Out of 100 million war deaths in 20th century, only 2% attributed to muslims

[JakeStarkey]

Post something from a legitimate source, asshole. If it's true, you shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of them.

If the site's facts are reliable and context, the problem is with you.

Oh look, Jake agrees with the left wing hack. Who would have guessed? Still waiting for a credible link.

Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.

 

[S.J.]

If the site's facts are reliable and context, the problem is with you.

Oh look, Jake agrees with the left wing hack. Who would have guessed? Still waiting for a credible link.

Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh look, Jake agrees with the left wing hack. Who would have guessed? Still waiting for a credible link.

Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

You are not the standard for creditability, S. J.

No one, even your own side, trusts you for critical, fair evaluation.

 

[S.J.]

Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

You are not the standard for creditability, S. J.

No one, even your own side, trusts you for critical, fair evaluation.

Can't find any, can you?

 

[Billo_Really]

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

No need to.

Once I provided a source to my initial claim, the burden of proof shifts to the objector (which is you), to provide evidence to show their (your) objection is not frivolous and has merit.

So where's your evidence to prove what I said was false?

 

[Billo_Really]

What?s FAIR? ? FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting

As a progressive group, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.​

They TELL you they're biased.

Nice hat Dave!

 

[S.J.]

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

No need to.

Once I provided a source to my initial claim, the burden of proof shifts to the objector (which is you), to provide evidence to show their (your) objection is not frivolous and has merit.

So where's your evidence to prove what I said was false?

The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site. I don't have to prove shit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Is Islam as violent as some people claim?

Not according to historical data!

...looking over the last century, the bloodiest in human history... out of the more than 100 million war deaths in the 20th century, something less than 2 percent came at the hands of Muslim-majority nations. Most of those dead came in wars where non-Muslim nations played a significant role—such as the Iran/Iraq War, where the United States aided the aggressor Iraq, and the Afghan Civil War, where the Soviet Union was a major military force.

In addition to that, murder rates in muslim country's, are less than in western nations.

“murder rates in most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States,” which is especially violent for a wealthy nation.

But what is most surprising of all, is that muslims have the highest disapproval rate of any of the 6 major religions, when it comes to the killing of innocent civilians.

Muslim Americans disapprove of violence against civilians at an exceptionally high rate. When asked if it “is justified for an individual or a small group of people to target and kill civilians,” 89 percent of Muslims said that it is never justified, which was the highest disapproval rate of the six religious and nonreligious groups polled. Muslim Americans also rejected military killing of civilians by a wide margin, while a majority of Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Mormons approved of such killings.

With that being said, when someone starts talking about the threat from Islam, I suggest you take that shit with a grain of salt.

Liberals are you aware that Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

You are not the standard for creditability, S. J.

No one, even your own side, trusts you for critical, fair evaluation.

Can't find any, can you?

jakes always on the opposite end of a discussion where Republicans are concerned.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

You are not the standard for creditability, S. J.

No one, even your own side, trusts you for critical, fair evaluation.

Back up the biased source with one that is not. Pretty simple request. It is not my job to prove a negative, it is your job to prove your positive statements with credible acceptable sites.

As was already asked, if I source an Arab site that claims the Holocaust never happened is that proof it did not happen?

 

[Billo_Really]

Liberals are you aware that Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.

And historical facts, say your hysterical facts, are full of shit!

 

[Billo_Really]

The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site. I don't have to prove shit.

You'd be thrown out of court, if you tried that shit in front of a judge.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

No need to.

Once I provided a source to my initial claim, the burden of proof shifts to the objector (which is you), to provide evidence to show their (your) objection is not frivolous and has merit.

So where's your evidence to prove what I said was false?

Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?

 

[S.J.]

The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site. I don't have to prove shit.

You'd be thrown out of court, if you tried that shit in front of a judge.

A judge would instruct you to present a credible source for your argument or throw YOU out of court.

 

[Billo_Really]

Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?

I did prove it.

What some asshole thinks of that website, has nothing to do with the fact I provided my corroborative citation.

Anyone can sit back and dismiss the evidence. But in a court of law, you have to provide evidence that your objection, has merit.

 

[Billo_Really]

A judge would instruct you to present a credible source for your argument or throw YOU out of court.

No he wouldn't. Judges only ask for evidence to be provided.

It's up to the ones who object, to prove that evidence is bullshit.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?

I did prove it.

What some asshole thinks of that website, has nothing to do with the fact I provided my corroborative citation.

Anyone can sit back and dismiss the evidence. But in a court of law, you have to provide evidence that your objection, has merit.

Actually in a Court of law your evidence must be from a known reliable source. Your source is not reliable. In a debate which is what this is supposed to be you are required to source your evidence and it must be reliable and acceptable to the other side. In a Debate one is not required to prove a negative, one is required to prove the positive, YOU made a claim, back it up with a source that is not know to lie deceive and mislead.

 

[Caroljo]

If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up. I'll wait while you go fetch some.

No need to.

Once I provided a source to my initial claim, the burden of proof shifts to the objector (which is you), to provide evidence to show their (your) objection is not frivolous and has merit.

So where's your evidence to prove what I said was false?

Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?

I've been googling this stuff and nothing comes up besides the site that was posted....so it's only an opinion of that site, not facts. I think Billy should show us some other proof, or admit he's just a hack.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Liberals are you aware that Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.

And historical facts, say your hysterical facts, are full of shit!

Gay marriage?
Womens right?
Freedom from religion?
What issues that you support would Muslims support?

 

[Billo_Really]

Gay marriage?
Womens right?
Freedom from religion?
What issues that you support would Muslims support?

I don't give a shit what Muslims do (and do not) support.

I'm an Irish Catholic.