Can world survive Islam.

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You tried to peddle this BS about defending Europe from invasion by Muslims before, but you never came up with a shred of evidence. Guess what? That's because there was no attempt by Muslims to invade Europe in that period.

What I came up with before was:

a) the fact that Muslims had recently destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, an act that greatly outraged popular opinion in Europe, and

b) the fact that Muslims had recently attacked, invaded, and conquered a significant portion of the Byzantine Empire, which led to the Emperor requesting aid from the west (the Crusades being the response to that call for aid).

Those two facts still remain.

1 Reply

@andy31,

andy31 wrote:

What do you think the chance is, that next time you are in the public place, you will die from hands of some crazy Christian screaming "Jesus is great", before he blow himself up?
Would you not say, zero to none?

Negligible for all practical purposes --- as is my chance of being killed by Islamic suicide bombers. It is motorists, not Jihadists, that I need to worry about in public places.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

If a church is organizing crimes then we go after it as a crime organization.

True as far as it goes. But I don't see how this is relevant to Andy's point. The billion-and-a-half Muslims of the world, nearly all of which Andy would bar from entering the United States, are not organized in a church, and aren't organizing crimes.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Quote:

True as far as it goes. But I don't see how this is relevant to Andy's point.

If we were to have a preacher telling his flock to kill abortionists, and the killing was done by the members and was organized in the church, then we would not let the churchyness of the building or the self professed religious nature of the organization stop us from viewing this group as a crime organization. Things dont change because the group claims to follow Islam rather than Christianity.

After that few decades of letting the Catholics off for sexually abusing kids we are not going to make that mistake again. If Islamic terrorists learn their craft in American Mosques then we are going to take action.

My point is that Andy is wrong that the first amendment will act as a shield to promoting criminal acts from within the religion.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Hmm, I wondering, how would I know that your answer will be exactly that.
As you are right about the fact, you elegantly avoid the admission to my tesis. My question was NOT what are you mostly afraid to die from in the public place. I do understand you feel very safe where you live, and not expecting any jihadists to pop up anytime soon. I like to share your hope Thomas, but given the fact, there is a growing group of people in other part of the world (??), who's main goal in life is to kill as many of us as they can, how long our safety will last do you think?

My wife is flying for AA. She knew very well one of the pilots, and one flight attendant who died smashed into tween tower in NY. They also felt very safe that day.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Neither of those justify a bullshit claim that the crusades were defensive, as i have pointed out to you in the past. The last time you brought up this bullshit, those were an afterthought--you initially said that Europe was threatened with invasion; those two points you came up with when i contradicted that claim. Furthermore, as i have also pointed out to you in the past, the crusaders did not do anything to defend the Roman Empire from the Turks. In fact, they had so badly plundered the Empire in marching to Constantinople, that the Emperor did the only sensible thing, and provided them transport across the Bosporus, to get them the hell out of his territory. The historical record simply does not support a bullshit claim that the crusades were defensive.

By the way, your post displays the warped thinking so common among the hating crowd. What the Turks did, you describe as being done by Muslims, as though they were a monolith. By no means were all Muslims attacking the Roman Empire. (There is no such thing as "the Byzantine Empire," except in the minds of much later historians and in survey history books--it was the Roman Empire.) However, whenever someone points out an enormity done by a christian or a group of christians, we always hear some **** to the effect that that is not all christians, or that they are not true christians. You are employing the rhetoric of bigotry

1 Reply

According to my predictions, the news was just released anout Muslim leaders calls for doubling number of mosques on our soil within 2 years. On 6th of April Muslims in France vowed for the same, which sparked number of antimuslims demonstrations there. Well, they are waking up.

In the meantime another ISIS video shows murdering of 30 Libian Christians.

It is important to mention that radical Muslims goal is to convert mosques to recruitment centers, served as a perfect breeding ground for terrorists.

There is a hot discussion going on whether or not we can stop this from happening, and how. The funds are coming from foreign countries.

0 Replies

Correction: it was 30 Etiopian Christians murdered by ISIS.

0 Replies

@andy31,

andy31 wrote:

Everyone, who's not Muslim should agree today, that in the human history, there was no other religion, even remotely as barbaric, distructive, and violent as Islam is.

It isn't about Muslim, it's about CIA survival, whose very existence depends on discovering new threats, even if they have to create them. It's about the Sunni and Shia long lasting blood feud, not ISIS or other fabricated names.

1 Reply

@Rickoshay75,

Hmm... I won't deny Sunni and Shia ongoing frictions, but... saying that everything is all about that it's quite a stretch. As a matter of fact we could only hope that this would be the case.
It looks more like we are the pray, that Sunni and Shia are fighting over.

1 Reply

@andy31,

Are you scared yet?

1 Reply

@andy31,

andy31 wrote:

but given the fact, there is a growing group of people in other part of the world (??), who's main goal in life is to kill as many of us as they can, how long our safety will last do you think?

There is no safety. There will always be something out there that might kill me with some probability. As part of protecting my life, I worry about these risks in order of their magnitude, greatest risks first. I don't expect Jihadists to rise to anywhere near the top of my threat list within my lifetime. And this expectation wouldn't change if I was a pilot rather than a physicist. Intentional or not, motorists just are that much more dangerous to me than Jihadists.

2 Replies

Be very afraid. The next wave of Afghan female terrorists is here:

Skategirls of Kabul

0 Replies

@Thomas,

I can't argue about you being wrong. However according to your analogy, your greatest risk is a natural death more than anything else, because everyone has 100% guarantee for that to happen if every other thing fail.
Do you see Thomas what spinning can do to any argument? It turns into nonsensical discussion.
Your approach is, that as long as your individual life is not in a immediate danger, than nothing else matters. Well... yes of course, nothing wrong with taking this position. You are free to do so. But we are talking about collective safety, and preservation of freedom and life style not only as a nation but even in a wider spectrum, as a western culture. My main point is, that there should be as many as possible of us aware of what is happening, and possibly stay actively involved into being proactive rather than reactive later on. As to the rest, without offending anyone, there is enough send out there to stick your heads in, and wait -- maybe it will go away in it's own. Otherwise, when the effect of changes will arrive to our door step, reaction will be required.

This nation has bad track record for ignoring early warnings.
Exact thing happened in WW2. Remember Pearl Harbor? Than Clinton kept ignoring eminent threat, and 911 happened, shortly after Bush took over. Since than we had a bunch of smaller scale attacks here in our soil by jihadists.
But ... oh well. Who even cares if 12 or 20 people were killed, here and there. There is way more dying from car accidents and from cancer. Right Thomas?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I am alert, not scared. You should be too.

1 Reply

@andy31,

As far as my global concerns go, the Muslim world and its many archaisms do not even get near the top of my list, where global warming and a collapse of western democracy are. If I were Muslim it would be different I guess.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

As far as my global concerns go, the Muslim world and its many archaisms do not even get near the top of my list, where global warming and a collapse of western democracy are. If I were Muslim it would be different I guess.

Seeing as how the EU is being overrun by Muslim hordes I would expect you to be a little more interested. Not to mention the continual problems of trying to train them to be productive EU citizens. If poor planning does not kill the EU this will, there is no escape from the conflict between Islam and the West. These Africans will willingly live in Europe so long as they can feed at the trough of the state, but they will never be Europeans.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

These Africans will willingly live in Europe so long as they can feed at the trough of the state, but they will never be Europeans.

What Africans are you talking about? Those who gave their lives for France during the 1st and 2nd world wars?

The problem is not Africa, Asia, or Europe. The problem is islamo-fascism.

And don't underestimate global warming. It's much more dangerous than any mad mullah. But of course, we can't blame that on them damn Ayrabs, or can we?

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

As for what can be done going forward: Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi was right when he said during a meeting in Washington with President Obama last week that the crisis isn’t going anywhere; migrants will try to make their way to Europe until some measure of stability is returned to LibyaThe North African country is the origin of the majority of migrants who attempt the Mediterranean route into Europe, and political chaos there has allowed people smugglers to operate with impunity.

But Libya isn’t getting any more stable this summer, and neither are political conditions in Somalia, Eritrea, and Syria. So the short-term solution is fairly obvious: The EU as a whole needs a more ambitious plan to rescue migrants. Southern European countries like Greece, Malta, and Italy complain, justifiably, that they’re shouldering an unfair portion of the burden for dealing with migrants, many of whom intend to head north once they reach Europe. But getting other European countries on board has been a tough sell—as recent elections have suggested, anti-immigrant sentiment is high on the continent

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/04/20/could_europe_have_done_anything_to_stop_the_migrant_tragedy.html

First off this needs to put to rest any claims of the superiority of French ideals, because joining the civil war in Libya was assinine, it was in direct opposition to the best interests of France. But the solution to keeping the invaders out is not to change their minds, it is to not let them invade. 1000 would be invaders drowning this week might help to keep others from following, but 10,000 would be better. If the Europeans were smarter they would be sinking every one of these landing crafts before they hit shore.

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

If I was in charge of US immigration policy, I would put the quota for those of the muslim faith at a virtual zero. It would require extremely exceptional circumstances to allow a muslim to immigrate here.

That would be a direct violation of our avowed belief in the principle of freedom of religion,

0 Replies

Can world survive Islam.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know