Why does the Middle-East hate the West?

Todd1700

Originally posted by carthage
They hate us due to constant involvement regime change, bombings, military interventions, sanctions, and genuinely killing them by the thousands. Not hard to see why case in point US foreign policy from 2000-2017

This.

Virtually every s##tstorm in the region can be traced back to something we did prior. The current instability over there is still due to the power vacuum left when we took out Saddam. Something Bush Sr knew was a bad idea but unfortunately his son never learned.

One more example of which you could list many.

In 1953 we (along with the Brits) helped overthrow the lawfully elected Iranian prime minister Mossadegh because he wasn't quite as friendly to western oil companies as we liked. Wanted to audit the books so to speak on how they had been conducting business over there. (Google Operation Ajax) So we helped orchestrate a coup and installed the Shah of Iran. Since we were responcible for placing and keeping him in power we were also blamed along with him by all the groups opposing him in Iran for anything he did to piss them off. So when the opposition groups finally ousted him they weren't just anti Shah people they were thoroughly anti American as well.

End result? By needlessly farting around with a foreign countries sovereign leader we set in motion events that transformed a country that had never been openly hostile to the USA before into one that openly despised us. And they have been a major sponsor of terrorism and anti American activities ever since.

For extra credit look into western countries actually forming the country of Iraq in the first place. It never existed until after WW1. And many of the groups in the region had no desire to be in a country with one another.

Look into our involvement in Afghanistan during the Russian invasion. Look at some of the people we armed and supported and what they went on to be after the Russians left. We operated under a policy then that "The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend". A completely ignorant policy because as we learned sometimes the enemy of your enemy is an equally foul piece of sh##.

Do yourself a favor and read a book called "Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire" by Chalmers Johnson.

It's a real eye opener.

Patient_Leech

They hate us because we are infidels, their religion is extremely clear about that.

And I'm sure our constant meddling in their affairs isn't helping things either.

Steve Zodiac

If you've ever been to the middle east you'd know the vast majority of people in most countries there don't hate the west.

chingchangwalla

^ You are stupid.

Surtur

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
^ You are stupid.

Not only that, but the "not all muslims" excuse is f*cktarded.

Like for instance, most Germans were not Nazi's. So obviously that all turned out okay.

Remember, it took just a few muslims to kill thousands of people on 9/11, just a few. We have over a billion muslims, let us say only 5% are extremists. 5% sure sounds low, but 5% of 1 billion is still millions upon millions of people. So again, it took just a few to kill thousands, and there are potentially millions more where that came from.

That's kinda why the term "Islamaphobia" is stupid. It's not a phobia when you have potentially millions of extremists., it's common sense.

Bashar Teg

Originally posted by Surtur
Not only that, but the "not all muslims" excuse is f*cktarded.

Like for instance, most Germans were not Nazi's. So obviously that all turned out okay.

germany is not a religion, special guy.

Surtur

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
germany is not a religion, special guy.

Nobody said it was and that wasn't the point, special guy. Point was even a small minority can f*ck up the world for everyone.

Now please give me some faith you have a bit of intelligence: you knew that, right? You knew overall the point I was making? I'd feel better if you knew and were just trolling, as opposed to a complete lack of comprehension on your part.

Though I suppose if you didn't know the benefit of that is how silly you will look in the future anytime you insult the intelligence of others.

Bashar Teg

germany was led by the nazi party. there is no central leadership for islam. but have fun trying to ape logic and reason. thumb up

Surtur

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
germany was led by the nazi party. there is no central leadership for islam. but have fun trying to ape logic and reason. thumb up

Not all Germans were nazis. A small minority was able to come to power and f*ck up the world.

The nazis also had something very akin to a religious fervor when it came to Hitler, the 1,000 year reich, the purity of the german people, etc.

Bashar Teg

again, all german citizens were under a single centralized leadership. islam is not. your argument is pure dogshit. but i suppose if you're too dumb to comprehend that, it means you win again thumb up

Surtur

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
again, all german citizens were under a single centralized leadership. islam is not. your argument is pure dogshit. but i suppose if you're too dumb to comprehend that, it means you win again thumb up

My point is that a minority was able to f*ck up the world.

You've officially lost all right to insult the intellect of others lol. So please continue to do so.

Robtard

As you've advised me more than once: have you tried explaining it in crayon?

Surtur

An imbecile with a crayon, that is all we need.

Bashar Teg

Originally posted by Robtard
As you've advised me more than once: have you tried explaining it in crayon?

pointless, unless someone takes his bong away for an hour or so

Surtur

I don't use a bong.

Firefly218

Originally posted by Surtur
Not only that, but the "not all muslims" excuse is f*cktarded.

Like for instance, most Germans were not Nazi's. So obviously that all turned out okay.

Remember, it took just a few muslims to kill thousands of people on 9/11, just a few. We have over a billion muslims, let us say only 5% are extremists. 5% sure sounds low, but 5% of 1 billion is still millions upon millions of people. So again, it took just a few to kill thousands, and there are potentially millions more where that came from.

That's kinda why the term "Islamaphobia" is stupid. It's not a phobia when you have potentially millions of extremists., it's common sense.

Did you read this?

Originally posted by Todd1700
This.

Virtually every s##tstorm in the region can be traced back to something we did prior. The current instability over there is still due to the power vacuum left when we took out Saddam. Something Bush Sr knew was a bad idea but unfortunately his son never learned.

One more example of which you could list many.

In 1953 we (along with the Brits) helped overthrow the lawfully elected Iranian prime minister Mossadegh because he wasn't quite as friendly to western oil companies as we liked. Wanted to audit the books so to speak on how they had been conducting business over there. (Google Operation Ajax) So we helped orchestrate a coup and installed the Shah of Iran. Since we were responcible for placing and keeping him in power we were also blamed along with him by all the groups opposing him in Iran for anything he did to piss them off. So when the opposition groups finally ousted him they weren't just anti Shah people they were thoroughly anti American as well.

End result? By needlessly farting around with a foreign countries sovereign leader we set in motion events that transformed a country that had never been openly hostile to the USA before into one that openly despised us. And they have been a major sponsor of terrorism and anti American activities ever since.

For extra credit look into western countries actually forming the country of Iraq in the first place. It never existed until after WW1. And many of the groups in the region had no desire to be in a country with one another.

Look into our involvement in Afghanistan during the Russian invasion. Look at some of the people we armed and supported and what they went on to be after the Russians left. We operated under a policy then that "The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend". A completely ignorant policy because as we learned sometimes the enemy of your enemy is an equally foul piece of sh##.

Do yourself a favor and read a book called "Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire" by Chalmers Johnson.

It's a real eye opener.

Surtur

Originally posted by Firefly218
Did you read this?

If you're trying to say we contributed to the instability over there, I would agree with you.

If you're trying to imply somehow it is 100% our fault these extremists commit terror attacks..that's a No.

Surtur

Honest question though, if they dislike us because of what we did in terms of contributing to the instability of the region well..what about Sweden? What is their issue with Sweden? They seem far more welcoming than the USA as well, and still they get shit on with terrorist attacks.

Almost like they really don't care who they attack and they use the past behavior of the West in order to justify their barbarism.

Steve Zodiac

Funny thing is, many Muslims in the middle east are about as Muslim as many Christians are Christian in Europe.

That said, real Christianity, the ultra-orthodox, has women wearing veils too, hang on a minute real Judaism does too, oh and scarves covering heads etc...

Kurk

The correct answer to OP is Wahhabism movement which began in the 19th century in the middle-east as a response to the 'apathetic' , western attitudes present during that time.

Robtard

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Funny thing is, many Muslims in the middle east are about as Muslim as many Christians are Christian in Europe.

That said, real Christianity, the ultra-orthodox, has women wearing veils too, hang on a minute real Judaism does too, oh and scarves covering heads etc...

Ssssh, mustn't talk about that.

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Robtard
Ssssh, mustn't talk about that.

Really? Why Not? What should we talk about? Like how all those RADICAL Christians and Jews run around killing gays and women?

Oh wait.....

Surtur

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Really? Why Not? What should we talk about? Like how all those RADICAL Christians and Jews run around killing gays and women?

Oh wait.....

This is why it's always hilarious whenever people try to compare Christianity to Islam. The icing on the cake would have been if someone mentioned the Crusades as well.

Oh they threw Judaism into the mix as well, lmao! What planet are these people from?

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
germany is not a religion, special guy.

Merkel would probably disagree.

http://i.makeagif.com/media/10-21-2015/C2Sjnt.gif

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Really? Why Not? What should we talk about? Like how all those RADICAL Christians and Jews run around killing gays and women?

Oh wait.....

You mean like the orthodox Jew who stabbed half a dozen people at LGBT Pride for the second time?

Or the evangelical Christian who shot a dozen people at a Planned Parenthood?

Approximately 96% of domestic terrorism in this country is committed by Jews and Christians, but you and Surt keep pretending that the 2.5% committed by Muslims is the greater threat.

Flyattractor

chingchangwalla

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You mean like the orthodox Jew who stabbed half a dozen people at LGBT Pride for the second time?

Or the evangelical Christian who shot a dozen people at a Planned Parenthood?

Approximately 96% of domestic terrorism in this country is committed by Jews and Christians, but you and Surt keep pretending that the 2.5% committed by Muslims is the greater threat.
Indonesia: 205 million Muslims. 50% support strict Sharia Law. 70% blame the the US or somebody else for 9/11. That's 143 million Muslims with Radical beliefs.

Egypt: 80 million Muslims. 65% want strict Sharia Law. 70% have mixed or positive feelings toward Osama Bin Laden. That's 55.2 million Muslims with radical beliefs.

Pakistan: 179 million Muslims. 76% want strict Sharia Law. That's 135.4 million radical Muslims.

Bangladesh: 149 million Muslims. Over 1/4 said suicide bombings are sometimes or often justified. 82% want Sharia Law. 2/3 said honor killings of women can sometimes be justified. That's 121.9 million radicals.

Nigeria: 75.7 million Muslims. 71% favor Sharia Law. That's 53.7 million radical Muslims.

Iran: 74.8 million Muslims. 83% favor Sharia Law. That's 62.1 million radical Muslims.

Turkey: 74.7 million Muslims. 32% said honor killings of women can be justified. That's 23.9 million radical Muslims.

Morocco: 32.4 million Muslims. Just over 3/4 favor strict Sharia Law. That's 24.6 million radical Muslims.

Iraq: 31.1 million Muslims. 78% say honor killings of women can be justified. That's 24.3 million radical Muslims.

Afghanistan: 24 million Muslims. 76% support honor killings of women. 99% favor Sharia Law. Almost 100% of Muslims in Afghanistan are Radicals.

Jordan: 6.4 million Muslims. Hamas has a 60% approval rating. That's 3.8 million radicals.

Palestinian Areas: 4.3 million Muslims. 78% have positive or mixed feelings about Bin Laden. 89% support terror attacks against Israel. 89% support Sharia Law. 3.83 million radical Muslims.

France: 4.7 million radical Muslims. 35% of French Muslims said suicide bombings can be justified. 1.6 million radicals.

Great Britain: 2.8 million Muslims. 78% want cartoonists of Muhammad legally prosecuted. 2.2 million radicals.

USA: 2.6 million Muslims. 13% said violence against civilians can sometimes be justified. 19% said they had mixed or favourable views toward Al Qaeda. That's 500,000 radical Muslims.

680,000,030 Radical Muslims in those countries.
942.4 million Muslims if you add all those countries together. THATS A MAJORITY
Countries like Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Yemen, Somalia and Libya weren't included in the Pew Research Survey.

Flyattractor

Don't use facts. It just confuses Poe.

chingchangwalla

In Syria, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iran, Yemen, Afghanistan and probably more its legal to kill non Muslim converts. EVEN IN THE UAE. Egypt has a 91% genital mutilation rate for women (27.2 million women) Saudi Arabian women can't drive, vote, travel abroad or enroll in higher education without male permission. In Pakistan over 1,000 women die annually from legal honor killings. EVEN IN THE MODERATE UAE, MEN CAN LEGALLY BEAT THEIR WIVES. Aaaaaaand if women get raped and come forward they can go to Prison... for being raped. Never go to Dubai

Flyattractor

But it is a great place to race Super Fast Cars!

Kurk

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
In Syria, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Iran, Yemen, Afghanistan and probably more its legal to kill non Muslim converts. EVEN IN THE UAE. Egypt has a 91% genital mutilation rate for women (27.2 million women) Saudi Arabian women can't drive, vote, travel abroad or enroll in higher education without male permission. In Pakistan over 1,000 women die annually from legal honor killings. EVEN IN THE MODERATE UAE, MEN CAN LEGALLY BEAT THEIR WIVES. Aaaaaaand if women get raped and come forward they can go to Prison... for being raped. Never go to Dubai But I want to see the Burj khalifa!
Originally posted by Flyattractor
But it is a great place to race Super Fast Cars!
Try the Bonneville Salt Flats instead

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Kurk
But I want to see the Burj khalifa!

Try the Bonneville Salt Flats instead

But in Dubai I can line the track with women and gays and just run them over and no one will complain!!!!!!

Can't do that in the Salt Flats!!!

chingchangwalla

Originally posted by Kurk
But I want to see Mia Khalifa

https://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph583a1fc827073

Surtur

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Indonesia: 205 million Muslims. 50% support strict Sharia Law. 70% blame the the US or somebody else for 9/11. That's 143 million Muslims with Radical beliefs.

Egypt: 80 million Muslims. 65% want strict Sharia Law. 70% have mixed or positive feelings toward Osama Bin Laden. That's 55.2 million Muslims with radical beliefs.

Pakistan: 179 million Muslims. 76% want strict Sharia Law. That's 135.4 million radical Muslims.

Bangladesh: 149 million Muslims. Over 1/4 said suicide bombings are sometimes or often justified. 82% want Sharia Law. 2/3 said honor killings of women can sometimes be justified. That's 121.9 million radicals.

Nigeria: 75.7 million Muslims. 71% favor Sharia Law. That's 53.7 million radical Muslims.

Iran: 74.8 million Muslims. 83% favor Sharia Law. That's 62.1 million radical Muslims.

Turkey: 74.7 million Muslims. 32% said honor killings of women can be justified. That's 23.9 million radical Muslims.

Morocco: 32.4 million Muslims. Just over 3/4 favor strict Sharia Law. That's 24.6 million radical Muslims.

Iraq: 31.1 million Muslims. 78% say honor killings of women can be justified. That's 24.3 million radical Muslims.

Afghanistan: 24 million Muslims. 76% support honor killings of women. 99% favor Sharia Law. Almost 100% of Muslims in Afghanistan are Radicals.

Jordan: 6.4 million Muslims. Hamas has a 60% approval rating. That's 3.8 million radicals.

Palestinian Areas: 4.3 million Muslims. 78% have positive or mixed feelings about Bin Laden. 89% support terror attacks against Israel. 89% support Sharia Law. 3.83 million radical Muslims.

France: 4.7 million radical Muslims. 35% of French Muslims said suicide bombings can be justified. 1.6 million radicals.

Great Britain: 2.8 million Muslims. 78% want cartoonists of Muhammad legally prosecuted. 2.2 million radicals.

USA: 2.6 million Muslims. 13% said violence against civilians can sometimes be justified. 19% said they had mixed or favourable views toward Al Qaeda. That's 500,000 radical Muslims.

680,000,030 Radical Muslims in those countries.
942.4 million Muslims if you add all those countries together. THATS A MAJORITY
Countries like Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Yemen, Somalia and Libya weren't included in the Pew Research Survey.

So again, this is why it is HILARIOUS when people try to bring up Christianity in comparison to Islam. Anyone doing so is delusional.

Especially since..we weren't talking about just America..but the entire world.

Surtur

But..but the Christians!

Palm Sunday bombings of Egyptian Coptic churches kill 44

"At least 44 people were killed in bomb attacks on the symbolic cathedral seat of the Coptic Pope and another church on Palm Sunday, prompting anger and fear among Christians and troop deployments across Egypt.

Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attacks, which also injured more than 100 people and occurred a week before Coptic Easter, with Pope Francis scheduled to visit Egypt later this month."

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Indonesia: 205 million Muslims. 50% support strict Sharia Law. 70% blame the the US or somebody else for 9/11. That's 143 million Muslims with Radical beliefs.

Egypt: 80 million Muslims. 65% want strict Sharia Law. 70% have mixed or positive feelings toward Osama Bin Laden. That's 55.2 million Muslims with radical beliefs.

Pakistan: 179 million Muslims. 76% want strict Sharia Law. That's 135.4 million radical Muslims.

Bangladesh: 149 million Muslims. Over 1/4 said suicide bombings are sometimes or often justified. 82% want Sharia Law. 2/3 said honor killings of women can sometimes be justified. That's 121.9 million radicals.

Nigeria: 75.7 million Muslims. 71% favor Sharia Law. That's 53.7 million radical Muslims.

Iran: 74.8 million Muslims. 83% favor Sharia Law. That's 62.1 million radical Muslims.

Turkey: 74.7 million Muslims. 32% said honor killings of women can be justified. That's 23.9 million radical Muslims.

Morocco: 32.4 million Muslims. Just over 3/4 favor strict Sharia Law. That's 24.6 million radical Muslims.

Iraq: 31.1 million Muslims. 78% say honor killings of women can be justified. That's 24.3 million radical Muslims.

Afghanistan: 24 million Muslims. 76% support honor killings of women. 99% favor Sharia Law. Almost 100% of Muslims in Afghanistan are Radicals.

Jordan: 6.4 million Muslims. Hamas has a 60% approval rating. That's 3.8 million radicals.

Palestinian Areas: 4.3 million Muslims. 78% have positive or mixed feelings about Bin Laden. 89% support terror attacks against Israel. 89% support Sharia Law. 3.83 million radical Muslims.

France: 4.7 million radical Muslims. 35% of French Muslims said suicide bombings can be justified. 1.6 million radicals.

Great Britain: 2.8 million Muslims. 78% want cartoonists of Muhammad legally prosecuted. 2.2 million radicals.

USA: 2.6 million Muslims. 13% said violence against civilians can sometimes be justified. 19% said they had mixed or favourable views toward Al Qaeda. That's 500,000 radical Muslims.

680,000,030 Radical Muslims in those countries.
942.4 million Muslims if you add all those countries together. THATS A MAJORITY
Countries like Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Yemen, Somalia and Libya weren't included in the Pew Research Survey.

The original post stated that fundamentalist Jews and Christians are just as repressive and violent as fundamentalist Muslims, and I added that in this country, fundamentalist Jews and Christians are responsible for nearly all domestic terrorism.

Instead of addressing the point that in America, one is more likely to a victim of domestic terrorism at the hands of a fundamentalist Jew or Christian than a Muslim, you deflected to Muslim-majority nations in which fundamentalist Muslims are responsible for the most domestic terrorism.

Congratulations on answering a question no one asked. Your little deflection tactic worked on someone though, so good job:

Originally posted by Surtur
So again, this is why it is HILARIOUS when people try to bring up Christianity in comparison to Islam. Anyone doing so is delusional.

Especially since..we weren't talking about just America..but the entire world.

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The original post stated that fundamentalist Jews and Christians are just as repressive and violent as fundamentalist Muslims, and I added that in this country, fundamentalist Jews and Christians are responsible for nearly all domestic terrorism.

Instead of addressing the point that in America, one is more likely to a victim of domestic terrorism at the hands of a fundamentalist Jew or Christian than a Muslim, you deflected to Muslim-majority nations in which fundamentalist Muslims are responsible for the most domestic terrorism.

Congratulations on answering a question no one asked. Your little deflection tactic worked on someone though, so good job:

Funny thing is is how the term "Domestic Terrorism" has been REDEFINED by the Leftist to usually mean something very different.

Cause ya know....that is what LEFTIES DO!

Surtur

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The original post stated that fundamentalist Jews and Christians are just as repressive and violent as fundamentalist Muslims, and I added that in this country, fundamentalist Jews and Christians are responsible for nearly all domestic terrorism.

Instead of addressing the point that in America, one is more likely to a victim of domestic terrorism at the hands of a fundamentalist Jew or Christian than a Muslim, you deflected to Muslim-majority nations in which fundamentalist Muslims are responsible for the most domestic terrorism.

Congratulations on answering a question no one asked. Your little deflection tactic worked on someone though, so good job:

This person isn't deflecting. The discussion was not specifically about America. It was about the world. *You* deflected to try to make this about just America.

How sad is it you tried to flip this around and act like people were dodging *your* points? How sad is it you tried to say people weren't addressing the point of terrorist attacks in America..when this wasn't about terrorist attacks in America? Tell me, did you give your post even 5 seconds of forethought before posting?

chingchangwalla

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The original post stated that fundamentalist Jews and Christians are just as repressive and violent as fundamentalist Muslims, and I added that in this country, fundamentalist Jews and Christians are responsible for nearly all domestic terrorism.

Instead of addressing the point that in America, one is more likely to a victim of domestic terrorism at the hands of a fundamentalist Jew or Christian than a Muslim, you deflected to Muslim-majority nations in which fundamentalist Muslims are responsible for the most domestic terrorism.

Congratulations on answering a question no one asked. Your little deflection tactic worked on someone though, so good job:

I'm going to explain this very simply so even a complete and utter retard like you can understand.
- Muslims are 0.45 of the population.
- 6% of terrorist attacks in the US are carried out by Muslims.
- Muslims are 13 times more likely to commit a terrorist attack than a non-muslim.

chingchangwalla

There have been 30,602 Muslim terror attacks since 9/11.

Only 6% of terror attacks are by Muslims

7% of terrorism is by Jewish extremists

66% of terror attacks are by leftists and Latinos

If I could deport all Latinos, Jews and Muslims I would. We would have a nice clean world as Hitler wanted. Although I do love blacks, so I would have to put up with their crime and heavy breeding

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Surtur
This person isn't deflecting. The discussion was not specifically about America. It was about the world. *You* deflected to try to make this about just America.

How sad is it you tried to flip this around and act like people were dodging *your* points? How sad is it you tried to say people weren't addressing the point of terrorist attacks in America..when this wasn't about terrorist attacks in America? Tell me, did you give your post even 5 seconds of forethought before posting?

You would have done better to spend five seconds following the chain of the conversation before posting:

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
. . . That said, real Christianity, the ultra-orthodox, has women wearing veils too, hang on a minute real Judaism does too, oh and scarves covering heads etc...

Originally posted by Robtard
Ssssh, mustn't talk about that.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Really? Why Not? What should we talk about? Like how all those RADICAL Christians and Jews run around killing gays and women?

Oh wait.....

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You mean like the orthodox Jew who stabbed half a dozen people at LGBT Pride for the second time?

Or the evangelical Christian who shot a dozen people at a Planned Parenthood?

Approximately 96% of domestic terrorism in this country is committed by Jews and Christians, but you and Surt keep pretending that the 2.5% committed by Muslims is the greater threat.

chingchangwalla

Hey Adam. Why don't you address the arguments above you ******?

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
I'm going to explain this very simply so even a complete and utter retard like you can understand.
- Muslims are 0.45 of the population.
- 6% of terrorist attacks in the US are carried out by Muslims.
- Muslims are 13 times more likely to commit a terrorist attack than a non-muslim.

Congratulations on your self-defeating argument.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
. . . in America, one is more likely to a victim of domestic terrorism at the hands of a fundamentalist Jew or Christian than a Muslim . . .

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
- Muslims are 0.45 of the population.
- 6% of terrorist attacks in the US are carried out by Muslims.

Retard, indeed.

chingchangwalla

You just ignore per capita? Obviously in America crime is committed more by non Muslims because they only make up 0.45% of the population. But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem with Muslims... ya know being 13 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE TERRORISTS! And Leftists like you actually want more immigrants...

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
You just ignore per capita? Obviously in America crime is committed more by non Muslims because they only make up 0.45% of the population. But that doesn't mean there isn't a problem with Muslims... ya know being 13 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE TERRORISTS! And Leftists like you actually want more immigrants...

Because actual risk is a matter of probabilities, i.e. how likely is one to be the victim of a terrorist incident, and how likely is the perpetrator to be a member of a particular ideological group, etc.

In the United States, the likelihood one will be the victim of a terrorist incident is low, and the perpetrator is vastly more likely to be a Jew or a Christian, so fearmongering and profiling Muslims is not an effective harm-reduction strategy.

chingchangwalla

13 times more likely to be terrorists... how much do I have to repeat myself. Nowhere in the Christian bible does it say to blow yourself up in the name of Allah and you'll get 70 virgins in heaven.

Surtur

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
You would have done better to spend five seconds following the chain of the conversation before posting:

But the topic isn't about terror attacks in America, so it's actually not a deflection to discuss non-American attacks.

Also nobody you quoted said anything to make this specifically about America. You decided to focus on that. The chain went:

Imbecile #1 makes asinine comment about Christians and Jews
Imbecile #2 says shh don't talk about it, as if it's the negative shit Christians do that rarely gets talked about or that people shy away from discussing

Fly makes a comment about Jews and Christians committing attacks(again, not specifically in America). You respond with shit about them doing stuff in America. You even say to someone else that instead of addressing this point about terror attacks in America someone "deflected" by daring to bring up stats from other countries.

Except once again, and this is not debatable in the slightest: you are the one who made this specifically about America.

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Surtur
But the topic isn't about terror attacks in America, so it's actually not a deflection to discuss non-American attacks.

Also nobody you quoted said anything to make this specifically about America. You decided to focus on that. The chain went:

Imbecile #1 makes asinine comment about Christians and Jews
Imbecile #2 says shh don't talk about it, as if it's the negative shit Christians do that rarely gets talked about or that people shy away from discussing

Fly makes a comment about Jews and Christians committing attacks(again, not specifically in America). You respond with shit about them doing stuff in America. You even say to someone else that instead of addressing this point about terror attacks in America someone "deflected" by daring to bring up stats from other countries.

Except once again, and this is not debatable in the slightest: you are the one who made this specifically about America.

Um, no.

Flyattractor stated that "radical Christians and Jews" do not "run around killing gays and women," and I listed examples of them doing exactly that.

chingchangwalla replied to my comment effectively stating, "What about all the radical Muslims in the world?"

That is a total deflection.

Steve Zodiac stated that fundamentalist Jews and Christians are just as repressive and violent as fundamentalist Muslims.

Flyattractor replied that it is a false equivalency to compare fundamentalist Jews and Christians to fundamentalist Muslims, because the degree of repressive and violent behavior of the former is not equivocal to that of the latter.

I replied that not only are they equivocal, but that in America, the former is much more likely.

chingchangwalla replied that fundamentalist Muslims are more likely to be radicalized worldwide, which has nothing to do with any of the above.

Surtur

So again: you brought up attacks in America. Then whined when someone else mentioned attacks outside America.

I'm glad we sorted that out.

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Surtur
So again: you brought up attacks in America. Then whined when someone else mentioned attacks outside America.

I'm glad we sorted that out.

There is nothing to sort out. The only person not up to speed here is you. He replied to my comment about the likelihood of an American being the victim of Muslim terrorism in America, by bringing up something unrelated. That is a deflection, regardless of the subject of the thread, because he was not commenting on the subject of the thread in general, but to my specific comment. Catch up.

Surtur

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
There is nothing to sort out. The only person not up to speed here is you. He replied to my comment about the likelihood of an American being the victim of Muslim terrorism in America, by bringing up something unrelated. That is a deflection, regardless of the subject of the thread, because he was not commenting on the subject of the thread in general, but to my specific comment. Catch up.

He could have been trying to get back to the focus on the thread. To which no, his quoting you doesn't negate that.

So TIL if you try to get a thread back on topic it's a deflection. Okie dokie.

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Surtur
He could have been trying to get back to the focus on the thread. To which no, his quoting you doesn't negate that.

So TIL if you try to get a thread back on topic it's a deflection. Okie dokie.

"Almost" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.

Surtur

Also you do realize that the post that began the conversation chain was itself a deflection, right?

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Surtur
Also you do realize that the post that began the conversation chain was itself a deflection, right?

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/deflect.gif

Badabing

Yeah, I'll be temp banning several people from this thread if the nonsense doesn't stop.

And to those reporting Ching's sig: It's not hate speech or over the board's PG-13 rating. I doubt it's a pro Hitler stance. More like a lesson from the past directed at those people who dislike the USA's 2nd Amendment.

Adam_PoE

Originally posted by Badabing
Yeah, I'll be temp banning several people from this thread if the nonsense doesn't stop.

And to those reporting Ching's sig: It's not hate speech or over the board's PG-13 rating. I doubt it's a pro Hitler stance. More like a lesson from the past directed at those people who dislike the USA's 2nd Amendment.

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
If I could deport all Latinos, Jews and Muslims I would. We would have a nice clean world as Hitler wanted. Although I do love blacks, so I would have to put up with their crime and heavy breeding

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
David Duke 2020 🇺🇸

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Or just tell anyone wearing a towel on their head they can't fly. Problem solved

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
https://www.pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph583a1fc827073

Surtur

Well ignoring the deflection attempts and getting back on topic:

I still say this has more to do with religion than foreign policy.

DellCurry

can't say anything

Surtur

Originally posted by DellCurry
can't say anything

In telling us you can't say anything you are in fact saying something.

Beniboybling

Originally posted by Surtur
Remember, it took just a few muslims to kill thousands of people on 9/11, just a few. We have over a billion muslims, let us say only 5% are extremists. 5% sure sounds low, but 5% of 1 billion is still millions upon millions of people. So again, it took just a few to kill thousands, and there are potentially millions more where that came from.

That's kinda why the term "Islamaphobia" is stupid. It's not a phobia when you have potentially millions of extremists., it's common sense. laughing

What a moron.

Darth Thor

^ You left out this part which is also moronic.

Originally posted by Surtur
Not only that, but the "not all muslims" excuse is f*cktarded.

Like for instance, most Germans were not Nazi's. So obviously that all turned out okay.

Darth Thor

And so much for white supremacy having nothing to do with these anti-muslim topics:

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
There have been 30,602 Muslim terror attacks since 9/11.

Only 6% of terror attacks are by Muslims

7% of terrorism is by Jewish extremists

66% of terror attacks are by leftists and Latinos

If I could deport all Latinos, Jews and Muslims I would. We would have a nice clean world as Hitler wanted. Although I do love blacks, so I would have to put up with their crime and heavy breeding

Beniboybling

oh dear

ESB -1138

Because the Quran tells Muslims to kill unbelievers if they refuse to convert or submit to Islamic rule. That's why they hate us.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Because the Quran tells Muslims to kill unbelievers if they refuse to convert or submit to Islamic rule. That's why they hate us.

Great theory.

Strange they (the fanatics) mainly kill Muslims though.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Great theory.

Strange they (the fanatics) mainly kill Muslims though.
The fanatics don't consider them to be real(or good enough) Muslims.

NemeBro

Originally posted by ESB -1138
Because the Quran tells Muslims to kill unbelievers if they refuse to convert or submit to Islamic rule. Does it?

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by NemeBro
Does it?
Yeah, multiple times.

NemeBro

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Yeah, multiple times. Show me, my son.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by NemeBro
Show me, my son.
One of many: "Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."

NemeBro

Thank you, so it seems like the Bible the Quran does preach violence against nonbelievers, though the Quran is somewhat more tolerant because it accepts the possibility of fealty rather than eradication. So how do you propose convincing Muslims to become like the majority of Christians and be fake believers?

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by NemeBro
Thank you, so it seems like the Bible the Quran does preach violence against nonbelievers, though the Quran is somewhat more tolerant because it accepts the possibility of fealty rather than eradication. So how do you propose convincing Muslims to become like the majority of Christians and be fake believers?
Islam needs to go through the process of reformation and enlightenment the way Christianity and the West in general did. How do I propose that happen? Well, I think it's already basically happening and Islamism and the violence associated with it is, I believe, a symptom of growing pains.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The fanatics don't consider them to be real(or good enough) Muslims.

Ergo, the term fanatics. And not a representative of the rest of the worlds muslims, or their religion.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
One of many:

I'd suggest actually reading the Quran in full instead of grabbing a couple of verses from a hate website and taking them completely literally on their own.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Islam needs to go through the process of reformation and enlightenment the way Christianity and the West in general did. How do I propose that happen? Well, I think it's already basically happening and Islamism and the violence associated with it is, I believe, a symptom of growing pains.

Except the current violence is more of a symptom of the growing pain inflicted on arab and muslim countries by the U.S. and the West in general.

It's a bit of a strange philosophy to invade their countries, keep troops stationed over their holy land, destabilise their nations, and then to claim they need to reform due to the psychos who've come about as a result.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Ergo, the term fanatics. And not a representative of the rest of the worlds muslims, or their religion.

I'd suggest actually reading the Quran in full instead of grabbing a couple of verses from a hate website and taking them completely literally on their own.

Except the current violence is more of a symptom of the growing pain inflicted on arab and muslim countries by the U.S. and the West in general.

It's a bit of a strange philosophy to invade their countries, keep troops stationed over their holy land, destabilise their nations, and then to claim they need to reform due to the psychos who've come about as a result.
They represent Islam more than you'd like to think. They aren't doing anything that could not be justified by the Quran or the Hadiths.

The Quran is full of verses that encourage hate and violence. The quote stands very well on its own: it's ordering Muslims to fight and oppress unbelievers.

It's more of a symptom of Salafism which predates US foreign policy by more than a century, and really, religious psychos have always existed in every religion. Though I admit it's true that the foreign policy directed at the Middle East mainly by the US hasn't helped things one bit, to think that there are no monsters other than ourselves and the ones we've created is childishly naive.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
They represent Islam more than you'd like to think. They aren't doing anything that could not be justified by the Quran or the Hadiths.

Again not if you read those things as a whole and in context.

Heck even if you just posted the verses immediately prior and after the one you posted it looks very different:

https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/03/04/quran-95-sword-verse/amp/

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory

The Quran is full of verses that encourage hate and violence. The quote stands very well on its own: it's ordering Muslims to fight and oppress unbelievers.

It's not "full" of verses. But yes there are multiple verses if taken on their own would seem like they are encouraging hate. But that's why there's the whole rest of the Quran which puts those few verses in context and repeatedly preaches being good people, to give to charity, to feed orphans, to not discriminate, to free slaves, to respect people of the book (Christians and Jews) and so on and so forth e.t.c.

Of course it doesn't stand on its own Lol.

Heck forget the whole Quran, you only need to read a few other verses from that chapter and it looks completely different.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory

It's more of a symptom of Salafism which predates US foreign policy by more than a century, and really, religious psychos have always existed in every religion. Though I admit it's true that the foreign policy directed at the Middle East mainly by the US hasn't helped things one bit, to think that there are no monsters other than ourselves and the ones we've created is childishly naive.

Salafism has been around for a while, but this current string of terror attacks everywhere is a very recent phenomenon.

Not sure what your point is here. You accept there's monsters in every religion and on both sides, and that our foreign policy towards that side of the world hasn't exactly helped.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Again not if you read those things as a whole and in context.

Heck even if you just posted the verses immediately prior and after the one you posted it looks very different:

https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/03/04/quran-95-sword-verse/amp/

It's not "full" of verses. But yes there are multiple verses if taken on their own would seem like they are encouraging hate. But that's why there's the whole rest of the Quran which puts those few verses in context and repeatedly preaches being good people, to give to charity, to feed orphans, to not discriminate, to free slaves, to respect people of the book (Christians and Jews) and so on and so forth e.t.c.

Of course it doesn't stand on its own Lol.

Heck forget the whole Quran, you only need to read a few other verses from that chapter and it looks completely different.

Salafism has been around for a while, but this current string of terror attacks everywhere is a very recent phenomenon.

Not sure what your point is here. You accept there's monsters in every religion and on both sides, and that our foreign policy towards that side of the world hasn't exactly helped.
Discover-the-truth.com is part of the honor brigade whose job it is to whitewash Islam to the maximum extent possible so I take whatever they say with a massive pinch of salt. Anyway, that's a massive page so it would be nice if you could point me to the exact part that says that when the Quran tells you to make holy war on the infidels and oppress them, it's not what it's actually saying.

Well, there are about a hundred verses that condone violence or can be interpreted that way. All of the nice and supposedly benevolent verses in the Quran do not cancel out all the nasty, violent, and oppressive shit that it is in it.

It's really only because how globalized the world has become. Prior to the modern age, all of the fighting and other nastiness was contained to the Middle East and other Islamic areas/countries. It's only relatively recently that it's spilled over to the rest of the world.

What my point is that it's ultimately not the US foreign policy that created these monsters, it was Islam, or more precisely, Salafism/Wahhabism.

Surtur

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Discover-the-truth.com is part of the honor brigade whose job it is to whitewash Islam to the maximum extent possible so I take whatever they say with a massive pinch of salt. Anyway, that's a massive page so it would be nice if you could point me to the exact part that says that when the Quran tells you to make holy war on the infidels and oppress them, it's not what it's actually saying.

Well, there are about a hundred verses that condone violence or can be interpreted that way. All of the nice and supposedly benevolent verses in the Quran do not cancel out all the nasty, violent, and oppressive shit that it is in it.

It's really only because how globalized the world has become. Prior to the modern age, all of the fighting and other nastiness was contained to the Middle East and other Islamic areas/countries. It's only relatively recently that it's spilled over to the rest of the world.

What my point is that it's ultimately not the US foreign policy that created these monsters, it was Islam, or more precisely, Salafism/Wahhabism.

People always end up ignoring the utterly toxic religion that is at the root of all of this. Seriously, what is it about Islam? You know the narrative about Donald Trump where he can say or do anything and not suffer any real consequences? Yeah, Islam is the religious embodiment of Trump. There always seems to be an excuse about why it's not really Islam, but something else. And if you dare to disagree? You're an Islamaphobe.

The geniuses that espouse that idea need to stop. You see they whine about people saying this is all muslims(despite not a lot of people saying that), but when you adopt their attitude they do that this isn't Islam...you see one extreme isn't any better than the other and it causes more extremists on each side. In other words pretending this has nothing to do with Islam is just as bad as pretending every single muslim is a terrorist.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Surtur
People always end up ignoring the utterly toxic religion that is at the root of all of this. Seriously, what is it about Islam? You know the narrative about Donald Trump where he can say or do anything and not suffer any real consequences? Yeah, Islam is the religious embodiment of Trump. There always seems to be an excuse about why it's not really Islam, but something else. And if you dare to disagree? You're an Islamaphobe.

The geniuses that espouse that idea need to stop. You see they whine about people saying this is all muslims(despite not a lot of people saying that), but when you adopt their attitude they do that this isn't Islam...you see one extreme isn't any better than the other and it causes more extremists on each side. In other words pretending this has nothing to do with Islam is just as bad as pretending every single muslim is a terrorist.
Yeah, and like Trump, it has a veritable horde of zealots who will defend it to the last.

I remember Douglas Murray saying something along the lines of: "When you have one president who insists that Islam has less to do with terrorism than any other religion(Obama), then you're inevitably going to get someone who insists that muslims shouldn't even be allowed into the country(Trump). It's like Yin and Yang of extremes and both are toxic to reasonable debate."

ArtificialGlory

Well, I agree that panic is virtually never productive. What I do have a problem is with Khan's comment on how "Terrorism is part and parcel of living in a major city". What kind of defeatist bullshit is that? Might as well just come out and say, 'just live with it, it's not going to stop'.

Beniboybling

Except he didn't say that either. He said that "part and parcel" of living in a global city is being prepared and vigilant against terrorism.

Darth Thor

The ONLY reason anything Khan said is at all considered controversial to hard right Americans is because Khan is a Muslim.

ArtificialGlory

Well, that is true. The obsession of right-wing groups and individuals with Khan is silly and almost certainly born out of prejudice.

Emperordmb

Originally posted by Darth Thor
The ONLY reason anything Khan said is at all considered controversial to hard right Americans is because Khan is a Muslim.
I disagree, I've heard of white non-Muslim politicians such as Macron getting lambasted for making similar comments.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I disagree, I've heard of white non-Muslim politicians such as Macron getting lambasted for making similar comments.

Except he didn't say anything controversial at all. He's been taken completely out of context and lambasted by Fox and Trump RIGHT AFTER the London attack.

In the UK even the PM (from the opposition party) defended him.

All the other world leaders gave their condolences. Trump lambasted the Muslim Mayor of London first.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory

What my point is that it's ultimately not the US foreign policy that created these monsters, it was Islam, or more precisely, Salafism/Wahhabism.

I disagree. I mean sure the muslim world is full of monsters, as are many non-muslim places like North Korea or China... but ISIS for instance didn't exist prior to the Iraq War, and these ridiculously regular terror attacks have only been around post the Afghan and Iraq war as well.

Beniboybling

Stop it Thor, someone might learn something.

Flyattractor

Nah I doubt it. You Leftists don't like to Learn things. Only Suppress knowledge.

NewGuy01

The most correct, all-encompassing answer would be "resentment over the west's violent interventions in their region," but it's also true that several of the factions therein just hate everyone who isn't religiously congruent with them.

Surtur

Originally posted by Flyattractor
Nah I doubt it. You Leftists don't like to Learn things. Only Suppress knowledge.

It's easier for them to blame the west. It allows them to avoid the gigantic elephant in the room with a bomb strapped to it's chest. Just tell yourself it's politics and ignore the many many instances where "allahu akbar" is screamed immediately before or during a terror attack.

We've seen terror attacks in countries like Sweden as well, so I'm confused as to who exactly the Swedes bombed in the past to earn the ire of these radicals. Though if Sweden never did anything like that it's no big deal...they will still find some excuse to come up with as to why. It's the Hilary Clinton defense taken to it's most extreme: blame everyone and everything besides the true culprit.

Flyattractor

Technically the U.S has been having issues since the Country was founded back in the 1700's. But back in those days it wasn't Islamic Terrorist so much as Islamic Pirates. That is kind of what the Shores of Tripoli song is about.

But then that is something The Leftists don't teach in SCHOOLS anymore.

hence that suppression of knowledge again...

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh come on. So any muslim who explains the Quran is just whitewashing or being an apologist? That's a pretty easy excuse to shout out for haters. But logically who would you go to learn about the Torah, a Rabbi scholar, or a Nazi?

I'll directly post the passage around the verse you posted and underline the important parts to consider which add a bit of context. The one you posted as verse 5:

"1. A declaration of immunity from God and His Messenger to the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty.
2. So travel the land for four months, and know that you cannot escape God, and that God will disgrace the disbelievers.
3. And a proclamation from God and His Messenger to the people on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage, that God has disowned the polytheists, and so did His Messenger. If you repent, it will be better for you. But if you turn away, know that you cannot escape God. And announce to those who disbelieve a painful punishment.
4. Except for those among the polytheists with whom you had made a treaty, and did not violate any of its terms, nor aided anyone against you. So fulfill the treaty with them to the end of its term. God loves the righteous.
5. When the Sacred Months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. And capture them, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayers, and pay the alms, then let them go their way. God is Most Forgiving, Most Merciful.
6. And if anyone of the polytheists asks you for protection, give him protection so that he may hear the Word of God; then escort him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know."

^ As you can see the verse clearly doesn't stand on it's own. I've only posted from the beginning of the chapter (4 verses prior to what you posted) and the verse right after the one you posted). Heck if you just posted the verse right after it looks pretty different.

For more historic context to that verse this guy explains it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3...tjir9ZyP7Rs57Gu
If they're attempting to rationalize away violence and hate in the Quran, then yeah. Logically, I'd go to the Torah, because both the Nazi and the Rabbi are very likely to be highly biased.

The context actually makes that quote look worse, not better as it puts the default stance of Islam against unbelievers as war unless they specifically have a peace treaty signed. Once it expires, it's free game to kill, oppress and imprison.

Here are some other lovely quotes from the Quran/Hadiths on what should be done with people who abandon Islam(apostates):
"They wish that you should reject faith as they reject faith, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."

"A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu'adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu'adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle."

"The Messenger of Allah said, "If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head."

"Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."(Don't forget to consider (2), which condones murdering people based on what they do in their bed).

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I disagree. I mean sure the muslim world is full of monsters, as are many non-muslim places like North Korea or China... but ISIS for instance didn't exist prior to the Iraq War, and these ridiculously regular terror attacks have only been around post the Afghan and Iraq war as well.
Well, North Korea is extremely isolated and China does not adhere to a religion that condones murder and oppression, but they certainly have their own issues.

Actually, terror attacks were common prior to the Iraq and Afghan wars, it's just that they were more confined to the Middle East. Since then, immigration to the West from the muslim world has increased significantly, bringing increased incidence of terrorism with it.

Trocity

The middle-east hates the west because western civilization is made up of big meanies who treat women as equals and their religion is different and don't forget the majority of muslims are peaceful people so shut up idiot.

carthage

Thor might want to change his name to Mohammed

Blackknighting

I think it is pretty clear by now that Thor is a Muslim whose reasoning is tarnished by that religion. He will find excuses for everything. In addition he has drunk on the cup of black victim culture.

Surtur

Sandyhook, San Bernadino, Dylan Roof, Pulse Nightclub shooting. All were used as an excuse to push an anti-gun agenda. We did not really see an uproar over that, despite doing the same thing they accuse Trump of: using a tragedy to push an agenda. I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy.

Originally posted by Trocity
The middle-east hates the west because western civilization is made up of big meanies who treat women as equals and their religion is different and don't forget the majority of muslims are peaceful people so shut up idiot.

There is actually some truth to this...they do hate us because of our freedom. They hate us because women are free here. They hate us because it's not illegal to be gay. They hate us because we do not follow their horrid religion. That, to me, is the sickest part. To hate someone because they don't worship your sky god.

Also there was a story about how over 100 Imams in London were refusing to bury the latest cowardly terrorists. Apparently this is a big deal because it prevents them from going to their heaven(that doesn't actually exist, but shhh).

So, I want all peaceful Muslims to call for this practice to be applied everywhere. Everywhere there is a terror attack the terrorists do not receive proper burials, full stop. Any place that refuses to do this should be deemed as supporting terrorism. If you are truly a peaceful "moderate" Muslim, stand up and call for them not to be given proper burials. The sad part is I bet some will say that's Islamaphobia.

I am at least glad that in the USA we are currently seeing many anti-sharia law rallies being held thumb up

Bashar Teg

Originally posted by Surtur
Sandyhook, San Bernadino, Dylan Roof, Pulse Nightclub shooting. All were used as an excuse to push an anti-gun agenda. We did not really see an uproar over that, despite doing the same thing they accuse Trump of: using a tragedy to push an agenda. I'm just sick and tired of the hypocrisy.

said the little guy who's politicizing mass-murders in this very quote. special rules for our special baby.

Bashar Teg

...but since you brought it up:

http://www.newsweek.com/newtown-shooting-threat-conspiracy-theory-guilty-plea-615653

sandy-hook denier, programmed by alex jones + mental illness, going to prison for threatening father of six year old. imagine that, bad enough your 6 year old child is executed. bad enough also that you're being accused by alex jones of faking it in front of millions of his loyal retards. and now you threats from his minions.

here comes the casual dismissals about how the right it allowed to ignore their own crazy base. yet if you're on the left you have to own every individual person and their actions. #SpecialRulesSnowflakes

Steve Zodiac

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Steve Zodiac
Surtur retreats to his safe space.

He appears to have not stop posting here so I guess he didn't "retreat to his safe place" But then only Cry Baby Leftist SJW's need Safe Places to hide in, and Surt def aint one of those.

ArtificialGlory

Flyattractor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Now that's some top-tier douchebaggery.

He is at that.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Flyattractor
He is at that.
I was talking about the batshit crazy conspiracy theorists.

Flyattractor

It applies to both.

Bashar Teg

im just as bad because i hurt fly's little feefees.

Flyattractor

Awww Widdle Bashy thinks I have FeeFee's. FeeFees. That is So Gay!!!!

It is Bashy to a T!!!!!!

Surtur

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
...but since you brought it up:

http://www.newsweek.com/newtown-shooting-threat-conspiracy-theory-guilty-plea-615653

sandy-hook denier, programmed by alex jones + mental illness, going to prison for threatening father of six year old. imagine that, bad enough your 6 year old child is executed. bad enough also that you're being accused by alex jones of faking it in front of millions of his loyal retards. and now you threats from his minions.

here comes the casual dismissals about how the right it allowed to ignore their own crazy base. yet if you're on the left you have to own every individual person and their actions. #SpecialRulesSnowflakes

I'm not sure why you think bringing up Alex Jones does anything. Do you think I'm an Alex Jones fan or something?

Nothing you just said negates my point about the hypocrisy of people complaining about Trump politicizing a tragedy when the left does it all the time, every single time there is a school shooting or a major shooting.

Oh and it's not just shootings. Hate crimes in general are sometimes used as well by the left. But yeah I think when the Democrats camped out inside a courtroom(with snacks and pillows) I think it was done in reaction to a shooting.

Bashar Teg

yup. people on the left have to own every single nutter, but special snowflake can selectively disown armies right wing lunatics. special rules for the special baby

Flyattractor

And why bring up Sandy Hook in this thread. If you want a School massacre that fits the thread topic....Here is one for you.

Beslan School Islamic Massacre.

Surtur

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
yup. people on the left have to own every single nutter, but special snowflake can selectively disown armies right wing lunatics. special rules for the special baby

What armies are selectively dismissed? I don't support Alex Jones and I do think he's a lunatic.

Also we have been through this before: the MSM is mostly left leaning. That is why I focus on the left more, because the MSM tends to do the opposite. It's the right that they focus on more.

But if someone on the right does something horrible it's not like I won't denounce it.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by carthage
Thor might want to change his name to Mohammed

Originally posted by Blackknighting
I think it is pretty clear by now that Thor is a Muslim whose reasoning is tarnished by that religion. He will find excuses for everything. In addition he has drunk on the cup of black victim culture.

Lol.

What's the obsession with who or what I am?

Surely people should be able to tackle arguments on the basis of those arguments, and not on the basis of potential bias/prejudice to the source of those arguments.

But also how does it make sense again to learn about the Quran from Muslim haters?

P.s. Carthage you've done nothing on this thread to prove you're not a "Star Wars forum only" Troll.

Bashar Teg

Originally posted by Flyattractor
And why bring up Sandy Hook in this thread. If you want a School massacre that fits the thread topic....Here is one for you.

Beslan School Islamic Massacre. it was your butt friend surt who brought it up. poor grandpa can't follow a discussion.

Flyattractor

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
it was your butt friend surt who brought it up. poor grandpa can't follow a discussion.

I try not to follow YOU in any way possible.

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
If they're attempting to rationalize away violence and hate in the Quran, then yeah. Logically, I'd go to the Torah, because both the Nazi and the Rabbi are very likely to be highly biased.

The difference is the Rabbi is far more likely to actually be learned to a scholarly level on the faith. Haters rarely are.

You can of course get non-Jews and non-Muslims who have academic credentials in Judaism and Islam, but they're not haters. Simply because a hater is not going to bother getting educated in those subjects to such high degrees.

They'd prefer to just pick out the odd verse which sounds bad.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
The context actually makes that quote look worse, not better as it puts the default stance of Islam against unbelievers as war unless they specifically have a peace treaty signed. Once it expires, it's free game to kill, oppress and imprison.

What? LOL

The whole passage is clearly about specific non-muslims there was a peace treaty with but who continuously kept breaking it. It doesn't at all suggest it's talking about all non-muslims everywhere. That they better have a peace treaty signed or else.

Not that a peace treaty is a BAD thing Lol.

I take it you didn't even watch the video I linked explaining the context around that specific passage.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Here are some other lovely quotes from the Quran/Hadiths on what should be done with people who abandon Islam(apostates):
"They wish that you should reject faith as they reject faith, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of God; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper."

Is this the Quran? At least quote the source and chapter so I can check for meaning and context.

Also seems like you ignored the verse of the Quran (60:8-9) I quoted about only fighting non-muslims who attack muslims. That clearly puts other "violent" versus anyone might pick out into context.

Can't take 1 verse on it's own and generally apply it. The Quran states that itself.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
"A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu'adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu'adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle."

"The Messenger of Allah said, "If someone changes his religion - then strike off his head."

"Allah's Apostle never killed anyone except in one of the following three situations: (1) A person who killed somebody unjustly, was killed (in Qisas,) (2) a married person who committed illegal sexual intercourse and (3) a man who fought against Allah and His Apostle and deserted Islam and became an apostate."(Don't forget to consider (2), which condones murdering people based on what they do in their bed).

^ Okay none of this is from the Quran (the book someone claimed tells all Muslims to kill non-muslims). I'm guessing because I've already posted the entire passage and context around the creme de la creme of violent versus in the Quran.

And this Apostate thing really has nothing to do with Islam vs The West, so no idea why you've brought it up.

Seems to me like you're just going to some hate website and picking out verses from the Quran (singled out from a passage clearly to be taken out of context), and the dodgiest Hadith's that can be singled out on top.

The agenda of the hate website is clearly to encourage hate towards muslims.

Blackknighting

Yeah, Thor's pretty much making non arguments regarding the 164 verses in Koran that call for Jihad at this point. It doesn't matter who's citing them, all that matters is they exist.

I've come to the conclusion that there's simply a lot of black guys that defend islam as a knee-jerk reflex because they ultimately support anything that tears down predominantly white nations, as they're a symbolism of oppression, despite being the most open and tolerant societies in the current day.

Guys like Thor would rather be kings on an anti-white pile of rubble than equals in a race-blind utopia. So if 1% of muslims blow up a bunch of white people on the reg then that's not a bug, that's a feature. Note that he doesn't even waste a single breath identifying with the victims of terrorism in our nations. He jumps straight to how we're a bunch bigots for not treating islam as 'a religion of peace'.

Addendium : sucking the cock of islam isn't going to help you as a black man in the UK Thor. As more people understand the truth of this religion and more people are being killed because of it, it will probably do the opposite.

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
The difference is the Rabbi is far more likely to actually be learned to a scholarly level on the faith. Haters rarely are.

You can of course get non-Jews and non-Muslims who have academic credentials in Judaism and Islam, but they're not haters. Simply because a hater is not going to bother getting educated in those subjects to such high degrees.

They'd prefer to just pick out the odd verse which sounds bad.

What? LOL

The whole passage is clearly about specific non-muslims there was a peace treaty with but who continuously kept breaking it. It doesn't at all suggest it's talking about all non-muslims everywhere. That they better have a peace treaty signed or else.

Not that a peace treaty is a BAD thing Lol.

I take it you didn't even watch the video I linked explaining the context around that specific passage.

Is this the Quran? At least quote the source and chapter so I can check for meaning and context.

Also seems like you ignored the verse of the Quran (60:8-9) I quoted about only fighting non-muslims who attack muslims. That clearly puts other "violent" versus anyone might pick out into context.

Can't take 1 verse on it's own and generally apply it. The Quran states that itself.

^ Okay none of this is from the Quran (the book someone claimed tells all Muslims to kill non-muslims). I'm guessing because I've already posted the entire passage and context around the creme de la creme of violent versus in the Quran.

And this Apostate thing really has nothing to do with Islam vs The West, so no idea why you've brought it up.

Seems to me like you're just going to some hate website and picking out verses from the Quran (singled out from a passage clearly to be taken out of context), and the dodgiest Hadith's that can be singled out on top.

The agenda of the hate website is clearly to encourage hate towards muslims.
Yeah, and the Rabbi is also very likely to have a massive emotional investment in his religion and try to make it look as good as possible.

What I mean is that it clearly states that it's OK to kill and oppress, unless you specifically have a treaty signed. It states that when the holy months are up, you can do whatever the hell you want with the infidels. This is exactly the opposite of how most decent civilizations operate, where it's only OK to wage war when there's an actual declaration of war. I watched maybe 5 minutes until it became clear that the guy is part of the honor brigade and realized that I could not trust a word he was saying in defense of Islam because of his huge investment in it.

It's from the Quran and the Hadiths.

That quote is canceled out by the ones that condone and even encourage violence.

Actually, the apostate thing has everything to do with Islam vs the West as it shows how toxic/authoritarian Islam is, and that obviously spills over into the ideological conflict with Western values.

shiv

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Why do Muslims in the Middle-East want to blow us up?

1st 4 lines: Airbourne "Born To Kill"

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Why do Muslims in the Middle-East want to blow us up?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/with-sten-guns-and-sovereigns-britain-and-us-saved-irans-throne-for-the-shah-1272932.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Why do Muslims in the Middle-East want to blow us up?

http://www.theonion.com/multiblogpost/this-war-will-destabilize-the-entire-mideast-regio-11534

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/aug/20/uksecurity.terrorism1

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Why do Muslims in the Middle-East want to blow us up?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jul/20/chilcot-mi5-boss-iraq-war

Originally posted by chingchangwalla
Why do Muslims in the Middle-East want to blow us up?

https://twitter.com/IrelandUncut/status/872140555261800461

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfXmpJRZPYI

Steve Zodiac

Originally posted by shiv
1st 4 lines: Airbourne "Born To Kill"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/with-sten-guns-and-sovereigns-britain-and-us-saved-irans-throne-for-the-shah-1272932.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/19/cia-admits-role-1953-iranian-coup

http://www.theonion.com/multiblogpost/this-war-will-destabilize-the-entire-mideast-regio-11534

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/aug/20/uksecurity.terrorism1

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jul/20/chilcot-mi5-boss-iraq-war

https://twitter.com/IrelandUncut/status/872140555261800461

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfXmpJRZPYI

thumb up

Excellent post!

Darth Thor

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Yeah, and the Rabbi is also very likely to have a massive emotional investment in his religion and try to make it look as good as possible.

There's bound to be bias, yeah. But at least Rabbi scholars learn about it to a scholarly level. Nazis, or Anti-Semites do not.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
What I mean is that it clearly states that it's OK to kill and oppress, unless you specifically have a treaty signed.

No it doesn't. Read every line again:

9:6- And if anyone of the polytheists asks you for protection, give him protection so that he may hear the Word of God; then escort him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
It states that when the holy months are up, you can do whatever the hell you want with the infidels.

That was 9:5. I just quoted 9:6 for you. Try to read the passage as a whole in context.

The 4 months was basically giving the Pagan Arabs time to leave.

These verses were specifically aimed at the Pagan Arabs who'd attacked and fought against Muhammad and his people from day 1. And even after agreeing to peace they still kept breaking those peace treaties. And these verses were saying "enough's enough, we can't trust you, either join us or you have 4 months to leave."

And yet still you're told in 9:6 that if any of them want to disassociate themselves from the rest of the Pagans, and ask for protection they'll be granted it.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
This is exactly the opposite of how most decent civilizations operate, where it's only OK to wage war when there's an actual declaration of war.

Breaking peace treaties and continuously attacking your people usually is taken as a declaration of war.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I watched maybe 5 minutes until it became clear that the guy is part of the honor brigade and realized that I could not trust a word he was saying in defense of Islam because of his huge investment in it.

So you basically admit you're not willing to listen to what any actual learned Muslim has to say about his own book?

Regardless That guy has a Massive following among the Muslim community, so this is what Mainstream Muslims believe.

Also you're still acting like haters have no agenda, or are somehow more learned in the Quran and more trustworthy Lol

He was giving the factual context. You can look up yourself when those verses were revealed and who to. It wasn't to Every Non-Muslim, because that wouldn't even have made sense. It was specifically to the Pagan Arabs who'd wanted Muhammad destroyed from Day 1. You don't need to be an Islamist apologist or a Hater to fact check. However with a subject like this, it wouldn't be a simple fact check, you'd have to do a bit of research. If you can't be bothered with that, then I'd suggest not making up your own interpretation of those verses.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
It's from the Quran and the Hadiths.

What chapter and verse of the Quran? I've already seen you isolate a single verse taking it out of context from a passage, because I happened to know what verse/passage that was.

Whilst others just took the verse you gave at face value, without even questioning what verse that was and checking the passage themselves.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
That quote is canceled out by the ones that condone and even encourage violence.

LOL How can that be cancelled out when it's specifically putting the "violent" verses into context.

Even the verses you're claiming encourage violence really aren't. Not when you read the entire passage, or God forbid the entire Quran.

Do you want me to start posting passages from the Quran that show it to be a humanitarian message? Because we'd be here all day if I did.

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
Actually, the apostate thing has everything to do with Islam vs the West as it shows how toxic/authoritarian Islam is, and that obviously spills over into the ideological conflict with Western values.

It has absolutely nothing to do with terrorist attacks.

I could quote for you "There is no compulsion in Islam" from the Quran 2:256, but you're likely to say that's also cancelled out, despite no Islamic text ever claiming it to be so.

Muhammad's sayings require a lot more historic and situational context than the Quran, because they're isolated sayings in response to a specific question, or situation. How many times are politicians quoted out of context? And it's not like Muhammad is available for a question/answer session.

Fact is you've been brainwashed to believe the Quran and Muhmmad gave a violent message, which simply isn't true. They advocate fighting (which is in the form of killing) at times simply for the Religion to survive all the hate and violence it was receiving.

But Muslims really don't believe in the interpretation you're pulling from whatever hate website, likely because they've actually read the Quran and studied a good portion of Muhammad's life.

Darth Thor

Beniboybling

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
I watched maybe 5 minutes until it became clear that the guy is part of the honor brigade and realized that I could not trust a word he was saying in defense of Islam because of his huge investment in it.Missed this, what a textbook case of bigotry. laughing

Anyway Thor, a laudable effort to offer an informed viewpoint, too bad so few people here will listen.

Robtard

Said it in another thread, but I'll take the word of the Pope (who is a study of world religions) concerning Islam over some website like religionofpeace.com

ArtificialGlory

Originally posted by Darth Thor
There's bound to be bias, yeah. But at least Rabbi scholars learn about it to a scholarly level. Nazis, or Anti-Semites do not.

No it doesn't. Read every line again:

9:6- And if anyone of the polytheists asks you for protection, give him protection so that he may hear the Word of God; then escort him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.

That was 9:5. I just quoted 9:6 for you. Try to read the passage as a whole in context.

The 4 months was basically giving the Pagan Arabs time to leave.

These verses were specifically aimed at the Pagan Arabs who'd attacked and fought against Muhammad and his people from day 1. And even after agreeing to peace they still kept breaking those peace treaties. And these verses were saying "enough's enough, we can't trust you, either join us or you have 4 months to leave."

And yet still you're told in 9:6 that if any of them want to disassociate themselves from the rest of the Pagans, and ask for protection they'll be granted it.

Breaking peace treaties and continuously attacking your people usually is taken as a declaration of war.

But haters have no agenda right?

He was giving the factual context. You can look up yourself when those verses were revealed and who to. It wasn't to Every Non-Muslim, because that wouldn't even have made sense. It was specifically to the Pagan Arabs who'd wanted Muhammad destroyed from Day 1. You don't need to be an Islamist apologist or a Hater to fact check. However with a subject like this, it wouldn't be a simple fact check, you'd have to do a bit of research. If you can't be bothered with that, then I'd suggest not making up your own interpretation of those verses.

What chapter and verse of the Quran? I've already seen you isolate a single verse taking it out of context from a passage, because I happened to know what verse/passage that was.

Whilst others just took the verse you gave at face value, without even questioning what verse that was and checking the passage themselves.

LOL How can that be cancelled out when it's specifically putting the "violent" verses into context.

Even the verses your claiming encourage violence really aren't. Not when you read the entire passage, or God forbid the entire Quran.

Do you want me to start posting passages from the Quran that show it to be a humanitarian message? Because we'd be here all day if I did.

It has absolutely nothing to do with terrorist attacks.

I could quote for you "There is no compulsion in Islam" from the Quran, but you're likely to say that's also cancelled out, despite no Islamic text ever claiming it to be so.

Muhammad's sayings require a lot more historic and situational context than the Quran, because they're isolated sayings in response to a specific question, or situation. How many times are politicians quoted out of context? And it's not like Muhammad is available for a question/answer session.

Fact is you've been brainwashed to believe the Quran and Muhmmad gave a violent message, which isn't true. It advocating fighting at times simply for the Religion to survive all the hate and violence it was receiving.

But Muslims really don't believe in the interpretation you're pulling from whatever hate website, likely because they've actually read the Quran and studied a good portion of Muhammad's life.
That is why it's best to learn from the Torah itself. If someone is so into their religion that they're willing to spend decades studying it, they're bound to have a large investment in it and probably cannot be trusted to give an unbiased account of it.

Yes, but notice how they're only to be given safety if they're willing to hear the "word of God"(that is, to be converted to Islam). Otherwise, they're to be hunted like animals/oppressed.

Mohammed was just as much the aggressor as the pagans. He spread Islam through violent means so of course he came into conflict the pagans. He also raided their caravans beforehand, so, again, it's understandable they didn't want Mohammed and his goons in their lands.

Those you label as 'haters' usually are people who do not mince words and call out Islam for the toxic religion it is.

All he was doing was trying to whitewash Islam. He failed to mention that Mohammed and his followers were the first to actually initiate violence. He is one of the honor brigade and his words mean nothing to me.

I believe it was from the Hadiths. Go and find the exact chapter/verse if you so wish. You can go ahead and try to put it into "context", but be careful not to actually make it look worse like you did the last time.

Like I said before, "context" didn't actually exonerate the violent verse. If anything, it made it look worse. Hell, when you look at the broader context, Mohammed and his ilk were the aggressors in a lot of ways.

Do you want me to start quoting all the violent/hateful/oppressive shit in the Quran and(or) the Hadiths cause then we will definitely be here all day long. Here, I'll start: "While we were in the Mosque, the Prophet came out and said, "Let us go to the Jews" We went out till we reached Bait-ul-Midras. He said to them, "If you embrace Islam, you will be safe. You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle, and I want to expel you from this land. So, if anyone amongst you owns some property, he is permitted to sell it, otherwise you should know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle.""

But it does. It has a lot to do with Islamism and violent Jihadism, as it legitimizes violence and oppression. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out how this leads to radicalization and terrorism, and this is before we even consider the corrosive effect it has on human rights in general.

Well, "There is no compulsion" bit contradicts a whole slew of passages from the Quran/Hadiths and Mohammed's own actions(or the actions of his closest confidants). At best, neither cancels out the other; they simply stand there in contradiction to one another.

Oh you mean Mohammed isn't available for him to try rationalize away his highly problematic beliefs? Either way, if he was here today, he'd be hung for war crimes.

If you really can't see all the violence and oppression in the Quran and the life and actions of Mohammed, then you're the one who's been brainwashed. There's really no way around that.