Dele: Outlaw islam and deny access to your country by islamic citizens.. simple and effective :)
Not all terrorism is linked to Islam and not all Islam is linked to terrorism. Is that too hard to remember?
Not every muslim is linked to terrorism but practically all major modern acts terrorism are linked to islam. Also members of that religion are practically impossible to assimilate causing frictions inside western countries (you remember how many muslim riots there were in Europe after a small cartoon was published in Denmark right?)
Dele: Outlaw islam and deny access to your country by islamic citizens.. simple and effective :)
Ha your going to get banned for this I forsee. Though I can sorta agree with you, not being racist or whatever but most acts are done by Islamic terror(granted there are smaller organizations out there ELF being one of them :)
Is Islam such a taboo now that I would get banned for simply suggesting that? Hell we just had a thread claiming communism is the best and Lenin/Stalin/Guevara/Mao were cool folks and I saw no bans for that and I seriously fail to see a difference here.
jim_doki: I've always said, the best, and often only, response to terroism
Business. As. Usual
So if your mom was in a bus that got blown up, you would want people to just say "hey another day"? Or would you want your government to track down those responsible and arrest/kill them?
Sitting back and ignoring something never works, you have to be proactive in some manner.
sneakypenguin: Ha your going to get banned for this I forsee. Though I can sorta agree with you, not being racist or whatever but most acts are done by Islamic terror(granted there are smaller organizations out there ELF being one of them :)
Well, even if most terrorsist acts are done by Islamic organisations (and I can't say this is the case as I haven't done any research on the subject, and I'm usually suspicous to media) you can't put the blame on the religion. If I understood you correct you mean that since most acts of terrorsism are done by islamic groups, Islam should be outlawed. But since most muslims are not terrorists or condone of terrorism, shouldn't they be allowed to practice their faith? (I'm not fond of religion in any form and I think the world would probably do better without it, but that's not an argument for the bannement of a particular religion).
On topic, I have no idea how to root terrorists out. Best way would be to prevent their organisations from getting new members while "dealing with" the already existing ones.
I don't know who Timothy McVeigh is, but note that both the Basque terrorists and IRA were not international terrorist groups yet they still had money. International terrorism requires even more money. Anyway the soultion clearly isn't that simple, but I believe stripping arabs of their oil-money is a good way to start.
Right, that's more reasonable. I agree with you that stopping their cash is, in theory, a good start in preventing this crap from happening. However the problem is that if you (meaning the western world) don't buy that oil China will. Or Russia. Or South America. I think your idea of going after terrorist finances is a sound one though, as international crime and terrorism are very much in bed together (look at the KLA and Talibans involvement with opium), the problem is going for oil won't do it.
@the "Ban Islam" guy-
Terrorist 1: "Should we blow up that super market?"
Terrorist 2: "Are you mad! We are banned from doing that!"
Kukul: The best solution to terrorism is producing electric cars and letting those motherfuckers starve.
Yep. This solution is obviously fool-proof as the long suffering and starving people of Afghanistan have obviously never engaged on any terrorist acts have they?
Well its obviously not fool-proof since you didn't get it. I meant the Saudi Arabians who fund the terrorists, not the starving Afghani Poor people don't blow themselves up if nobody asks them to.
I do get it. The thing is this - the 9/11 attacks were done on the budget of a few plane tickets and some knives. That's all. A few hundred dollars, at most, bypassed the most expensive and technologically advanced security net in the history of the world. You know how much anthrax costs to produce? Go to a place where they shear the wool of sheep and you will find tonnes of it. Bombs? There is enough material in the average kitchen to make a decently lethal pipebomb if you know what you are doing. Terrorism costs virtually nothing.
You are talking out of your ignorant ass my friend. 9/11 attacks costed more money than you and me will ever earn. Years of preparations, teaching these people to fly, funding their travels and upkeep, maintaing an army of people who will ensure your seciurity and indoctrinating them properly, paying bribes to maintain secrecy etc. That costs a lot of money. Thats why you don't see every group of lunatics killing thousand of people. Just the ones with money.
Hmmm... And how much money did Timothy McVeigh have? More than you or I will ever earn? I suppose making electric cars would have stopped him too huh? And the 7/11 terrorists who bombed London (who were all English). And also the Basque terrorists, electric cars will stop them too! My god it is so simple!
Thank you for enlightening me to my ignorant ways.
I don't know who Timothy McVeigh is, but note that both the Basque terrorists and IRA were not international terrorist groups yet they still had money. International terrorism requires even more money. Anyway the soultion clearly isn't that simple, but I believe stripping arabs of their oil-money is a good way to start.
Timothy McVeigh was the guy who blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City and also sent mail-bombs to people in the mid-90s. And yes, he did not have a lot of money. I wouldn't have a lot of money either given all the travel he was doing.
However that doesn't change the fact that International Terrorism is very expensive despite what one may think.
Who ever clicked Ignore them, cute, now get real and go watch the News, These are like Fanboys on Roids. Best thing you can do, is fight back harder, they bomb something, we bomb them back 5 times harder. But you make them fight where they live, bring the fight to them.
This type of conflict is not US vs Terrorist, this is
WESTERN CIVILIZATION VS Terrorist.
Everyone is involved, US, UK, AU, France, Germany, etc, etc, etc.
jim_doki: I've always said, the best, and often only, response to terroism
Business. As. Usual
So if your mom was in a bus that got blown up, you would want people to just say "hey another day"? Or would you want your government to track down those responsible and arrest/kill them?
Sitting back and ignoring something never works, you have to be proactive in some manner.
When you have the choice between doing nothing and making things worse the decision is easy.
EDIT: and the guy above me has the punisher symbol as his avatar, so his opinion was never gonna be balanced.
jim_doki: I've always said, the best, and often only, response to terroism
Business. As. Usual
So if your mom was in a bus that got blown up, you would want people to just say "hey another day"? Or would you want your government to track down those responsible and arrest/kill them?
Sitting back and ignoring something never works, you have to be proactive in some manner.
When you have the choice between doing nothing and making things worse the decision is easy.
EDIT: and the guy above me has the punisher symbol as his avatar, so his opinion was never gonna be balanced.
I like my Avatar,
First we have done nothing for 10 years before 2001 9/11, I remember that day I was setting in history class.
Look doing nothing or ignoring these people doesn't do a thing, it makes them even more mad, and then they pull bigger attacks off.
We have tried to talk to them, but they don't want to listen(Israel PLO talks in the late 90s). So do you just sit around when someone is trying to shoot you in the foot, no. You shoot them first, in the arm that is holding the gun.
They will not stop, we are dealing with a new type of enemy that does not have rules.
Best thing to do is keep them busy fighting in there own land, then have them throw more planes into US buildings, or bomb more UK subways, or blowup more Trains in Spain.
You can't win a defensive war, we tried that it was called Vietnam, so for Western Civilization we have to fight. If we can make peace without giving up the things we hold dear as westerns then fine. Until they learn we shouldn't change our ways, because thats what they want, and that means they won if we have to change culture.
btw, I didnt support the Iraq war, but the War on Terrorism that's something I do support.
Hevoo: Who ever clicked Ignore them, cute, now get real and go watch the News, These are like Fanboys on Roids. Best thing you can do, is fight back harder, they bomb something, we bomb them back 5 times harder. But you make them fight where they live, bring the fight to them.
Yeah punching them back harder would probably stall it, but I dont think that terrorism will stop that way. The reason for this is that we don't want to get bombed even once, while they don't mind having the crap beaten out of them as long as they manage to blow up a public space every now and again. And as for taking the fight to them, well it would be exceedingly difficult as they got terrorist cells in nummerous places in numerous countries. Bombs won't work.
Edit. As for the war in Vietnam: Since Vietnam won the war wouldn't that say that you in fact CAN win a defensive war? (Well kind of a Pyrrhic victory but still).
First we have done nothing for 10 years before 2001 9/11, I remember that day I was setting in history class.
Look doing nothing or ignoring these people doesn't do a thing, it makes them even more mad, and then they pull bigger attacks off.
We have tried to talk to them, but they don't want to listen(Israel PLO talks in the late 90s). So do you just sit around when someone is trying to shoot you in the foot, no. You shoot them first, in the arm that is holding the gun.
They will not stop, we are dealing with a new type of enemy that does not have rules.
Best thing to do is keep them busy fighting in there own land, then have them throw more planes into US buildings, or bomb more UK subways, or blowup more Trains in Spain.
You can't win a defensive war, we tried that it was called Vietnam, so for Western Civilization we have to fight. If we can make peace without giving up the things we hold dear as westerns then fine. Until they learn we shouldn't change our ways, because thats what they want, and that means they won if we have to change culture.
btw, I didnt support the Iraq war, but the War on Terrorism that's something I do support.
I like your avatar and I liked the punisher film, it just doesn't scream 'I'm not going to pick the option with the most guns'.
For Vietnam to be a defensive war it would have had to be fought on US soil, Vietnam was an offensive war and didn't necessarily require US involvement.
Who here had heard of Al-Queda before 9/11? They used to be a small fairly unknown group. They aren't new, but because of the media and the war on terror, they've grown and developed stronger links to other terrorist groups.
Terrorist 1: "Should we blow up that super market?"
Terrorist 2: "Are you mad! We are banned from doing that!"
Well its bloody about time we tried doing something. I mean look at UK, you get more money for multiple wives from government (it is recognized if the marriage happened outside UK) and there are Imams encouraging muslims to blow westerns up right under their noses inside mosques. Welcome to Eurabia..
Terrorist 1: "Should we blow up that super market?"
Terrorist 2: "Are you mad! We are banned from doing that!"
Well its bloody about time we tried doing something. I mean look at UK, you get more money for multiple wives from government (it is recognized if the marriage happened outside UK) and there are Imams encouraging muslims to blow westerns up right under their noses inside mosques. Welcome to Eurabia..
Only if you believe the radical right wing press (also known as the Daily Express, Telegraph, or Daily Mail). Most of that is bollocks.
Seriously, have you been into a hospital or dentist lately in the UK? VAST numbers of our medical staff are Muslim immigrants (not to mention all of our shop-keepers).
Also, since when has banning anything actually made a damn difference? Ban it, criminalize it, make all those who are Muslim criminals. That's really going to stop terrorism and extremist attitudes isn't it?
EDIT: Ohh I see you actually linked the Telegraph. Exactly WHAT does that article have to do with terrorism? It looks to me like you have a beef with Muslims in general.
First we have done nothing for 10 years before 2001 9/11, I remember that day I was setting in history class.
Look doing nothing or ignoring these people doesn't do a thing, it makes them even more mad, and then they pull bigger attacks off.
We have tried to talk to them, but they don't want to listen(Israel PLO talks in the late 90s). So do you just sit around when someone is trying to shoot you in the foot, no. You shoot them first, in the arm that is holding the gun.
They will not stop, we are dealing with a new type of enemy that does not have rules.
Best thing to do is keep them busy fighting in there own land, then have them throw more planes into US buildings, or bomb more UK subways, or blowup more Trains in Spain.
You can't win a defensive war, we tried that it was called Vietnam, so for Western Civilization we have to fight. If we can make peace without giving up the things we hold dear as westerns then fine. Until they learn we shouldn't change our ways, because thats what they want, and that means they won if we have to change culture.
btw, I didnt support the Iraq war, but the War on Terrorism that's something I do support.
I like your avatar and I liked the punisher film, it just doesn't scream 'I'm not going to pick the option with the least guns'.
For Vietnam to be a defensive war it would have had to be fought on US soil, Vietnam was an offensive war and didn't necessarily require US involvement.
Who here had heard of Al-Queda before 9/11? They used to be a small fairly unknown group. They aren't new, but because of the media and the war on terror, they've grown and developed stronger links to other terrorist groups.
First, Vietnam was a Defensive war, we NEVER pushed up north into Northern Vietnam, for fear of starting a larger war. If we went on the offensive in Nam we would have won.
Vietnam was about stopping the spread of commies, around the world. If you look at it from a large point of view, Vietnam was just one of a few major battles fought during the "Cold War". We were defending a Free Capitalistic nation of South Vietnam.
Second, does you knowing that a group exist or not exist make the threat any less. Our government knew about Al-Queda, hell we helped them fight the Russians back in the 80s. That's besides the point, We have been fighting these guys for about 60 years now, since 1948. You really need to work on your history, its clear you don't know anything about this topic.
The basis of terrorism is to spread terror, it's in the name. Just ignore them as best you can, and don't disrupt your daily lives because of them. That renders them useless, as their mission has failed completely.
Sombra Negra: The basis of terrorism is to spread terror, it's in the name. Just ignore them as best you can, and don't disrupt your daily lives because of them. That renders them useless, as their mission has failed completely.
That sounds logical, But when they kill your family, or friends, or attack your nation do ignoring them, after that.
Human emotion is more powerful then logical for good reason sometimes.
But bombing terrorists just makes us the antagonists. Going into foreign countries and completely fucking everything up just makes people want to attack us more. It's like kicking a hornet's nest, they'll just sting you harder.
Terrorist 1: "Should we blow up that super market?"
Terrorist 2: "Are you mad! We are banned from doing that!"
Well its bloody about time we tried doing something. I mean look at UK, you get more money for multiple wives from government (it is recognized if the marriage happened outside UK) and there are Imams encouraging muslims to blow westerns up right under their noses inside mosques. Welcome to Eurabia..
Only if you believe the radical right wing press (also known as the Daily Express, Telegraph, or Daily Mail). Most of that is bollocks.
Seriously, have you been into a hospital or dentist lately in the UK? VAST numbers of our medical staff are Muslim immigrants (not to mention all of our shop-keepers).
Also, since when has banning anything actually made a damn difference? Ban it, criminalize it, make all those who are Muslim criminals. That's really going to stop terrorism and extremist attitudes isn't it?
I dont claim that it's a miracle cure for all of our problems but it's propably the best change for maintaining our own culture in the long run. Lets look at the equation for a while. Europe losing "orginal" population + high rates of immigrants + higher amount of children immigrants have + unassimilation of immigrants = Islamization in the long run. I think a gentelman in Canterbury also saw what was going to happen.
Tell me mr tomato. Would you want to live under Sharia law?
First we have done nothing for 10 years before 2001 9/11, I remember that day I was setting in history class.
Look doing nothing or ignoring these people doesn't do a thing, it makes them even more mad, and then they pull bigger attacks off.
We have tried to talk to them, but they don't want to listen(Israel PLO talks in the late 90s). So do you just sit around when someone is trying to shoot you in the foot, no. You shoot them first, in the arm that is holding the gun.
They will not stop, we are dealing with a new type of enemy that does not have rules.
Best thing to do is keep them busy fighting in there own land, then have them throw more planes into US buildings, or bomb more UK subways, or blowup more Trains in Spain.
You can't win a defensive war, we tried that it was called Vietnam, so for Western Civilization we have to fight. If we can make peace without giving up the things we hold dear as westerns then fine. Until they learn we shouldn't change our ways, because thats what they want, and that means they won if we have to change culture.
btw, I didnt support the Iraq war, but the War on Terrorism that's something I do support.
I like your avatar and I liked the punisher film, it just doesn't scream 'I'm not going to pick the option with the least guns'.
For Vietnam to be a defensive war it would have had to be fought on US soil, Vietnam was an offensive war and didn't necessarily require US involvement.
Who here had heard of Al-Queda before 9/11? They used to be a small fairly unknown group. They aren't new, but because of the media and the war on terror, they've grown and developed stronger links to other terrorist groups.
First, Vietnam was a Defensive war, we NEVER pushed up north into Northern Vietnam, for fear of starting a larger war. If we went on the offensive in Nam we would have won.
Vietnam was about stopping the spread of commies, around the world. If you look at it from a large point of view, Vietnam was just one of a few major battles fought during the "Cold War". We were defending a Free Capitalistic nation of South Vietnam.
Second, does you knowing that a group exist or not exist make the threat any less. Our government knew about Al-Queda, hell we helped them fight the Russians back in the 80s. That's besides the point, We have been fighting these guys for about 60 years now, since 1948. You really need to work on your history, its clear you don't know anything about this topic.
Yes Taliban was an American made monster, and most of us know that they were funded and supported in the 80s.
But did you know Clinton helped their closest allies fight the Serbs in 1999? Threw them out of their own country to make way for his own little faction? Did you know that when Bush accepted Kosovos declaration of independance in February, he effectively signed over another state for these criminal extremists?
There will be another attack in another few years. And when it happens people will be once again pointing there fingers at a bunch of people in some mountains in some tiny nation nobody has ever even heard of. And people will forget all about how we had a chance to stop this crap from happening right now. Sure, a few people will point out we helped them out fighting an enemy. But nobody will actually take responsibility.
Terrorism prevention begins at home kids. :) Stop fucking up the world with war after war after war and maybe this kind of crap wouldn't happen.
Kukul: The best solution to terrorism is producing electric cars and letting those motherfuckers starve.
Yep. This solution is obviously fool-proof as the long suffering and starving people of Afghanistan have obviously never engaged on any terrorist acts have they?
And the terrorists and Taliban there make their money from the opium poppies anyway.
There needs be some negotation, and then compromise. Bombing the shit out of other countries does fuck-all to stop terrorism, it probably only strengthens the resolve of the terrorists themselves.
Oh wait, is there still that whole "We don't negotiate with terorrists" business?
First we have done nothing for 10 years before 2001 9/11, I remember that day I was setting in history class.
Look doing nothing or ignoring these people doesn't do a thing, it makes them even more mad, and then they pull bigger attacks off.
We have tried to talk to them, but they don't want to listen(Israel PLO talks in the late 90s). So do you just sit around when someone is trying to shoot you in the foot, no. You shoot them first, in the arm that is holding the gun.
They will not stop, we are dealing with a new type of enemy that does not have rules.
Best thing to do is keep them busy fighting in there own land, then have them throw more planes into US buildings, or bomb more UK subways, or blowup more Trains in Spain.
You can't win a defensive war, we tried that it was called Vietnam, so for Western Civilization we have to fight. If we can make peace without giving up the things we hold dear as westerns then fine. Until they learn we shouldn't change our ways, because thats what they want, and that means they won if we have to change culture.
btw, I didnt support the Iraq war, but the War on Terrorism that's something I do support.
I like your avatar and I liked the punisher film, it just doesn't scream 'I'm not going to pick the option with the least guns'.
For Vietnam to be a defensive war it would have had to be fought on US soil, Vietnam was an offensive war and didn't necessarily require US involvement.
Who here had heard of Al-Queda before 9/11? They used to be a small fairly unknown group. They aren't new, but because of the media and the war on terror, they've grown and developed stronger links to other terrorist groups.
First, Vietnam was a Defensive war, we NEVER pushed up north into Northern Vietnam, for fear of starting a larger war. If we went on the offensive in Nam we would have won.
Vietnam was about stopping the spread of commies, around the world. If you look at it from a large point of view, Vietnam was just one of a few major battles fought during the "Cold War". We were defending a Free Capitalistic nation of South Vietnam.
Second, does you knowing that a group exist or not exist make the threat any less. Our government knew about Al-Queda, hell we helped them fight the Russians back in the 80s. That's besides the point, We have been fighting these guys for about 60 years now, since 1948. You really need to work on your history, its clear you don't know anything about this topic.
Yes Taliban was an American made monster, and most of us know that they were funded and supported in the 80s.
But did you know Clinton helped their closest allies fight the Serbs in 1999? Threw them out of their own country to make way for his own little faction? Did you know that when Bush accepted Kosovos declaration of independance in February, he effectively signed over another state for these criminal extremists?
There will be another attack in another few years. And when it happens people will be once again pointing there fingers at a bunch of people in some mountains in some tiny nation nobody has ever even heard of. And people will forget all about how we had a chance to stop this crap from happening right now. Sure, a few people will point out we helped them out fighting an enemy. But nobody will actually take responsibility.
Terrorism prevention begins at home kids. :) Stop fucking up the world with war after war after war and maybe this kind of crap wouldn't happen.
I can agree with that but where to start, where to start.
Kukul: The best solution to terrorism is producing electric cars and letting those motherfuckers starve.
Yep. This solution is obviously fool-proof as the long suffering and starving people of Afghanistan have obviously never engaged on any terrorist acts have they?
And the terrorists and Taliban there make their money from the opium poppies anyway.
DrummerM: There needs be some negotation, and then compromise. Bombing the shit out of other countries does fuck-all to stop terrorism, it probably only strengthens the resolve of the terrorists themselves.
Oh wait, is there still that whole "We don't negotiate with terorrists" business?
Yes, and there way of negotiating always ends with them wanted us to be Islamic, and that crap isn't happening.
okay, well if you think destroying a country which has terroists in it's military or just nuking the country will reduce terroism well you know about as much about world politics as George W Bush. the best way to combat terroist attacks is defensivly rather than offensivly, increases in security and attempts to make deals, force does not work (do some research into 'the troubles' in ireland) during high threats security should be increased but not to the level we're going too where Britain and America are turning into police states.
I find it interesting that the only country (not organisation) which has been considered a major terroist is the USA.
to answer your other question what would you do if a terrorist struck your country and what action I'd want taken. well I like all other British people are completely unscared of terroists so after the tube bombings the only action we wanted our gov't to take was to repair the underground as quickly as possible so we wern't late for work the next day.
zirnitra: okay, well if you think destroying a country which has terroists in it's military or just nuking the country will reduce terroism well you know about as much about world politics as George W Bush. the best way to combat terroist attacks is defensivly rather than offensivly, increases in security and attempts to make deals, force does not work (do some research into 'the troubles' in ireland) during high threats security should be increased but not to the level we're going too where Britain and America are turning into police states.
I find it interesting that the only country (not organisation) which has been considered a major terroist is the USA.
to answer your other question what would you do if a terrorist struck your country and what action I'd want taken. well I like all other British people are completely unscared of terroists so after the tube bombings the only action we wanted our gov't to take was to repair the underground as quickly as possible so we wern't late for work the next day.
zirnitra: to answer your other question what would you do if a terrorist struck your country and what action I'd want taken. well I like all other British people are completely unscared of terroists so after the tube bombings the only action we wanted our gov't to take was to repair the underground as quickly as possible so we wern't late for work the next day.
I've got to say me and cuddly_tomato are also from the UK and there does seem to be the opinion here...
I don't know who Timothy McVeigh is, but note that both the Basque terrorists and IRA were not international terrorist groups yet they still had money. International terrorism requires even more money. Anyway the soultion clearly isn't that simple, but I believe stripping arabs of their oil-money is a good way to start.
How would that help all it would do is fuel more citizens anger and push them towards acts of terrorism while finding other means of funding maybe even as far as gaining allies in other nations, you would in essence be making the situation ALOT worse.
cuddly_tomato: To deal with terrorism you have to actually try to deal with it, as happened after WW2 with Japan and Germany. When the allied nations went in, and helped them rebuild. They didn't sanction them into starvation, then bomb them into the stone age, then sell off the rights to rebuild to the highest bidder so that the people living there didn't even have food or fresh water two years after "mission accomplished".
sneakypenguin: Then one could argue that with their reduced economy they would be more likely to Yeah all them damn canadian with their toxic maple syrup bombs.. or worse Icelanders that attack school buses with icepicks. Sorry just being facetious
Your post is true but majority is based in the middle east(including africa) and asia.
yeah, the majorroty of the terrorists come from the areas with the majorroty of the worlds population, brilliant detective work!...NOT! also, the US has purposefully destroyed the econnomy of many of these nations in order to retain it's world domminence so why should we feel sorry for the "most powerfull" nation in the world? and the idea of "stripping them of their oil money" is how this started ion the first place. how about stripping the USA of it's nukes? and why do people always use the term "arabs"? the arab-emmerates nation is rich and happy. the terrorist come out of nations that have had their resorses stolen by contrys like the usa. What the hell are they doing in iraq anyway? since they have arrived the usa has paid less for the raw oil, sold iraq corn and grain at inflated prices and destroyed the contry.
If you do try to nuke them, you might nuke everyone including yourself. Such acts will only create more opposition, and in such way, more terrorists, even in your own country.
I don't think there is any real way to deal with it... If they do believe or are brainwashed enough to kill themselves or at least endanger their lives for an idea or a concept, there is no real way to fight them. Destruction will only create more opposition, pacifism will not really work either...
But if I'm not mistaken, most terrorists who are in the news today are doing it for their religion... So, umm, that's a good place to start?
OverlordSteve: The best response to terrorism is to have your president/prime minister/dictator for life flip the terrorists off on world-wide TV.
"Hey Terrorists, **** you."
It's both childish and pathetic. It wouldn't work against them, and while it might gain some popularity from the people who are opposing terrorism, it will not stop anything from happening.
It's both childish and pathetic. It wouldn't work against them, and while it might gain some popularity from the people who are opposing terrorism, it will not stop anything from happening.
It's both childish and pathetic. It wouldn't work against them, and while it might gain some popularity from the people who are opposing terrorism, it will not stop anything from happening.
You thought I was actually serious?
I thought it was funny... *shuffles feet nervously* We could have a tele-fundraiser too! The fiftieth person to call in gets a mini-scooter. It'd work wonders, I tells ya.
Not every muslim is linked to terrorism but practically all major modern acts terrorism are linked to islam. Also members of that religion are practically impossible to assimilate causing frictions inside western countries (you remember how many muslim riots there were in Europe after a small cartoon was published in Denmark right?)
Is Islam such a taboo now that I would get banned for simply suggesting that? Hell we just had a thread claiming communism is the best and Lenin/Stalin/Guevara/Mao were cool folks and I saw no bans for that and I seriously fail to see a difference here.