Islamist Terrorism and Western Imperialism.

a reply to: Lumenari

Violent criminals of every faith are guilty of equal acts of violent attacks against others for mere differences in faith, but in the collective minds of many the violence by criminals claiming to be Muslims is on a higher level of bad. So when non-Muslim African villagers stone to death a random person for whatever reason they believe, its not as bad as when a violent criminal of a Muslim background does it. I have brought this up a thousands times. You guys have been programmed to auto-respond with sound bites and do not even realize it.

"they been fighting for seven hundred years!!" tell me now who the # has not been fighting for seven hundred years??? The first two official World Wars had zero, I repeat ZERO to do with Islam, and collectivley some up to 80 million lives were lost between those two global conflicts. Who knows what the current world war's body count, primarily being fought in the Muslim world, but not by Muslims against each other, will end at.
"they will throw me off buildings and stone me" Really? Other than a handful of ISIS (i.e. violent criminals) incidents cite me a single example of people being thrown off buildings as a matter of official policy or even just as en epidemic among the Muslim world? No really, cite me the examples. I recall another thread where I found statistics on homicides and suicides by way of being thrown off a high building. Can you believe that most of the worlds death by way of high-rise falls are suicides? The one single instance of this alleged systematic execution by way of being thrown from a building was a group of violent criminals, the ISIS terrorist organization, acting in a state of anarchy where no government was in charge. I love how enlightened people think they are when they cite this one instance as an example that all billion+ humans are somehow guilty of. Like, I guess my neighbor is secretly tossing homosexuals from downtown skyrises, but I don't know about it because they are just that damn good at covering it up.
I remember one example cited years ago of an Iranian execution of two gay men by way of hanging was used as why "All of Islam and Muslims are bad". Except upon further reading, these two homosexuals were guilty of raping and molesting a minor child. I thought we all want pedos dead in this world? Who cares if they were gay, they attacked a minor. Many atheists and Christians on this site regularly conjure up their torture/murder fantasies when a thread on pedos pops up.
Another clever article by the Guardian mentions that Iran does have that law in the penal code, and even explains how rare it is for that to even happen in the country. But the article is spun in a way to make the reader believe that the men were hung solely for the crime of being homosexual, when the article clearly states they were also guilty of kidnapping and robbery. Somehow, punishing violent criminals becomes "they are murdering innocent homosexuals" in Western news and the psyche of those who do not investigate any further in order to reinforce their prejudices.
What else you got for us?

a reply to: JDmOKI
What I do not understand is how even though ALL religions have been attacking themselves and others, especially over differences in sub-genres of faith, but everyone believes that Islam is uniquely positioned as the only guilty party. What about the Christian attacks on Hindus and vice versa in India? Or Buddhists for that matter have been guilty of horrific crimes against humanity in southeast Asia. Are those crimes, less severe because they were not committed by a Muslim?


And seriously this go for all readers, at what point is a violent crime worse when committed by an alleged Muslim vs. the same criminal acts committed by any other race/religion/ethnicity/ideology?
If stoning is so bad we condemn all billion + Muslims for their complicity when an instance occurs in a rural enclave, why do we not condemn all Africans for their complicity when they stone someone in a village and upload the videos online? If you actually search for stoning murders online, the majority of them are from rural African villages, then you will see occasional acts in rural villages where the culture may be Islamic, and then I see the occasional south American psychotic also murder somebody with massive chunks of rock.

Why aren't all Americans complicit in murder when some regular guy whacks his entire family before murdering him or herself?? Some of those people were church goers themselves. How about that church goer Christian Castro who held several women imprisoned in his home for over a decade and raped them repeatedly over time before being busted by a neighbor in Ohio I believe? Now we get to make our excuses though right and say "oh he was not a real Christian, uhhh.. its not written in his book.. etc etc " whatever whatever. I get it, any crime is amplified and made worse if the person can be determined to be a Muslim vs any other human.

Yet, I am the naive apologist? No you guys are the ones who need to snap into reality. I can do this again tomorrow, and the same people will come in with the same expected sound bites: "killing the world for 700 years, throws gays off buildings, pedophiles!!!" Yea I think we all know the real powerful pedophiles are protected by the Catholic Church.

When a Muslim gleefully stones his own daughter to death because she doesn’t want to follow Islam anymore. He is NOT a criminal.
He is NOT violent and he is NOT breaking any law.

He does the act in front of his friends and family and peers and is openly supported by ALL of them. And by his government. And by his pedophile prophet.

If he did NOT stone her to death, it would be the job of his son or his brother or his father or by her husband. All of who would gleefully carry out the task.

When a Central African non-muslim stones someone to death for whatever reason, they are a criminal. Their culture and their country say it’s ‘wrong’ what he did to that person.

You’ve never lived in ANY islamic country, especially not one in the Middle East.

The ‘level of bad’ is worse when it’s perpetrated by islam simply because it’s EVERY ONE OF THEM who supports the act.

You won’t find that in any other culture on Earth.

a reply to: Breakthestreak
And in whichever specific instances in Pakistan , Sudan, Somalia and Saudi/Emirates these violent crimes by Savage criminals occur, is it on a scale worse than all these snapped non -muslim family murder/infanticide murder all the kids violent criminals for any number of reasons from no reason at all to they we're plotting to kill me first type psychosis. If the honor killings are on a scale worse, please explain the variables on whatever scale has generated that conclusion.
If they are equally heinous, why all the drama to generate extra hate against a specific type of person?

Your insulting too many of our fellow Americans, many who have also dutifully served and sacrificed for this great nation. It's permissable to have prejudiced views in our free society. But we must not allow ourselves to coerce the perception of others on their own personal biases.

a reply to: englishdissident

Doesn't matter what religion or where its from or started, their all " liars and idiots", actually there also all hypocrites and satanists.

I don't know whats worse religions or those blind mice who follow them.

Very passionate subject if not the most of all. But ill stand by my statement, their all outright nutters.

a reply to: JDmOKI

but everyone brings up the crusades which stopped but Jihad kept on rolling strong.

George W Bush used the term 'crusade' when he went to war on the middle east, when did they stop exactly?

a reply to: uncommitted

A religious crusade ended about 700 years ago and after that was ruthless and never ending Muslim wars of expansion from the moors and ottomans.

We all know the Iraq War was for oil and also know Bush was an idiot.

a reply to: JDmOKI
So you mean to tell us only Muslims of very specific empires were waging war from the crusades until... now?
Wars are conducted by states and ruling governments. Are you saying that the empires of Europe had no wars they were fighting the entire time the Ottoman empire existed?? You cannot call one nation/state/empire a war monger and then completely ignore and dismiss all the other players in the world warring against each other in parallel with the same time periods.

Tell us how many wars were waged to spread Islam into south-East asia?? My reading on history was that it expanded into the East rather peacefully (peaceful relative to the battles waged in the West) through commerce/trade and other cultural exchanges.

Did you forget that expansion of European empire into the Western hemisphere lead to the worst genocide that we know of in human history? Those were not Muslims my friend. They were either representing the interests of the various Monarchs, ultimately up to either the Church of England or the Vatican Church. And some Dutch as well.

Colonization of the western hemisphere by Europeans murdered multitudes more than by Ottoman or Moorish expansion. Subsequently, the two global wars of our modern age, where we all like to move the goal posts to when the ugly past of one side is brought up, which combined is responsible for the deaths of over 80 million humans over two split periods of just under ten years each, were both started by Europeans, fighting each other! Its like Christians cant seem to stop fighting each other now for 2000 years or something. it matters not that there was no single religious institute commanding all Christians, the vast majority of those fighting for God and Country in Europe were Christians, whether practicing or mostly in name only like today.

Can you explain to me why 2000 years on, Christians cannot stop killing each other, or how because some Muslims fight each other over some simple differences that is somehow worse than all the sectarian government ordered wars causing Christians to fight and murder each other in two world wars?

The hypocrisy and prejudice is quite easy to expose when we actually do side by side comparisons. If we were really being honest, we would be able to see that Islamic empires have actually contributed to significantly less bloodshed than those of the Christian and sectarian nations of their Western European neighbors over the same 700 year period of time (a sound bite that is repeated when triggered by any mention of Islam). For the most part, that is mostly in reference to the Ottoman empire in any case. Lets ignore the fact that Islam had spread to Africa and South-East Asia through mostly trade and commerce without raising armies to conquer anybody. Who was raising armies in that same time period though, conquering and enslaving African states and committing wholesale genocide in North and South America? Europeans of course, many allegedly on missions for Christ. But we know religion is just the excuse to get idiots as cannon fodder. It has always been and will always be about taxable land, resources, and access to markets. Whether they be Ottoman, Italian, Portuguese, Dutch, Chinese, British, American, French, Greek or Persian.

SO to claim that Islam has some exclusive claim to externally directed or internally directed violence is pure ignorance at its worst! All humans are capable of #, and we prove it on a daily basis. That search link I provided of so many American mothers and fathers murdering their children and whole families. Look through it long and hard, because it stretches back decades, and most of them have nothing to do with Islam. Motives range from no reason at all- to "God told me too" , but somehow when criminals who can be connected to Islam commit violent crimes against humanity in war zones, all 1 billion + Muslims who had nothing to do with those crimes are collectively responsible somehow, even the ones residing in America. W go even further and start claiming that those behaviors are common place and widespread, but I have shown in this thread that they are not.

Anybody who cannot see the level of ignorance that line of thinking comes from is unable to reflect introspectively. Just another trigger to unleash baseless sound bites that do not hold up to actual scrutiny and investigation, or history for that matter.

Islamists are the same tool as the Nazis were during WW2, attempting to serve EU-NATO imperalism and colonialism.
Denmark high state officials received 2 Lorenz machines right before WW2, to make sure all could properly coordinate with Hitler for the invasion of Poland and the Soviet Union ... Those Siberian oil resources always seem to be very close to Eurogarch pockets ... but systematically spell trouble , don't they ?

a reply to: worldstarcountry

You really claim that Islam's didn't war constantly in turkey eastern Europe Spain northern Africa India Russia France Italy Sicily etc

The only time they stop is when they fully submit to islam.

You talk about history lessons and ignorance while you wanna connect colonialism and Christians.

Muhammad was a religious warlord and jesus the ultimate pacifist. This is coming from a atheist btw. Muslim apologists who claim to know Islam while living in the west. The virtue points you think you're collecting aren't real. I'm sure I'm missing some points from your rant but you threw your novel defending Islam and their theocratic empire

a reply to: JDmOKI
No actually, those parts you stated I did not claim Muslims did not fight there. I said Islam expanded into South Asia pretty much through commerce and culture exposure. Indonesia was not conquered by Muslim armies, neither was India, Burma, or China.

Now, in regards to the Ottoman empire specifically, yes they did spread out through military conquest, but many of their victories did not see as much bloodshed as people are led to believe, due mainly to the fact that like the USA, the ottomans tended to allow lands and people to practice their traditional cultures fairly unharassed. It could be why they were the longest lived empire after christ from what I can read of history. I do believe they even stretched for a longer time than the Romans, assuming we are not attempting to include the Byzantine as a continuation of the original Roman empire.

The Chinese of course are the oldest living empire, as even though Egyptians and Greeks, Mayans and Mongolian culture Are still around, they do not have any real global influence any longer.

Also nowhere have I stated that any specific Islamic empire/nation-state we're not in conflict. What I have stated, is that these 700 years folks like yourself aRe triggered into repeating with the mere mention of Islam or Muslim, you never bring up the fact that everyone else was fighting as well. Be it Buddhist, Christian, Hindu or polytheistic cultures, when disagreements about resource and land claims and market access, they still would fight.

We have to move beyond this notion that Muslim culture is somehow the source of the world's violence, or exclusively responsible . It's immature, insincere, and dare I say, ignorant.

The OP is classic western racism.

Telling the brown peoples of the world “you didn’t build this!”

Whether it’s the idea that aliens must have built the pyramids, because little brown people could never do this on their own, or that Britain is ultimately the progenitor of the rise of modern India and China...

The OP literally schittz all over 1400 years of Islamist history. What about the haj? The Hashishim? The rise of the Ismaili? What about frickin Muhammid Achmad bin abd Allah, the Mahdi of the battle of Karthoum.?

here's an interesting, fact filled, read on Islam;

www.raymondibrahim.com...

… Today in history, on May 29, 1453, the sword of Islam conquered Constantinople. Of all of Islam’s conquests of Christian territory, this was by far the most symbolically significant. For not only was Constantinople a living and direct extension of the old Roman Empire and current capital of the Christian Roman Empire (or Byzantium), but …

it's historical, in the sense it has nothing to say about Western Imperialism...but only references the Civilized Worlds adventures (under a handful) with the Crusades as a blow-back to the Jihadists of Islams' 400 years of attacks with only half-as-many aggressions against Christians in the western word of Europe mostly (Islam having already captured lots of north & Sahara North Africa and lots of central Asia on their way to encompass All the Mediterranian Sea Coasts Lands


fyi...

You see, if Europeans had fought against Western Imperialism, then there would be no ISIS.