Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

Matthew Anderson4 said:Where?

In your previous response, when you were trying so hard to convince me that we aren't looking for an excuse but rather the cause... wouldn't it be more accurate to say we are looking for the catalyst instead of the cause?

Aha, there you are. No clue.
Isn't that semantic stuff just totally irrelevant to the point?

Regarding the semantics of it all.
That’s how I should’ve phrased it, right?

I’m quite pleased that I managed to trigger a bit of semantic alertness in you.

Or, if you prefer the more sophisticated route—resorting to Latin, as it were. *Est operae pretium.*

Back in middle school, my history teacher hammered it into our heads a million times: every single historical event has both a cause and a trigger.
It’s like if you finally snap and slap a coworker at the office—the cause is that they've been driving you crazy for months, but the trigger is some stupid little thing they did right before you lost it.😬>

So, when you're out there hunting for motives and digging through the causes—if I may be so bold as to put it that way—are you actually getting anywhere, or what?

lus orbitur vi

Alright, folks.
Do you even realize the actual balance of power here?
For every single American lost in an attack by an EU nation, they could lose a hundred thousand people in the Middle East.
What happened in Paris was horrific, there's no debate about that. But if this triggers a massive retaliation from France against thousands in the Middle East... Hmm.
And it looks like that’s exactly where this is headed.
A dozen terrorists take out two hundred people, and the response will be disproportionate.
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if we see tactical nukes—the small ones—dropped on Syria. Not necessarily by the French, though.
These idiots have absolutely no idea what kind of beast they've just poked.

This whole thing is spiraling way too far, too fast.

Matthew Anderson4 said:cause = excuse?

Funny how the debate hasn't even moved past one of the causes, mostly because some group of pseudo-intellectuals decided that one single cause is somehow the only cause.

We’re really getting into whether Islamic teachings play a role in all of this. That’s the core of the debate—we're looking for the actual root cause. Now, I’m not saying this is the only factor at play. The world isn't that simple, and I know nobody here thinks it is. But I can't help but wonder if there’s a connection when you see someone shouting "Allahu Akbar" while they're causing chaos. Is there a link to the faith? In my view, beyond all the usual talking points about "evil Americans" or the systemic issues involving white people, there are other underlying causes we tend to ignore. We just don't talk about them because we're too afraid of being politically incorrect.

Anthony Jackson2 said:You're missing the point because your entire argument starts from a flawed premise. They didn't attack because of religion, they didn't attack because we're "infidels," and it's not some grand scheme to Islamize us (?). The attack wasn't about faith—it was driven by other factors that you, Emily Ward3, that wannabe comedian Ken, and the rest of you seem determined to ignore, which is exactly what this thread has been debating for three days now.
They use religious rhetoric because the people pulling their strings have brainwashed them into thinking there’s a reward waiting in paradise—but that isn't why the attack happened.

For three days now, you've been bashing Islam, yet you conveniently forget how many people have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity—and you also forget that "peaceful" Christians in this country have only managed to nearly wipe each other out twice in the last century.

Besides, when you start quoting the Old Testament—all those lovely verses about forgiveness and peace...🙄

No, Islam isn't inherently violent, just as Christianity or Buddhism aren't—even though millions have died in the name of all three. Why? Because there are enough corrupt people in this world to twist any belief system to serve their own petty interests. Attacking Islam is an insult to the millions of people who have lived peacefully in America for generations under that "violent" faith.

Personally, I don't think religion does anyone any good, but I can understand why some people need it. Still, seeing one religion like Christianity being placed on a pedestal above all others—it's honestly nauseating.

Here’s the situation. To be clear, Anthony Jackson2 didn't say that their belief in the Quran being the word of God was the cause. What he actually said was that their attacks weren't motivated by faith. He was arguing that there are plenty of other reasons behind this, none of which have anything to do with their religious convictions. Basically, religion just isn't one of them.

That’s exactly what I find so terrifying about the current state of things. We aren't allowed to call out bad ideas anymore if they happen to be tucked under the umbrella of faith. It’s become this untouchable shield. If someone actually believed that Florida shared a border with France, or that humans were born with three eyes, or that water wasn't made of hydrogen and oxygen—people would laugh. They’d demand actual evidence. If someone claimed two lions could somehow give birth to zebra cubs, you'd call it nonsense immediately. But when it's wrapped in religious conviction, the conversation changes entirely. You can't apply the same logic. We've lost the ability to demand proof for things that simply aren't true.

Religion is where that logic falls apart. Anyone can claim they believe in everything, and then we’re expected to just nod along. It’s become this repetitive mantra—that all religions are essentially the same. But I have to disagree. Take Jainism, for example. It’s one of the oldest faiths out there, built entirely on the foundation of meditation and absolute non-violence. You can’t exactly take their core teachings and twist them to justify aggression. Unless you’re lying through your teeth or losing your grip on reality, it’s just not possible. By those standards alone, Jainism stands as a superior faith compared to many others. We can draw these distinctions anywhere. Some belief systems hold much more progressive, modern views on certain issues, while remaining incredibly primitive regarding others. They aren't all cut from the same cloth.

What I'm trying to get at is that bombers have much more on their minds than just some malicious white guy pushing their buttons. It feels like we’re completely overlooking that part of the equation.

Anthony Jackson2 said:You're missing the point because your entire argument starts from a flawed premise. They didn't attack because of religion, they didn't attack because we're "infidels," and it's not some grand scheme to Islamize us (?). The attack wasn't about faith—it was driven by other factors that you, Emily Ward3, that wannabe comedian Ken, and the rest of you seem determined to ignore, which is exactly what this thread has been debating for three days now.
They use religious rhetoric because the people pulling their strings have brainwashed them into thinking there’s a reward waiting in paradise—but that isn't why the attack happened.

For three days now, you've been bashing Islam, yet you conveniently forget how many people have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity—and you also forget that "peaceful" Christians in this country have only managed to nearly wipe each other out twice in the last century.

Besides, when you start quoting the Old Testament—all those lovely verses about forgiveness and peace...🙄

No, Islam isn't inherently violent, just as Christianity or Buddhism aren't—even though millions have died in the name of all three. Why? Because there are enough corrupt people in this world to twist any belief system to serve their own petty interests. Attacking Islam is an insult to the millions of people who have lived peacefully in America for generations under that "violent" faith.

Personally, I don't think religion does anyone any good, but I can understand why some people need it. Still, seeing one religion like Christianity being placed on a pedestal above all others—it's honestly nauseating.

This right here is exactly what I mean. If you move from criticizing specific ideas within Islam to attacking its very foundations, it becomes nasty. It turns into an attack on people, and then you get that pathetic whining about how millions of people live peacefully.

Let's try a thought experiment. Imagine there were Catholic nations in the Middle East. Every single law was pulled straight from the Bible, other religions were banned, they shipped millions of Bibles across the globe, they had religious police, stoning, lashings, mutilations...

Now, let's say I live in Chicago and I call myself a Catholic. I go to church regularly and follow Biblical principles—though not necessarily to the letter. I take the parts about love to heart, but I recognize that some parts were written ages ago and don't really apply to the modern world. If I saw those things happening in those countries, I wouldn't claim to be a Catholic just because they are. I’d start my own reformed Catholic church to condemn those primitive laws. I would tell everyone that they are interpreting the Bible completely wrong.

But that doesn't happen with Muslims. Everyone condemns ISIS. But how many people actually condemn Saudi Arabia? Anyone who tries to reform Islam often faces execution or stoning. I'm telling you, the statistics are horrifying. There are massive groups of people who believe Sharia law is the divine mandate we must live by. There is a huge collection of outdated rules that make no sense in today's world, yet millions of people still cling to them literally. For them, the greatest honor is memorizing the Quran.

In America, there are very few people—if any—who take every single word of the Bible literally. Like the idea that God created the entire universe in seven days. But I fear there are far too many Muslims who take the Quran entirely literally.

I just wanted to point this out. I intentionally avoided talking about Christianity or the Bible here; I used other examples instead. I haven't once praised Christianity. We are discussing Islam and how much its teachings influence behavior. Yet, so many people immediately retreat into their shells, making jokes about the Crusades or historical genocides. Sure, we can talk about that, but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Alex Brown50 said:No excuses—none at all. But there are causes, right? Between past baggage, current issues, genuine oppression, religious fanaticism, and politics... you can't just wipe the slate clean on history, and honestly, things aren't exactly getting better today. It was crosses and swords yesterday, and now it's missiles and drones.

Western civilization didn't just pop out of nowhere, either. It grew from a bunch of different sources, absorbed tons of other cultures, and let's be real—it definitely profited off other people's misery. It’s pretty naive to think exploitation just stopped because we cleaned up our own backyard and don't have to see the grit anymore. So, fine—let these "uncivilized" places deal with it on their own, as long as we don't have to hear about them (unless, you know, we need their oil or cheap labor).

As for the New Testament, you can't just take it at face value without oversimplifying everything. Back when those words were being written, the Old Testament wasn't even in the format we use today. And even if we could pinpoint exactly which part of the tradition Jesus was talking about regarding the Law, it still depends on which aspect of that tradition you mean. Plus, the New Testament itself is super diverse and open to so many interpretations—sometimes even contradicting itself... It's definitely not black and white.

Let me be clear. I’m not out here representing Christianity, nor do I want to. I don't care much about what's written in the Bible; it isn't my moral compass, and I certainly don't view it as some divine blueprint for the universe. But when you look at the contrast—like Jesus being this sort of hippie preaching on a hillside versus Muhammad acting as a military commander—the difference seems pretty stark to me.

James Anderson5 said:I read the Quran a long time ago, but quite thoroughly—not sure if you have? And since you mentioned it isn't a huge book (it's about 600 pages total), I have my doubts. You're talking about Sharia law, but much of that is actually based on the Hadiths—collections of traditions believed to be the sayings of Muhammad. The thing is, there's a lot of disagreement over whether he even said certain things. Plus, Sharia varies significantly between Sunnis and Shiites and changes from one country to the next...

The Quran itself doesn't mention stoning as a punishment for anything, though it does mention flogging for adultery, provided there were four witnesses who saw it happen. Obviously, that doesn't make the punishment okay. Stoning for adultery was actually something found in the Old Testament and Jewish tradition too. The reason we don't look at Christianity as a "crazy" religion is because of the spirit in which the Bible was written, especially the New Testament. It's the same deal with the Quran; for instance, the Sufis are supposed to embody its true spirit...

Just as Western civilization rejected all those extreme practices, Middle Eastern cultures should ideally do the same. Luckily, the West had the benefit of developing a philosophical foundation that gave us enough distance from pure religious dogma...

Ultimately, the key today lies in education and economic stability. But it's not always a given, because even a place like Saudi Arabia publicly executes dozens of people every year. To be honest, many parts of that region didn't have centuries of cultural, scientific, or philosophical development; until recently, they were mostly dealing with primitive tribal structures. Just look at the groups American oil companies had to negotiate with when they first started drilling. That's why trying to force democracy onto those nations felt so unrealistic—many weren't ready for it, much like how it wouldn't necessarily work in China either...

When I said the Bible wasn't a large book, I meant in terms of scale. And if I haven't read it cover-to-cover, I won't pretend I have. If you have, fair enough. There are beautiful passages in the Quran, truly. But there are also sections that point very clearly toward the path Muhammad took, and the path one must follow to reach paradise.

But hey, we agree on this: you called those practices insane, and that’s exactly what I’m saying. Those laws might have made sense a thousand years ago, but today, they are unacceptable. And while millions of Muslims likely feel the same way, the problem is the millions who don't—the ones who take these things literally. I fear that number is much larger than the group that rejects them. I base that on what I see in Middle Eastern nations and the perspectives expressed by Muslims living in Europe regarding the practices back home.

Just as we rejected those radical practices and moved beyond religious extremism, Muslims need to do the same. On that point, we are in total agreement.

Anthony Jackson2 said:The media wants us to look at these politicians—as if staring at them actually changes anything. It’s all just a performance for the cameras.

Nobody's out here asking for justifications regarding something like this—honestly, I don't know why it even needs to be mentioned, let alone debated. It’s just a pointless conversation.

I think we’re all mature enough now to actually talk about what caused this—without the theatrics. The root issues go way deeper than just religion, and that should be obvious to anyone who does more than glance at a headline once a week—or even those who've been paying actual attention to how this attack unfolded.

As for the whole religion debate—I only jumped in because I felt physically sick reading someone claim you have to distance yourself from Christian teachings just to justify killing. Apparently, they forgot that history spans a bit longer than twenty years.

I said what I said, and I'm fully aware of the implications, but I honestly think you're mistaken. Like I mentioned earlier, there's a fundamental difference between Jesus and Muhammad regarding how they perceive the world.

That being said, I'm intentionally stepping away from discussing Jesus right now to focus on much simpler examples. I'm bringing this up because people keep accusing me of glorifying Christianity. Look, we can talk about Christianity if you want. We really can. But right now, the conversation here is about Islam.

Go ahead, kiss the devil... because now they’re finally facing the music. They finally got what was coming to them. ☕

Western politics hasn't really faced the music when it comes to Christianity—specifically its darker side—and you can't just separate Islam from the whole Judeo-Christian framework either. Plus, let’s be real, the West isn't living in some perfect little bubble made of nothing but pure love and humanitarianism for everyone else...

To me, there's no real difference between a psychopath dropping bombs and those suits acting all high and mighty while funding the Israeli regime and pulling the strings on civilian casualties from afar. It's the same sickness, honestly—they're basically two sides of the same coin.

So, yeah—let's just wait for the primitive small-minded folks to evolve into sophisticated versions of themselves (assuming they don't kill or enslave half the planet first, which—given how things are going—is a pretty safe bet). Until then? Just stay quiet. Trying to argue is a lost cause anyway.

James Anderson5 said:Why would I mix up apples and oranges? It’s obvious that all dissidents were under surveillance during the old era, but it's also clear that most extremism in history stems from economic instability, lack of education, and human rights violations—not religion. Religion is just there to give a psychopath some kind of justification for what they want to do...

Neither Buddhism, Islam, nor Christianity are inherently violent, yet you'll find followers of all those faiths who have done all sorts of terrible things throughout history...

In its best form, Islam simply enriched Western history and culture, from the Alhambra to the palaces of Sicily, contributing everything from science to literature; but in its worst form today, it poses a threat to physical security...

Simply because Busic wanted to sensitize the American public in a way that ultimately backfired on him. He expressed regret multiple times over the death of the American police officer and realized he had made a massive mess of things...
The man was a Slavic studies student—a major idealist (or rather, an activist) for the American cause—speaking out at a time when many wouldn't dare oppose the communist totalitarian regime. In the end, Busic attempts suicide because of these intense "patriots"... yes, those modern-day political caricatures we all mock on forums and the internet today...

And who is Breivik? That guy had mental instabilities from a young age—couldn't even finish school and spent his time after that engaging in all sorts of illegal nonsense just to get his hands on money. When that failed, he quickly identified his scapegoats in the form of Muslims and Marxists who supposedly were destroying Norway. This schizophrenic individual consciously crafts a plan to murder his ideological enemies, designing it so perversely that he kills as many innocent young people as possible without mercy...
He never repented for his actions; instead, he plays the part of some unrepentant intellectual in his cell...

So, you've unconsciously placed two completely different personalities and two entirely different scenarios into the same context. Regarding religion, I agree—people in general are losing their sense of reason, and they easily succumb to prejudice out of laziness instead of actively resolving misunderstandings...

Michelle Doyle61 said:We’re really getting into whether Islamic teachings play a role in all of this. That’s the core of the debate—we're looking for the actual root cause. Now, I’m not saying this is the only factor at play. The world isn't that simple, and I know nobody here thinks it is. But I can't help but wonder if there’s a connection when you see someone shouting "Allahu Akbar" while they're causing chaos. Is there a link to the faith? In my view, beyond all the usual talking points about "evil Americans" or the systemic issues involving white people, there are other underlying causes we tend to ignore. We just don't talk about them because we're too afraid of being politically incorrect.

Here’s the situation. To be clear, Anthony Jackson2 didn't say that their belief in the Quran being the word of God was the cause. What he actually said was that their attacks weren't motivated by faith. He was arguing that there are plenty of other reasons behind this, none of which have anything to do with their religious convictions. Basically, religion just isn't one of them.

That’s exactly what I find so terrifying about the current state of things. We aren't allowed to call out bad ideas anymore if they happen to be tucked under the umbrella of faith. It’s become this untouchable shield. If someone actually believed that Florida shared a border with France, or that humans were born with three eyes, or that water wasn't made of hydrogen and oxygen—people would laugh. They’d demand actual evidence. If someone claimed two lions could somehow give birth to zebra cubs, you'd call it nonsense immediately. But when it's wrapped in religious conviction, the conversation changes entirely. You can't apply the same logic. We've lost the ability to demand proof for things that simply aren't true.

Religion is where that logic falls apart. Anyone can claim they believe in everything, and then we’re expected to just nod along. It’s become this repetitive mantra—that all religions are essentially the same. But I have to disagree. Take Jainism, for example. It’s one of the oldest faiths out there, built entirely on the foundation of meditation and absolute non-violence. You can’t exactly take their core teachings and twist them to justify aggression. Unless you’re lying through your teeth or losing your grip on reality, it’s just not possible. By those standards alone, Jainism stands as a superior faith compared to many others. We can draw these distinctions anywhere. Some belief systems hold much more progressive, modern views on certain issues, while remaining incredibly primitive regarding others. They aren't all cut from the same cloth.

What I'm trying to get at is that bombers have much more on their minds than just some malicious white guy pushing their buttons. It feels like we’re completely overlooking that part of the equation.

This right here is exactly what I mean. If you move from criticizing specific ideas within Islam to attacking its very foundations, it becomes nasty. It turns into an attack on people, and then you get that pathetic whining about how millions of people live peacefully.

Let's try a thought experiment. Imagine there were Catholic nations in the Middle East. Every single law was pulled straight from the Bible, other religions were banned, they shipped millions of Bibles across the globe, they had religious police, stoning, lashings, mutilations...

Now, let's say I live in Chicago and I call myself a Catholic. I go to church regularly and follow Biblical principles—though not necessarily to the letter. I take the parts about love to heart, but I recognize that some parts were written ages ago and don't really apply to the modern world. If I saw those things happening in those countries, I wouldn't claim to be a Catholic just because they are. I’d start my own reformed Catholic church to condemn those primitive laws. I would tell everyone that they are interpreting the Bible completely wrong.

But that doesn't happen with Muslims. Everyone condemns ISIS. But how many people actually condemn Saudi Arabia? Anyone who tries to reform Islam often faces execution or stoning. I'm telling you, the statistics are horrifying. There are massive groups of people who believe Sharia law is the divine mandate we must live by. There is a huge collection of outdated rules that make no sense in today's world, yet millions of people still cling to them literally. For them, the greatest honor is memorizing the Quran.

In America, there are very few people—if any—who take every single word of the Bible literally. Like the idea that God created the entire universe in seven days. But I fear there are far too many Muslims who take the Quran entirely literally.

I just wanted to point this out. I intentionally avoided talking about Christianity or the Bible here; I used other examples instead. I haven't once praised Christianity. We are discussing Islam and how much its teachings influence behavior. Yet, so many people immediately retreat into their shells, making jokes about the Crusades or historical genocides. Sure, we can talk about that, but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Let me be clear. I’m not out here representing Christianity, nor do I want to. I don't care much about what's written in the Bible; it isn't my moral compass, and I certainly don't view it as some divine blueprint for the universe. But when you look at the contrast—like Jesus being this sort of hippie preaching on a hillside versus Muhammad acting as a military commander—the difference seems pretty stark to me.

When I said the Bible wasn't a large book, I meant in terms of scale. And if I haven't read it cover-to-cover, I won't pretend I have. If you have, fair enough. There are beautiful passages in the Quran, truly. But there are also sections that point very clearly toward the path Muhammad took, and the path one must follow to reach paradise.

But hey, we agree on this: you called those practices insane, and that’s exactly what I’m saying. Those laws might have made sense a thousand years ago, but today, they are unacceptable. And while millions of Muslims likely feel the same way, the problem is the millions who don't—the ones who take these things literally. I fear that number is much larger than the group that rejects them. I base that on what I see in Middle Eastern nations and the perspectives expressed by Muslims living in Europe regarding the practices back home.

Just as we rejected those radical practices and moved beyond religious extremism, Muslims need to do the same. On that point, we are in total agreement.

I said what I said, and I'm fully aware of the implications, but I honestly think you're mistaken. Like I mentioned earlier, there's a fundamental difference between Jesus and Muhammad regarding how they perceive the world.

That being said, I'm intentionally stepping away from discussing Jesus right now to focus on much simpler examples. I'm bringing this up because people keep accusing me of glorifying Christianity. Look, we can talk about Christianity if you want. We really can. But right now, the conversation here is about Islam.

The Reformation of the Western Church was another massive powder keg—one that triggered an incredible amount of violence and death across the West... I suspect many Muslim clergy are well aware of this history, which is likely why they choose to let things play out as they are rather than interfering with the status quo.

Christian America has certainly produced its own share of terrorists—think groups like the Weather Underground, the Unabomber, or even lone actors like Anders Breivik. While they might not have been charging into battle clutching a Bible, I guess it’s hard to argue that terrorism is exclusively tied to Islam. If I were to write out my full thoughts on Islam right now, I'd probably get banned immediately, but I suspect it isn't the sole reason behind these terrorist attacks in this broader context.

Matthew Young35 said:Alright, folks.
Do you even realize the actual balance of power here?
For every single American lost in an attack by an EU nation, they could lose a hundred thousand people in the Middle East.
What happened in Paris was horrific, there's no debate about that. But if this triggers a massive retaliation from France against thousands in the Middle East... Hmm.
And it looks like that’s exactly where this is headed.
A dozen terrorists take out two hundred people, and the response will be disproportionate.
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if we see tactical nukes—the small ones—dropped on Syria. Not necessarily by the French, though.
These idiots have absolutely no idea what kind of beast they've just poked.

This whole thing is spiraling way too far, too fast.

What they'll likely do is send French soldiers into that desert, where those kids will probably perish for no real reason. The French president seems a bit ridiculous to me; all these moves feel pretty absurd. He’s putting 115,000 police officers on the streets now that everything is already over, mostly just so he doesn't lose the next election.

Jessica Gonzalez said:What they'll likely do is send French soldiers into that desert, where those kids will probably perish for no real reason. The French president seems a bit ridiculous to me; all these moves feel pretty absurd. He’s putting 115,000 police officers on the streets now that everything is already over, mostly just so he doesn't lose the next election.

Honestly, Hollande is just a total clown and a desperate politician. Like, the guy literally has zero wins under his belt, period. I guess the only way he stays in office is if he just declares a permanent state of emergency across the whole country.

Look, sure, you’ll find some bad actors even among Catholics, but let’s be real—groups like the IRA or the Provisional IRA weren't out there committing terror attacks in the name of the Bible or preaching Catholic doctrine; they were driven by Irish nationalism. Same goes for the Baader-Meinhof Group—they had absolutely zero connection to Catholicism. And as for the Black Hand? That was over a century ago, and from what I know, religion wasn't even on their radar as a motive. So, honestly, these comparisons you're making? You're way off base here.

As for Breivik, bringing up his mental health issues is kind of a moot point—it's just a distraction from the reality of what happened.

So, ETA was basically a nationalist group, but their whole vibe was actually super far-left and totally anti-religious.

Eric Fox7 said:Look, sure, you’ll find some bad actors even among Catholics, but let’s be real—groups like the IRA or the Provisional IRA weren't out there committing terror attacks in the name of the Bible or preaching Catholic doctrine; they were driven by Irish nationalism. Same goes for the Baader-Meinhof Group—they had absolutely zero connection to Catholicism. And as for the Black Hand? That was over a century ago, and from what I know, religion wasn't even on their radar as a motive. So, honestly, these comparisons you're making? You're way off base here.

As for Breivik, bringing up his mental health issues is kind of a moot point—it's just a distraction from the reality of what happened.

Anyway, regarding Breivik, I’m not buying this idea that millions of people actually support his terrorist acts or are trying to canonize him; unless you think someone is just straight-up insane, killing innocent people for any reason is fundamentally wrong.

I can't even begin to wrap my head around these terrorist acts, especially when they're carried out by people who don't have anything to do with Islam at all (just look at some of you guys on this forum).
If the justification for murder is simply that some imaginary person doesn't fit into someone else's preferred worldview, then the world has truly gone to hell.
By that logic, let Marvel fans go at DC, or let Bond fanatics storm the Universal studios or the Paramount headquarters just because they're offended, and we could go on forever. We could send kamikazes to New York City to blow things up because "they have a reason," and they could retaliate against us. It's a never-ending cycle. It’s not that Americans aren't capable of mistakes, but it’s always the regular people who pay the price, while everyone tries to justify the violence through these ridiculous, nonsensical lenses. Every single nation and every ethnic group can find a "reason" to act like this if they look hard enough.

No one can honestly claim Muslims are more backward than Westerners when about 40% of Americans believe the world was created just 10,000 years ago based on biblical accounts

http://www.gallup.com/poll/170822/be...n-origins.aspx

I even know people right here in the States who hold those views. The only difference is they’re often struggling financially and living in unstable environments with few ways out—which is basically perfect breeding ground for extremism. It's really no mystery why someone like Hitler rose to power in Germany back when the nation was economically broken

On a side note, I caught that list of demands being used in the negotiations for the new administration—if they actually pull all that off just for the sake of entrepreneurship, more power to them, otherwise neither the Democrats nor the Republicans would ever get it through