Looks like Ohio State knifer was a Muslim refugee from Somali. Tell me again why we are allowing these into US?

That article is from 12 years ago but it states that there are several hundred Hindu attacks on Christians PER YEAR.

"there are now several hundred per year"

Chewbaccca wrote:

No one is is slaughtering people in the name of a religion. Only Muslims. We are not able to sufficiently vet these refugees so doesn't it make sense to stop allowing into the country until they can be sufficiently vetted?

Dylann Roof was a poor red-neck from the south. He recently killed 9 innocent people. Many poor, red-neck form the south have killed innocent people.

Please tell me why we don't ship all poor, southern red-neck to some deserted island is the pacific?

Bogleman wrote:

Islam as it is practised in the West is pretty docile and tolerant. There are exceptions, but for the most part, they tolerate Shia, Ahmadis etc. So barring Muslims from the US will not really solve any problems. Because compared to the Muslim world, the US especially does not have a jihadist problem. Nor is it likely to in the future.

.

ISLAM AS A SYSTEM

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat.

Islam is not a religion nor is it a cult. It is a complete system. Islam has Religious, legal, political, economic and military components. The religious component is a beard for all the other components. Islamization occurs when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their so-called "religious rights." When politically correct and culturally diverse societies agree to "the reasonable" Muslim demands for their "religious rights," they also get the other components under the table. Here's how it works (percentages source CIA: The World Fact Book (2007)).

As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country, they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States -- Muslim 1.0%

Australia -- Muslim 1.5%

Canada -- Muslim 1.9%

China -- Muslim 1%-2%

Italy -- Muslim 1.5%

Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%

Germany -- Muslim 3.7%

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%

Spain -- Muslim 4%

Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply (United States).

France -- Muslim 8%

Philippines -- Muslim 5%

Sweden -- Muslim 5%

Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%

The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%

Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris -- car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam -- Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana -- Muslim 10%

India -- Muslim 13.4%

Israel -- Muslim 16%

Kenya -- Muslim 10%

Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20%, expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and church and synagogue burning.

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare.

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%

Chad -- Muslim 53.1%

Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60% on, you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels.

Albania -- Muslim 70%

Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%

Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%

Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide.

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%

Egypt -- Muslim 90%

Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%

Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%

Iran -- Muslim 98%

Iraq -- Muslim 97%

Jordan -- Muslim 92%

Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan -- Muslim 97%

Palestine -- Muslim 99%

Syria -- Muslim 90%

Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%

Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%

United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of "Dar-es-Salaam" -- the Islamic House of Peace -- there's supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim.

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%

Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%

Somalia -- Muslim 100%

Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Many Americans mistakenly believe that the West has done something to deserve that hatred Muslims worldwide feel toward Westerners. They are way off the mark. We dont have an ounce of blame for their problems. Because our schools have been ruined by Political Correctness, most Americans have a gross misunderstanding of the origins of Islam, the history of Islam and life under Islamic rule. From the very birth of Islam and throughout its history right up today, Islam has been spread through violent conquest with the purpose of destroying, converting or subjugating the infidel.

Soon after Mohameds conversion he gathered up an army of followers from Medea and crushed and forcibly converted the people of Mecca. From there he used the sword to crush and convert all of Arabia. He and his bloody followers of this Religion of Peace lurched out of the Arabian peninsula and annihilated the Christian cultures of North Africa and Palestine and Asia Minor with the speed and ferocity never seen before. I know the schools and the media constantly remind us how horrible the Christian Crusaders were. Of course, due to Political Correctness, they no longer mention the history and the background leading up to the events that precipitated the Crusades against Islam. The Muslims were not content with these conquests, next they invaded Europe and conquered Spain and Marched on Paris. They were finally stopped 70 miles south of Paris. Had they not been stopped, the course of history would have been changed and most of the World would be bowing to Mecca 7 times a day whether they wanted to or not. The Arabs also attacked the eastern end of Europe. The Muslims brutally destroyed the Christian cultures that proceeded them, killed millions of infidels, forcibly converted millions and the small percentage that did not convert faced horrible injustices. This is the background leading up to the Crusades. The final lightening rod that set off the Crusades was after the Muslim Caliph ordered the burning and destruction of the few remaining churches in Palestine.

The great Arabian Empire was succeeded by even bloodier Muslims. The Mongolian successors of Genghis Khan were converts led by leaders such as Tamerlane. They were the next to lead the Religion of Peace with their horribly brutal conquests featuring burying thousands of people alive and trampling children to death with their horses for fun. Their grotesquely savage conquests went from China to the Balkans and everything in between. The next leaders of the Religion of Peace were the Muslim Ottomans whom raped and savaged what was left of the old Arabian Empire and conquered and destroyed the last vestige of the old Byzantine empire. Their 3 day nightmare of looting and raping of the Christians followed their final conquest of Constantinople are considered by historians to be ugliest and cruelest 3 days of organized mass torture in human history. The sights, including virginal nuns being raped over 100 times were even too much for the murderous Sultan himself to watch and he stopped it after 3 days. The spread of the Religion of Peace did not stop there. Following the conquest of the Balkans, the Muslims stole away Balkan boys as children, took them back to Turkey, made the Muslims then returned them to the Balkans. Their decedents are the modern day Albanians, Bosnian and Albanians Serbians or Kosovars as Bill Clinton charmingly named them. The region has been engrossed in violence ever since. The Turks were finally stopped at the gates of Vienna, Austria. Had they not been stopped, the course of history would have been changed and most of the World would be bowing to Mecca 7 times a day whether they wanted to or not. Later, the Muslim Turks would lead massive genocidal campaigns to annihilate the Christian Armenians.

As taught in the Koran, Muslims have been simply following the directive to slay the infidel. Muslim atrocities, and the collective Muslim response to those atrocities, might be better understood knowing their belief system as spelled out by a few, among many, passages from the Koran: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah" (Surat At-Taubah 9:29). "I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks [behead] and smite all their finger tips of them" (Koran 8:12). "The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures" (Koran 98:1-8). "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth [Islam], until they are subdued" (Surat At-Taubah 9:29).

What about today? In the Sudan, Chad, Indonesia, Nigeria, Uganda, Palestine, the Philippines, Kashmir, Chechnya, Serbia and soon Kenya, the followers of the Religion of Peace are attacking the infidels and wont stop until they are completely destroyed. In fact anywhere in the World Muslims exist in large numbers, you can count on them trying to annihilate their Infidel neighbors. In the Sudan and Chad the Christian children are sold into slavery to be used as sex toys by the Muslim despots in the Middle East. So much for the religion of peace.

So why do so many Muslims hate the West and especially America so much? Dont believe the people that are telling you that is complicated or that is somehow the Wests fault. It is actually quite simple. As you can see from the history of Islam, never forget that you are the Infidel and what the Koran direct the believer to do to the Infidel and how Islam has dealt with the Infidel throughout its entire history. There is also another more basic reason rooted in the dark side of human nature. It is simple envy. Look at it from the eyes of the average Muslim in the Middle East. They look at you and see that the Muslim world that was once equal to the West, is now 1000 years behind the West. Their despotic Cult of Personality leaders and their state run media and their Koran tell them they are superior to everyone else. But in their hearts they know it is not true. They look at the great wealth of the West and see their own poverty. They look at the democracies of the West and how we can choose our leaders and then the see the brutal tyrants and/or corrupt royalty that they have allowed to subjugate themselves. They look at the freedoms we have to go where we want, do what we want, say what we want, eat or drink what we want, practice any or no religion, the freedom to dress anyway we want, the pleasures we can pursue, none of which they have. They look at their religion which shackles them, which fosters a backward looking culture, which stifles innovation, which encourages Cult of Personality despotic leaders and evil maniacal terrorists, which makes them bow 7 times a day to Mecca. A religion so powerful that there is no way out other than death.

Saddam Hussein would gas his own people, torture his people, starve his people, fight wars he could not win, with the snap of a finger order his son in law tortured to death, send wives of suspected unloyal party members to rape chambers, he would destroy his own country and himself . But, such is the suppressing power of Islam, one thing Saddam would not dare do and that is he would never dare to not show himself on TV publicly bowing to Mecca.

So when the average Muslim sees the wealth and freedom of the West and they see their own defacto slavery, they feel great envy. With the modern communications they see it every day and driven by the words of the Koran the envy boils over into rage and hatred of us. Instead of blaming themselves, their culture and their religion as they should, it is easier to blame the West. Ironically, without the Western presence in their countries that they so decry, they would never have discovered the oil, never been able to drill and pump it and export it and get all those petrodollars and they would be fighting far many bloody wars amongst themselves and would be 2000 years behind us instead of only 1000 years behind us. No, they wont look inward, it is easy to blame an external enemy, the West. And there are many intelligent but poorly informed, naive Americans who believe it is the Wests fault that they are 1000 years behind us. No, it is not our fault, it is their culture and their religion that has put them in their current state. From the Wests standpoint, it doesnt matter that we are not to blame. They think we are and regardless we will always be considered the Infidel and they want to obliterate us from the world as the Koran directs and the will attack us as they did on 9/11/01 and they will continue to attack us if we dont first stop them. You cannot reason with someone who follows the passages from the Koran I cited above and blows up an innocent child while shouting Allah is Great! and who believes his reward for the atrocity is 100 virgins for himself in the afterlife. French and German and Spanish appeasement of the Religion of Peace wont keep you safe.

Because 1/69,933 refugees you took in last year is 0.0014 %.

That's why.

Facts(even though I know you probably don't care about them):

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/statistics/251288.htm

diggersss wrote:

Because 1/69,933 refugees you took in last year is 0.0014 %.

That's why.

Facts(even though I know you probably don't care about them):

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/statistics/251288.htm

ISIS has said they plan to infiltrate these refugees. These refugees can't be sufficiently vetted. So just crazy to allow any refugees when they can't be properly vetted. If you had 1000 M&Ms and knew one had cyanide, would you allow your child to eat them fully knowing that he or she would likely not eat the poisoned one?

1/69,933 too many!

My knee-jerk reaction to your post was to dismiss it on account of its generalizations and the fact that this is letsrun. But after thinking it over, (what other choice do you have in recounting a history of Islam on a letsrun but to generalize) I think there is a scary amount of truth in this post.

I've always believed that people are equally capable of doing good as they are likely to do evil, and that ideology can exponentially increase this potential in either direction. Perhaps Islam is a magnifyer of the darker parts of the human condition; but this then begs the question:

What other religions and/or ideologies have been followed by huge masses of people and have been found to be vehicles for evil?

Writing while running wrote:

My knee-jerk reaction to your post was to dismiss it on account of its generalizations and the fact that this is letsrun. But after thinking it over, (what other choice do you have in recounting a history of Islam on a letsrun but to generalize) I think there is a scary amount of truth in this post.

I've always believed that people are equally capable of doing good as they are likely to do evil, and that ideology can exponentially increase this potential in either direction. Perhaps Islam is a magnifyer of the darker parts of the human condition; but this then begs the question:

What other religions and/or ideologies have been followed by huge masses of people and have been found to be vehicles for evil?

It doesn't beg that question. Who gives a carp about what other religions or ideologies have been used to commit evil? This is the evil we have to deal with today. You sound like Obama when he responded to Muslims cutting off the heads of 20 Christians:

"Get off your high horse because the Christians committed atrocities during the Crusades".

.... a 800 years ago!

It begs the question:

How do we keep this evil from spreading to this country?

With the obvious answer:

Keep them out!

Therefore: Trump

Chin up and Pull up champ wrote:

diggersss wrote:

Because 1/69,933 refugees you took in last year is 0.0014 %.

That's why.

Facts(even though I know you probably don't care about them):

http://www.state.gov/j/prm/releases/statistics/251288.htm

ISIS has said they plan to infiltrate these refugees. These refugees can't be sufficiently vetted. So just crazy to allow any refugees when they can't be properly vetted. If you had 1000 M&Ms and knew one had cyanide, would you allow your child to eat them fully knowing that he or she would likely not eat the poisoned one?

ISIS wants Western countries to stop accepting refugees from Syria and other parts of the Middle East. It shames them that Muslims are fleeing from their 'Islamic State'. They want the people to be beaten into submission there with nowhere to go and nobody to accept or help them. Force them to be subjects of their regime.

The way things are going, the only way this war in Syria will stop is when everyone is dead.

You are complaining about the actions of this one stupid Somali, saying that because of this no refugees should be allowed into the US. In Syria the people actually need help, the refugees are real. We have a humanitarian duty to help these people.

“Nobody cares about us. We’re just Arab Sunnis living in Aleppo. If we had one Frenchman in Aleppo the whole world would have risen up. There is no longer any humanity. The wounded are dying, a patient whose stomach is open in the operations room has to be abandoned, women are leaving delivery rooms still bleeding because the hospitals are getting attacked, babies are dying because oxygen tanks are empty and generators aren’t working.”

The last hospital in Aleppo has been destroyed in systematic bombing.

Chin up and Pull up champ wrote:

ISIS has said they plan to infiltrate these refugees. These refugees can't be sufficiently vetted. So just crazy to allow any refugees when they can't be properly vetted. If you had 1000 M&Ms and knew one had cyanide, would you allow your child to eat them fully knowing that he or she would likely not eat the poisoned one?

You failed basic statistics and probability, non?

Its more like with the US muslim population of 3-4mm, the odds of coming to any harm are the odds of an event - say 1:500k, times the odds that you will be where the event is occurring - probably 10^20-30. So the odds of you being @ OSU on that date and at the exact time, or in Pulse on the exact night at the exact time, are extraordinarily low.

Even with 30-40 individuals or groups planning events in the US, only a small number will follow through. This is true of any US terror group - jihadists, christian, white supremacist, etc. So the odds of you actually coming to harm are much greater for driving to work, crossing the street, or getting salmonella etc.

If you had a bowl of 10^20 skittles, and one would kill *a* child (which one? We don't know), you'd still eat them. Because this in fact happens - 57 children/year choke to death on hard candy

So skittles are more dangerous than jihadists.

By that line of reasoning, we should then not bother to try and reduce and/or eliminate the risk of getting killed by a jihadist because the number killed isn't worthy of the effort? I suspect that the people and the families of the people injured in the latest attack would beg to differ. As would the victims of the Boston marathon bombings, the San Bernadino attack, etc. We try to mitigate morbidity and mortality by reducing the spread of infection, accidents, food poisoning, hospital and MD error, why not this? If we can control it, we should, by any means possible.............as its one of few things we actually do have control of. But then again, I suppose its OK not to as the end result is more democratic voters.

The Ohio State attacker was interviewed at the start of the semester and voiced his concerns about stereotypes of Muslims gaining traction and that Muslims are not like their stereotypes. On the one hand, he has only reenforced the stereotypes and calls for a ban on Muslim immigration; on the other hand, he has demonstrated one of the problems with all this anti-Muslim talk (not focused on terrorism per se), that you will alienate a religion with 1.5 billion adherents, some tiny percentage of which will react violently.

He was from Somalia via Pakistan and so had not been in the United States for that many years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/11/30/i-interviewed-the-ohio-state-attacker-on-the-first-day-of-school-it-felt-important-now-its-chilling/?utm_term=.377736975a8e

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Bogleman wrote:

So skittles are more dangerous than jihadists.

By that line of reasoning, we should then not bother to try and reduce and/or eliminate the risk of getting killed by a jihadist because the number killed isn't worthy of the effort? I suspect that the people and the families of the people injured in the latest attack would beg to differ. As would the victims of the Boston marathon bombings, the San Bernadino attack, etc. We try to mitigate morbidity and mortality by reducing the spread of infection, accidents, food poisoning, hospital and MD error, why not this? If we can control it, we should, by any means possible.............as its one of few things we actually do have control of. But then again, I suppose its OK not to as the end result is more democratic voters.

The amount spent by DHS to prevent further jihadist attacks - $65bn - is sufficient. The low numbers of jihadist attacks in the US is evidence of this.

It is impossible to get to 0. The marginal cost would be enormous. Just as we cannot get to 0 airplane deaths, so to can we not get to 0 terrorist deaths.

So if one were considering spending another $10bn to save lives, spending it elsewhere - needle exchanges and ARV drugs, diabetes treatment, organ donor efforts, driving safety campaigns, etc - the marginal bang per buck would be far greater.

I understand the statistics. One aspect of that number may also suggest that a lot of the intervention strategies now in place are working. How many attacks that are being thwarted is unknown by the general public. But I would also suggest to you that while the relative number of successful attacks is now low, relative to the morbidity and mortality from CHD or cancer as an example, the probability is that they will accelerate as their tactics change without further aggressive intervention. And believe it or not, we actually have more control in prevention of further terrorist attacks then we do for both of the aforementioned diseases. How would you feel about the 'marginal bang/buck" if it was one of your family members that was killed or injured? Also, I think there are many inexpensive options available...........relatively speaking of course. Like for a start, monitoring social media posts. But thats a micro aggression I think in liberal speak.

Jimmy the Macedonian wrote:

Majority of fatal attacks on U.S. soil carried out by white supremacists, not terrorists

In the 14 years since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, nearly twice as many people have been killed in the United States by white supremacists and anti-government radicals than by Muslim jihadis, according to a new study.

White supremacists and anti-government radicals have killed 48 Americans, including last week’s deadly attack in South Carolina, versus 26 killings by Muslim radicals, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/

So we should not worry about these attacks? Maybe we should have more resources aimed at all extremist groups promoting violence and fewer on drug use.

Same reason you ancestors were allowed to come to America dumb A$$ Free country

luv2run wrote:

So we should not worry about these attacks? Maybe we should have more resources aimed at all extremist groups promoting violence and fewer on drug use.

You think $65bn/year and tens of thousands of serious professionals worrying about this is not enough?

You think FBI is not monitoring social media? All the money they have and they have not thought to do that?

You have no evidence that there will be more attacks. This is an assumption based on emotion. As is the appeal, "what if your family were hurt". The odds that this happens are astronomical vs dying in a car crash, from an infection, etc.

An enormous amount is spent already. Banning "Muslims" - whatever that even means - will not rid the US of the possibility of a terrorist event.

By pushing people to wear seatbelts, traffic deaths fell by the 10s of thousands. This is something over which the US has control. If some guy decides to shoot up a grade school, the US has little if any control over that, due to the prevalence of guns.

jjjjj wrote:

The Ohio State attacker was interviewed at the start of the semester and voiced his concerns about stereotypes of Muslims gaining traction and that Muslims are not like their stereotypes. On the one hand, he has only reenforced the stereotypes and calls for a ban on Muslim immigration; on the other hand, he has demonstrated one of the problems with all this anti-Muslim talk (not focused on terrorism per se), that you will alienate a religion with 1.5 billion adherents, some tiny percentage of which will react violently.

He was from Somalia via Pakistan and so had not been in the United States for that many years.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/11/30/i-interviewed-the-ohio-state-attacker-on-the-first-day-of-school-it-felt-important-now-its-chilling/?utm_term=.377736975a8e

Try this logic.

Don't let them come here.

Here's some jerk in the US for two years and we're supposed to disregard reality because he's not feeling accepted. We're supposed to change and deny the fundamental nature of a religion founded by a violent warlord who gloried in rape and plunder. Islam is a religion that has been rife with strife for just about all of its 1400 years. If we don't start calling it a Religion of Peace and ignore the violence, then "you will alienate a religion with 1.5 billion adherents, some tiny percentage of which will react violently." This is the logic of self-hating cowards.

If there are almost 60 Muslim run countries in the world, let Muslims like the stabber go to one of those. He can pray 5 times a day, then try to please Allah by killing his neighbors who are Muslims not in his sect or apostates or just not devout enough.