Something vaguely interesting in the wake of recent terrorist attacks.

[Monty92]

Likewise the Crusades had nothing to do with Christianity, I presume. It is good to have your perspective aired, and comforting to think how infrequently a pop concert is blown up, but a global view might suggests that violence in the name of that religion is not so rare as you suggest. In the last week:

2017.07.11 (Nigeria) Eight villagers are forced to the ground and executed for defying Sharia.
2017.07.10 (India) Seven Hindu pilgrims, including five women, are massacred by heavily-armed Muslim terrorists.
2017.07.10 (Iraq) Seven children are executed and hung from lamp posts by the Islamic State.
2017.07.08 (Kenya) Nine villagers are beheaded 'like chickens' by Islamic extremists.
2017.07.07 (Egypt) Islamic militants stage a brutal assault on a checkpoint that beings with a suicide blast and leaves two dozen dead.
2017.07.06 (India) A 65-year-old Hindu is stabbed to death during a Muslim riot over an 'offensive' Facebook post.
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Finally, apostasy. Remind yourself what the punishment for apostasy is in Islam. Then ask yourself if that really is the kind of thing we can pretend is compatible with western enlightenment values.

Indeed. One wonders why Peter is so keen to differentiate western terrorists from their counterparts in societies where religious dogma still prevails? Most western terrorists have spent time in such societies, so why should they not also be considered products of the same environment?

Peter, you point to how few terrorists there are in spite of the efforts of fundamentalist Imams to persuade them and how this shows that the religion is not to blame. Again, why do you only count western terrorism in your workings?

Also, how would your smugness be looking if all of the foiled attacks of recent years had been successful in the west? Would you be quite so ready to point to how few of them are prepared to die and murder for their beliefs?