Dutch politician: If Mohammed were alive in the Netherlands today, I would propose he be tarred and feathered

[almaty 19]

too add to your post....the ME has the minority of muslims in the world and it is the area where those who have a bias always point too...:

Largest Muslim Populations in the World

Rank Country Muslim Population

1 Indonesia 182,570,000

2 Pakistan 134,480,000

3 India 121,000,000

4 Bangladesh 114,080,000

5 Turkey 65,510,000

6 Iran 62,430,000

7 Egypt 58,630,000

8 Nigeria 53,000,000

9 Algeria 30,530,000

10 Morocco

hmmm..where is a ME country at??????

Unfortunately, these numbers are...GROSSLY WRONG!!!

that number for India would be a 1987 estimate, that mentioned for Pakistan around 1996.

The number for India in 1991 was about 157 million, 2001 about 179 million (unofficial estimate closer to 201-219 million, meaning India displaces Indonesia). Muslim population of India has always exceeded that of (erstwhile West) Pakistan since Partition.

#s maybe off brother sriniv..but the point is..the ME is a minority of muslims in the world...

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

too add to your post....the ME has the minority of muslims in the world and it is the area where those who have a bias always point too...:

Largest Muslim Populations in the World

Rank Country Muslim Population

1 Indonesia 182,570,000

2 Pakistan 134,480,000

3 India 121,000,000

4 Bangladesh 114,080,000

5 Turkey 65,510,000

6 Iran 62,430,000

7 Egypt 58,630,000

8 Nigeria 53,000,000

9 Algeria 30,530,000

10 Morocco

hmmm..where is a ME country at??????

Unfortunately, these numbers are...GROSSLY WRONG!!!

that number for India would be a 1987 estimate, that mentioned for Pakistan around 1996.

The number for India in 1991 was about 157 million, 2001 about 179 million (unofficial estimate closer to 201-219 million, meaning India displaces Indonesia). Muslim population of India has always exceeded that of (erstwhile West) Pakistan since Partition.

#s maybe off brother sriniv..but the point is..the ME is a minority of muslims in the world...

I don't think that was questioned.

[mawilson 2,133]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

He said MOST not ALL. Why are you arguing about this? You know damn well that most

terror groups are Islamic. Let's take a look at our State Department's

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs)

1. Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
   
2. Abu Sayyaf Group
   
3. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
   
4. Ansar al-Islam
   
5. Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
   
6. Asbat al-Ansar
   
7. Aum Shinrikyo
   
8. Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
   
9. Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA)
   
10. Continuity Irish Republican Army
    
11. Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group)
    
12. HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)
    
13. Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)
    
14. Hizballah (Party of God)
    
15. Islamic Jihad Group
    
16. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
    
17. Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Army of Mohammed)
    
18. Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI)
    
19. al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad)
    
20. Kahane Chai (Kach)
    
21. Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK)
    
22. Lashkar-e Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous)
    
23. Lashkar i Jhangvi
    
24. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
    
25. Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
    
26. Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM)
    
27. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
    
28. National Liberation Army (ELN)
    
29. Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
    
30. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
    
31. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
    
32. PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
    
33. al-Qa’ida
    
34. Real IRA
    
35. Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
    
36. Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA)
    
37. Revolutionary Organization 17 November
    
38. Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
    
39. Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)
    
40. Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL)
    
41. Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network)
    
42. United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)
    

Highlighted in red are Islamic FTOs.

[Heracles 417]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies.

Theo Van Gogh tried that, oh but wait he was assassinated by Mohammed Bouyeri...

Indeed, half of the participants in these wars are Christian. So it's the Christian imperialist powers vs. the Muslim terrorists?

How so?

Edited March 2, 2007 by Infidel

[peezey 0]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

He said MOST not ALL. Why are you arguing about this? You know damn well that most

terror groups are Islamic. Let's take a look at our State Department's

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs)

1. Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
   
2. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
   
3. Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
   
4. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
   
5. PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
   

Highlighted in red are Islamic FTOs.

Wow, so just because they are arab, they are Islamic FTOs? Those above are nationalist and not religious, but nice try. So that leaves half the list as FTOs with "Islam" in their name in some way, but only about half of those claim much of a desire to bring all the rest of us to Islam and "kill the west," especially those based in southeast asia,

So, again, I ask, please someone provide the demographics of terrorists in the 20th Century.

[mawilson 2,133]

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs)

1. Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
   
2. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
   
3. Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
   
4. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
   
5. PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
   

Highlighted in red are Islamic FTOs.

Wow, so just because they are arab, they are Islamic FTOs? Those above are nationalist and not religious, but nice try.

In most cases - yes. With the exception of the PLO, the FTOs I highlighted are all Islamic.

1. The ANO is also called the Fatah Revolutionary Council, the Arab Revolutionary Brigades,

or the Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims

2. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) took part in the 1979 Islamic revolution which replaced

the Shah with a Shiite Islamist regime. MEK’s ideology is a blend of Marxism and Islamism.

4, 5. PFLF. In the 1960's the PFLP trained several thousand terrorists, most of them Islamic jihadists

in bases in Syria and Jordan. The PFLP began life as a Marxist organization but over time became

Muslim. Its secular nature was its undoing.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

It's convenient to mixed nationalists with religious extremists. Religious extremists are profitable.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

You prove that list wrong. You asked, I provided and you aren't happy with the results. Imagine that. You can't prove it wrong because it's right and you know it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

You prove that list wrong. You asked, I provided and you aren't happy with the results. Imagine that. You can't prove it wrong because it's right and you know it.

Surely you can add something to the discussion other than relying on that same tedious old source. The fact that you keep pulling this out of the hat when there is no shortage of discussion and debate on this subject would seem to reveal your own biases (and apparent unwillingness to delve more deeply into the debate) rather than prove your point. IMO anyway.

More than that if we're comparing religions - you might find that there is just as much blood, death, destruction and denunciation in the bible (Old Testament) as there is in the Koran. That says to me religion plays a part, but that other factors are just as (if not more important). Why are you fixated with proving specifically that it is the religion itself that is somehow evil?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

You prove that list wrong. You asked, I provided and you aren't happy with the results. Imagine that. You can't prove it wrong because it's right and you know it.

Surely you can add something to the discussion other than relying on that same tedious old source. The fact that you keep pulling this out of the hat when there is no shortage of discussion and debate on this subject would seem to reveal your own biases (and apparent unwillingness to delve more deeply into the debate) rather than prove your point. IMO anyway.

More than that if we're comparing religions - you might find that there is just as much blood, death, destruction and denunciation in the bible (Old Testament) as there is in the Koran. That says to me religion plays a part, but that other factors are just as (if not more important). Why are you fixated with proving specifically that it is the religion itself that is somehow evil?

Prove the list of terrorist attacks wrong. You won't and you can't. Such denial is frightening. The list contains known historical attacks.

Edited March 3, 2007 by LuckyStrike

[mybackpages 0]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

You prove that list wrong. You asked, I provided and you aren't happy with the results. Imagine that. You can't prove it wrong because it's right and you know it.

Surely you can add something to the discussion other than relying on that same tedious old source. The fact that you keep pulling this out of the hat when there is no shortage of discussion and debate on this subject would seem to reveal your own biases (and apparent unwillingness to delve more deeply into the debate) rather than prove your point. IMO anyway.

More than that if we're comparing religions - you might find that there is just as much blood, death, destruction and denunciation in the bible (Old Testament) as there is in the Koran. That says to me religion plays a part, but that other factors are just as (if not more important). Why are you fixated with proving specifically that it is the religion itself that is somehow evil?

Prove the list of terrorist attacks wrong. You won't and you can't. Such denial is frightening. The list contains known historical attacks.

Maybe so but then who is keeping the list?

[peezey 0]

So now you are making things up?

MKO:: "the group primarily engaged in ideological work, rejecting both fundamentalist interpretations of Islam and Marxist philosophy."

Overthrowing the shah had NOTHING to do with the current regime being what it is today. The nationalist platform of the party had everything to do with expelling corruption. This was a group of university students sick of the corruption. This isn't a mystery, but keep promoting the lies.

From MIPT: "The MEK is the primary opposition to the current Iranian government and acts as the focal point of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a coalition of Iranian opposition groups which claims to be the transitional parliament-in-exile with 570 members. The NCRI was headquartered in Iraq, with representative offices in other countries including a presence in Washington where it has previously received support from the US Congress. After the 9/11 attacks however, the US government actively courted cooperation from the government of Iran and further sidelined any unofficial support for the MEK."

"The MEK's goal is to overthrow the Iranian government and replace it with the NCRI. At a 1995 conference, the group outlined a 16-point plan:

1) Guarantee freedom of belief, expression and the press, without censorship; 2) Guarantee freedom for political parties, unions, groups, councils, forums, syndicates, except those loyal to either the Shah or Ayatollah Khomeini, provided they stayed within the law; 3) Ensure governments would be elected; 4) Respect for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; 5) Abolish courts, tribunals, security departments introduced by the Ayatollah Khomeini regime; 6) Ensure women enjoy the same social, political and cultural rights as men (including a ban on polygamy); 7) Abolish privileges based on gender, religion or ethnic group; 8) End discrimination against religious minorities; 9) Abolish compulsory religious practice; 10) Secure Iranian territorial integrity while recognising the right of Iranian Kurdistan to autonomy; 11) Safeguard all social, cultural and political rights for ethnic minorities; 12) Repeal what the MEK deems to be `anti-labour, anti-peasant laws'; 13) Encourage a return from exile for all who fled either the Shah or Khomeini regime; 14) Base the economy on the free market, national capitalism and private ownership; 15) Provide welfare needs to the poor; 16) Improve Iran's foreign relations with neighbouring and other states; to live in peaceful co-existence. "

ANO is NOT religious. "The Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims is one of many factions/suspected cover names of the ANO." Keep trying.

Now your PFLP is just a complete lie. Which hate site did you pull that ####### from?

From the MIPT Terrorism Knowledge base:

"The PFLP is a Marxist-Leninist, Palestinian secular nationalist movement."

"Faced with decreasing support from the Soviet Union in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the PFLP became an increasingly marginalized player in the Palestinian nationalist movement."

"Despite these operations, the PFLP continues to be a marginal player in the Palestinian movement, losing ground to both Islamist (Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and secular (Fatah) rivals."

Nothing, nada, zilch about the group training terrorists or having religious ideology. In fact, the description says over and over again that the group is marginal and has little effect on politics or people in the region.

Try the truth once in a while.

In most cases - yes. With the exception of the PLO, the FTOs I highlighted are all Islamic.

1. The ANO is also called the Fatah Revolutionary Council, the Arab Revolutionary Brigades,

or the Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims

2. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO) took part in the 1979 Islamic revolution which replaced

the Shah with a Shiite Islamist regime. MEK’s ideology is a blend of Marxism and Islamism.

4, 5. PFLF. In the 1960's the PFLP trained several thousand terrorists, most of them Islamic jihadists

in bases in Syria and Jordan. The PFLP began life as a Marxist organization but over time became

Muslim. Its secular nature was its undoing.

Edited March 3, 2007 by peezey

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nice try, come back with real statistics from reputable academic or political institutions' studies. And I didn't ask how many Islamic terror activitites happened, I asked for the demographics of ALL TERRORISTS of the 20th century. In case that is unclear, what is the nationality, ethnicity, age, gender, religion of ALL TERRORISTS?

You prove that list wrong. You asked, I provided and you aren't happy with the results. Imagine that. You can't prove it wrong because it's right and you know it.

Surely you can add something to the discussion other than relying on that same tedious old source. The fact that you keep pulling this out of the hat when there is no shortage of discussion and debate on this subject would seem to reveal your own biases (and apparent unwillingness to delve more deeply into the debate) rather than prove your point. IMO anyway.

More than that if we're comparing religions - you might find that there is just as much blood, death, destruction and denunciation in the bible (Old Testament) as there is in the Koran. That says to me religion plays a part, but that other factors are just as (if not more important). Why are you fixated with proving specifically that it is the religion itself that is somehow evil?

Prove the list of terrorist attacks wrong. You won't and you can't. Such denial is frightening. The list contains known historical attacks.

I'm not trying to prove it wrong - I'm just wondering why you seize on this single site as the sole means to validating your entire argument. It simply seems to me that there is no shortage of debate on this issue, so while that single 'hate site' might be compelling enough for you to base your views on, why do you expect it to be enough for everyone else?

First off, it doesn't cite the specific sources for the incidents it includes in that list (other than some vague reference "international news"). Secondly, the criteria they use for defining a 'terrorist' attack as it pertains to including it on their list seems rather arbitrary and ill-defined.

Like the Danish politician in the OP article (and no, he obviously doesn't deserve death threats), www.thereligionofpeace.com doesn't add anything substantive to the international debate.

There is nothing positive whatsoever on there about Islam, the diversity of muslim culture across the globe, Rather it amounts to little more than "I hate muslims and Islam" - with the addition of politically correct (but contradictory and contextually meaningless) disclaimers to the effect of "of course we don't hate all muslims". Surprising (or perhaps not) how often, and how easily those plaintive assertions are forgotten when discussing yet another atrocity, before popping up again when there is any hint that their motives might be questioned.

The simple fact is that if 1 billion+ people really did hate us without reason and wanted to kill us on sight - they would have rather better success IMO.

[mawilson 2,133]

Nothing, nada, zilch about the group training terrorists or having religious ideology. In fact, the description says over and over again that the group is marginal and has little effect on politics or people in the region.

Nice try. I never said they were religious, only that they trained religious fanatics - and also that

their secular nature was their undoing. You said it yourself --

"the PFLP continues to be a marginal player in the Palestinian movement, losing ground to both Islamist

(Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and secular (Fatah) rivals."

You know how unpopular Fatah is in the Palestinian territories, which has a lot to do with its secular

nature.

[peezey 0]

Prove the list of terrorist attacks wrong. You won't and you can't. Such denial is frightening. The list contains known historical attacks.

No one is saying it's not right or wrong. What was asked was, what is the demographic makeup of a terrorist in the 20th century? To which you posted a list of terror attacks perpetrated by muslims/arabs. You seem to have left out all the hundreds of terrorist attacks by the hundreds of other terrorists in the 20th century.

However, you don't care to answer the question, you only care to propagate hate and misinformation, proven well by your consistent hate-filled remarks that totally ignore the fact terrorism is perpetrated by a vast, diverse kind of group/person, and religion is not the unifying factor in identifying who these people are.

Nothing, nada, zilch about the group training terrorists or having religious ideology. In fact, the description says over and over again that the group is marginal and has little effect on politics or people in the region.

Nice try. I never said they were religious, only that they trained religious fanatics - and also that

their secular nature was their undoing. You said it yourself --

"the PFLP continues to be a marginal player in the Palestinian movement, losing ground to both Islamist

(Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) and secular (Fatah) rivals."

You know how unpopular Fatah is in the Palestinian territories, which has a lot to do with its secular

nature.

Nice try yourself. You are saying now that the the Terrorist Knowledge base is totally and wholly inaccurate since they mention NOTHING about training terrorist as part of PFLP's agenda?

Edited March 3, 2007 by peezey