daesh right now? Don't they know that Jihad is the central belief of Islam? Dumbasses. Probably think that Jihad that personal meaning and that the war against Daesh scum is their jihad.

 

[Horse Style]

Not all white people shoot up schools, not all men rape, not all feminists are cunts so on so forth.

I actually never got the animosity for the "not all" argument. Feminists hate the term not all men, but it's clearly true and it's often brought up when people are making sweeping generalizations.



Fucking weird, the Yemeni Muslims I know hate radical Islamists and Saudi Arabia far more than anyone I've ever met.

Also how fucking stupid are the ISF fighting Daesh right now? Don't they know that Jihad is the central belief of Islam? Dumbasses. Probably think that Jihad that personal meaning and that the war against Daesh scum is their jihad.

The "not all" argument is annoying when people insert it when it shouldn't be brought up. When someone criticizes the doctrines of Islam, you'll have some buffoons bring up the "not all" argument. It's like in their minds, if you criticize anything to do with Islam, you must be criticizing ALL Muslims.

 

[Ruprecht]

You could always use the search button...

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/the-peaceful-majority-are-irrelevant-islam.3112361/

Facebook chainpost crap.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

The "not all" argument is annoying when people insert it when it shouldn't be brought up. When someone criticizes the doctrines of Islam, you'll have some buffoons bring up the "not all" argument. It's like in their minds, if you criticize anything to do with Islam, you must be criticizing ALL Muslims.

Man I think it comes down to people not being aware of their terminology when speaking.

Feminists get mad when they make a broad statement about men being rapists. Naturally the response is "well not all men" because it's true.

I find watching people debate they use terms that (likely accidentally) lump an entire group of people together in a discussion about a minority.

Just look at it like...

"The Muslim community needs to have a real discussion about the rise of radical terrorism that's exclusive to their community currently"

As opposed to "the ones who are not radical support the ones who are"

 

[Bald1]

Substitute peaceful majority with silent majority and it's the same as every group, or movement with one exception - the vocal minority in Islam is much more harmful than let's say the vocal minority of feminists or BLM members.

The 10% vocal minority of a group of 1.6 billion people is a hell of a big number of problematic folks. Hell, even if it's 1% the sheer number is crazy. So yeah, in this case the peaceful minority is inconsequential unless they're proactively peaceful.

 

[FierceRedBelt]

I don't know why it irks me so much that she stopped her speech just to let people finish applauding her.

It takes away from the nature of exposing her thoughts without worrying about what politically correct thought might be.

I agree with everything she said though.

 

[voxom]

Not all white people shoot up schools, not all men rape, not all feminists are cunts so on so forth.

I actually never got the animosity for the "not all" argument. Feminists hate the term not all men, but it's clearly true and it's often brought up when people are making sweeping generalizations.
.

there is a difference between being born a certain way and choosing to follow a certain ideology.

lumping a group of people together because of their gender or their skin color is retarded. lumping a a bunch of followers of the same ideology together isn't. why? because if someone disagreed with what that ideology says/does they could just leave that ideology, a white guy can't stop being a white guy, though.

retarded liberals don't understand that. that is why when people say "fuck BLM: they misconstrue it as someone saying "fuck black people" which isn't the case. one is an ideology, one is a race.

same thing with feminism. when people say "fuck feminism" liberals try to misconstrue it as you saying "fuck women". again isn't the case.

they are shitting on an ideology, not a race or a gender.

there is no rule book, or manual, or group of ideas for being a man. but there is for being a muslim.




so you can sit and say "not all muslim are radical suicide bombers" and that may be true. but a hell of a lot of them support them because they share the same ideology. that is why the french terrorists were able to hide so well. because they were supported by the "moderates" in the muslim community.

'"Abdeslam relied on a large network of friends and relatives that already existed for drug dealing and petty crime to keep him in hiding," Belgium's federal prosecutor Frederic Van Leeuw said of the only surviving suspect of the Nov. 13 attacks that killed 130 people in Paris."
http://in.reuters.com/article/france-shooting-islamic-state-idINKCN0WM0N6?rpc=401&


same thing about radical feminists, sure "not all feminsits are like that" but the ones who aren't just stand behind the ones that are.

 

[Thunderflash500]

People keep acting like a lot of these Muslims went through an enlightenment. Huge numbers do support suicide bombers, killing gays and atheists. Not all, but a surprising amount.

 

[ShinkanPo]

You could always use the search button...

http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/the-peaceful-majority-are-irrelevant-islam.3112361/

Facebook chainpost crap.

@Horse Style @voxom

@Devout Pessimist

I 100% agree with what Bridgit have said in the video

If am not mistaken Bridgete Gabriel's argument in that video actually came from some one else blog?

I think its the very idea of Paul E. Marek's blog..


She should have quoted Marek instead I think Marek desserves some credit for that argument.

Paul E.Mareks blog here

 

[ShinkanPo]

People keep acting like a lot of these Muslims went through an enlightenment. Huge numbers do support suicide bombers, killing gays and atheists. Not all, but a surprising amount.

Atheists are evil and terrorist!

 

[Ruprecht]

@Horse Style @voxom

I 100% agree with what Bridgit have said in the video

If am not mistaken Bridgete Gabriel's argument in that video actually came from some one else blog?

I think its the very idea of Paul E. Marek's blog..


She should have quoted Marek instead I think Marek desserves some credit for that argument.

Paul E.Mareks blog here

It's crap. The whole "Heritage Foundation Benghazi Panel" was nonsense, and Gabriel was just pushing her usual agenda. Of course it was a prepared spiel and wasn't original.
I've already spelt out why the comparison is nonsense the other hundred or so other times some mindless drone cut and pasted this.

 

[7437]

No one is talking about lumping all of them together. This seems to be a knee-jerk reaction any time radicals or the doctrine of Islam are criticized. People come up with this strawman that everyone is being lumped together. They aren't.

When people talk about how violent the doctrine is, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. When people talk about how terrible the violent radicals are, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. Cut the strawman out and focus on the real problem.

Looking at the other posts in this thread, there are a lot of people who lump them all together.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

there is a difference between being born a certain way and choosing to follow a certain ideology.

lumping a group of people together because of their gender or their skin color is retarded. lumping a a bunch of followers of the same ideology together isn't. why? because if someone disagreed with what that ideology says/does they could just leave that ideology, a white guy can't stop being a white guy, though.

retarded liberals don't understand that. that is why when people say "fuck BLM: they misconstrue it as someone saying "fuck black people" which isn't the case. one is an ideology, one is a race.

same thing with feminism. when people say "fuck feminism" liberals try to misconstrue it as you saying "fuck women". again isn't the case.

they are shitting on an ideology, not a race or a gender.

there is no rule book, or manual, or group of ideas for being a man. but there is for being a muslim.




so you can sit and say "not all muslim are radical suicide bombers" and that may be true. but a hell of a lot of them support them because they share the same ideology. that is why the french terrorists were able to hide so well. because they were supported by the "moderates" in the muslim community.

'"Abdeslam relied on a large network of friends and relatives that already existed for drug dealing and petty crime to keep him in hiding," Belgium's federal prosecutor Frederic Van Leeuw said of the only surviving suspect of the Nov. 13 attacks that killed 130 people in Paris."
http://in.reuters.com/article/france-shooting-islamic-state-idINKCN0WM0N6?rpc=401&


same thing about radical feminists, sure "not all feminsits are like that" but the ones who aren't just stand behind the ones that are.

Man I'm saying that it isn't just liberals. People make excuses for their people when they misconstrue things and you're right often to support their narrative.

I don't hate all Muslims just because I think their religion is shit the same reason I don't hate Christians because I think their religion is fucking stupid.

I tend to have these conversations with Muslims a lot, I wish we had more on this forum to even out the debate tbh. I'm often very critical of their religion but in a respectful manner and tend to have some good conversations.

I also understand how many Muslim-Americans be sympathic to things like the PLO, look at the massive network in Boston to keep the Provisional IRA in fighting shape and the massive sympathies they had in this nation.

Many Arab-Americans have been exposed to islamaphobia in some form since 9/11, especially those that happen to live in smaller towns, while many people, a few even on this very forum seemingly applaud or dismiss it. It is not the silent peaceful majority of Americans, saying "hey guys.. That sucks I'm sorry it happened" no, by nature they hear the loudest and most hateful voices, because those are the voices loudest projected.

They see their home countries bombed relentlessly by Western countries on the media, and after the excitement, did the media show the US soldiers enduring mortar fire to protect people trying to vote? Did they show the military gaining the respect of tribal leaders of Afghanistan?

We heard about CIA briefcases of money going missing, we heard about hospitals being accidentally bombed, we heard about torture, illegal prisons, and corruption.

The silent majority of Americans are against these things, the loudest minority taunted Arabs and Arab-Americans. They heard "turn Iraq into a parking lot" and now they're hearing "don't allow anymore in" "they can't be trusted" "watch lists for all Muslims" by someone who is the republican nominee for president for fucks sake.

Muslim Americans are Americans all the same, and they're being treated like they aren't and that most certainly plays a part into a group of people willing to be more lenient towards these organizations.

Che Guevara spoke on this in Guerrilla Warfare, about the importance of maintaining sympathies among a population, and if you study almost every single terrorist group in existence, the story is always rather similar.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

No one is talking about lumping all of them together. This seems to be a knee-jerk reaction any time radicals or the doctrine of Islam are criticized. People come up with this strawman that everyone is being lumped together. They aren't.

When people talk about how violent the doctrine is, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. When people talk about how terrible the violent radicals are, they aren't saying all Muslims are the same. Cut the strawman out and focus on the real problem.

Really? Go through this very thread dude.