Originally Posted by polle54

hehe

what are you talking about?

99% of all terrorists are not from iraq world wide, not even fucking close.

But lets for the fun of it - say that you are right.

Your logic tells you then:
Premise 1: 99% of all terrorists are muslims
Premise 2: supporting terror is wrong
Conclusion: Ergo supporting muslims is wrong.

Both Premise 1 and 2 are correct but the conclusion is dead as wrong.
just as:
Premise 1: A rock is hard.
Premise 2: Iron is hard
Ergo: Iron is a rock.

the fact that both the rock and a piece of Iron is hard is not enough to identify it as a rock.
The fact that 99% of all terrorists are muslims are not enough to identify every muslims as terrorists.

I think it's safe to say that our of the many many million muslims it's far under 0.001% there are actual terrorists but in your logic 99% of all muslims are terrorists and should be judged as so. So actually your argument is way way of.

Metaman you can't argue like this.