patrick.net

Bigsby says

most muslims are good people because they have not really read, understood, and agreed with the koran. it's the serious and honest muslims you have to worry about.

Absolute nonsense. The vast majority of practicing Muslims are extremely knowledgeable about the Quran - far more so than Christians and the Bible.

I would disagree with both of you. Understanding the Koran is what creates suicide bombers. Interpreting the Koran to be what it is not, is what makes for a peaceful Muslim.
That's what worries me. No Muslim suicide bomber became a suicide bomber, without first believing in the word of the Koran.

Bigsby says

The vast majority of practicing Muslims are extremely knowledgeable about the Quran

Whatever way, that is the problem. The bible has been rewritten many times, and they have gone so far as not recommending the old testament anymore. And the old testament is a children's book compared to this.

Bigsby says

Insulting islamophobia. I suspect you wouldn't feel so free bandying around such comments about blacks, Jews or asians, I'm sure, but hey, here you are happily saying it about 1.6bn people.

Again, jews, blacks and Asians do not run around and decimate people while justifying this with they jewness, blackness or asianness. These generalizations, while certainly unfair to those who don't condone this violence, happen for a reason. It's human nature and absolutely necessary for survival to generalize.

mell says

Again, jews, blacks and Asians do not run around and decimate people while justifying this with they jewness, blackness or asianness. These generalizations, while certainly unfair to those who don't condone this violence, happen for a reason. It's human nature and absolutely necessary for survival to generalize.

Calling all Muslims savages and having another poster saying that all Muslims should be killed are not the kind of generalizations necessary for survival. It's simply offensive and the fact it is being tolerated or agreed with on here is frankly disgusting.

Strategist says

I would disagree with both of you. Understanding the Koran is what creates suicide bombers. Interpreting the Koran to be what it is not, is what makes for a peaceful Muslim.

That's what worries me. No Muslim suicide bomber became a suicide bomber, without first believing in the word of the Koran.

The corruption, abuse, brainwashing... of the often young, angry and impressionable is what allows these 'leaders' to manipulate and use these kids as suicide bombers.

Bigsby says

Calling all Muslims savages and having another poster saying that all Muslims should be killed are not the kind of generalizations necessary for survival. It's simply offensive and the fact it is being tolerated or agreed with on here is frankly disgusting

Nobody is saying kill all muslims-except you of course . Straight out of the feminazi playbook of political correctness.
Now you have 10-20 Muslim jihadis kill so many and openly declaring this is just the start -pray tell how are you going to stop them?? Sadaam, Gaddafi and the senior Assad found a way to stop and control them.

Now if they don't kill us and live in peace-nobody cares-but they keep killing and killing and killing in so many different countries across several continents-except in those countries where there was a strongman. So that should say something.

When are you going to wake up-when ISIS comes here and kidnaps your family and uses them like they did the Yazidis-will you still be singing the same tune?

I think it is better to stop them as early as posisble, because too many atrocities and we might slip into marital law like paris and people will just accept our own strongman to protect against these violent jihadis and we can kiss freedom goodbye

Bigsby says

Calling all Muslims savages and having another poster saying that all Muslims should be killed are not the kind of generalizations necessary for survival. It's simply offensive and the fact it is being tolerated or agreed with on here is frankly disgusting.

I haven't seen anybody advocating the killing of all Muslims, but I haven't read through this thread thoroughly. Wrt the savage comment, think it's more a sign of growing fear and unease. Offensive yes, but so is calling Jews apes and pigs and lightly clothed western women whores. It's great when Muslims speak out against this and there are certainly those who do, but you cannot deny that there hasn't been a large enough outcry and distancing from these sort of actions yet. Mostly images of people celebrating in the streets dominate the media, and I don't know a single American or westerner, no matter how right-wing and hard-line they may be, that has ever celebrated the death of an innocent person in a war they supported, not even a death of an enemy combatant.

mell says

I haven't seen anybody advocating the killing of all Muslims, but I haven't read through this thread thoroughly.

Reggie in another thread, to which I responded that he was an idiot and got 3 dislikes for my trouble. Apparently it's worse to call someone an idiot than it is to wish 1.6bn people dead. Go figure.

mell says

Offensive yes, but so is calling Jews apes and pigs and lightly clothed western women whores. It's great when Muslims speak out against this and there are certainly those who do, but you cannot deny that there hasn't been a large enough outcry and distancing from these sort of actions yet. Mostly images of people celebrating in the streets dominate the media, and I don't know a single American or westerner, no matter how right-wing and hard-line they may be, that has ever celebrated the death of an innocent person in a war they supported, not even a death of an enemy combatant.

I can't make others speak out, but that is no reason for me to keep quiet. And I'm sorry, but there was a great deal of jingoistic nonsense going on when the bombs started dropping in Iraq, and those caused the deaths of a great many innocents, far more than anything ISIS has managed.

This enemy does not need an army, has no central economy and has no qualms about killing/raping/torturing innocent people tottaly unrelated to the cause.

Theya re willing to strike at any country and at any time and with ferocity of beasts. Now, the west will have to come up with some thing. if you look at what ISIS did to the yazidis- raping children and selling them as slaves-mind you these were their own countrymen who they lived with for centuries-you can imagine what they will do to us if they get a hold of us.

yes Bush's war on Iraq and other such may be causes-but they have been killing and bombing far before that and in too many countries and continents. We have to find a way o deal with these animals. The strongmen that we took out-successfully dealt with them and kept them in check-so maybe we need to look at if that si a viable strategy. There is a vacuum in Iraq , Libya and now Syria. iran ont he other hand had their own revolution and they got their own verison of democracy-you don't see Iranian jihadis coming to paris to blow up cities?

They need strong leaders there.

Even nature abhors a vacuum.

Remember all the bullshit about Jihad?

Most Muslim Sects believe the Great Jihad, the physical Jihad, to be binding on Muslims generally (ie Muslims as a group) and more important than the Lesser Jihad, which is a form of self-improvement.

Remember the End of the World and Peace comes only when Islam conquers the world and there are no unbelievers according to the Koran.

And there is no peace with infidels, only Hudnas (temporary cease-fires).

Dan8267 says

The Catholics and the Protestants killed each other for a century in England before the American founding fathers were born.

First, I want to say that I completely agree with your sentiment. However, a major difference is the Catholics and the Protestants weren't fighting over ideology. They were fighting over power and money. It was all about who was to be the highest power in the land... Is it the Pope? Is it the King? Further, the Catholic church owned much land and valuable assets in these countries. The Royals, on the other hand, were going increasingly broke, largely due to wars, I might add. Once the Kings figured that 1) they didn't want to have to answer to the Pope; and 2) by getting rid of the Catholic church they could seize the lands and assets of the church... Well, the rest is history. Only the uneducated/semi-educated followers ever thought this was about ideology. Ideology was just an excuse. That belief is what kept regular folks occupied while the upper class stole the cookies from the cookie jar. The minute the Royals got their hands on the money and the power, that was the end of the Catholic church's dominance in those countries. I believe it was Henry VIII who came up with the idea of selling the former church lands to give the successful middle class folks opportunities for titles, a very clever idea for the itme. "Mayor" was one such title that was for sale.

Anyway, what makes Islam different is their fight appears to really be about ideology. They think that anyone who doesn't believe as they do should die and that they are following the "call" if they make it happen. They are willing to die for the effort. How does one argue with that?

We need to get it through our thick skulls that there is no arguing with these people. Any organization that advocates killing people should be illegal. It shouldn't matter that some members don't actually go around killing people. The fact that it's ever taught and flown under the flag of Islam should be enough. Throw the fuckers out and let them kill each other. I have no interest in figuring out who the "good" ones are and who the "bad" ones are. Their superstition is toxic to everyone else on this planet and they should be dealt with accordingly. I look at it this way... If I opened up a school that taught people how to be criminals, how long would I be allowed to stay open? Imagine if I were a really great school that could help serial killers be the best at their jobs. I'd be shut down. But if we call it a religion, it's okay? Sorry, it isn't. Shut them down. Send them away. And be done with it, already.

turtledove says

First, I want to say that I completely agree with your sentiment. However, a major difference is the Catholics and the Protestants weren't fighting over ideology.

Also they were fighting each other, not the rest of the world. Biggest difference.

I didn't realize the voices in my head were gods.I thought they were a bunch of idiots.

Strategist says

Interpreting the Koran to be what it is not, is what makes for a peaceful Muslim.

That's what worries me. No Muslim suicide bomber became a suicide bomber, without first believing in the word of the Koran.

yes, this is true.

and any attempt to reform the koran, or even to put the peaceful verses above the ones instructing war, are met with violence. consider mahmoud taha, a 76 year old engineer in sudan. he was executed in 1985 for blasphemy for attempting to elevate the verses about tolerance (written in mecca, when mohammed had no army) above the verses instructing war (which were written in medina, after mohammed had an army and was busy killing his enemies).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Mohammed_Taha

the net result was no change: muslims are still obligated by islamic law to make war on all non muslims, killing them if they don't convert or pay a ransom (jizya).

turtledove says

We need to get it through our thick skulls that there is no arguing with these people. Any organization that advocates killing people should be illegal.

agreed.

there is a constitutional problem though. islam has successfully exploited the loophole that religions are protected by the consitution -- even when they are also fascist polticial movements which are attempting to overthrow the government and eliminate freedom of speech and freedom of religion, ironically.

i don't use the term fascism lightly, or as an insult. islam actually is pretty pure fascism, involving all the key elements:

Nationalism (arabic language and culture)
Totalitarianism (controls all aspects of your life, even how you shit)
Single-party state (democracy is forbidden by islam, only god makes laws, not men)
Personality cult (mohammed)
Dictatorship
Militarism
Direct action (jihadis)

if we can prohibit entry by communists, we should definitely be able to prohibit entry by muslims.

now it becomes very important to accurately tally which politicians are tacitly pro islamic immigration, and which are explicitly and openly against it. our lives depend on it.

Strategist says

Outlawing all religions is just not practical.

Outlawing narcotics is just not practical. That hasn't stop government from doing so.

The cost of continuing to kowtow to religion is far less practical than outlawing it. You worship some fictional character, then you are insane and you don't get to vote. If people carrying weed don't get to vote, then people so devoid of reality that they think an invisible sky daddy is pulling the strings don't get to vote either.

Strategist says

Today, we have a serious threat from one religion

Wrong. Islam is not one religion. Christianity is not one religion. Judaism is not one religion. Each is dozens of religions. And the Islamic religions are not the only problems. All religions are the problem. They are all essentially the same, irrationality causing bad behavior, death, and destruction. The only way to fight any religion is to fight religion itself, and that means fighting all religions.

Arguing that we need to fight only one religion is like arguing we need to fight only one form of racism. It's stupid.

lostand confused says

Spying on everyone is not the answer. Gubmnt already does that-it didn't stop the Boston bombing s and it didn't stop the French bombings and it won't stop any future terrorist bombing.

Yep, all the spying and wiretapping violations haven't done jack diddly squat to make the world a safer place. Nor was it the point of that. The government is far more interested in spying on those trying to make peaceful political change than spying on terrorists because the former is a far greater threat to their power. Terrorism has never done anything but bolster government power. Thus, government loves terrorism. It's a very useful boogieman.

turtledove says

However, a major difference is the Catholics and the Protestants weren't fighting over ideology. They were fighting over power and money.

I would argue that all ideological fights are fights over power and money.

In any case, rationality is a necessary if not sufficient condition for world peace. And religion and rationality are mutually exclusive.

It's not the specific, arbitrary mythology of Islam that matter. It's the irrational commitment to rules and authority that's bad. And that has a name: faith. Faith is a terrible evil. It causes so many other evils. It does not matter what the brainwashed have faith in. Faith itself is a core evil that spawns legions of other evils. That is why there must be a unified opposition to all religions and all faiths.

turtledove says

Any organization that advocates killing people should be illegal.

You do realize this includes
- the U.S. military
- the Pentagon
- both Republicans (extensively) and Democrats (to a lesser degree)
- conservative radio
- death penalty advocates

Not saying that I disagree though...

Dan8267 says

Islam is not one religion.

actually, islam is pretty homogeneous in the fundamentals: koran, hadith, mandatory war on unbelievers, murder of anyone who insults mohammed, death for anyone who leaves islam.

Out of 1.5 billion , 1 billion were muslim converted by force. Humanity and peace were evolving from Hinduism and Buddhism . Most of Buddhism believed in non violance, vs muslim rulers wo will kill u if you dont convert. Bangladesh, indonesia, pakistan, and parts of India contains 1 billion. Either make them non religious, Buddhist / Hindu like, and 80 percent of violence will disappear.

actually, islam is pretty homogeneous in the fundamentals

What makes a religion is a power structure. Shite and Sunnis are two different religions at war even if their mythology and violent practices are the same. Yes, I agree that Islam today is far more fascist than Christianity today, but that is only because agnostics and atheists have weakened Christianity's hold over the people with every advancement in science and engineering. Islam today is what Christianity was in the Middle Ages.

And there is no reason to believe that Christianity, left to its perverted devices, would not revert back into the same kind of fundamentalist fascism that it used to get away with. Fundamentalism is just the end result of religion itself. All religions move towards fascism and fundamentalism if not opposed.

If we waved a magic wand that destroyed every Koran, every reference to Islam in every text or picture, and destroyed every neural connection forming every memory of Islam in every human brain, what would happen to all the Muslims? Obviously, they would cease be Muslims and Islam would no longer exist in any form. But they would not stop being violent, sociopaths hell-bent on a single religious doctrine. They would simply cling onto some popular religion around them, Judaism or Christianity, and would call for the same convert-or-die doctrine under their new religion.

It is faith itself that is the core evil. Faith cannot tolerate anything that threatens it, and rationality is the greatest threat to any faith. Rationality questions everything, and faith cannot tolerate that. The object of the faith is not important. It's the nature of faith to violently oppose all threats to the faith. Even when rationality gets the upper hand and prevents faith from using violence, the faithful use subterfuge to get their way. One needs only to look at America as a prime example of that. Anti-abortion laws that require transvaginal ultrasounds, i.e. rape. The use of school textbooks to indoctrinate children into creationism. Such acts may not be as openly offensive as jihad, but they serve the exact same purpose, to use coercion to force one person's arbitrary and corrupted will unto another.

sikhism is interesting, having evolved out of hinduism as an anti-muslim defense force in reaction to the repeated muslim invasions of india.

it doesn't demand that you convert, doesn't kill you for any insult or for leaving the faith, and is very inclusive. yet it is also pretty badass in terms of self-defense.

good model.

You have to understand you are arguing with a Brit. The BBC media has had an anti Jew bias for the past couple decades and as a result has put forth a pro Palestinian and pro Muslim propaganda line that has brainwashed a large number of Brits over the past 2-3 decades. It's basically futile to argue how damaging Islamists have been to the western world.

It was Sikh awareness day at the Clippers game yesterday. A mix of Sikh Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts presented the colors and a Sikh violinist played the national anthem. At half time they did a dance program to Indian music.

It's cliched for sure but most of my encounters with Sikh have been 7-11 employees. They've always been nice with me and treated me with respect, even when I was a kid. After 9-11 I went out of my way to be nice to them because I knew many Americans would mistake them for Muslim.

Most Sikh I have met seem like they really love the United States. I think they're a credit to the US.

I'm Sikh and its ironic and really depressing for the ignorance of people. Our whole race was born to oppose and fight Gorilla wars against invaders from Middle east. The strongest , tallest and bravest were chosen and a warrior race was established for self-defense but what is depressing is that we are mistaken for muslims. My dad was called bin-laden in Suana room in the gym and I made that ignorant asshole apologize to him. Next time , in Farmers market someone kicked him on the toe ( apparently his turban attracts this hatred ). He never told me and he kept walking and i came to know about this only later because he wanted to avoid trouble

cloud15 says

My dad was called bin-laden in Suana room in the gym and I made that ignorant asshole apologize to him. Next time , in Farmers market someone kicked him on the toe ( apparently his turban attracts this hatred ). He never told me and he kept walking and i came to know about this only later because he wanted to avoid trouble

sorry so many americans are so ignorant. we don't learn much about sikhism in school.

What percentage of all Muslims would openly support Sharia Law in their own countries let alone ours?
What percentage of Muslims condemn the murder of civilians when interviewed, but would also admit that "all bets are off" when civilians "insult" their prophet? I suspect those numbers would be significant - and I declare that such belief IS radical and unacceptable.
I will say that I intend to openly resist an increasing Islamic influence in my country.
If that makes me racist, so be it.
I do not want to see more burka wearing females in my country.
If that makes me racist, so be it.
Executions of civilians for apostasy from Islam, public speech critical of government, marriage infidelity, or truthfully any crime shy of blatant first degree murder are truly the barbaric acts of an inferior culture.
If that makes me racist, so be it.

I am no longer concerned about offending Muslims. They are clearly too easily offended.

Strategist says

they must get more proactive, and go after these radicals themselves.

nice thought, but realistically, has about zero chance of happening. The threat of ostracism or death is too much to deal with for the less violent.

dodgerfanjohn says

It's basically futile to argue how damaging Islamists have been to the western world.

The guy is a brainwashed buffoon.....not to mention the anti-Hindu bias since you know who kicked them out of India.

Ever wonder why Nigerians, Indian non-muslims and Chinese prefer to come to the US while Pakistanis prefer Britain?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/161435/100-million-worldwide-dream-life.aspx

Furthermore they are so racist in the media there that they try to lump Pakistani gangbangers with hindus, sikhs and east asians with inflammatory titles. That's why

http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/561997/Asian-gangs-were-allowed-to-prey-on-vulnerable-girls

Article written by muslim apologist in UK who lacks knowledge of her Qur'an

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/sep/30/abuse-children-asian-communities

lostand confused says

Nobody is saying kill all muslims-except you of course . Straight out of the feminazi playbook of political correctness.

Really, so how do you take the comment below? And I'm neither a feminist nor a nazi. I am an individual who knows a lot of Muslims, and as such, I don't appreciate people throwing around comments like the one quoted. But hey, you seem happy to ignore it and say I am simply making it up.

reggie says

It's not discrimination to kill or deport anyone who practices Islam or Sharia law outside of the Middle East, because that is exactly what they want to do to you if you are not one of them while they are in your country.

MMR says

dodgerfanjohn says

It's basically futile to argue how damaging Islamists have been to the western world.

The guy is a brainwashed buffoon.....not to mention the anti-Hindu bias since you know who kicked them out of India.

I'd say it's your comments that make you the buffoon. And care to share my anti-Hindu bias? I asked why you were posting nothing but stuff on attacks in India when we were discussing Europe. How does that translate as anti-Hindu bias in your mind?

dodgerfanjohn says

You have to understand you are arguing with a Brit. The BBC media has had an anti Jew bias for the past couple decades and as a result has put forth a pro Palestinian and pro Muslim propaganda line that has brainwashed a large number of Brits over the past 2-3 decades. It's basically futile to argue how damaging Islamists have been to the western world.

Oh my, an expert on everyone from the UK, and the BBC as well. How fascinating. And perhaps you could elaborate on how damaging Islamists have been to the Western world over the centuries. You know, the world wars they started, the financial crises they instigated, the mass unemployment, the poverty.... The impact of Islamists on the West has been negligible. You couldn't exactly say the same about the impact of the West on the Middle East though, could you? But of course, that doesn't fit with your narrative.

Bigsby says

lostand confused says

Nobody is saying kill all muslims-except you of course . Straight out of the feminazi playbook of political correctness.

Really, so how do you take the comment below? And I'm neither a feminist nor a nazi. I am an individual who knows a lot of Muslims, and as such, I don't appreciate people throwing around comments like the one quoted. But hey, you seem happy to ignore it and say I am simply making it up.

reggie says

It's not discrimination to kill or deport anyone who practices Islam or Sharia law outside of the Middle East,

Read that statement again Bigs. If a Muslim kills someone for insulting his Prophet, he is practicing the sharia laws, which would be murder/terrorism. Yes, he should be executed, just as a gang member from East LA killing someone in a random shooting should be executed, because I believe in the death penalty.

Strategist says

Read that statement again Bigs. If a Muslim kills someone for insulting his Prophet, he is practicing the sharia laws, which would be murder/terrorism. Yes, he should be executed, just as a gang member from East LA killing someone in a random shooting should be executed, because I believe in the death penalty.

I don't need to read the statement again. Your point is irrelevant to what he said (not to mention decidedly muddled) - you simply need to read the first line he wrote. It was an abhorrent comment, so you shouldn't waste your time trying to defend it.

just because a small group of Jews successfully kicked the shit out of multiple middle eastern Islamic nations(at the same time no less) doesn't mean the Islamists weren't the aggressors.

That's quite the selective memory you've got there Bigsby. And with that ....ignoring invasions of Israel for literally NO VALID REASON, I'll again assert you are a product BBC propaganda.

Integration of African Americans in America was obviously an excellent policy and a humanitarian decision and so the right thing to do. But Europe and other nations should be allowed to question whether integration of Muslims (a clear percentage of whom are both violent and opposed to basic human rights) is categorically different for these reasons: www.reddit.com/​r/​PoliticalDiscussion/​comments/​3k3wdg/​i_​keep_​hearing_​muslims_​want_​to_​force_​their/​

Integrating Islam into the West is like integrating single white middle aged men with beards who drive vans into high schools. Sure, not every one of those guys is a problem. But when we crunch numbers, there's clearly a problem. I respect numbers and I respect people. Nations need to fix the Islamic terrorist problem and human rights violations where they arise, not shuffle middle-age Islamic men around the world in some disillusioned hope this magically makes the world more diverse.

Cool people can be anywhere. That's the ticket. African Americans post-slavery and mid-oppression, amazingly cool people on the balance. By contrast, Islam is not producing a high percentage of cool people like America accomplished WITH African Americans in the 20th century. Integration is not some golden recipe that works everywhere at all times. I've learned this in nature.

If there were some super advanced eco-society today, the worst thing for them would be to integrate with modern America that loves, on the balance percentage-wise, plastic and gasoline and pharma-blah and other toxic terribles. Integration is not some golden recipe for diversity. Sometimes it works against diversity. We see this in nature constantly.

I'm not trying to pick on Islam either. I think the same thing about Roman Catholic priests -- a certain percentage of them clearly have predator problems according to statistics. Its dangerous to integrate 'celibate' priests into a culture (like a school) that not only lacks safeguards against predators, but gives them places to hide and also monetary handouts.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

Scratch out 'negro' and replace with 'muslim' and scratch out '3/5ths a man' and replace with 'game'

I'm still waiting for those 3/5 negro suicide bombers. Man, those were the daysDieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

Then, anyone with a hunting license could help manage the muslim threat.

or you could just beat them to that gatling cannon you were talking about Bolton. If you don't get your hands on it before they do...you won't live to see the apocalypse

why shoot them; why not continue to push for gun control and simply not let them in? Most of these guys won't even add anything to the economy anyway

Bigsby says

You know, the world wars they started, the financial crises they instigated, the mass unemployment, the poverty.

Exactly, the BBC anti-Jew bias...you actually proved his point. On another note, why does the BBC lump pakistani gangbangers in with Hindus, Sikhs and Chinese by calling them 'Asian Gangs' and Asian 'pedo rings' when they are actually Pakistani pedo rings

Of course the only notable prosecutions that happened in the financial crises were Indians who were hung out to dry by their Jewish bosses.