I agree with the consensus...Muslims tend to come from inferior cultures and their religion is a bit more juvenile than the ones we are accustomed to.....wait, then why aren't newer religion even more violent...and for that matter, why aren't non-Muslims from the same places just as violent?
First let me say that this is one of the most spectacularly paternalistic-racist things I've ever read on the Atlas Forum.SWEET! What do I win?
Can you give some examples?
Well lets look at that...from the list of terrorist acts in Thailand:
1972 Israeli Bangkok Embassy hostage crisis-A bunch of Palestinians attack the Israeli embassy
2005 Songkhla bombings-while no one ever claimed it, most clues point to the Patani United Liberation Organization (PULO)...guess what they fight for?
2006 Bangkok bombings-
probably not Muslim related
2006 Hat Yai bombings-
probably is Muslim related, but hard to say
2007 Songkhla bombings-same as above
2007 South Thailand bombings-same as above ( Buddhists or ethnic Chinese were the targets)
2009 Narathiwat bombing-not much info...but it was in the south
2012 Iranian blows up own self trying to kill Jews
2 out of the 8 was
probably non-Muslim
I started doing the same for India, but holy crap they've got serious issues. I know there are a lot of people there, but man, that's a lot of terrorism by a lot of different groups of people...Sikhs, commies, random regional groups, Muslims, Buddhists, Furries, Purple People Eaters and Flat Earthers. I'll concede that Muslims aren't the champions of Terrorism in India (but they are certainly competitive!).
As for Indonesia, I haven't clicked on ALL the links, but after 8 or so I haven't seen one that wasn't done by Muslims.
In the future, when defending Muslims, you might not want to bring numbers into it. It NEVER works out well.
..and no Xahar, we don't need yet another picture of the OKC bombing.