1
   

Interesting Take On Hitler / Religion/ Bush By M. Farrell

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 01:17 pm
primergray wrote:
Gungasnake is actually correct in his opinion on slavery in the present-day Islamic world, though I don't know if the phenomenon can be blamed on the faith itself or not.


You should tell especially the Europeans more about that: some are looking for more evidence against Turkey becoming an EU-member!
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 03:35 pm
Gungasnake should be minister for immigration.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 03:45 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
primergray wrote:
Gungasnake is actually correct in his opinion on slavery in the present-day Islamic world, though I don't know if the phenomenon can be blamed on the faith itself or not.


You should tell especially the Europeans more about that: some are looking for more evidence against Turkey becoming an EU-member!


To the best of my knowledge Turkey has banned slavery at present but a hundred and fifty years ago and on back they were the biggest slavers of all time.

They didn't have to go sailing to conduct slave raids; simply riding south sufficed. I've got a copy of a Russian movie about the poet Pushkin's ancestor three or four generations back who was given to Tsar Peter as a Christmas gift by the sultan of Turkey and the thing starts off with an animated sequence showing the Turkish slave raid in which the kid was taken, and the whole thing looks pretty politically incorrect if you ask me, in fact people today might call it a hate crime. Pretty much anybody who wasn''t worth bothering to haul back as a slave got killed. Title is "Skaz pro to, kak Tsar Pyotr Arapa Zhenil" or trhe equivalent in cyrillic characters if you've got any sort of a Russian movie outlet nearby.

Europeans had slavery in the form of serfdom in the middle ages. What basically changed that was Chengis Khan and Tamerlane. Chengis Khan's sons and grandsons reopened the silk road all the way from China to Europe after it had been kaput for many centuries and for a hundred and fifty years Europeans were able to take trade caravans to India and China and come back with spices so that they finally had something more than just salt to put on meat and then, about 150 years later, Tamerlane broke up the Golden Horde at Sarai, turned southern Russia and the area of Astrakhan into a wasteland which Russians called "Dikoyeh poliye" or 'wild fields, and the silk road was shut down again.

At that point Europeans said there was no way in hell they were going back to eating meat with just salt on it and started sailing around Africa to get to India and, naturally enough, the first time those ships put into west African ports for supplies, the Africans figured they were just more muslims come to buy slaves, and thus the great age of the European slave trade was born.


'
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 03:48 pm
I don't doubt that.

I was reffering to "slavery in the present-day Islamic world".

Thanks that you corrected this.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 04:45 pm
gungasnake wrote:
To the best of my knowledge Turkey has banned slavery at present but a hundred and fifty years ago and on back they were the biggest slavers of all time.


By all means lets look back 150 years and see what the US was doing at that time... Hmm... Yep, slavery here, too!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Gunga, your logic is as impeccable as ever!
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 04:53 pm
DrewDad wrote:
[

By all means lets look back 150 years and see what the US was doing at that time... Hmm... Yep, slavery here, too!


That's not EXACTLY right. In other words, not all Americans were owning slaves in those days; just the democrats.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 06:14 pm
gungasnake wrote:
Chengis Khan's sons and grandsons reopened the silk road all the way from China to Europe after it had been kaput for many centuries and for a hundred and fifty years Europeans were able to take trade caravans to India and China and come back with spices so that they finally had something more than just salt to put on meat and then, about 150 years later, Tamerlane broke up the Golden Horde at Sarai, turned southern Russia and the area of Astrakhan into a wasteland which Russians called "Dikoyeh poliye" or 'wild fields, and the silk road was shut down again.

At that point Europeans said there was no way in hell they were going back to eating meat with just salt on it and started sailing around Africa to get to India and, naturally enough, the first time those ships put into west African ports for supplies, the Africans figured they were just more muslims come to buy slaves, and thus the great age of the European slave trade was born.


That was good, gunga. Kinda simplified, but pretty accurate - was that your own synopsis?
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 06:38 pm
timberlandko wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
Chengis Khan's sons and grandsons reopened the silk road all the way from China to Europe after it had been kaput for many centuries and for a hundred and fifty years Europeans were able to take trade caravans to India and China and come back with spices so that they finally had something more than just salt to put on meat and then, about 150 years later, Tamerlane broke up the Golden Horde at Sarai, turned southern Russia and the area of Astrakhan into a wasteland which Russians called "Dikoyeh poliye" or 'wild fields, and the silk road was shut down again.

At that point Europeans said there was no way in hell they were going back to eating meat with just salt on it and started sailing around Africa to get to India and, naturally enough, the first time those ships put into west African ports for supplies, the Africans figured they were just more muslims come to buy slaves, and thus the great age of the European slave trade was born.


That was good, gunga. Kinda simplified, but pretty accurate - was that your own synopsis?


Pretty much. Apparently a lot of politically correct history books make it sound as if Christians and the white man invented slavery and, historically, that ain't the way it was.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 06:59 pm
Dunno as I'd go with your assessment of the teachin' of the history of slavery ... I sorta remember somethin' about a guy named Moses, and big flap over bricks and plagues and stuff like that .... a pretty fair while before there was anything like a "white man" concept, let alone a Christian. Then there were the Romans - any Roman worth anything owned a few - Greeks were a real hot market commodity. Oh, yeah, and some of those barbarian babes brought a helluva price too; Germanii and Celts were real premium stuff.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 07:25 pm
Gunga, I don't care what they do in their country but you have to keep the suicide bombers out of America. It amazes me that so many americans on this forum are so muslim tolerant given september 11th.
0 Replies
 
Joe Republican
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 08:28 pm
gungasnake wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Gunga, just because a lot of people believe something does not make it right. Look at how many people here believe the Bush is a moron. Certainly they are not the first to think that, but as we know, they are wrong.

Just as it is wrong to believe that all Muslims are bad people and that we should nuke their religious centers. It's stupid to blame the majority for the acts of the minority.


You have to have been following this one for a while to comprehend it. I never advocated nuking Mecca. What I did say was that my first instinct would have been to Nuke Mecca but that a reasonable person would want to try what George W. Bush has done first, and that those two were about the only two options Bush had at the time of 9/11.

"Joe Republican" appears to be a sort of a master of the out of context
quote and is on some sort of a smear and demonize campaign.


Again, although arguing with you is akin to arguing with a second grader. . .

I think you need to read up on what out of context means. Your quote was neither out of context nor correct.

To put your entire quote "in context"

Quote:


There are two things Bush could have done after 9-11: what I'd have done, and what he has done. Me, I'd have levelled Mecca and Medina, and banned the practice of Islam not only in America but throughout the world.


You see, the first part is irrelevant because it tells of what Bush did and what you would have done. As for the rest of the quote, It is not out of context, it is pertenant to the "context" of the paragraph. It's relevant to your hateful beliefs and posts.

As far as feeling that you are correct in your beliefs because others think the same way only proves there are a lot of hate filled people out there.

Just look at it this way, people also though along the same lines as Hitler, and if you replace the word Muslim with Jew in a lot of your posts, you can see how people relate Bush to Hitler. It isn't because of Bush's actions necessarily, but the beliefs of some of his followers (read gungasnake). You can very easily relate the hatred toward the Jews in WWII Nazi Germany to the hatred spewed by you and your posts against Muslims.

If you can't see how to the dots connect, then you are truly a lost immoral soul.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 08:29 pm
It wasn't Islam that attacked, it was Terrorists who practiced a very strict and fundamentalist version of Islam.
0 Replies
 
Joe Republican
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 08:34 pm
McGentrix wrote:
It wasn't Islam that attacked, it was Terrorists who practiced a very strict and fundamentalist version of Islam.


Thank you McG. At least I know one Bush supporters who uses his brain Smile
0 Replies
 
Joe Republican
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 08:43 pm
australia wrote:
Gunga, I don't care what they do in their country but you have to keep the suicide bombers out of America. It amazes me that so many americans on this forum are so muslim tolerant given september 11th.


It's not "Muslim tolerant" just tolerant of others beliefs.

Our country was founded partially because of religious persecution, yet now 200 years later, people like yourself are all too quick to castigate an entire group of people based on a minority.

Using this logic, should we have killed all 30 year old blond arian looking people because McVeigh bombed the fed. building in Oaklahoma City? How about we kill all mathematicians because the Unibomber was a MIT mathamatician.

You see, it is called predjudice. We had this thing in the 50's and 60's called the civil rights movement. It was about treating fellow man with respect and dignity.

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you, or if you want me to directly quote the bible.

Quote:
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Matthew 7:12
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 08:44 pm
They should be doing racial profiling though.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 09:03 pm
Okay then, how do you know which muslims in america are normal and which ones are sleepers? Remember Attha lived in a nice neighbour hood, wore designer clothes and seemed a normal person.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 09:09 pm
Quote:
Okay then, how do you know which muslims in america are normal and which ones are sleepers? Remember Attha lived in a nice neighbour hood, wore designer clothes and seemed a normal person.


What if I decided to become a terrorist? I'm white, middle class. Noone would suspect me.

And there's no reason that someone won't, or wouldn't, any more than a Muslim would become a terrorist. There are plenty of Anglo muslims who could be used, if they cared to. Pleny of sympathizers who are white.

You can't stop terrorism and the like through racial profiling; it's insulting, invasive, and just plain doesn't produce results. If anything, you add to tensions by doing so.

America, where everyone is free and equal, as long as they aren't Muslim. Doesn't make such a great slogan, does it?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 09:19 pm
Racial profiling i think is risk minimisation. It happens everywhere. It happens going through immigration and customs when travelling.If I travel to Europe I never gut pulled up or searched with an australian passport. But the guy in front of me on a chinese passport might. Obviously they think through statistics that the risk is higher with him.

I am not expert, but I would assume that the risk of terrorism is higher in muslims. Does anyone agree or dispute this?
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 09:52 pm
australia wrote:
Okay then, how do you know which muslims in america are normal and which ones are sleepers? Remember Attha lived in a nice neighbour hood, wore designer clothes and seemed a normal person.


guess we better keep the irish out too, ya know, that whole i.r.a. thing. especially bono from u2 ! boy, what a hate mongering mick bastard ! makes me detest my scots / irish side.

oh. wait... no, that's complete shite too. Shocked
0 Replies
 
DontTreadOnMe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Dec, 2004 10:00 pm
oh yeah. and australians too! ned kelly! terrorized the country side...

but, we'd lose mel gibson.

oh, no we wouldn't. he's a new yorker...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/11/2025 at 10:35:15