Muslim Leaders 'Expose ISIS' Lies’ In Digital Magazine

[Baruch]

my grandparents were an atheist good ol boy, an mental hospital reject, an reverend bigot, and a handicapped shrew what do you want from me

Sounds like y'all come from good people ;-)  Never devalue your ancestors ... without them you wouldn't be the wreck you are today ;-))

[josephpalazzo]

Ive actually seen Muslims shit up close  and I can say the culture is based off their religion which is baffling terrible. Why the fuck are you defending Muslims?

Muslims are considered to be victims and hence must be shielded from the dregs of society, a pet project for the Left.(READ: CrucifyCindy, shiranu)

[Baruch]

Except many people are victims, and many of those are Muslims, because of the minerals under the sand dunes.  The rapacious Anglo-Saxon Mafia won't leave them alone ... the oil/gas has been in play even before WW I ... just not exploited much until after WW II.  And the dregs of society ... are the Elite ... the self appointed assholes who make life not worth living, because they horde all the money like Scrooge McDuck.  I will take an honest thief like Jean Valjean any day over a politician or banker.

[josephpalazzo]

Except many people are victims, ...

Well, the day you stop feeling to be a victim is the day you'll start to really live life.

[SilentFutility]

You know the Islamphobes and racists on this board like pr are going to try to spin this into something sinister

Islam is not a race.

Phobia implies an irrational fear of something, not a reasoned out argument that may or may not be correct but is nonetheless arrived at through an attempt at a logical thought-process. In a debate, you assume the other person to be sane, and that they have a reason for thinking the way they do, and you discuss and question that reason and try to share your reasoning in order to make them understand and possibly be convinced by your point of view. By labelling someone phobic of something, you imply that their thoughts are irrational, hence from the outset you are not open for debate, you are closing off your mind.

If you're on this forum simply to tell people with other views that they are irrational rather than to share ideas, discuss things and ultimately to learn, then why bother at all? What does starting discussion with other people simply to shut down the discussion achieve?

[Baruch]

Well, the day you stop feeling to be a victim is the day you'll start to really live life.

Except I am not a victim.  I am a perp.  But there are actual victims ... I have victimized some, and my fellow uber-menschen have done the same.   Yes, I can really live life, if I can get one of those snappy SS uniforms.  This is why the US with 5% of the world's population, consumes 20% of the output ... and not just in the 19th century, but in the 21st.  See, you people assume I am opposed to immorality and sin ... but you are wrong.  I am in favor of ethics, because it reduces the damage and casualties from our gang wars.  Truce between baboons and hyenas.

[Shiranu]

Islam is not a race.

Well, considering that's not what he said... but I don't know of maybe more than 1 or 2 posters on the forum (and neither of them are part of this issue) who I would consider probable racists.

Phobia implies an irrational fear of something, not a reasoned out argument that may or may not be correct but is nonetheless arrived at through an attempt at a logical thought-process.

I don't particularly think anyone here is an Islamaphobe (and I don't particularly think thats a very great word to begin with), but I do think several links they use are definitely posted by "Islamaphobes" in that they are not rational articles... nor factual half the time. I think a better word would just be lazy if a source appears to back up their bias. So biased, possibly so far as to say bigoted? Yeah, sure. But not Islamaphobic.

[pr126]

Criticizing, attacking Islam is bigoted.
Criticizing, attacking Christianity is not.

Isn't that double standards?  No? Why not?

Mysogyny, gender apartheid, child molesting, animal sacrifice, bigotry, hatred, racism, ill treatment of women, FGM, torture, mindless killings, eternal warfare, beheading, amputating limbs, pagan rituals, opposition to science- unless it is weapons, these are the fruits of Islam.

I am sure I have left a few out.

But for some atheists, - I am looking at you Shiranu, CrucifyCindy, it is worth defending. Really?

[Sargon The Grape]

When most Christian publicity depicts moderates, and most Muslim publicity depicts radicals, it's easy to see defenders of the latter as upholding a double-standard when they happily attack the former for comparatively small issues. Also, those who are the loudest are heard by the largest audience.

To me, the most powerful image of the average Muslim comes from a story my grandparents told me about one of their trips to Israel. They're on a bus, and get to talking with an Israeli and a Palestinian; who were Jewish and Muslim, respectively. They got to talking about religious and ethnic tensions. Both of these men expressed that they just wanted the bullshit and the violence to stop, and to just live and let live. They weren't high-minded philosophers or scholars; just two average joes on a bus ride to wherever. This is how most people of any religion, race, or creed think, regardless of whatever they may profess. It doesn't make a very sexy headline, though.

[pr126]

Of course there are plenty Muslims who do not want eternal warfare, who would like to live in peace.
But what are they doing to convince their coreligionist of that, without getting themselves killed for it?

Can they openly reject the Quran and the teachings of Muhammad? Would they still be regarded as Muslims? 

[Shiranu]

Criticizing, attacking Islam is bigoted.
Criticizing, attacking Christianity is not.

If someone was here only to post anti-Christian things, calling them scum and worthless and a threat to our way of life that anyday will force us to follow biblical law, then yes I would consider them bigoted and obnoxious.

I am sure I have left a few out.

Quite a few. But as Byakuren pointed out, it's very easy to focus on the negative things that sell, and not the positives that don't.

But for some atheists, - I am looking at you Shiranu, CrucifyCindy, it is worth defending. Really?

Frankly, I couldn't care less about someone's religious belief if it isn't being imposed on me or hurting anyone and think it's a nice way to keep touch with one's culture. So as long as it's not being imposed on me, as it is not here, then yes I think it is worth defending. And the overwhelming majority of Muslims are people just like you, me, the Christian cashier at your local market, the Jewish guy down the street, the Hindu passing you at the university, etc. etc., so clearly Islam is not the root cause. The average American Muslim anyways is almost identical to the average American Christian; the only huge difference I have seen is they are a little less quick to mention their religion or ethnicity because they are afraid of social backlash.

If so few Muslims practice "True Islam" (Saudi Waha.-ism), then I see as little reason to attack Islam as I do to attack Christianity for the WBC, the RCC or Judaism for the ultra-orthodox warmongerers in Israel or the isolationists who refuse to report crimes in American Jewish sections.

[pr126]

Frankly, I couldn't care less about someone's religious belief if it isn't being imposed on me or hurting anyone and think it's a nice way to keep touch with one's culture.

You couldn't care less because it does not affect you personally.  YET.
All the bad things happen far away, to other people. not your worry.

And the "culture" which is governed by Islam, a way of life, is not nice by a long shot. 
Try living as an atheist in an Islam dominated country, experience the "nice" culture close up and personal,  see how long you last.

Suppose that Islam will dominate Europe, which is a probability.
Do you think America will be left alone?

[mauricio]

If someone was here only to post anti-Christian things, calling them scum and worthless and a threat to our way of life that anyday will force us to follow biblical law, then yes I would consider them bigoted and obnoxious.

Quite a few. But as Byakuren pointed out, it's very easy to focus on the negative things that sell, and not the positives that don't.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about someone's religious belief if it isn't being imposed on me or hurting anyone and think it's a nice way to keep touch with one's culture. So as long as it's not being imposed on me, as it is not here, then yes I think it is worth defending. And the overwhelming majority of Muslims are people just like you, me, the Christian cashier at your local market, the Jewish guy down the street, the Hindu passing you at the university, etc. etc., so clearly Islam is not the root cause. The average American Muslim anyways is almost identical to the average American Christian; the only huge difference I have seen is they are a little less quick to mention their religion or ethnicity because they are afraid of social backlash.

If so few Muslims practice "True Islam" (Saudi Waha.-ism), then I see as little reason to attack Islam as I do to attack Christianity for the WBC, the RCC or Judaism for the ultra-orthodox warmongerers in Israel or the isolationists who refuse to report crimes in American Jewish sections.

This is true, thought i would say the average muslim is peaceful but probably more conservative in things like sexual mores and religious traditions, than your average European.
The thing is , coming back to the context of the thread, the immigrants and refugees coming to europe currently are not just muslims they are much more distinct individuals with a set of characteristics that will cause problems to europe (I described some of those in a post to crucifycindy in the previous page basically they are poor, they are in psychological distress, and they are coming into an alien culture.) . The decision to accept refugees is a decision that needs to be taken with a realistic perspective too.  Not just idealistically.

[Baruch]

Pr126 ... Europe has repeatedly benefited from invasion ... just ask the Indo-Europeans.  Or are you Basque?

Being a busybody in foreign policy is a false reversal of American isolationism circa 1941.  In fact Americans then weren't isolationist, that is a convenient myth ... just ask the fascist supporters like Prentice Bush.  So to take care of all the 7 billion asshats in the world, the US needs to make war on those 7 billion asshats?  And why it is the US who needs to determine who is a threat and who is not ... why not the UN?

[josephpalazzo]

See, you people assume I am opposed to immorality and sin ... but you are wrong.  I am in favor of ethics, because it reduces the damage and casualties from our gang wars. 

In geopolitics, there is no ethics.