Talk:Muslim/All Terrorists Are Muslims

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] All Terrorists Are Muslims

Nice way to insert pure lies in the article by quoting them as "dissenting voices." Are all terrorists Muslism? Just last week the United Liberation Front of Asam and National Democratic Front of Boroland were involved in 60+ deaths in India. What about Nagaland rebels (Christian terrorists)? All this happened only last week week. http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041004/news_1n4indianu.html And Maoist terrorists in Nepal?

Let's take Hamas and compare it with LITE. No doubt that Hamas has big support among Muslims. However, Hamas began as a welfare and charity for the Palestinian. The political/charitable arm of Hamas was officially registered and recognized within Israel in 70s and 80s, when the movement was offshoot of Muslim Brotherhood. No wonder Hamas has so many "supporters." Not all of them are terrorists.

Still, let compare it with LITE (Sri Lanka). LITE has at least 10,000 members. Moreover, LITE has probably killed 100-fold more people than Hamas. Check it out.

Not just that, even if we only count suicide bombings, LITE has carried out more suicide bombings than Hamas. http://www.spur.asn.au/News_2003_July_27.htm

"240+ suicide bombings" (so far).

That's a lot more than Hamas.

I am going to delete such pathetic attempts "quote from a Muslim" to insert lies in an articles.

I can quote some lies by a Nazi on Judaism or some Christian nut on Christianity (by disguising them as a quote). Won't change the fact that the statemnt is a lie.

I am going to delete that pure lie until someone can convince me otherwise. OneGuy

Ask a few questions

1) Do you disagree with what they say or do you deny outright that they said it? 2) If they said it then it is fact and althought your POV disagrees the reader has to decide.....thats the way of knowledge. 3) Yes you can quote a Christian nut on the Christian page but the reader has to decide. Not you. Censorship is not an option and this is not Saudi Arabia. Move along--Malbear 06:50, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As for the contention that "others are worse" add that in and we will see what the readers think. Do you fear the facts and do you seek thr truth?--Malbear 06:51, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

*ahem* We have an article on Islamist terrorism, hint hint. —No-One Jones (m) 06:54, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ok, lets say I create an article on Quran. Does that mean that all Quran discussion has to magically fly off this page?--Malbear 06:59, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

No, it means we should have a short summary of the Qur'an and how it relates to Muslims, with the full details in the main article. Other articles to which you might direct your efforts are Islamism, the closely-related Islam as a political movement, and Militant Islam.
Furthermore, I'm not sure why this page isn't organized like Christian, which has a pointer to the main article on the religion followed by some disambiguation; seems that would be the better way to do it, to cut down on redundancy and suchlike. —No-One Jones (m) 07:06, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I can go to Judaism page and post a dozen quotes from Martin Luther on Judaism. http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/luther-jews.html

How about some quotes from Israel Shahak on Judaism page? The point is that you want to insert some slander against Muslims, so you found a quote, even though the fact in the quote was a pure lie, as I proved above and you failed to answer me. Who is this guy anyway? I never heard of him. You found the guy and his idiotic quote because you wanted to insert your POV (in this case a LIE). Are we going to mention everything (whatever nonense) anyone said as "quotes from this or that" as to hide our POV and insert lies in the article? OneGuy 07:11, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The thing is you could go to the Judaism page and insert somethings about Jews by Yasser Arafat. Your fear here is not that these thigns cast Muslims in a bad light. Your fear here is that these things are said by Muslims. Yes, I could put in a quote by, for example, some Muslim hater. Again this wouldn't be taken seriously since we know this persons agenda. However, the quotes taken as they stand, by Muslims about Muslims are damming and this is what you fear....
As for your contention about Lies and Truth. Well that is a matter of perception. The facts however are not. I found some people who are Muslims. One runs media in a muslim country and writes for muslims and about muslims and is a muslim. Feel free to quote something you said in response. For example, add the statement here "But some anonymous person named OneGuy from Wikipedia has emphatically stated that "This is a lie"". Then let the reader decide and move on.
The other person quoted is a graduate on Msulim studies and has been a president of the muslim youth movemement of a muslim country. In fact that country is even chairman of the rotating chairmanship of the OIC. Even the muslim based opposition party listens when he speaks about islam because he is an ulama. again feel free to add "But some anonymous person named OneGuy from Wikipedia has emphatically stated that "This is a lie""
Bullshit. I am going to QUOTE Jews on Judaism .. Not Yasser Arafat. Or Christians on Christianity. Apparently, you never heard of Israel Shahak I can post so many qutes so quickly that you will think lightning has struck you.
Anyway, as I proved the statement in the quote was a lie. You failed to rerspond to that. I wonder why? OneGuy 07:33, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
which quote do you feel was a lie?--Malbear 01:22, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I already explained why the statement that all terrorists are Muslims is a lie. You never answered my argument. Look above and read it again. You never directly answered the argument and evidence there. I wonder why? OneGuy 05:50, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
By the way since you are too lazy to do your own research I have pasted the locations from where the quotes were taken. --Malbear 01:27, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Also, what you do on the Judaism page is not the issue here. After all this page is Muslim not Muslims and Jews, not Middle East social issues etc. There has to come a point where Muslims STOP blaming the Jew for everything. These are the views of credible Muslims and yet you already squirm. A small percentage of the Muslims world (meaning those who live in "Islamic" countries...not the apolgitsts in secular countries) have internet access, education etc. If those of you who do are already uncomfortable and choose to blame the Jews for whatever discomfort you feel or turn every issue into a discussion of Judaism; then those who have even less....--Malbear 01:31, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I am an atheist. It's not about blaming Jews. It's about inserting irrelevant slander (in this case a lie) into article because you are a bigot. Your irrelevant quote (a lie in this case) went into the relevant article. What are you whining about now? As for blaming Jews, what I said was that I can do that to Judaism and Christianity page much more effectively if I wanted too. Anway, you won't be allowed to spread you irrelevant bigotry here. OneGuy 05:20, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
And why did you insert that irrelevant tibit about Christianity anyway? Your motive again was to slander Muslims by claiming (falsely) that Muslims feel "aversion" to identify with Muhammad. Are you some kind of missionary or something??? The article is about Muslims. The info about Christianity was completely irrelevant here (your only motive again was to insert slanders). OneGuy 05:30, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
And one last thing. You didn't have to give me a reference. I read this quote from a nobody important long begore you inserted it here. That doesn't change the fact that the claim that all terrorists are Muslims is a lie, as I showed above in my first response. You never responded to it. OneGuy 06:03, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)


I don't really give a flying f*** what you are or you are not. Firstly this is an article on Muslims, not Islam. As such opinions on Muslims do matter. Yes opinions by people who are Muslims or are authorities on Islam (the term is Ulama) do count. Such as in a page on, for example, French wine. If the winemaker is quoted as saying that the wine tastes worse than piss in a bucket then yes that opinion matters in the understanding of that particular wine.
Secondly. The thing about Christians was already in there when I first got to this page. As such I clarified it. Since the clarification (which is about Muslims) was irrelavant then so was something along the same vein which was further afield. I really wish you would stop being lazy and start doing research. It really makes for better arguments on your part. Sloppiness just lets us see you for what you are.....sermons being in Al Jazeera we are here to compile the sum total of human knowledge. Yes this knowledge may not be welcome in Esfahan or Riyadh but this is not either place.
Thirdly, whether it is a lie or not is not for you to decide. It is for the reader to decide. We present the evidence and then the reader decides. You can ADD to this knowledge but removal is really something else unless you claim that these quotes are (1) out of context (2) misquoted (3) falsifications. The content of the statement stands and the reader must decide for himself.
The point stands. You are a bigot who inserted a lie in the article (that

all terrorists are Muslims) by masquerading it as a quote from a nonbody (a general manager of Arabiya TV station?? LOL). Won't happen here. Take it to the relevant topic on terrorism. OneGuy 12:21, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Let's say I am a bigot, let's further postulate from this that I despise Muslims. The fact remains that this is an encyclopedia and knowledge (that's farily topical and accurate)has a place here. Even knowledge that you dislike has a place here.
So your tactic is simple. May work in the streets of Riyadh but not here. First of all we do not claim that all Muslims are terrorists. In fact the only person who has made that claim so far is yourself. Let's be clear on this.
Secondly, the claims are relevant to the state of "Muslims" which is what this article is about. If I choose to add this same quote in Islamic terrorism so be it, if not....so be it too.
Thirdly, If Al arrabiya is a small station and this guy is unimportant then why do you fear what he says? Could it be that Al arabiya is not so unimportant? After all it must have some basis to be number three in the gulf, behind al-jazeera and abu dhabi TV. Couldit be that this man used to run the Tv network that reached these same moslems? Could it be that if Ted Turner said something damming about American culture that it would actually mean something on a page about Americans? You tell me....
Exactly. This is Encyclopedia. Bigots shouldn't add lies in the article (such as ALL Muslims are terrorists) by masquerading it as quotes from a nobody. I don't fear what he says. Why would I? I know that what he said is a provable lie. He is also a nobody (manager LOL) Provable lies can't be included in Encyclopedia. OneGuy 13:33, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
"All Muslims are terrorists" are your words, not mine....So buzz off. Next another use of the word bigot will be taken up to policy. Policy requires a formal warning and this is the LAST one you are getting.
stated policy of wikipedia is " Be tolerant of others views, even if you disagree with them. You may well regard the other party's views as being on the fringe. This may even be true, but Wikipedia is aiming for a neutral point of view, not to exclude unconventional views. We are not trying to write a "single correct version of the truth."...now move along

... If there indeed is still debate going on about this, I'd like to submit an argument. Timothy McVeigh. Thanks. -- Kizor 06:56, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The problem is the title of the page and it's implied logic. If you are willing to read a logical deduction, then think of it this way. If all terrorists are Muslims, that would imply that non-Muslims cannot be terrorists. As Kizor points out, where does that leave Timothy McVeigh (who is definitely not a Muslim but definitely committed an act of terror). This is only one example of numerous barbarians using religion and/or political situations as a cover for terrorism. Zara