If islam is the religion of peace

[Free_Matt_417]

"Western Civilization" is based on colonialism, slavery and exploitation of third world resources through propagation of debt and military conflict to support a culture of consumerism and the wealth of multinational corporations.

Sam, your all too right once again.

The only reason countries in South-East Asia and Africa aren't power world countries, is because they were the of either the British empire, the French, the Dutch, the Spanish etc. Africa has the largest deposits of gold and diamonds in the world, but it's been pillaged and butt-fucked, just like so many other countries, during the 1800-1900's. They sucked them DRY

 

[GeoffP]

How much are the zombies going for?

Mostly they seem to go for .30 calibre ammunition. The .22s just don't seem to put them down consistently. So much for the "Zombie Survival Guide". I used it to cook a passing seagull.

 

[Prince_James]

SamCDKey:

"Western Civilization" is based on colonialism, slavery and exploitation of third world resources through propagation of debt and military conflict to support a culture of consumerism and the wealth of multinational corporations.

"Third World 'Civilization'" is based on brutal despotism, endemic caste and tribal slavery, and constant, vicious warfare, wedded to back breaking labour, an agricultural system prone to periods of immense famine and drought, and a complete disregard for the value of life. Moreover, the people are of an inferior intelligence almost universally, and their ignorance is almost always buttressed by a priestly caste that seduces them into a belief in hocus-pocus nonsense.

It is also a fact that where Western Civilization is most entrenched, the quality of life is highest. And when other civilizations - such as Japan or South Korea - they share in the bounty. The rejection of the West produces the hell-holes we call The Middle East, Africa, Central and South Eastern Asia, and much of Central and South America.

 

[Prince_James]

G.Owen:

All are wicked? Certainly, you are a slave if you believe this nonsense. Wickedness is no more part of the human condition than greatness is.

Moreover, I have peace, as do many others. Are we then to be counted amongst the non-wicked?

 

[madanthonywayne]

They just keep changing the labels.

The monarchy was no less exploitative than the corporations are.

We have some experience of British colonialism.

If it weren't for the Brits, you Indians couldn't even talk to each other, what with your 500 languages.

"Western Civilization" is based on colonialism, slavery and exploitation of third world resources through propagation of debt and military conflict to support a culture of consumerism and the wealth of multinational corporations.

The West didn't invent any of the ills you complain of. Quite the contrary. It was the west that first saw them as problems. That invented the ideas of freedom, of democracy, of human rights. Is the West perfect, of course not. But it pisses me off to see people constantly blaming the west for all the worlds ills.

Slavery, oppression, militarism; these are all old ideas. Not at all creations of the west. As PJ pointed out, these evils florish today not in Western countries, but in your own backyard.

 

[Prince_James]

Precisely.

 

[timmbuktwo]

Sam, your all too right once again.

The only reason countries in South-East Asia and Africa aren't power world countries, is because they were the of either the British empire, the French, the Dutch, the Spanish etc. Africa has the largest deposits of gold and diamonds in the world, but it's been pillaged and butt-fucked, just like so many other countries, during the 1800-1900's. They sucked them DRY

you ever seen an african work?

 

[S.A.M.]

If it weren't for the Brits, you Indians couldn't even talk to each other, what with your 500 languages.
The West didn't invent any of the ills you complain of. Quite the contrary. It was the west that first saw them as problems. That invented the ideas of freedom, of democracy, of human rights. Is the West perfect, of course not. But it pisses me off to see people constantly blaming the west for all the worlds ills.

Slavery, oppression, militarism; these are all old ideas. Not at all creations of the west. As PJ pointed out, these evils florish today not in Western countries, but in your own backyard.

How many Indians do you think speak English?

Great analysis without ever setting foot in a place.

As for the colonialism and oppression, I'd say the puppet dictators, death squads and School of Americas, not to mention the "free trade" and third world debt, clearly show why the oppression and militarism is in our backyards.

 

[S.A.M.]

you ever seen an african work?

Are they outsourcing?

Need immigrants to pick up the trash? Mow the lawns?

 

[madanthonywayne]

How many Indians do you think speak English?

All the ones I know, including the tech support guys for my old compaq computer who resided in India. By the way, goggle has this to say:

English
Only about three percent of India's population speak English, but they are the individuals who lead India's economic, industrial, professional, political, and social life. Even though English is primarily a second language for these persons, it is the medium in which a great number of the interactions in the above domains are carried out. Having such important information moving in English conduits is often not appreciated by Indians who do not speak it, but they are relatively powerless to change that. Its inertia is such that it cannot be easily given up. This is particularly true in South India, where English serves as a universal language in the way that Hindi does in the North. Despite being a three percent minority, the English speaking population in India is quite large. With India's massive population, that three percent puts India among the top four countries in the world with the highest number of English speakers. English confers many advantages to the influential people who speak it -- which has allowed it to retain its prominence despite the strong opposition to English which rises periodically. http://www.languageinindia.com/junjul2002/baldridgeindianenglish.html

So only about 3% speak English, yet it serves (just as I thought) as a universal language in southern India the equivalent of Hindi in the north.

I've known a lot of Indians, one of my best friends in college was Indian and she told me that English was a sort of univeral language over there.

 

[S.A.M.]

All the ones I know, including the tech support guys for my old compaq computer who resided in India. By the way, goggle has this to say:

So only about 3% speak English, yet it serves (just as I thought) as a universal language in southern India the equivalent of Hindi in the north.

I've known a lot of Indians, one of my best friends in college was Indian and she told me that English was a sort of univeral language over there.

Let me rephrase that:

How many Indians do you think speak to each other in English?

I speak to all the Indians I know in whatever Indian language we have in common, and most of us speak at least three and understand at least double that. And in my experience, we only speak English to each other as a courtesy if a non Indian is around and sometimes not even then.

 

[Tiassa]

Why does it kill shi’as & sunni’s in Iraq?
Why does it kill shi’as & sunni’s in Pakistan?
Why does it kill Sindhis and Muhajirs in Pakistan?
Why does it kill Christians in Darfur?
Why does it kill Christians in Indonesia?
Why does it kill Christians in the Philippines?
Why does it kill Baha'is in Iran?

Economy, education, and perpetual betrayal of the human condition. Islam, despite its popular reputation for rigidity, is very adaptable. Given time and the opportunities enjoyed by free societies in the West, we will see the separation of brutality and faith. Remember, it only took Western society centuries.

 

[Free_Matt_417]

you ever seen an african work?

Yeah i do, they are the hardest working people I've seen. They come to Australia, from hostile environments, where people get beheaded and shit like that, and they see how lucky they are, and work their bulls off.

The only reason African-Americans seem apathetic to the American government, is because their ancestors were forced away from the place they loved.

 

[GeoffP]

Economy, education, and perpetual betrayal of the human condition. Islam, despite its popular reputation for rigidity, is very adaptable. Given time and the opportunities enjoyed by free societies in the West, we will see the separation of brutality and faith. Remember, it only took Western society centuries.

Yes, and that is rather the point, and not the point, at the same time.

Islam's "reputation for rigidity" - or rather that of it's political arm - is a reputation well earned. Islamic governance, by definition, is of religious observance and therefore in line with the Quran and hadiths, which are not exactly noteworthy (particularly in the Medinan ayah) for their wide tolerance of non-muslims - or, cynically, of non-muslims who do not accept tenets of the muslim faith. Sharia law, in line with the Quran, lays down a system of layered status for those under its power, with male muslims at the top, female muslims somewhere below that, and non-muslims at the bottom of the heap. This is not and egalitarian design - it is a vicious and small-minded apartheid - and, much to Hype's chagrin, a real one - of which the practical scale has never been seen.

And it is indeed true that the West took some considerable time to build up equality, which even today is in threat. This is not something that should be permitted to be obliterated in the name of the supposed will of a supposed god. Yet, from the outset, the tools of Western civilization were there - the recognition that all persons have inalienable rights, that they should be given the freedom to pursue them and their own benefit, and not as some theoretical provenance of a mythical entity - but for their own sake. There is nothing akin to them in islam, or nothing that I have seen. Can political islam indeed adapt? - or is it not more fair, and more just of us to simply ask: can eastern societies not simply divest themselves of sanctioned religious meddling? Can there not be separation of mosque and state? Why must our societal tolerance of Middle Eastern and othersuch nations of the ummah extend to the ridiculous maximum - that forlorn hope of coexistence with a political view that desires nothing better than the destruction of Western society and rationalism? Should we do as Chamberlain did, and engage in ridiculous moral gymnastics for the sake of appearing utterly, completely devoid of judgementality - so that we, ourselves, may later be judged by this selfsame other for that very lack? Why should we not demand such separation, before we discuss anything of further consequence? It is not the separation of brutality and faith that is required, but the separation of faith and governance. Of free will, and freedom of religion. That is the issue of concern.

In short: because we imagine that we could be fools, does that then mean we ought to be? Do we really think our ecumenalism demands stupidity, as well?

Best,

Geoff

 

[GeoffP]

They just keep changing the labels.

What labels? You realize that this is an actually developing system, and not a supposedly developing one?

The monarchy was no less exploitative than the corporations are.

All right. And? Monarchies are hardly unique to any civilization. What differs is merely the extent of technological and international force they are able to exert.

We have some experience of British colonialism.

And many places, of many colonialisms. This is hardly a uniquely Western phenomenon. Rather, it occurs in the dark corners of every single civilization the world has known - Western, islamic, southern Asian, eastern Asian, North American. The only difference is, again, that technological and military capacity. If you're going to accuse the West of all evils, Sam - and ignore those of others - it might be best to consider capability and credo together, for as not all ability is equivalent, neither is all philosophy.

 

[S.A.M.]

What labels? You realize that this is an actually developing system, and not a supposedly developing one?

All right. And? Monarchies are hardly unique to any civilization. What differs is merely the extent of technological and international force they are able to exert.

And many places, of many colonialisms. This is hardly a uniquely Western phenomenon. Rather, it occurs in the dark corners of every single civilization the world has known - Western, islamic, southern Asian, eastern Asian, North American. The only difference is, again, that technological and military capacity. If you're going to accuse the West of all evils, Sam - and ignore those of others - it might be best to consider capability and credo together, for as not all ability is equivalent, neither is all philosophy.

I'm not the one ignoring all others. If you go back to the post of yours that I responded to,

And yet, it isn't any of that which Western civilization is about - oppression, or sublimation.

That is exactly what western civilisation is about.

The farming subsidies that bankrupt farmers in the third world, the undermining of democracy, the death squads, the support for dictators who play ball, military aggression against those who dare stand up for themselves, the escalation of conflict in key regions to maintain control over valuable resources. The power concentrated in the IMF, WTO that has starving countries in debt cycles. Thats the basis of Western civilisation. It is extremely deliberate at policy level with laws in place to help maintain the differences.

Its no coincidence that foreign aid is such big business and that the latest debate in microcredit is how to make it profitable for the West.

You could go back to the industrial revolution and see how cheap labour in the colonies and the easy availability of and transfer of raw materials was a major factor in the rapid advancement of social change.

Again, no coincidence that Britain was the best at it then, with cotton from India bought dirt cheap, processed in British mills and sold back to the Indians (and others) at prices reflective of British quality. And food much needed by the locals transported out of the country to British troops fighting elsewhere, never mind the famines created in the wake.

Much like Africa going from one civil war to another, like the Middle East, with puppet regimes firmly in place to ensure they did not develop any silly ideas of independence.

Equality in the West is just an extension of the old boys club. And that's only cause the locals cannot maintain the population growth at desired levels. Yet to see one other than the sahibs elected President though.

It is yet another Civilized Power, with its banner of the Prince of Peace in one hand and its loot-basket and its butcher-knife in the other.

— Mark Twain, To the Person Sitting in Darkness, 1901, describing the United States playing the European-style imperialist game in the Philippines.

 

[WildBlueYonder]

If Christianity is a religion of peace, then
why does it kill blacks in Congo?
why does it kill indians in America?
why does it kill aztecs, mayans in mexico, south america?
why does it kill muslims in Algeria?
why does it rape altar boys in Churches?
why does it kill muslim civilians in Iraq?
why does it burn mentally ill people alive, thinking they are possessed?
why does it kill muslims on the way to Jerusalem, (crusaders)
why does it drop 2 ATOMIC bombs on 100 thousands civilians in Japan?
why does it kill jews and muslims in Spain?
and ...so on

I like all your examples, it tells me that Christians learned muslim war tactics rather well, are you saying that islam is pure in those countries mentioned?
who sold Africans to the Europeans, was it not arab slave-traders?
would muslims not have done the same against the American Indian, that it did against the Hindu Indian?
who is killing Algerians right now?
who raped Christian boys in muslim lands?
who stole Christian boys, to turn into Janissaries?
who’s bombing mosques & marketplaces in Iraq right now?
who crucifies, kills or burns people for not converting to islam by force in Darfur Sudan?
who taught the Crusaders the ways of jihad?
Who would use atomic bombs right now, maybe Iran, Pakistan, al-queada?
just what were muslims doing in Spain in the first place, taking a vacation? just happened to overthrow the Visagothic kingdom by mistake, you know, minding their own business & the kingdom fell into their laps,

it is my contention that the Reconquest of Spain by its people against these muslim interlopers, taught the Spanish many muslim ideas:
1) several stratagems of war, that helped them conquer the New World & hold the old at bay
2) the love of plunder, loot & war
3) the use of religious tolerance & intolerance, as a way to gain support from various factions as time & circumstances warrant
4) religious extremism & ruthlessness
5) the union of church & State (caliphate)
6) lying & diplomacy as war

wildblueyonder, you always attack muslims, without looking your own past
must be awful and sad to be around you

Thanks for caring about my social & mental health
Not to worry, I have plenty of people that care about me,
As for me being awful & sad
Thanks to people like you, I have a career in cyberspace
I’ll be correcting muslim errors for a long time to come, such as:

Arab pederasty, I had heard that in muslim countries older men had sex with young boys, because they are not “men”(yet) nor “women”, so it was ok

The practice of pederasty in the Muslim world seems to have begun, according to surviving records, sometime during the 800s and ended, at least as an open practice, in the mid-19th century. Throughout this era, pederastic relationships, poetry, art and spirituality were found throughout Muslim cultures from Moorish Spain to Northern India. The forms of this pederasty ranged from the chaste and spiritual adoration of youths at one extreme, to the violent and forcible use of unwilling boys at other. While sodomy was considered a major sin, other aspects of same-sex relations were not, though they were problematized to various degrees at various times and places.
The seeming co-relation of pederasty with the rise of Islam has been commented on by modern historians, who see a link between the love of boys and the protective attitude of Islam towards women, leading to their removal from public life, together with the tendency of Sharia law to accommodate within the domain of "private behavior" inevitable activities, as long as they do not interfere with public order.[1] The topos of "ishq" – passion – which could have as object a beautiful beardless boy as easily as a woman, is prominent in literature.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_the_Islamic_world

Even Yasser Arafat did this

Arafat was Gay!

A newly released book by former Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry MacCalauf details a 1999 dinner at the White House with Arafat and former President Clinton. During the entire dinner, Arafat was seated next to him and kept rubbing his hand on his leg and even attempted to fondle his crotch.

HOMO HUAKBAR!

Now it has been revealed that Yassir Arafat was a Queer! Now that the truth is out of the closet, we'll get the details on his untimely demise from Aids as well. Yassir had a special fondness for the young gay prostitutes that Hamas pimps for in Gaza and sodomized one that was HIV Positive.

This is great news for Muslim Queers and now the wonderful truth can be revealed to the world:

* Aeisha was Gay!
* The Prophet Mohammed (SWT) was Gay!!
* Allah is Gay Too!!!

MUSLIMS ARE ALL Gay!!!

Being Gay is Hojat al-Islam wa al-Moslemeen!

Join the http://queerjihad.blogspot.com/ Today
From: http://queerjihad.blogspot.com/

The sizeable presence of Gay Muslims is kept well hidden from the world but is nonetheless quite common as witnessed by the "Girly Boys" of Central Asia.

'Culturally, Afghanistan seems to share some of the traits of the ancient Greeks. According to one Afghan soldier, "Women are for babies, and men are for pleasure." This place American, British and Australian special operators in a unique and precarious predicament in how to deal with southern Afghanistan's flagrantly homosexual community, which appeared to be quite extensive, especially in the isolated mountainous regions of Afghanistan.
From: http://queerjihad.blogspot.com/

Unknown if this rumor is true, but it goes along with the previous, I heard it from 2 USAF personnel, stationed in 2 diff bases in the muslim world; Libya (Wheelus AFB, now closed) & Turkey (I think he said “Incirlik AB”). That during Ramadan, muslim men have sex with each other, wear droopy pants to catch their poop, so as to catch the “baby”, thinking that they will give birth to the “madhi” (muslim-version of messiah), since according to secret muslim tradition, the madhi will be born of man