Muslim asking question and then wishes she hadn't! Great response :)

the question was not a question but a statement.

the answer was the correct one to the statement

the 75% are irrelevant because they do nothing, and continue to do nothing until the radicals come for them, but by then it will be too late.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

at some point the irrelevant will need to stand up and fight for what is right, until then though

originally posted by: TheSpanishArcher
I don't get it. She never answered the question, just rips the questioner. Her history lesson answered the question not at all.

I sure don't see the thread title as accurate but others mileage may vary. I'll just chalk this one up in the "whatever" category.

Yes..the question was how do you fight ideology with weapons....when it is a war that can only be won on ideological grounds. A very sound and reasonable question that did not deserve the vitriolic reply.

The panel responder ignored this very hard question that would have shone a light on the ineffectual nature of sending troops against one eyed minds..so a case of cheap points....which only muddies the debate more and in the process underscores questioners point. More this kind of reply risks proving the Islamist point too..that the USA has no "better" ideological basis from which to address the issue or fight. No real alternative.

Anyone who knows the reality of the deaths at Benghazi knows it was an inside job to leave them there, that those poor souls were left to die by those meant to support them. That Muslim extremists killed them was a fact yes...though much like a gun in the hands of a hunter..they were ultimately just a convenient vehicle to cement the propaganda. A convenient way to get rid of those you dont want coming home to speak the truth. And in saying that, perhaps it is the case that the USA has already learned how to fight ideology with weapons..by using ideologues themselves as the weapons.

It is ignorant for people to be fighting for freedom of speech to a pool of communities that have decided Sharia Law for themselves. If they are happy with it, why not? That is THEIR freedom of speech saying:

We want Sharia Law to be executed in our (fill in the blank) country.

Why do some people insist on the religion to be confining and oppressive? Individuals who wants to comment on the law and order in Islam should do more research not only on opposition side, but also on the affirmative. Why do they think the law is relevant? Why do they want it? What do they aim to achieve from it? All I see are people labelling other people's opinions as extremist without knowing the head or tail of the issue addressed.

Like Muslim women wearing hijab. It is compulsory in Islam. But we see a proportion of them going around whipping their hair back and forth, flipping it like nobody's business. There are certain extent of execution that some people don't know. Most Muslim women have the freedom to chose what they want in this modern day. You can see that in Southeast Asia. And as of late, most Muslim women have decided on putting on hijab, and following the teachings of Islam more closely. Nothing wrong with that. They are not forced. They willingly put it on. And why do feminist go on and on about how oppressed they are to have been forced to 'mummify' themselves behind yards of cloth? Don't take the freedom of speech too far as to take the words out of other people's mouth. Just because you proactively lobby for the freedom of speech, doesn't mean that you could take over others' freedom of speech and decide on what they want and what they might not want.

Muslims are humans too. I don't think they are religions that allow extremist go over bombing people who don't agree with them. Alike to Christianity, Buddhism...Islam is peaceful. The extent of extremist shouldn't be associated with Muslims wholly. Religion is a way of life to people. But people remain human...either you're good or bad, it can be passed up for judgement. It's hard to be labeled, I guess. Muslims are oppressed due to people dictating what they ought to be and what they ought to think.

From what I've collected, Islam never allowed for the war to involve women, children and the disabled or elderly. Islam never allowed for the destruction of others' religious houses. They encourage brotherhood and understanding, protecting one another and what I like most is, to refrain from arguments that have no outcomes but igniting prejudice and hate.

But we're only humans...right? Those percentage are just numbers used to objectify something thoroughly abstract and subjective. How do you measure Islamic extremity? Is there a Key Progress Indicator? Is there a Critical Variable measurable?

This is just a thought. No harm intended. It's just...frustrating to see that they are being misunderstood like the Jews are being misunderstood due to what Israel is inflicting on Gaza. See? We're not all the same although we come from the same root of race. Even in families, we have the black sheeps. But do we condemn everyone to be bad due to just one bad apple? Or for that matter...hundred and thousands of bad apples? Are the irrelevant percentages really irrelevant?