Can world survive Islam.

Hope and love do not replace hopelessness and hate without work. We humans have to work at suppressing the unsavory sides of our natures.

As humility is to you?

Setanta, first of all for you to acuse anyone here to be hateful, is quite remarkable. Perhaps if you would read your own post a loud, you wouldn't write such a silly and hypocritical statements.



My dedication to own opinion is my right, and I'm not going to change it, or modify it for sake of avoiding of your dedication to argue.

So far, your reather nugatory attempts of name calling, among nonsensical display of arogants, did not deliver compelling evidence proving your point.
If your desision is not to discuss the topic with me anymore, you are not going to be miss.

An enjoyable read, Set except for the start and finish . The word bigot is thrown around so much on this forum as to have lost any meaning .

Meaning or not, it sure sounds good, eh!? Especially if your goal is tout yourself as being superior in all moral and intellectual ways, ya know?

When Islam takes over a country it eliminates the opposition . It has the death penalty for any Muslims who convert to ANY other religion . Its heavy 'evangelism' means it only needs a foothold to grow .

Its greatest resistance is met in wealthy countries where all religions are going backwards . It (being its leaders) understands that, and has declared the English speaking world its number one enemy . The cultural and ideological power of English speaking countries has the world headed for a good deal of common cultural ground . The failure to share the oil wealth inside Muslim countries has kept people poor and non-western . So far their greatest mistake is in re-energising old animosities .

In Australia, apart from a lone wolf, we have not had a terrorist attack and this is solely due to the Muslims aiding us out of altruism . It might also be they understand they are weak here and need time to grow .

I've already proved the point that Islam has caused not even a significant fraction of the misery and death caused by christians, you just refuse to admit it. Calling you a bigot when you hate Muslims just because they're Muslims is not name-calling, it's merely descriptive. It does not surprise me at all that you're not going to change your opinion. You came here to post your screed and rant against Muslims, not to debate honestly. There are absolutely no surprises in what you have written.

What should i be humble about? I don't do that phony baloney christian humility bullshit. It's possible that you're someone who got banned and has come back with a sock puppet account. But whether or not you are, you don't know me, and if you have decided to make me the target of your phony righteous indignation, don't expect to get much traction with it. It's obvious that you only showed up in this thread to criticize me. If you were criticizing the content of my comments about ISIS, or Islamistx or history, it would be worth the discussion. But when all you've got is invidious, waspish sniping . . . well, i've already lost interest. Have a nice life, don't bother to write.

EDIT: Before you start making snide remarks about paranoia, i just checked your profile page. You have five posts, and the first three posts are consecutive attempts to criticize me with absolutely no reference to the topic of the thread nor to the arguments anyone is making. I'd say you just came here to stir the turd. Have fun, enjoy your own stink.

Does not prove anything now does it, because only apples to apples comparisons count. You need to be talking about misery produced per capita, and since those who follow the Bibles vastly outnumber those who follow the Koran they can be expected to cause more misery.

You havent proven a thing. Where was the comparison ?

I dont know if he does or not, I dont have your super powers, but if anyone is going to hate Muslims, now's the time .

One thing I want to make clear, I do not hate ALL Muslims, but I absolutely hate those committing barbaric acts against our civilization.
That being said, while I opose your opinion about me hating Muslims for being Muslims, I am admittedly lacking any respect for Islamic religion. Nevertheless I have some degree of compassion to rest of Muslims who are peaceful, and are being committed to those awful beliefs by birth.

As to your analysis of misery and death caused by Muslims versus Christians, -- lots of chaos and lack of relevance, would be the best way to describe it: when you use statistics as a reference point, than percentage of Muslims Vs Christians should be mentioned as well. Right now there is little over 23% Muslims versus population of other religion's. Christans are 33.6%

Next, you are bringing Hitler on the picture, claiming he was christian. That's where, for obvious reasons, you are confusing me. Are you suggesting he was on religious mission, so now you want to categorized all IIWW casualties as Christian caused?

Going back to the bottom line. If there is percentage all Muslims estimated between 15 to 25 % that are extremists, sworn to kill all of us (like they say: kill all jews and Americans, along with infidels), than you did not make me or anyone else feel safer, just by mentioning how many people were killed in Srebrenica or in IIWW.

I hope you did not expect enybody's reaction to be: "Oo, ok. Now I feel better. Yeah, let's not worry about Muslims anymore. We need to lookout for those christians... look how many people they killed... " I'm only debating your opinion.

Getting upset again would be counterproductive. Instead I'd like to see you bringing some valid arguments.

Here is something for you to read, Set. You might find it very informative.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/10/cultural-psychology-how-islam-managed-to-stay-medieval-for-1400-years

I hate those committing barbaric acts regardless of any religious affiliation, racial description, gender, what have you.

I did not suggest that Hitler was on a religious mission, although there is good reason to think that, at least in 1920s, he thought he was. He certainly wanted to portray himself that way. But this is all nonsense. I'm not comparing one religion to another, i'm just pointing out that your original claim that Islam is the most destructive and dangerous religion in history is bullshit--they're not even close to christianity. Whether or not there was a religious motive, misery and deaths inflicted by christisans outweighs the misery and death inflicted by anyone else by orders of magnitude.

I'm not trying to make you or anyone else feel safer. It is not my opinion that christians have been murderous and continue to be, those are facts--whether you like them or not, and whether their motives are religious or not.

I'm "bringing" valid observations, although not arguments, because i don't give a rat's ass if you are hateful and deluded. You seem to have this childish view that anyone who does not agree with you must be trying to whitewash violence by Muslims. Frankly, i'm getting really sick of the stupid straw man fallacies you constantly throw up at me as though i've said those things, when i've said no such things.

By the way, one usually abbreviates World War Two as WWII. You don't do yourself any favors when your presentation is so consistently poor.

Jihad Watch ? ! ? ! ?

Seriously, you expect me to waste my time with your favorite, ultra-rightwing hate blog? The Southern Poverty Law Center, respected world wide for their efforts to track hate groups, has referred to the David Horowitz Freedom Center, which sponsors Jihad Watch, as a far right group.

I'll pass--but i'm not surprised to discover that you think it's a reliable source. If you go out looking for condemnations of any group, you'll find them online, never doubt that. Also, David Horowitz earns over $300,000 a year from this non-profit organization. Nice work, if you can get it.

The Anti-Defamation League, an internationally recognized organization that fights prejudice and bigotry, writes that Horowitz sponsors a college campus project that promotes anti-Muslim views and arranges events with anti-Muslim activists. The ADL is a Jewish organization, and cannot reasonably be characterized as having a pro-Muslim bias.

If there was no religious motive then it wasnt Christians but you Atheists .

Well then, give us a reference that loves terrorism and we will look at that .

Yes, they need to be fought.

This is not really a question of nature. Islamism, like fascism or communism, is an ideology. It is relatively recent historically (end 19th early 20th century) and MODERN in many ways. Let's not mistake these guys for a thing from the past. They are like a rapidly mutating, highly infectious new mental virus attacking (primarily) the Islamic faith and the muslim world. Or if you prefer they are like a fire burning their hearts and cities.

Fires, or viruses, need to be fought. Don't get me started on ISIS and Boko Haram and co. But the world WILL survive them. They will flow and then they will ebb.

If we (the west) don't do anything, the fire will stop when the Muslim world is in ruins, or when it summons the energy to fight back... a bit of both probably depending on the country concerned.

The problem if the West intervenes too soon and systematically, is that they will be seen as the good guys and the West as the bad police guys. The Muslim world needs to evolve and thus it needs to develop cultural antibodies to radical islamism. To get there, it needs to suffer the disease, to see what atrocities it leads to, to feel it in their flesh. They need to come to a point of fear and disgust for the Islamists which can only result from living through it. This may seem heartless to some but people only learn from their own mistakes.

Not sure how to strike that balance between fighting the disease and allowing to go its course for antibodies to develop.

That's a silly claim on at least two levels. First, the truth of a claim doesn't depend on the person evaluating it. If it's true that Islam is the most destructive force in human history, why shouldn't Muslims agree with it? If it's not true, why should non-Muslims agree with it? Second, the claim is false. As Setanta and others pointed out, Christianity did far worse things as Isis is doing today back in the Middle Ages. And since your original claim is that Islam is the most barbaric IN HUMAN HISTORY, bringing up the Middle Ages if a fair objection. Your baiting and switching on the point does not reflect well on your capacity to learn from your mistakes.

No, you read some history. As any reputable Hitler biography will tell you --- the one I know is Alan Bullock's --- Hitler was baptised, raised, and confirmed in the Catholic Church. He never left it, it never excommunicated him. How was Hitler not a Catholic?