Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

@coldjoint,

Quote:

I just noticed your signature. You are not worth my time .Bye.

That is so lame. It's been used by a number of frightened Americans. If you've got evidence for your position you have nothing to fear. You know you have no evidence for your position and you are scared blind.

0 Replies

@camlok,

Quote:

Thank you for clearing that up, Vikorr. It is rarely spoken of. You forgot to mention the entire Central and South America.

I didn't forget to mention them exactly, as they haven't been invaded exactly, though you could make an argument for both Mexico, and Panama. I included Latin American countries them under the umbrella of 'running coups'.

Quote:

The point is, the Muslim thing is all just another USA propagandist sham. All based on 911 lies.

It's hard to argue with all the bombings, knifings, car attacks etc. It's hard to argue with the perps calling out allahu akbar as they do such. Or with police forces around the world coming up with the same/similar literature in the perps homes. Or with the propoganda that ISIS put out in magazines like Dabiq. Or english translations of the Quran and Haddiths, by muslim organisations. Or the life of Mohammed, as written by Muslims. Or the earliest history of the first and few generations. Viewed together, there is coherency.

Regarding motivation. With most other invasions, it was easy to see financial gain in it for the US (excepting perhaps the Clinton era invasions of places like Somalia), I can't see a similar one for the 'war on terror'.

Quote:

If the US had not spent its entire existence stealing the wealth and killing the people of most of the nations of the world, the Earth could be a peaceful place.

Well, without disputing the first part, which is a perspective many hold, with a number of valid arguments in its favour....there would still be war - it's in human nature. It's existed throughout history, and will continue to be do so.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Trump has really given Muslims a bad reputation which are all lies.

This thread has been going for a lot longer than Trump has been president.

Personally, I have been a proponent of up front, honest debate by politicians...which would be an open discussion of the problems, coupled together with an open discussion of the virtues.

As I said years ago, without open discussion of both sides of the coin, more and more people will get disillusioned with the lies by ommission, and the government would slowly start losing control of the message. When people can see there is an issue, and it's ongoing, and they perceive it to be severe - they lose faith when the government explanation for the issue doesn't make sense. They lose faith when they see their government putting what they perceive to be only bandaids on the problem, without seeing any improvement....leaving them open to misinformation, populist bigotry, and radicalisation towards 'patriot' type organisations, or insulationist ideology - which ranges from mild to severe.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

I didn't forget to mention them exactly, as they haven't been invaded exactly, though you could make an argument for both Mexico, and Panama. I included Latin American countries them under the umbrella of 'running coups'.

In the early days, it was all the Marines that did the US's dirty work. This has been ably described by Smedley Butler. Then the US installed, as it always does, its vicious right wing dictatorships. So much for advancing freedom. That is a total myth but a popular one nevertheless.

Quote:

It's hard to argue with all the bombings, knifings, car attacks etc. It's hard to argue with the perps calling out allahu akbar as they do such. Or with police forces around the world coming up with the same/similar literature in the perps homes.

That all comes to you from propaganda central. It began with the lies of 911 and subsequent US illegal invasions based on these vicious US lies made many people angry around the world.

When the US can fool its gullible citizenry with the 911 charade it's hardly surprising that it can continue this charade with a highly willing media.

Why does the US think its anger, all based on US lies is justified but the people who have suffered these actual illegal invasions of sovereign nations are supposed to be totally accepting of the US's vicious behaviors?

Quote:

Well, without disputing the first part, which is a perspective many hold, with a number of valid arguments in its favour....there would still be war - it's in human nature. It's existed throughout history, and will continue to be do so.

You are ignoring the salient fact that all these illegal invasions of sovereign nations have been US illegal invasions and terrorist acts. They started right after WWII and continue to this day.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

This thread has been going for a lot longer than Trump has been president.

That's true, but Trump is also a bigot against Muslims, and he needs to be challenged on his lies. What he says has much impact on the American people and across the world. Trump is a small minded, ignoramus-bigot who needs to be challenged. Our silence can only mean we support his bigotry. Trump even tries to stifle the media by calling it "fake news." Have you ever seen Trump provide evidence that the media is fake news? I have not.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

That we can agree on

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

That's true, but Trump is also a bigot against Muslims, and he needs to be challenged on his lies. ... Our silence can only mean we support his bigotry.

Your [plural] silence means that you [plural] have long supported much more egregious things like all the US war crimes, illegal invasions and terrorism.

These things have had great impact on multiple nations. How would you [plural] like it if someone had planned and carried out a genocide that murdered half a million US kids and millions of US adult citizens?

0 Replies

@camlok,

Quote:

That all comes to you from propaganda central.

Uh, no it does not.

There's actually several points that you made that I agree with - but this one isn't possible. The scale of such a conspiracy, across so many countries, so many corporations, so many organisations, with so much dedicated technical knowledge & time required, involving so many people, with so many 'martyrs', killing so many people for the purpose of manipulation, for no clear purpose, is impossible.

Most large scale 'conspiracies' require human nature to collude with them. Usually the motivation of greed is the simplest unifying motivator. Outside of that, it requires a unified ideology - and for a conspiracy ideology - if there isn't a clear purpose, there can't be a unified ideology.

The conspiracy you argue for, goes against human self interest. And as mentioned, all wide scale 'conspiracies' require human self interest to be on their side.

Governments around the world are now, pouring money into counter terrorism, while trying to project a dishonest message regarding Islamist Terrorism (a denial message of any basis in the foundation of Islam)...to what ends?

Not to mention, if you were into a conspiracy theory, that the two behaviours contradict each other (in terms of where such is offering its support).

5 Replies

@vikorr,

The A2K powers that be deem that this cannot be discussed except in cloistered threads where Americans are protected from the truth.

Surely you have noticed that no one discusses US "evidence" EVER. That is because there is no, as in nothing, zilch, nada, zero, actual court room quality evidence for the US government story.

Since this thread is about Muslims, it is well within the rules to state that elements of the US government concocted a false narrative on September 11, 2001 to falsely accuse Muslims.

There are many absolutely impossible things that make the US government story a totally impossible event. That is, things occurred that it was not remotely possible for alleged hijackers to have done. The science is clear - Muslims could not have done the things described in the link below.

You can view them here:

https://able2know.org/topic/177028-3#post-6699973

Notice that Setanta tried to advance the same false ideas and then when he was faced with the science, the facts, he took a powder.

What is so ironic is that the US fable is the actual conspiracy theory [in its pejorative meaning], again, one that has not a shred of court room quality evidence to support it.

1 Reply

@camlok,

Quote:

What is so ironic is that the US fable is the actual conspiracy theory [in its pejorative meaning], again, one that has not a shred of court room quality evidence to support it.

And there are unifying ideologies, and human characterists that allows such:
- the concept of patriotism
- the desire to believe we are good
- the discomfort we feel with people different from us

Not only do the media play on these, but the community self reinforces such. And this sort of behaviour isn't the sole domain of the US. The US just happens to be the arguably most powerful nation on earth at the moment, meaning such has more impact around the world.

Quote:

Since this thread is about Muslims, it is well within the rules to state that elements of the US government concocted a false narrative on September 11, 2001 to falsely accuse Muslims.

I never said it wasn't - though I personally think it's an incredibly doubtful theory myself. This though, is just one event, in just one country, and according to you, allegedly involving just one organisation. What I commented on, was a conspiracy theory that you apparently believe in, that makes a US 9-11 conspiracy theory seem like a child's toy compared to a Boeing Dreamliner.

Quote:

You can view them here:

I read them. You talk about evidence, and then make claims without even trying to link 'evidence'? You talk about nothing making it to court for those who think 9-11 was an Islamist Terrorist attack - can you show your claims making it to court?

People can believe what they like, so long as it isn't violent ideology - even if (as a general rule) I personally think they should look at both sides of any given story. But ultimately - everyone should hold themselves and their ideas to the same standard that they hold others.

3 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

camlok: Since this thread is about Muslims, it is well within the rules to state that elements of the US government concocted a false narrative on September 11, 2001 to falsely accuse Muslims.

Quote:

vikorr: I never said it wasn't - though I personally think it's an incredibly doubtful theory myself. This though, is just one event, in just one country, and according to you, allegedly involving just one organisation. What I commented on, was a conspiracy theory that you apparently believe in, that makes a US 9-11 conspiracy theory seem like a child's toy compared to a Boeing Dreamliner.

I'm not sure what it is you are trying to say, vikorr. I suspect that you are feeling terrible mentally confusion and that is totally understandable. Just follow the science and the truth/facts. In that is everyone's salvation.

The science and the facts/truth totally sink the US government narrative. From these truths only good can come. It is always a good thing when evil is expunged.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

I read them. You talk about evidence, and then make claims without even trying to link 'evidence'? You talk about nothing making it to court for those who think 9-11 was an Islamist Terrorist attack - can you show your claims making it to court?

The evidence/science links itself. That's the neat thing about evidence and science. It exonerates the innocent and it captures the guilty.

You know that there is an unbelievable reluctance among Americans to hold their leaders to account. But forget that and focus on the science/evidence. Remember, there is NONE for the US government story.

Quote:

People can believe what they like, so long as it isn't violent ideology -

The totally false US government narrative has led to a great deal of extremely violent ideology and ACTION that has seen the USA/UK slaughter millions of innocents. That is Nazi level evil on a much grander scale.

Quote:

even if (as a general rule) I personally think they should look at both sides of any given story. But ultimately - everyone should hold themselves and their ideas to the same standard that they hold others.

Anyone who is willing to look at the science and the evidence, anyone who isn't blind, knows full well that there were never any hijackers. There is no evidence for hijackers and there is voluminous evidence that shows it is totally impossible for there to have been any.

This is a Gulf of Tonkin on a grand scale.

2 Replies

@camlok,

The operations of governments is not science.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

What the hell does that nonsense mean, CI?

1 Reply

@camlok,

Is English your second language?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

That is something that you should not be asking of anyone. You can't even explain your own gibberish.

1 Reply

@camlok,

It doesn't require any explanation because they are self-explanatory. Except for people who have problems with the English language.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

It was not even grammatical.

0 Replies

@camlok,

Quote:

I suspect that you are feeling terrible mentally confusion

No. My thoughts are quite clear on this. What I said is easy enough to understand - why then do you have trouble understanding it? My experience is that people who struggle to comprehend something that goes against their beliefs but is otherwise easy to understand - are usually ideologically driven.

Quote:

The evidence/science links itself

There are people arguing both sides of the coin here. None of it is truly science. It's best guess. There are no precedents for this sort of thing, for any expert to study. Experts can only project hypotheticals from other, lesser events, that did not have the same ingredients as this one.

As an example:
https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3544/4278927/

Quote:

NIST report and press conference: Fire did indeed inflict enough column damage to destroy the building through a previously undocumented collapse sequence of thermal expansion. "Anyone who has run a tight jar lid under water to help loosen it knows that the metal expands when it gets hot," Sunder said. "Heat also causes steel to lose strength and stiffness. Thermal expansion occurs at temperatures much lower than those required to reduce steel strength and stiffness." The report found that as WTC 7's steel beams expanded in the heat, numerous structural connections throughout the building failed. That weakened the structure even before the collapse of any vertical columns.

This is believable, because anyone who knows anything about heat and metal, acknowledges the science behind expansion of metal when heated. It is quite easy to see how a building built around outer steel girders bonded to concrete, could have issues if the metal is becomes superheated.

Further, anyone who has ever had anything to do with concrete, knows it suffers under impact. It is quite easy to see how a building built around outer steel girders bonded to concrete, could have issues under the incredible impact of a commercial airliner hitting it.

Being a building made of outer steel girders - any collapse of the building is likely to be much more controlled than a building that doesn't have such a structure (just about every other highrise).

The weight of such a high building also creates issues. Each time a floor collapses, it adds weight and impact to the floor below. This is fairly common sense.

It seems to me there are common sense reasons for the type of collapse. But in any event, as I said previously, there is no actual precedents or comparisons on which anyone, let alone an expert can make factual claims. At best, it is a guess, rather than fact.

Quote:

The totally false US government narrative has led to a great deal of extremely violent ideology

I was critical of the upcoming US invasion of Iraq, before the war started, knowing it was going to start even when the propaganda said they were giving Saddam every opportunity...even when even a high percentage in Australia were conned into believing it necessary. I still haven’t seen what I think to be the ‘true’ reason for that invasion. I’ve seen a number of credible theories, but none that I actually think are the truth. This may, or may not tell you something.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

Quote:

I read them. You talk about evidence, and then make claims without even trying to link 'evidence'?

If you read them, how can you possibly believe that there were hijackers as the US government fable describes?

There were 7 total impossibilities listed there. When things are impossible within a given narrative that makes the narrative false.

I'll add one more. The seismic record does not support the US government narrative. The seismic record shows huge subterranean explosions. One more thing that hijackers could not have done.

1 Reply

Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know