NSR Netherlands: Current events (in the world).

Okay, but then show me where they specifically seperate the ordinary Muslim from the radical violent part in the quoted item. I only see a generic "accusation" which includes all Muslims and the violent behaviour to the Ramadan Fest.
By the way, you should read the faith of the Rohingya people in Birma, who are subject to genocidal acts by the Budhist. Even the Budhist Dalai Lama expressed his concerns to the wrongly Nobel peace prize awarded Aung San Suu Kyi, who is in denial of the atrocities to them.

Myanmar2 July 2016
Mob burns down mosque in Myanmar
State-owned newspaper says police could not control attackers in Kachin state, the second attack in little over a week.

• 
  
  
  • 
  • 

• 
  
  
  • 
  • 

A mosque in Bago province was ransacked by a mob in June [File:EPA]
A mob has burned down a mosque in northern Myanmar - the second such attack in just over a week in the predominantly Buddhist nation.

The state-owned Global New Light of Myanmar newspaper reported on Saturday that security forces in Hpakant, in Kachin state, were unable to stop the attackers.

It said the attack on Friday came after mosque authorities failed to meet a June 30 deadline to tear down the structure to make way for a bridge.

No arrests were made, the newspaper said.

In a separate incident, a mob on June 23 demolished a mosque in Bago Region, about 60km northeast of the capital Yangon.

There has been sporadic but fierce violence against Muslims in predominantly Buddhist Myanmar since rioting in 2012 forced more than 100,000 members of the Muslim Rohingya minority to flee their homes in western Rakhine State.
Did your source also take in account the UN report(http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=54268) in which this was to read:
During its year-long probe, the UN found "an alarming increase" in incitement to hatred and religious intolerance by ultra-nationalist Buddhist organisations against the Rohingya.

Buddhist nationalists have staged protests across the country against even using the term Rohingya.


Inside Story - Is the Rohingya plight being ignored?
They label the group "Bengalis", casting Myanmar's more than one million Rohingya as illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, denying them citizenship even though their families have lived in Myanmar for generations.

Monday's report also found that state security forces have committed a wide range of other violations against the Rohingya.

These include summary executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and detention, torture and ill-treatment and forced labour, the report said.

So how truthful is your source considering the nill figure for the rest of the religions?

 

Fok off kunt

 

I was civil towards BD, wonder where you got that phantasy from? Unless BD is of the opinion I'm not being civil to him. But that'he can tell himself. If not he has no need for you to make up things in his name.

 

You donot want to understand it do you. The response was an explanation of a tradition.Nothing more or less. I wonder if you are in need of medication, like you suggested to me.

 

Just a few posts up. When I posted the police brutality you connected it with crime stats etc.
An enormous chunk of those stats consist of blacks in prison for three times possession of marihuana. If those kind of people are dangerous criminals about 70% of the Dutch population should be behind bars. But stats numbers arenot the whole story ever. It is about the what is behind the make up of the numbers.

 

The latter. I don't see the similarities or connection between one and the other.

I agree with the argument but it's always a shame to find out the messenger is a nutcase.

 

Lol

 

Correct. Certified psychopath and jesus freak.

 

This isn't a correct statement.

The fact there are more black criminals shouldn't mean that the police has to deal more with blacks. You are thinking in the same direction those cops are asked to act and that's because of this statement that I get checked more than you at the airport controls.

The problem in the US is clearly that cops are looking for street black criminals (and not for criminals in general) which eventually causes rebellion of certain individuals, which causes this kind of deaths. Those cops are driving around ghettos looking for any little suspect behavior a black person could have in order to disturb them and make identity checks. That's their jobs. Just like there are some specialized polics units of the same kind in europe, who are ONLY working in suburbs.

You know that cops have a system of bonuses as well, which will push them to arrest people in any circumustance if they want to.

Thinking : there are more black criminals so the police has to deal more with blacks is like a vicious circle.

In 2016 cyber criminality looks like a bigger problem than small majijuana dealers or small pickpockets for me. Some scam websites make thousands and thousands euros benefits every month , what they have ? A trial and a fine in the worst case. After long proceedings. They don't have cops coming to check their bodies X5 a day, insulting them etc.

Also a lot of harassement on the web, pedophilia...Should be more cops on the web than driving around suburbs.

 

Slightly stepping away from where this thread is going, and going back to something i've wondered about in the beginning of it, and have done ever since.. linguistics basicly... Muslim?

When is one a muslim and when not? Can a muslim disregard certain parts of the Quran and still be a Muslim?!! Can a muslim know nothing about the Quran and still be a Muslim?

I think religion, or atleast christianity, judiasm and Islam are clearly per definition fundamentalistic. Its foundation is literally a book.. And the books say what you should and should not do, they say that the book is true, just, devine and right, and they have moral lessons. Some of the moral lessons can be good to modern day society. But there are bad ones too. Really really bad ones towards women, towards unbelievers (christians and jews are treated like brothers of the faith, they get to live) and many more. Those are unacceptable. A book that claims to be true, demands their followers to do as it says, can NOT have crazy shit in them, no matter how good the good parts can be.

But I do think most people who consider themselves religious/muslim(in this discussion) dont even/ever read these books.. They consider themselves muslim or christian as part of their identity, just like the colour of their hair. Not much if any thought goes beyond that, no critical thinking or examining, dont have the same moral values, but they consider it a critical part of their identity anyway. For me, my definition is that if you dont think your holy book of choice is true, then you are simply not a follower of that religion. You can believe in god, you can be spiritual, you can even be spiritiual based on a religion if you like. But thats just spirituality. Thats how I see it.

For me a muslim should should follow the does and donts of their holy book, have the same moral values of their holy book, and believe that their holy book is true and divine. Like it says in the (allahfckingdamned) book! So i disqualify most muslims from being called muslim... They can be named... ehm.. Quranbased spiritualitualists? Does that make sense?

I'd love to specify/''place'' muslims into smaller sections to a certain belief system ''''''based'''''' on the Quran, as opposed to just calling them all ''muslims''. Help me!

 

About the crime stats: the number of wrongly convicted pesons in a study from Ohio
https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm
10,000 INNOCENT PEOPLE CONVICTED EACH YEAR, STUDY ESTIMATES

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- About 10,000 people in the United States may be wrongfully convicted of serious crimes each year, a new study suggests.

A very depressing article lifts it to the total spectrum of crime:
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic...re-wrongly-convicted-researchers-do-the-math/
Especially this parts puts in the limelight the bias black people suffer:

“Let’s give the professor the benefit of the doubt,” the op-ed read. “Let’s assume that he understated the number of innocents by roughly a factor of 10, that instead of 340 there were 4,000 people in prison who weren’t involved in the crime in any way. During that same 15 years, there were more than 15 million felony convictions across the country. That would make the error rate .027 percent — or, to put it another way, a success rate of 99.973 percent.”
But that claim, Gross writes in today’s issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, “is silly.”Here’s the problem with its logic. The known exonerations were almost all murder and rape cases, which get much more post-conviction attention, whereas the total number of felonies also includes burglary, car theft, tax fraud, and drug possession. Some 95 percent of felony convictions are the result of plea bargains, with no formal evidence ever presented, and most never bother with an appeal.

There’s a more rigorous way to crunch the numbers, according to Gross’s new study. And that approach leads to a false conviction rate that was high enough to make me gasp — 4.1 percent.

To be more precise: Gross and his colleagues calculated a 4.1 percent error rate among people who are sentenced to death. This is a small subset (less than 0.1 percent) of the total number of prison sentences but, because of the stakes, these cases are scrutinized far more than most. For capital cases, Gross writes, “everyone from defense lawyers to innocence projects to governors and state and federal judges is likely to be particularly careful to avoid the execution of innocent defendants.”

The same bias that gets black people shot innocently gets them convicted innocently.
Mind you, the numbers are probably too low, because the wrong murder convictions are calculated based on the exonarated cases.
See about that in this article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...0fc3a2-1aae-11e5-93b7-5eddc056ad8a_story.html

 

Aha, okay. There is no similarities or connection. It is an event on its own I brought in and given the aftermath in Dallas with probably consequences in the Presidential elections too.

 

That's why talking about the books and attacking Islam is stupid in my opinion. There's nonsense to attack a book. Nonsense to attack a theory, an ideology. You should attack people, people who carry actions. There was a problem with the nazis ideology since most of nazis could deport/kill jews, if you saw somedody wearing a nazi uniform in the street you could immediatly know about his intentions, now the case of muslims is completly different since a lot of muslims can wear religious clothes only by tradition. Or they can wear it to express their faith but won't attack any gay or apostate...
Less than 1 % of "muslims" carry bad actions such as killing gays, apostates....

So there's no muslim problem. No concrete problem with Islam in its substance. Islam is not nazism. It has some potential parts that could lead to nazi society type, just like judaism has too, but it is not applied by the biggest majority of the muslim world, so no need to make wrong accusations.

There might be problems with the muslim immigrants backgrounds, cultural and social problems, but religion is just the wrong guilty party.

It became so ridiculous that even a drug dealer can scream allah akbar and make people to classify him as a muslim. How can people know if he's muslim or not ? Does he apply the 5 pillars of Islam ? Anybody can pretend to be a muslim. What if christians, atheist or jews people start to make bad actions in the name of Islam ? It's just too easy if people only look at the religion label.

Obviously people should make more sociology instead of making analyzes of religions.

 

I want to reiterate this question, it wasnt rhetorical. I gave my view on it and im curious to see how others would answer it. I basicly disqualified the majority of muslims from being called muslims, which also means they cant call themselves muslims either. Its not accurate linguisticly. That makes sense to me. How do you guys look at it?