Mohamed2001
HATE NEWSPAPERS
Expose it or I will say you're an East German every single time I reply to you.
(tis just a joke)
It's again that time of the year ... or Muslim bashing!
- Thread starter Crni Vuk
- Start date
Expose it or I will say you're an East German every single time I reply to you.
(tis just a joke)
Despite our differences, I think we can all agree that in order to reconcile muslim values with western ones and finally put an end to all of this contention, we need to empower those in the muslim world who are willing to work with us.
We need to encourage truly Radical Islam
We also need to promote the lesser known subsects of radical Islam. Notably, Gnarly Islam, Bodacious Islam, Totally Sweet Islam and Xtreme-to-the-Max Islam.
The first step in doing this is to airdrop roughly 280 tonnes of skateboards, bmx bikes, gaming consoles and copies of every entry in the Tony Hawk's Pro-Skater franchise into the region. We begin with the most destabilized hotspots and move outward.
The second step in this operation would involve broadcasting a mash-up of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Viva La Bam and Thrashin' on a constant loop over every radio frequency and television channel we can get our hands on. It is imperative that this be maintained for at least 13 weeks leading up to the airdrop campaign and 39 weeks following it.
This would allow the proponents of the aforementioned sects, small in number as they are, to come out of the shadows and help their brothers and sisters from Lahore to Lebanon see the benefits to the truly Radical way of life. The rubble and debris in the more war-torn zones lend themselves well to sick grinds. We will need to help facilitate the construction of hella verts and ramps but I believe that to be a trifling concern.
I name this project Operation: 180° after the trick and the bold new direction this will bring to the Islamic world.
Allahu hella tight yo!
...
(Honestly, fuck my phone. It did not make posting this easy. Seriously, fuck my fucking phone. Thank christ its a slow day at work)
We need to encourage truly Radical Islam
We also need to promote the lesser known subsects of radical Islam. Notably, Gnarly Islam, Bodacious Islam, Totally Sweet Islam and Xtreme-to-the-Max Islam.
The first step in doing this is to airdrop roughly 280 tonnes of skateboards, bmx bikes, gaming consoles and copies of every entry in the Tony Hawk's Pro-Skater franchise into the region. We begin with the most destabilized hotspots and move outward.
The second step in this operation would involve broadcasting a mash-up of Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure, Viva La Bam and Thrashin' on a constant loop over every radio frequency and television channel we can get our hands on. It is imperative that this be maintained for at least 13 weeks leading up to the airdrop campaign and 39 weeks following it.
This would allow the proponents of the aforementioned sects, small in number as they are, to come out of the shadows and help their brothers and sisters from Lahore to Lebanon see the benefits to the truly Radical way of life. The rubble and debris in the more war-torn zones lend themselves well to sick grinds. We will need to help facilitate the construction of hella verts and ramps but I believe that to be a trifling concern.
I name this project Operation: 180° after the trick and the bold new direction this will bring to the Islamic world.
Allahu hella tight yo!
...
(Honestly, fuck my phone. It did not make posting this easy. Seriously, fuck my fucking phone. Thank christ its a slow day at work)
Last edited:
valcik
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Christians beat them to the punch, this is Hungarian priest Zoltan Lendvai pulling wild tricks:
American decadence beats everyone again.
When we start seeing videos like this being made by Imams, we know we've reached headway with Islam.
mithrap
Ring a ding-ding, baby
Jokes aside, there's some truth in that. Islam never, never had to face criticism from afar and open visibility with an online, connected world, and this is a real challenge that will definitely change the way they show their faith to the world. And Isis, despite being a "Frankenstein caliphate" as I like to call it, understood how efficient an online presence can be, when it comes to indoctrinate people. I'm expecting to see other branches of Islam also jumping in, trying to do the exact opposite, show a nice, cool and peaceful thingy, a bit like Mr.Rogers with breakdancing, if you excuse the analogy.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
As people have brought up, Christianity had its reformation, Islam has not. Christianity has the New testament, Islam does not.
Farkhunda was killed because an Imam was selling indulgences and she disagreed with him. In the 21st century, for this to happen is INSANE. If you are willing to criticize Westboro Baptists, then people need to stand up and say the Imams actions are un-acceptable.
Issues like indulgences where you can buy shit from the church to get into heaven were eliminated.
People no longer believed that the church was the only way into heaven. Most of Christianity supports the promise and makes PUBLIC, that entry to heaven is merely to believe and have a relationship with Jesus/God.
Slaying infidels does not purify ones soul.
While in Islam, you do have people who interpet itin a sane manner, one cannot CHANGE the words, for they are holy. This is one issue which allows the radicals a way out, to spread their hate. They say, 'Well any chucklehead can interpret the prophets words but we adhere to his ACTUAL words. Therefore, we are adhering to Islam in its most un-polluted form.
Farkhunda was killed because an Imam was selling indulgences and she disagreed with him. In the 21st century, for this to happen is INSANE. If you are willing to criticize Westboro Baptists, then people need to stand up and say the Imams actions are un-acceptable.
Issues like indulgences where you can buy shit from the church to get into heaven were eliminated.
People no longer believed that the church was the only way into heaven. Most of Christianity supports the promise and makes PUBLIC, that entry to heaven is merely to believe and have a relationship with Jesus/God.
Slaying infidels does not purify ones soul.
While in Islam, you do have people who interpet itin a sane manner, one cannot CHANGE the words, for they are holy. This is one issue which allows the radicals a way out, to spread their hate. They say, 'Well any chucklehead can interpret the prophets words but we adhere to his ACTUAL words. Therefore, we are adhering to Islam in its most un-polluted form.
mikek17
First time out of the vault
First of all when you say that Christianity "had its reformation" are you referring to the Protestant Reformation? If you are that did not reform the Catholic faith, it just created a new sect of Protestants. What "reforms" the Catholic church are the Ecumenical Councils, which have each added new ideas to the Faith. Now none of these councils (except, arguably, the second Vatican synod) have EVER contradicted the Bible (specifically the New Testament, which is the foundation for the Catholic faith) and the Bible still does not say go kill people to get your virgins. But Islam on the other hand, even if the Sunni, Shi'a or otherwise sects chose to reform their faith, it does not change the text in the qur'an. So really at the end of the day the radicals just say it was a corruption of their faith and honestly I think if an Islamic reformation DID happen, there would be MORE radicals, I mean look at Vatican 2, when that happened more Catholics left their faith than ever before, I think a similar effect would happen with the muzzies
Izak
I Shot The ALBATROSS
I believe he's referring to the Enlightenment, during which the political importance of the church eroded. Correct me if I'm wrong Darkcorp.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
You are absolutely correct Izak. In hindsight, I didn't go into detail enough of what I mean when talking about the reformation.
The reformation, enlightenment, etc, all these things proved that religion is not the final arbiter in the actions of man. No longer was religion all present, in both the daily lives of everyone from the lowest to highest but also in the laws of different nations.
To elaborate:
The reformation showed that religion could be wrong, no matter how entrenched or powerful it seemed to be. The catholic church was no longer the 'king', of religion.
The protestant reformation also paved the way for other deviations of doctrine that was once dominated by Catholicism.
What I am trying to point out is that it diluted a once monolithic religion, therefore weakening its ability to impose its will on others, AKA, start shit like the crusades for example.
As others pointed out, the Koran was written in a time of religious war and upheaval. To this day, the text remains unchanged. What does that say about the religion itself? A refusal to change? A refusal to adapt? Insofar as what is officially endorsed by the book, AKA the spokesperson of a religion.
The reformation, enlightenment, etc, all these things proved that religion is not the final arbiter in the actions of man. No longer was religion all present, in both the daily lives of everyone from the lowest to highest but also in the laws of different nations.
To elaborate:
The reformation showed that religion could be wrong, no matter how entrenched or powerful it seemed to be. The catholic church was no longer the 'king', of religion.
The protestant reformation also paved the way for other deviations of doctrine that was once dominated by Catholicism.
What I am trying to point out is that it diluted a once monolithic religion, therefore weakening its ability to impose its will on others, AKA, start shit like the crusades for example.
As others pointed out, the Koran was written in a time of religious war and upheaval. To this day, the text remains unchanged. What does that say about the religion itself? A refusal to change? A refusal to adapt? Insofar as what is officially endorsed by the book, AKA the spokesperson of a religion.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say that. We just mostly don't give enough of a shit that we turn to religion as solution. Religion opressed people for such a long time, that it turned upside down, and then it was bash-the-priest. See Communism, French revolution and many more. I would not call that a reformation. We just decided, that the bible is a really really really shitty rule book for a government. We still keep mostly christian traditions though, but that's simply beacause christianity as a really big thing for the last 900 years in Europe.
For the most part, we have simply historically replaced religion, typically with what we see as western ideals, rationality, logic, free spech and all that. Things that actually have more in common with the greek and roman philosophers and teachings then christianity! Faith, was never about logic, deducation or reasoning. We have simply grown up with modern civiliced ideals and take them as granted. But when you look at no clue 70% of the world, they are not. Poverity, no education, violence and autocratic governments are usually the norm. When you look at many muslims nations, the ones which are more radical, they have one thing in common.
illiteracy and bad educational systems.
Give those young guys a steady income, a wife and a house, and most of them might not even read the first pages of the Quaran.
I have no doubt that given enough issues, economical preasure and bad education, you could turn any chistian nation, be it with the new or old testament in to a nightmare for anyone who's NOT a part of the specific christian faith they use.
“These people are not a true representation of Islam and so by mocking them, it is a way to show that we are against them,” said Nabil Assaf
It's not that there are no voices of criticism, logic and even satire in the arabian world AND within Muslims. We should simply not forget that we're talking about many dictatorships here. And as we all know, it happens often enough that the own population suffers from this as well. Even under Muslims you find free thinkers, artists, non-conformists and all sorts of people. But they are often silenced, or remain silent, out of fear.
There is also some heavy criticism, come from Muslims and former Muslims. It's just that you have to look out for those to find them, where as Jihadists and Terrorists always make the headlines, simply because they are there.
For example, Hamed Abel Samad. He was raised as Muslim, he was in Islamic schools. And he says, Islam is used today more or less like faschism. He faced a lot of death threats for his criticism, and he even required some protection for a time. But what makes it interesting, is that his father is an Imam. And he said, his family doesn't agree with him, but they still support him.
Last edited:
mikek17
First time out of the vault
You're right, there of course needs to be a better form of government than just "our laws are: follow the Ten Commandments" that's why we have autocrats.
The Crusades were simply regaining the territory that had been lost to the Muslims, who went to war to capture it, and oppressed the people living there if they weren't Muslim.
mithrap
Ring a ding-ding, baby
I was about to point that out, about the crusades. Say what you want about the barbarism of the crusaders (Which is undeniable, of course : the first massacre of Jerusalem, or the sack of the jewish on the way, and many other things which are simply horrible and, of course, cannot be forgiven in the name of any religion), the crusades, by themselves, were kind of legitimate, at least according to history's standards.
Christianity had lost 2/3 of its territory, due to the islamic conquests. Its pilgrims couldn't make their way to the holy land anymore, relics were at risks and 2/3 of its people lived under occupation. Wether this occupation was brutal or not, it depended and changed from century to century. Mehmet II may have been quite moderate towards its occupied populations, same for Salladin, but these two were exceptions, not the rule.
Every single one of these elements were a VERY valid Casus Belli, and even today's nations wouldn't think twice before launching a military action. It's actually weird that the crusades took four centuries of numerous casus belli before finally launching.
Also, the reopening of the pilgrimage roads to the holy land + the alliance with the Roman Empire (or the Byzantine, if you prefer) + the absence of the knights who were brutalizing people and sacking trade roads... All of that actually provoked a formidable exchange of knowledge, which led to Europe's first true era of prosperity, arts, economics and scientific advancements, also called the first Renaissance.
On the other hand, they also provoked the sack of Constantinople, which led it to be taken by the Ottomans, which... Well, slowly put an end to the Roman Empire. Hell of a collateral damage if you ask me. On this account, the crusades fucked up, and really bad. But when it comes to Islam, well, a Casus Belli, by definition, can lead to a military action. Wether it's good or bad, I just know that it is to be expected.
olestra
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
That's it, I think I should convert to Islam out of solidarity. Someone call https://kiwifar.ms, they can help get me beheaded if i recant.
I guess that's why Christians couldn't hold the land to this day ... because Europeans who never even set foot outside of their villages ... had to reclaim land that was given up/lost ... by their ancestors? The land the Crussaders conquered have been called Crussader states for a reason. When you look at the history, it had much more to do with the Pope Innocent III and his political machinations. And the Crussaders themself? Most of them could care less about the holy land and it's relics. For them it was to gain power, land and wealth.
Let us best not get to much in to this Crussade shit because honestly, it was not one of the glorious moments of Religion. It doesn't matter if we talk about Islam or Christianity. They both made enough shit during that time to fill a topic on its own.
So let us best stay more in times that are relevant today. Because with all the terrorism, it is easy to ignore that we, do mistakes as well. And is those those mistakes, that lay the foundation of future terrorism.
US air strike in Syra kills up to 85 civilians mistaken for ISIS
A US air strike killed nearly 60 civilians, including children, in Syria on Tuesday after the coalition mistook them for Islamic State (Isil) fighters.
Some eight families were hit as they tried to flee fighting in their area, in one of the single deadliest strikes on civilians by the alliance since the start of its operations in the war-torn country.
Pictures of the aftermath of the dawn strikes on the Isil-controlled village of Tokhar near Manbij in northern Syria showed the bodies of children as young as three under piles of rubble.
The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the strikes appeared to have been carried out in error, with the civilians mistaken for Islamist militants.
Who knows how many civilians died with the last 2 or 3 years. How many died since 2001?
*Edit
And if we really want to make a change in the future, then we have to stop to fuel the enemies of our enemies with weapons. Several nations that we sell weapons and equipment, use it to start conflicts, bombing civilians and to opress people. Is it really such a surprise, that radical groups, who are fought by the Saudis eventually decide to let go a bomb in London, the capital of the nation that sells arms to their enemies?
UK has 'legal duty' to challenge Saudi Arabia over Yemen airstrikes
The UK has licensed the sale of £6.7bn of weaponry to Saudi Arabia, including an estimated £2.8bn since airstrikes against Yemen began in March 2015. The conflict is believed to have killed more than 2,800 civilians, including at least 700 children, many of them in airstrikes. A fragile ceasefire exists in the country.
Sands, a war crimes expert, claimed ministerial statements showed the British government had not pressed the Saudis to explain what actions they were taking to ensure their targeting was designed to prevent civilian casualties.
Last edited:
Yes, I also enjoy playing Crusader Kings 2.
mithrap
Ring a ding-ding, baby
Of course, I don't think that anybody "defends" the crusades. It is just important to put things in context ; in this one, it's not about if they are right or wrong, but if they were inevitable or not. And considering the loss of 2/3 of the christian lands, the expansionist nature of the Islamic armies back then, the pleas of the Byzantine Empire and the situation in Europe, a military action was inevitable, for the better (first Renaissance of Europe, kingdom of Jerusalem) and, of course, the worst (horrible war crimes, pillages on the jewish populations on the way, and of course, the "collateral damages" on Constantinople).
As for the situation of today, yes, I agree with you. The west has handled very poorly these conflicts, mainly by equipping crazy entities, wether they are governments or militias (hell, Saudi Arabia is basically a victorious Isis which settled down, and we act like it's our best pal). We have armed extremely violent and unstable militias, again and again with the foolish hope of them not turning on us and on the civilians at any time. Just two months ago, one of our politicians in France (François Fillon) suggested that our government should start to equip and support Hezbollah against Isis, pretexting that they would be "better auxiliaries". And the guy isn't the loner, crazy and goofy politician, he was a prime minister and is probably the most calm guy we have, so it says a lot when even him makes such a shameful display of ignorance and bad diplomacy (how many times have we done this mistake, and how many times did it give results ? It's litteraly what started this whole mess), so bad that it can only lead to more innocent lives getting caught in the conflict. Damn, history books will not be kind. And if the governments don't care about the mark they'll live in history, well maybe they aren't equipped to take part in a freaking war, in the country in which history has litteraly begun.
Shit like that takes the ability to project oneself in decades, if not centuries ahead, plan and act in consequence. There's a reason why the whole concept of "eternal glory" was put in the head of the powerfuls, back then. To freaking think about the long term consequences and not take short term, foolish actions, while not caring about the mid term results. Like equipping crazy "auxiliaries" in times of religious war and expect them to behave like choir boys. The U.S. elections leave few room for optimism, considering Trump's lack of knowledge/wisdom and Hillary's epic fail with her support of the arab spring. None of them are equipped to deal with such a complex conflict. It's like somebody else's kitchen with 30 cooks, nobody speaks the same language, one of them hates everyone and in the end, nobody is sure of what the final meal should be. Accidents are inevitable.
mikek17
First time out of the vault
Yup. Tired of US government giving GUNS to rebel groups who join terrorists, it happened with the Mujahideen in Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan, Al Quaeda, and now ISIS. Thankfully Donald J Trump said he would put a stop to it if he were president.
Which remains to be seen. Obama wanted to put an end to Guantanamo. He kinda made it a big thing in his political campaign. And now? We have more drone strikes under Obama than Bush. Eh ... politics, I mean the one with Trump, Obama, Hillary the really famous idiots, is really nasty. They lie, deceive and change their opinions when ever it suits them. I think there are many good politicans out there, some senators, governors, mayors and the like, who do a terrific job for their communities and some had to face some serious challanges in their career. But the really popular ones? Same shit. And don't get me even started on the democratic and republican party.
mithrap
Ring a ding-ding, baby
Thing is : if we don't equip the Peshmerga Kurds (who are Sunni, mostly communist muslims but also the only viable opponent to Isis, as they were to Saddam Hussein, and maybe to Erdogan, one day), Isis will probably win against our only viable ally (or if they survive, they would be mad at us. Who knows, maybe like "Mujahideen kind of mad") and then, things will get really, really ugly. The coalition must stop giving weapons to the rebel militias against Assad, sure, but that would mean officially accepting Bashar's position as president, backed by Russia and still officially at war with our ally, Israel (even though, I don't think he will reclaim the Golan heights but who knows, really), so there's that... Hard choice. I'm not sure that Donald Trump knows enough about the middle east to take such decision and conceptualize the consequences. Neither can Hillary Clinton, don't get me wrong.
Hillary Clinton dealt with this whole situation with an epic fail that will probably be talked about in future history books. But Donald Trump already confused Bashar Al Assad with Kadhafi (who are different in all ways possible. One is alive, the other is dead. One was in Lybia, the other in Syria. One was Sunni, the other is Alawite...) and already said that he doesn't know anything about the local groups. I want to be optimistic, really, but here, that's just scary.
If Trump does "bomb the shit out of Isis" like he said he would, he would also kill the Peshmerga, which would have horrible consequences (The Peshmerga are the only viable obstacle for Isis' infiltrations into Europe. If they disappear, you can expect a shitload of terrorist attacks in the following months ; oh, and also Isis recruiting far more people, which would cover their losses... and of course, Erdogan seizing the opportunity to crush the remaining Kurds). Carpet bombs would also kill the Yazidi (who are innocent, peaceful, and already the target of genocide. They only survived because of the Kurds) and a large portion of the oriental christians, which would be a freaking disaster. Consequence : the whole middle east will view Isis as a lesser evil, and will immediately form a new, even badder entity to avenge their loved ones.
Also, Bashar will never let Americans "take Isis' oil" like Trump promised, because it's... well, his oil, by right. Isis may have stolen it from him, but it's still his (boy's like the middle east Stannis), and Russia wouldn't really appreciate American firms exploiting his buddy's oil fields. So there's another problem here, with even heavier consequences.
Really, I don't think that either Trump nor Hillary are the ones to deal with this situation. It's a confusing mess, one that would require a Talleyrand kind of diplomat to understand the situation and find a solution.