A Comforting Thought About Muslims.......

I know that these numbers make me feel all unsafe and threatened. We should start a global war designed to exterminate all Muslims.....right? Fucking retards.

There is a much much better chance that you, your children and the rest of your family will be slaughtered by some US citizen lunatic with an assault rifle who has an imaginary beef with the government, Mickey Mouse or his psychiatrist than by some Islamic jihadist. Originally Posted by timpage

Not quite.

Since the Muslims killed about 3,000 Americans on 9-11, they have averaged well over 200 per year since 2001. I don't think American nuts with assault rifles have done anything close to that.

Perhaps in a couple of decades when the 9-11 average gets watered down, you may be right.

Of course, that assumes the Muslims don't achieve any more mass killings in the US over the 20 years to lift their average back up. Good luck with that.

I know that these numbers make me feel all unsafe and threatened. We should start a global war designed to exterminate all Muslims.....right? Fucking retards.

There is a much much better chance that you, your children and the rest of your family will be slaughtered by some US citizen lunatic with an assault rifle who has an imaginary beef with the government, Mickey Mouse or his psychiatrist than by some Islamic jihadist. Originally Posted by timpage

Timmy, Watch it...

Not quite.

Since the Muslims killed about 3,000 Americans on 9-11, they have averaged well over 200 per year since 2001. I don't think American nuts with assault rifles have done anything close to that.

Perhaps in a couple of decades when the 9-11 average gets watered down, you may be right.

Of course, that assumes the Muslims don't achieve any more mass killings in the US over the 20 years to lift their average back up. Good luck with that. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Well, I don't know. You assume the count starts at 2001 and I don't.

The point is that statistically I suspect you are much much much more likely to be the victim of gun violence perpetrated by some American toting a gun than some imaginary Muslim running amok...do you really want to argue that point? I think we reach the 3,000 Kia mark from gun murders about every 4 months or so per the stats. But.....whatever your good with, right?

Well, I don't know. You assume the count starts at 2001 and I don't.

The point is that statistically I suspect you are much much much more likely to be the victim of gun violence perpetrated by some American toting a gun than some imaginary Muslim running amok...do you really want to argue that point? I think we reach the 3,000 Kia mark from gun murders about every 4 months or so per the stats. But.....whatever your good with, right? Originally Posted by timpage

Thanks Timmy...


Top 30 Murder Capitals of America:

30 Atlanta, GA
29 Richmond, VA
28 Memphis, TN
27 Montgomery, AL
26 Cleveland, OH
25 Compton, CA
24 Philadelphia, PA
23 San Bernardino, CA
22 Miami Gardens, FL
21 Macon, GA
20 Kansas City, MO
19 Little Rock, AR
18 Stockton, CA
17 Trenton, NJ
16 Baton Rouge, LA
15 Birmingham, AL
14 Oakland, CA
13 Youngstown, OH
12 Newark, NJ
11 Baltimore, MD
10 St. Louis, MO
9 Jackson, MS
8 Wilmington, DE
7 Fort Myers, FL
6 Gary, IN
5 Saginaw, MI
4 New Orleans, LA
3 Detroit, MI
2 Flint, MI
1 Camden, NJ

Most of these cities have strict gun control, are run by Progressive Democrats and have a majority population of black Americans.
Remove half these cities from this list and the US murder rate drops to one of the lowest on the planet.

I've seen some of that "strict gun control" in Camden and Trenton. You probably need to present your facts differently. Or make a point that's defensible.

Are you saying that it's local gun control, that is causing all the murders?

Are you saying its Progressive Democrats causing all the murders?

Are you saying it's the Black people causing all the murders?

Or are you saying that the "strict gun control" you speak of is a lie.

Try and connect your opening statement to Muslims, not Democrats, not decaying inner city America, not Negroes. if you're not going to provide links for your assertions, then how do you expect anybody to believe you ... Especially if they can't understand what the fuck you're saying!

I'll bet you piss your pants a lot because you forget to unzip your fly.

Well, I don't know. You assume the count starts at 2001 and I don't.

The point is that statistically I suspect you are much much much more likely to be the victim of gun violence perpetrated by some American toting a gun than some imaginary Muslim running amok...do you really want to argue that point? I think we reach the 3,000 Kia mark from gun murders about every 4 months or so per the stats. But.....whatever your good with, right? Originally Posted by timpage

Well, your original point wasn't simple "gun violence".

It was American crazies with assault rifles.

But, even so, if you throw in ALL gun killings, not doubt that trumps jihadist killings.

But, in terms of what the average American should worry about, it still may not be so clear.

I think the majority of people who are killed by guns are either criminals murdered by other criminals or family members murdered by another family member.

The number of people killed in cold blood by strangers with guns is still comparatively small.

Which is probably why more people worry about terrorists than being shot in a bank robbery.

Well, I don't know. You assume the count starts at 2001 and I don't. Originally Posted by timpage

You are correct. The "count" started BEFORE 9001.

I'll bet you piss your pants a lot because you forget to unzip your fly. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Now everyone knows why you wear diapers. Makes sense.

It's true, most of the people killed by guns (assault style looking weapons make up less than 1%) are involved in a criminal activity. Followed by accidents and suicide.


Since we've been running with the numbers;

World Muslim population=2.08 billion (2014 projected)
North American Muslim population=8.04 million (2014 projected)
According to PEW research, what percentage of Muslims actively support the idea of jihad=20%
Number of jihad supporting Muslims in the world=416 million
Number of jihad supporting Muslims in North America=1.608 million
Number of US troops in World War II=16.1 million
Number of US troops in Europe at the end of the war=1.9 million

We have almost as many jihad supporting Muslims in the US as we had troops in Europe following World War II. Of the troops in World War II about 65% were actual frontline troops (this includes airmen flying into enemy airspace). Statistically speaking we could have at this time 453,000 Muslims that are ready to go to war with the west living in the US at this time. That is about three times the number of soldiers, sailors, and airman who fought on D-day on the allied side. Lets just reduce it to the White House number of 1%. 90,000 Muslims ready to invade (they're already here) and fight in the US against a foe (that would be us) who is not ready to defend, not ready to accept, and not ready to fight back against them. Around the world the number is 20 million or more than all the Americans that served in the military in World War II.

Lets just reduce it to the White House number of 1%. 90,000 Muslims ready to invade (they're already here) and fight in the US against a foe (that would be us) who is not ready to defend, not ready to accept, and not ready to fight back against them.[/COLOR] Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

That's about 3 times as many as are reportedly in ISIS,

..... and the U.S. military can't kick their asses. (I know who "California Jane" is now.)

While numb-nuts wants to "demilitarize" law enforcement in this country...

... our ONLY LINE OF DEFENSE DOMESTICALLY.

It would absolutely be hysterical, if no one showed for the February "summit"!!!!!!

2017 can't get here fast enough.

Well, your original point wasn't simple "gun violence".

It was American crazies with assault rifles.

But, even so, if you throw in ALL gun killings, not doubt that trumps jihadist killings.

But, in terms of what the average American should worry about, it still may not be so clear.

I think the majority of people who are killed by guns are either criminals murdered by other criminals or family members murdered by another family member.

The number of people killed in cold blood by strangers with guns is still comparatively small.

Which is probably why more people worry about terrorists than being shot in a bank robbery. Originally Posted by ExNYer

+1

The world famous historian, Will Durant has written in his Story of Civilisation that "the Mohammedan conquest of India was probably the bloodiest story in history".

India before the advent of Islamic imperialism was not exactly a zone of peace. There were plenty of wars fought by Hindu princes. But in all their wars, the Hindus had observed some time-honoured conventions sanctioned by the Sastras. The Brahmins and the Bhikshus were never molested. The cows were never killed. The temples were never touched. The chastity of women was never violated. The non-combatants were never killed or captured. A human habitation was never attacked unless it was a fort. The civil population was never plundered. War booty was an unknown item in the calculations of conquerors. The martial classes who clashed, mostly in open spaces, had a code of honor. Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death.

Islamic imperialism came with a different code--the Sunnah of the Prophet. It required its warriors to fall upon the helpless civil population after a decisive victory had been won on the battlefield. It required them to sack and burn down villages and towns after the defenders had died fighting or had fled. The cows, the Brahmins, and the Bhikshus invited their special attention in mass murders of non-combatants. The temples and monasteries were their special targets in an orgy of pillage and arson. Those whom they did not kill, they captured and sold as slaves. The magnitude of the booty looted even from the bodies of the dead, was a measure of the success of a military mission. And they did all this as mujahids (holy warriors) and ghazls (kafir-killers) in the service of Allah and his Last Prophet.

Hindus found it very hard to understand the psychology of this new invader. For the first time in their history, Hindus were witnessing a scene which was described by Kanhadade Prabandha (1456 AD) in the following words:

"The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people's wealth, took Brahmins and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious Turks."

That was written in remembrance of Alauddin Khalji's invasion of Gujarat in the year l298 AD. But the gruesome game had started three centuries earlier when Mahmud Ghaznavi had vowed to invade India every year in order to destroy idolatry, kill the kafirs, capture prisoners of war, and plunder vast wealth for which India was well-known....

Timur had captured 100,000 Hindus. As he prepared for battle against the Tughlaq army after crossing the Yamuna, his Amirs advised him "that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolators and enemies of Islam at liberty". Therefore, "no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword".

Tuzk-i-Timuri continues:

"I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death. One hundred thousand infidels, impious idolators, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasiruddin Umar, a counselor and man of learning, who, in all his life, had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives."

http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_histor...ghal_atro.html

Interesting.

Speaking of slaughtering Indians...

Interesting.

Speaking of slaughtering Indians... Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Yeah, you Mussulman-luvin, Hitler worshipping, lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM, the religion of the Aztecs was so genteel.

and your point is ...

It's true, most of the people killed by guns (assault style looking weapons make up less than 1%) are involved in a criminal activity. Followed by accidents and suicide.


Since we've been running with the numbers;

World Muslim population=2.08 billion (2014 projected)
North American Muslim population=8.04 million (2014 projected)
According to PEW research, what percentage of Muslims actively support the idea of jihad=20%
Number of jihad supporting Muslims in the world=416 million
Number of jihad supporting Muslims in North America=1.608 million
Number of US troops in World War II=16.1 million
Number of US troops in Europe at the end of the war=1.9 million

We have almost as many jihad supporting Muslims in the US as we had troops in Europe following World War II. Of the troops in World War II about 65% were actual frontline troops (this includes airmen flying into enemy airspace). Statistically speaking we could have at this time 453,000 Muslims that are ready to go to war with the west living in the US at this time. That is about three times the number of soldiers, sailors, and airman who fought on D-day on the allied side. Lets just reduce it to the White House number of 1%. 90,000 Muslims ready to invade (they're already here) and fight in the US against a foe (that would be us) who is not ready to defend, not ready to accept, and not ready to fight back against them. Around the world the number is 20 million or more than all the Americans that served in the military in World War II. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Good post!