Why does the Middle-East hate the West?

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
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."

Heh yeah, I like Doug and he was the one I first heard talking about why having extremists on either side of the Islam equation is bad.

Also speaking of Trump and Muslims this had me thinking about the recent controversy where the mayor of London said something along the lines of "people don't need to panic" and Trump took issue with this. People then complained it was taken out of context because the mayor was telling them not to panic about the increased police presence on the streets as opposed to saying "don't panic over terrorism".

But wait, when you think about it...why was there an increased presence of police? Because of terrorism. But if the terrorism has gotten so bad that the place where 90% of the cops don't even carry guns suddenly has a shitload more cops out on the streets? Why is that something not to panic over? I don't understand this logic.

Also here is a recent article written by Douglas Murray:

DOUGLAS MURRAY: Blind, bovine hope will get us nowhere – it’s time to change our response to Islamic extremism

The first couple of sentences alone illustrate the problem:

"Last Sunday, I appeared on the BBC’s Sunday Politics to discuss the aftermath of the Manchester attack. I said what I thought, and various Muslim groups promptly went bananas.

This was not caused by my suggestion that this country should finally crack-down on British officials who spend their retirements working as shills for the House of Saud. Nor by my ridiculing of that modern European tradition whereby someone blows us up and we respond by singing John Lennon songs (and now Oasis too).

Rather they objected to my simple two-word suggestion that we could all do with ‘less Islam’."

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'.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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=wI3XYnc1YVQ&list=PLssNvbqch19dV-gpkjtjir9ZyP7Rs57Gu

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
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.

They're not really that nasty when read in context. The one you posted is the crème de la crème of nasty verses. And like that one most of them look pretty different just in the context of the entire passage.

The rest are clearly put into context by a verse in the Quran you've likely never heard of, because it won't be advertised by the haters:

Surah 60 verses 8-9:

"8.Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting kindly and justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act kindly and justly.
9.Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers."

Like I already stated, if you actually read the Quran instead of googling "Violent verses in the Koran", then you'd find the book mainly preaches a pretty harmless and humanitarian message of giving to the poor, freeing slaves, feeding orphans and not to racially discriminate.

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.

Stop it Thor, someone might learn something.

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

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.

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

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.

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...

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

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).

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.

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.

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.

Thor might want to change his name to Mohammed

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.

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 👆