Earthquakes cause more damage than muslims. There are more muslims than earthquakes, though. What's that say?
But to focus on what you're trying to get us to debate (maybe a title change might help this thread to make more sense..).. to make petrol, you need oil. Oil comes, primarily, from Muslim nations. Apparently God had a sense of humour when he put them there. To keep a steady flow of oil, you need to keep these Muslim nations stable and friendly. Rebellion and 'religious anger' are two things which are not compatible with stability and friendship. Religious anger threatens the steady flow of oil, prices go up. So far, we have said nothing new, and nothing that goes against what you're saying, G.
Say, for example, that I deal in wood-based paper. Deforestation is my enemy, but also a consequence of my increasing activity. Environmental Protection Groups threaten to sink my wood-ships and curb my lumberjack activity. As a result of their threat, my paper will become more expensive.
Same thing with chocolate and Indians (and friends) in the Amazon.
So what is your point, G? You're saying we should protest against 'Wall Street' saying our petrol becomes more expensive? Do you
really want to have a discussion about macro-economic effects of colliding societies (Civilisation vs. Islam) on raw resource harvesting (Arabian Oil) and production chains (Oil->Petrol) on this subject, or do you just wish to protest the system?
You know I love your arguments G, but please, get back on ground level and get back to this discussion from the start, without presuming that we know which way you want to go with this. Because CLEARLY our direction is not the direction you'd want this discussion to go.
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall")
