patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,248,542 comments by 14,886 users - Blue, goofus, HANrongli, Patrick online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 578 - 617 of 2,852 Next » Last » Search these comments
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 11:13am
Not the only and definitely not the first by a two or three generations. The Slave Trade was first banned by Britain during the Napoleonic Wars, followed by a total ban on Slavery in 1833.
Yes, ironically American history would have been better if we had lost the American Revolution. Slavery would have been extinguished a generation earlier and countless murders and rapes avoided.
One of the great, for lack of a better word, ironies of history is that America fought a revolution for liberty yet there would have been more liberty in America if it had lost that revolution. Sad, but true.
NDrLoR
2016 Jan 28, 11:26am
That's not an ad hominem attack
It's exactly what you did several months ago when you started a post about how Christians are evil. The term for this is passive-agressive--you launch attack, then act surprised and indignant when someone disagrees with you when that's what you wanted all along. How boring would it have been if all the responses were in your favor?
6. The high tax rates on the uber-rich that existed in the 1950s
None of whom would have paid the high tax rates in reality.
Dan8267 says
You are a disingenuous piece of shit.
And you come across as an angry little twit who doesn't have a life. The photos you posted of yourself and your friends in your responses to ironman are indicative of an empty head.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 11:30am
This man ain't no Tony Starks.
True dat. Ironically, Tony Stark, as portrayed by Robert Downey, has almost an identical personality to me. Maybe CIC is secretly attracted to me? It would support my theory that he's a self-hating, closeted homosexual homophobe.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 11:33am
the US was a relative latecomer.
http://www.reuters.com/article/uk-slavery-idUSL1561464920070322
1948 - United Nations General Assembly adopts Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including article stating "No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."
The United States massively violates this International law every single day by using prisoners as slave labor. That should stop immediately. It is one of the great injustices and shames of our time.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 11:42am
That's not an ad hominem attack
It's exactly what you did several months ago when you started a post about how Christians are evil.
Stating that the Nazis were evil because they committed genocide is not an ad hominem attack on the Nazis. You need to learn what the the Ad Hominem Fallacy is.
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
You are an idiot. That was an insult, not an ad hominem attack. I'm not saying that you are wrong because you are an idiot. After all, idiots are occasionally right. I'm saying you just an idiot and we can tell that from your asinine false arguments. Your arguments are wrong because they
- contain baseless assertions
- have no evidence to support them
- are empirically false
- contain logical fallacies
6. The high tax rates on the uber-rich that existed in the 1950s
Evidence?
You are a disingenuous piece of shit.
And you come across as an angry little twit who doesn't have a life.
No, I don't. You just don't like me. I don't like you either. The difference is that I don't have to lie about how pathetic your are. The truth is on my side.
I have debunked every single lie you've posted on this thread. That makes me superior to you. I'm more intelligent, more thoughtful, more honest, and morally superior to you. All your faith in the false god of Jesus hasn't made you a morally decent person. In fact, I suspect that religion is partly to blame for your immorality. Morality is best served by reason and contemplation, not faith.
The photos you posted of yourself and your friends in your responses to ironman are indicative of an empty head.
The only photo of myself I have ever posted on this site is my avatar image. I have never posted any photos of my friends on this site, and I would not. Can Christians ever stop bearing false witness against their neighbors?
Dan is apparently unaware that the US Christian groups were at the forefront of the Abolitionist movement.
The Christians in the Abolitionist movements figured out slavery's evil long before atheist/agnostic leaders like Thomas Jefferson.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 12:06pm
Dan is apparently unaware that the US Christian groups were at the forefront of the Abolitionist movement.
I'm quite aware that there were Christians in both the anti-slavery and pro-slavery camps.
Are you aware that there are Muslims who are anti-terrorists? Does that imply that Islam is a religion of peace and that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism? That sensation you are experiencing right now, it's called hypocrisy.
Are you aware that in every single passage of both the Old and New Testaments that mention slavery, the Bible is pro-slavery. Yes, the holy book of Christianity and the infallible word of the Christian god is slavery is good.
Slavery was ended despite Christianity, not because of it. It is no coincidence that slavery only ended after Christianity's power had waned enormously. For 1800 years, Christianity practiced slavery and nations infected by the plague of Christianity only stopped practicing slavery after Christianity had lost most of its grip on the public.
As Christianity and all other religions fade from our society, our society has become more moral and just. The best time in Western culture -- nay, in the entire world history -- is today and that's because religion, particularly Christianity, is dying. All the civil and human rights and rejection of violence has increased as church attendance has fallen. So much for Christianity promoting morality. History says the opposite.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 12:10pm
The Christians in the Abolitionist movements figured out slavery's evil long before atheist/agnostic leaders like Thomas Jefferson.
Oh so now Thomas Jefferson is an atheist or an agnostic? I thought Jefferson was a deist.
Like other Founding Fathers, Jefferson was considered a Deist, subscribing to the liberal religious strand of Deism that values reason over revelation and rejects traditional Christian doctrines, including the Virgin Birth, original sin and the resurrection of Jesus. While he rejected orthodoxy, Jefferson was nevertheless a religious man.
It's funny how the religious beliefs of dead people change dramatically and constantly depending on whether or not a poster wants to claim that dead person as a member of his group or his opponent's group.
Dan - the LEADERS of the Abolitionist movement were Christians. Not some hangers on or johnny come lately's.
Slavery was around long before the bible and was part of life in virtually every society on the planet.
As Christianity and all other religions fade from our society, our society has become more moral and just.
As I already pointed out, we already had a relatively recent experiment with that hypothesis with the various Communist nations - and they ALL were genocidal maniacs run by atheists that killed more people in a few decades than all religion combined over centuries.
You fanatical religion haters have absolutely no leg to stand on based on RECENT HISTORY.
I think it is more germane to discuss the actions of the atheists in the USSR and Russia a few decades ago, as opposed to the "pro-slavery" bible thumpers from 2,000+ years ago.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 1:14pm
Dan - the LEADERS of the Abolitionist movement were Christians. Not some hangers on or johnny come lately's.
Socal2 - the LEADERS of the Pro-Slavery movement were Christians. Not some hangers on or johnny come lately's.
Slavery was around long before the bible and was part of life in virtually every society on the planet.
Violence was around long before Islam and was part of life in virtually every society on the planet. Are you saying that Islam is not a significant factor in violence today?
You are disingenuously whitewashing history. The Bible and the Christian god are pro-slavery. I didn't make up all those Bible quotes. Just because an evil is not unique to a culture does not mean that culture does not heavily promote and carry out that evil.
Racism and genocide have been practices for tens of thousands of years before the Nazis. That doesn't mean it's wrong to associate Nazis with racism and genocide as those are pretty strongly linked to Nazi history. It's kind of their bible, Mein Kampf. You know what Christianity's bible is. It's the Bible. And that book is way the fuck pro-slavery just like Mein Kampf is pro-Aryan.
As I already pointed out, we already had a relatively recent experiment with that hypothesis with the various Communist nations - and they ALL were genocidal maniacs run by atheists that killed more people in a few decades than all religion combined over centuries.
Your sample set is three, hardly a significant number. My sample set is over a hundred.
Furthermore, atheism is not a characteristic of communism. Cuba is religious and communistic. In fact, there is nothing in communist economic or political philosophy that relates to atheism.
And to put the nail in the coffin of your argument, Communism is not a characteristic of atheism. There is absolutely nothing about atheism that is relevant to communism.
In contrast, the Spanish Inquisition was intrinsically a religious action motivated by Christianity. The Holocaust was intrinsically religious also motivated by the desire to make Christianity the only religion. The various genocides of the Native Americans were deeply connected to Christian expansionism. The Dark Ages were defined by Christian opposition to reason, learning, and advancement.
If you are trying to make the case that any atheist state must be a dictatorship or a communist state then you are the biggest fucking idiot in history. It is obvious that atheists do not have to be tyrants or communists and that the measly three examples you have given are not even remotely representative of Western atheists. You couldn't even find a Western European or American example. That should show weak your argument is.
How the fuck are Neil deGrasse Tyson and Richard Dawkins resemble Stalin or Mao? Your case is ridiculous and obviously so. I can name dozens of Christian tyrants who committed genocide, torture, mass incarceration of political opponents, mass rape, and so forth. The difference between my arguments and yours is that
1. I have the weight of all of human history with hundreds of examples across thousands of years. You have three anomalies.
2. The examples I show are intrinsically related to Christianity. Your anomalies are not in any way relevant to atheism.
3. I have shown how religion inherently is dangerous and how faith inescapably promotes evil. You have shown NO reason why atheism causes people to do evil.
Put simply, you have ignored all the evidence, all the examples, and all the analysis that shows religion in general and Christianity in particular are evil. You discard without reason all evidence against your position and assert without evidence that atheism is inherently evil. You white wash Christian history and claim that because other cultures have also done some of same evils that it's okay to condone the evils done by Christianity.
All of these disingenuous arguments are hypocritical because you do not accept their applications to Islam. This entire thread has been about the question of whether or not Islam is a religion of peace despite that tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of Muslims are violent and have no respect for human life. I can site as many examples of Muslims today who are anti-terorrist as you can site anti-slavery Christians from the 1860. Yet, no where do you claim that because many Muslims are anti-terrorist that Islam does not promote terrorism. That would be a ridiculous argument. For the exact same reason, it would be a ridiculous argument that because some Christians were anti-slavery that Christianity and it's unerring holy Bible did not heavily promote slavery in American and European history.
I think it is more germane to discuss the actions of the atheists in the USSR and Russia a few decades ago, as opposed to the "pro-slavery" bible thumpers from 2,000+ years ago.
You are only saying that because doing so would support your false arguments. In reality, the comparison we should be making is American atheists during any time period with their Christian counterparts. And that comparison always makes Christians look bad.
The best examples, of course, would be from America now rather than last century. Every single "god hates fags" sign held at funerals, including funerals of soldiers, was held by a Christian, not an atheist. The entire bigotry against homosexuality and marriage equality is intrinsic to Christianity. Atheists are not homophones in any measurable number.
Atheists make up 0.07% of the prison population despite making up 7% of the population. That's a ratio of 1:100. Christians on the other hand are 73% of the prison population while only 70.6% of the general population. That's a ratio of 108:100.
In other words, Christians are 108 times as likely to commit crimes than atheists. If anything, given the huge prejudices against atheists and for Christians, this is a very low estimate of just how much more likely Christians are to commit crimes. Put simply, atheists are statistically immensely less violent and criminal than Christians today.
This fact shouldn't be surprising since intelligence is the number one cause of atheism and it's also the number one cause of pro-social, non-violent behavior and empathy.
Furthermore, atheism is not a characteristic of communism. Cuba is religious and communistic.
You could not be a member of the Communist party in Cuba and be religious. And like most Commie hell-holes, if you were not a party member in good standing, you were dirt poor, starving or in a gulag. Now granted, South American Commies weren't as bat-shit crazy against religion as the European and Asian Commies. But Chinese and Russians set the bar pretty high with their genocidal actions..
"religious people were not allowed to join the Cuban Communist Party due to religion being contradictory to the party's Marxist philosophy."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_CubaDan8267 says
And to put the nail in the coffin of your argument, Communism is not a characteristic of atheism. There is absolutely nothing about atheism that is relevant to communism.
Atheism has EVERYTHING to do with Marxist/Leninist philosophy. Your own words against religion are almost identical to the 19th and 20th Century monsters that cursed the world with Communism:
"Marxism–Leninism holds that religion is the opium of the people, in the sense of promoting passive acceptance of suffering on Earth in the hope of eternal reward. Therefore, Marxism–Leninism advocates the abolition of religion and the acceptance of atheism.[4] Marxist–Leninist atheism has its roots in the philosophy of Ludwig Feuerbach, G.W.F. Hegel, Karl Marx, and Vladimir Lenin.[5]"
"Marx - In his rejection of all religious thought, Marx considered the contributions of religion over the centuries to be unimportant and irrelevant to the future of humanity. Furthermore, in his view, atheistic philosophy had liberated human beings from suppressing their natural potential and allowed for people to realize that they, rather than any supernatural force that required obedience, were the masters of reality. Marx’s opposition to religion was based especially upon this view in that he believed religion alienated humans from reality and held them back from their true potential. He therefore considered that religion needed to be removed from society."
"Engels considered religion as a false consciousness, and incompatible with communism. Engels, in his lifelong contacts with leaders of Social Democratic and Communist parties in Europe as well as the founders of the First International (the 19th century political union of communist movements), urged them to disseminate and cultivate atheism"
"Lenin’s unequivocal hostile intolerance towards religious belief became a distinctive feature of ideological Soviet atheism, which was contrasted with milder antireligious views of Marxists outside the USSR. His hostility to religion allowed no compromises, such that it even alienated leftist religious believers who sympathised with the Bolsheviks. It even alienated some leftist atheists who were willing to accommodate religious beliefs"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist%E2%80%93Leninist_atheism
NDrLoR
2016 Jan 28, 5:12pm
There is absolutely nothing about atheism that is relevant to communism.
No, just its heart and soul. The 20th century produced two of the most brilliant minds, both of whom were atheists into their 30's, one a communist, to enter the public discourse of mid-century. Both Whittaker Chamber and C. S. Lewis converted to Christianity from atheism and set examples by their testimonies and writing that stand the test of time 'till today--so far above the caliber of people like Jon Stewart and Bill Maher as to not even bear mentioning in the same breaths. It's the thesis of Whittaker Chambers' 1952 book Witness that atheism is the main theme of communism, more so than as an economic system--the state replaces God with man.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 5:39pm
Atheism has EVERYTHING to do with Marxist/Leninist philosophy.
You clearly know nothing about atheism, Marxism, or world history. You are talking to a hard-core atheist here who is in no way an advocate of Marxism, the Soviet Union, China, or Cuba. When face with a living example that contradicts your preconceptions you continue to ignore reality. That is why faith and religion are evil and people who succumb to those evils are brainwashed and incapable of grasping reality.
It is because you have unquestioning faith in doctrine, including political doctrine, that you cannot correct the gross misconceptions in your head. And that is why every rational, sane person must oppose all religions including your false, brainwashing one.
Atheism has EVERYTHING to do with Marxist/Leninist philosophy. Your own words against religion are almost identical to the 19th and 20th Century monsters that cursed the world with Communism:
"Marxism–Leninism holds that religion is the opium of the people, in the sense of promoting passive acceptance of suffering on Earth in the hope of eternal reward.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people." - Adolf Hitler
So either you agree with Hitler and by your own logic are a genocidal maniac, or you hate children.
Can you see how stupid your reasoning -- and I use that term very loosely -- is?
Religion is like a drug. It causes delusions and is highly addictive to some people. That's as far as I'd take the analogy, but that to that extend it is true. A truth is a truth regardless of who says it. Even broken clocks are sometimes right. If that's the best argument you can make, i.e. you said something reasonable that other people who aren't reasonable also said, then you are on very weak ground.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 5:43pm
There is absolutely nothing about atheism that is relevant to communism.
No, just its heart and soul.
Bullshit. There is nothing that I, Richard Dawkins, or Neils degrasse Tyson advocated that is even remotely similar to the Soviet Union. Nor do you have any evidence demonstrating that American or European atheists have advocated dictatorships and the curtail of liberty. How fucking stupid are you? Do you even realize that you are talking to the most liberal person you will ever interact with in your pathetic life? I believe that prostitution and sex in public should be legal. How the fuck am I an advocate of a strong central state that controls all aspects of life and the press? You're a fucking moron.
Dan8267
2016 Jan 28, 5:45pm
atheism is the main theme of communism, more so than as an economic system--the state replaces God with man.
Moron is too kind of a word to describe you.
Atheists don't replace a fictitious god with man. Atheists oppose the belief in all false gods and want them replaced with nothing. If you can't understand even this simple truth, then your religion has fucked you up even more than I thought.
curious2
2016 Jan 31, 5:06pm
And again:
Also today:
I think Muslim terrorists go out of their way to horrify in order to prove their loyalty, since loyalty to Allah is the highest value in Islam.
horrify in order to prove their loyalty
'Horrify' within the dictates specified in the Quran. What 'normal' people would be horrified with is somehow 'rationalized' in some way or other by 'moderates' and cheered by those who are more 'devout'
curious2
2016 Feb 3, 2:08pm
More today:
"Explosion on flight from Somalia was caused by [Islamic terrorist] bomb
There was no immediate comment from al-Shabaab, the Somali Islamist militant group that has waged an insurgency against the western-backed government.
Though al-Shabaab mostly withdrew from Mogadishu in 2011, the group still carries out attacks in the city and against African Union peacekeepers across the country.
Last month al-Shabaab attacked a beachfront restaurant in Mogadishu and launched an assault on a base near the Kenyan border, where it claimed to have killed more than 100 Kenyan soldiers belonging to the AU’s Amisom force. Officials in Kenya have refused to give details of casualties."
and more:
and more:
and more:
The federal indictment also accuses Justin Nojan Sullivan of offering an undercover FBI employee money to kill his parents, who he believed would interfere with his plans for an attack.
***
Sullivan, who lived with his parents in Morganton, a foothills town of about 17,000, converted to Islam and was watching videos of Islamic State beheadings by the fall of 2014, the indictment said. Authorities said he pledged his allegiance to the terror group."
The Islamic strategy seems to be to cause chaos and anarchy, so that Islam can emerge as the most powerful force and take over. When that happens, the imposition of Sharia enforces Islam and bans all competitors by crimininalizing apostasy and blasphemy.
MisdemeanorRebel
2016 Feb 3, 2:16pm
What's funny is we only really "Count" and "React" to the attacks that happen in the West. By far, the Islamic Terrorism is far worse in Islamic Countries.
I wonder how many people were killed by extremist Christians worldwide in the last week? Betcha nowhere near as many.
curious2
2016 Feb 3, 2:36pm
I wonder how many people were killed by extremist Christians worldwide in the last week? Betcha nowhere near as many.
A Muslim would probably count the continuing casualties of W's "crusade" into Iraq at the behest of "a higher father." I count those as casualties of crony capitalism (hello, Halliburton) and the military industrial complex. America has unfortunately killed a lot of people, because patronage networks (including the Saudis) have repeatedly hijacked American power and used it for their own purposes. Nothing in the Constitution requires America to convert or kill the whole world, nor to punish people for criticizing America or renouncing citizenship. I can't deny America and Christianity have blood on their hands, but the difference is that in Islam, that's intrinsic to the doctrine. You can find isolated examples of lone Christian terrorists (e.g. Eric Rudolph), but they can't find enough of each other to form the sort of conspiracies that enable large scale attacks. There are no perfect religions, nor any perfect countries, but the difference is Islam says to kill you for pointing that out.
curious2
2016 Mar 7, 2:19pm
Just another day in the "Islamic Republic" of Pakistan:
At least 31 other people were injured in the attack in Charsadda district, said district police Chief Sohail Khalid, adding that five women, four children and five police officials are among the injured.
A spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it was in retaliation for the execution of Mumtaz Qadri on February 29.
Qadri was convicted of killing the governor of Punjab province in 2011."
For those just tuning in, Punjab's Governor Salmaan Taseer was assassinated because he had proposed repealing the death penalty for blasphemy instead of executing Asia Bibi, who had been convicted of blasphemy. Islam requires enforcing Sharia, which requires the death penalty for blasphemy; Governor Taseer's proposal was therefore inherently critical of Islam, and so was itself blasphemy; therefore, all Muslims were required to kill him, and all Muslims were prohibited from defending him. One of his own guards murdered him in broad daylight, and expressed no remorse, citing instead the "holy" law regarding blasphemy: “This is the punishment for a blasphemer,†Qadri had reportedly said during his interrogation.
The root of the problem appears in the oxymoronic name of the country: Islamic republic.
Meanwhile:
Among the dead were 52 civilians, while the rest were members of the security forces, a police officer said. Another 95 people were injured in the attack that targeted a security checkpoint at one of the entrances to the city of Hillah. The officer said that eight other people were still missing."
Also:
Three different countries, three different ethnicities/races, one common motive.
Strategist
2016 Mar 7, 4:20pm
Dan - the LEADERS of the Abolitionist movement were Christians. Not some hangers on or johnny come lately's.
Slavery was around long before the bible and was part of life in virtually every society on the planet.
God is supposed to give morals to the people, not accept the morals of the people. Slavery should have been banned in the Bible.
Strategist
2016 Mar 7, 4:21pm
Just another day in the "Islamic Republic" of Pakistan:
Just another day in the PEACEFUL "Islamic Republic" of Pakistan
There.....I fixed it for you.
Strategist
2016 Mar 7, 4:26pm
Atheism has EVERYTHING to do with Marxist/Leninist philosophy. Your own words against religion are almost identical to the 19th and 20th Century monsters that cursed the world with Communism:
This is silly.
I am a goddamn atheist and a capitalist at the same time.
curious2
2016 Mar 11, 7:49pm
Donald Trump: 'I think Islam hates us'
“And I will stick with exactly what I said to Anderson Cooper,†Trump said.
Why is Trump the only major candidate saying so? Have the others not read any of Islam's sacred texts, or are they all hoping for more of those sweet Saudi gifts?
curious2
2016 Mar 13, 1:05pm
Another day, another snackbar:
“A lot of people ran out into the sea to escape. So apart from the people who died from gunshots there may be people who have drowned and have been swept out to sea."
HydroCabron
2016 Mar 13, 1:21pm
Why is Trump the only major candidate saying so? Have the others not read any of Islam's sacred texts, or are they all hoping for more of those sweet Saudi gifts?
I don't doubt your point, but Trump has something in common with nearly all Muslims: He hasn't read the Koran.
I agree that Islam is really disgusting, and that Trump has a point, but it gets more and more obvious that most practitioners of every religion with a scripture longer than a USA Today article have not read it, and rely on others to tell them what to believe.
Trump has referred to "Two Corinthians" as a book of the Bible. It's likely that George W. Bush read most of the Bible - there's evidence he dropped out of the Bible study group he joined when he was born again. Kerry probably never read it. Romney has read the Book of Mormon. Clinton might have, but only because he's a quick reader. Reagan probably read it, but didn't comprehend it. Cheney? Definitely read it, but only to masturbate to the gruesome accounts of genocide, infanticide and slavery.
Strategist
2016 Mar 13, 3:47pm
Another day, another snackbar:
"'At least 16 dead' after gunmen open fire in Ivory Coast resort
A major car bomb explosion in Turkey too. Damn Buddhists.
curious2
2016 Mar 15, 4:42pm
Since the law's passage, many conservative clerics and religious leaders have denounced it as being in conflict with the Muslim holy book, the Koran, and the constitution.
They are correct. Until the voters of Pakistan decide to remove "Islamic" from their Constitution and the name of their country, these problems will continue. Also, countries that have welcomed Muslim immigrants from Pakistan (e.g. Australia, Sweden) have reported dramatic increases in violence against women, e.g. a 10x increase in reports of rape in Sweden. As far as the believers are concerned, they have a superior religion, and they have no intention of aping western standards. Too many regressive identitarian "liberals" refuse to see that fact, and refuse to read the doctrine that they insist on importing.
curious2
2016 Mar 22, 3:20pm
George Packer, "Exporting Jihad," The New Yorker, March 28, 2016 issue:
The ideology of Salafi jihadism is static and “incredibly simple,†Bernard Haykel, an expert on Islam and the Middle East at Princeton, said. “You can learn it in an afternoon.†Salafis follow literalist interpretations of the Koran and maintain that all spheres of society must be ruled according to strict Sharia law (which, for example, promotes the removal of women from the public sphere). Those who support jihad make selective theological and legal arguments to justify violence against the perceived enemies of Islam. The targets do not change: the West, Jews, Shiites, the secular governments and security forces of Islamic countries, and Sunni Muslims who are deemed apostates. But the factors that drive young men and women to adopt Salafi jihadism are diverse and hard to parse: militants reach an overwhelmingly reductive idea by complex and twisted paths. A son of Riyadh grows up hearing Salafi preaching in a state-sanctioned mosque and goes to Syria with the financial aid of a Saudi businessman. A young Sunni in Falluja joins his neighbors in fighting American occupation and “Persianâ€â€”Shiite—domination. A Muslim teen-ager in a Paris banlieue finds an antidote to her sense of exclusion and spiritual emptiness in a jihadi online community. Part of the success of ISIS consists in its ability to attract a wide array of people and make them all look, sound, and think alike.
***
Kamal had joined the Jasmine Revolution, but he was angry that it had not improved the prospects of young Tunisians like him... He glanced at the other tables in the garden café, lowered his voice, and outlined what he called “the project.†He said, “The Islamic State will rule the world. There will be no flag other than the flag of Allah, and there will be justice and peace all over the world. Those who have done wrong...will be killed under the Koran. Some will die in public trials, in front of everybody... They’ll get what they deserve. They are infidels.
***
For all his talk about jihad, Kamal seemed like a young man who would jump at a chance to party at a techno club. He was eager to mention European friends with whom he discusses religion (but not the project).â€
curious2
2016 Mar 22, 3:59pm
"Police hunt suspect after Islamic State kills 30 in Brussels suicide attacks"
Eventually, western governments' domestic "war on terror" will become unsustainable, as they run out of resources to pursue Islamic "radicals" amid haystacks of "moderate" Muslims while trying to maintain western freedoms. Countries with growing Muslim populations are approaching a fork in the road: either give up western freedoms (as France has already begun to do), or give up Islam, because the two cannot coexist when the Muslim population becomes too large to police effectively. The best and simplest solution as I see it is offer everyone a free one-way ticket to Mecca, on one condition: if they go, they can never return. Islam requires all believers to go to Mecca. If you offer them the opportunity, believers can't refuse. It's about the only vulnerability in the religion, as far as I can tell. Offering everyone a free ticket is not discriminatory, and it isn't persecution, but it might work, and it would cost less than our current campaigns of invade&invite&surveillance. Also, on a going forward basis, you could add that anyone who chooses to go to a specific list of countries that advocate or finance the violent overthrow of American government, is likewise choosing to renounce whatever right they may have had to return. If you guarantee that the believers can't come back, then those who don't believe could say so without fear of getting killed by the believers.
Patrick
2016 Mar 23, 4:42pm
At the functional root of the the holocaust there was wealth and power to be commandeered
this is true.
same for the armenians. the turks used religion (armenians were a christian minority in a muslim country) to help whip people up against them, but a major unspoken motive was taking over armenian businesses and property.
curious2
2016 Mar 23, 5:27pm
I tried to find a transcript on CNN but so far only part of it is published there. I saw the video and can confirm she said that, along with saying we have to "toughen our surveillance, our interception of communication" here in the USA. Most of the former Secretary of State's remarks are consistent with the party line, but the bit about bin Laden got my attention, in light of reports that the Saudis (who reportedly gave more than $40 million to the Clintons and their Foundation) were paying the Pakistanis to house bin Laden. At least she is now acknowledging that the latest carnage "is clearly rooted in Islamic thinking."
[Update 2016-06-17: CNN updated the online transcript to include Hillary saying it "is clearly rooted in Islamic thinking", but only after many other sources had picked up on the comment.]
« First « Previous Comments 578 - 617 of 2,852 Next » Last » Search these comments
A Call to the Muslims of the World from a Group of Freethinkers and Humanists of Muslim Origins
Dear friends,
The tragic incidents of September 11 have shocked the world. It is unthinkable that anyone could be so full of hate as to commit such heinous acts and kill so many innocent people. We people of Muslim origin are as much shaken as the rest of the world and yet we find ourselves looked upon with suspicion and distrust by our neighbours and fellow citizens. We want to cry out and tell the world that we are not terrorists, and that those who perpetrate such despicable acts are murderers and not part of us. But, in reality, because of our Muslim origins we just cannot erase the stigma of Islamic Terrorism from our identity!
What most Muslims will say:
Islam would never support the killing of innocent people. Allah of the Holy Qur'an never advocated killings. This is all the work of a few misguided individuals at the fringes of society. The real Islam is sanctified from violence. We denounce all violence. Islam means peace. Islam means tolerance.
What knowledgeable Muslims should say:
That is what most Muslims think, but is it true? Does Islam really preach peace, tolerance and non-violence? The Muslims who perpetrate these crimes think differently. They believe that what they do is Jihad (holy war). They say that killing unbelievers is mandatory for every Muslim. They do not kill because they wish to break the laws of Islam but because they think this is what true Muslims should do. Those who blow-up their own bodies to kill more innocent people do so because they think they will be rewarded in Paradise. They hope to be blessed by Allah, eat celestial food, drink pure wine and enjoy the company of divine consorts. Are they completely misguided? Where did they get this distorted idea? How did they come to believe that killing innocent people pleases God? Or is it that we are misguided? Does really Islam preach violence? Does it call upon its believers to kill non-believers? We denounce those who commit acts of violence and call them extremists. But are they really extremists or are they following what the holy book, the Qur'an tells them to do? What does the Qur'an teach? Have we read the Qur'an? Do we know what kind of teachings are there? Let us go through some of them and take a closer look at what Allah says.
What the Qur'an Teaches Us:
We have used the most widely available English text of the Qur'an and readers are welcome to verify our quotes from the holy book. Please have an open mind and read through these verses again and again. The following quotes are taken from the most trusted Yusufali's translation of the Qur'an. The Qur'an tells us: not to make friendship with Jews and Christians (5:51), kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (2:191), murder them and treat them harshly (9:123), fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (9:5). The Qur'an demands that we fight the unbelievers, and promises If there are twenty amongst you, you will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of them (8:65). Allah and his messenger want us to fight the Christians and the Jews until they pay the Jizya [a penalty tax for the non-Muslims living under Islamic rules] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued (9:29). Allah and his messenger announce that it is acceptable to go back on our promises (treaties) and obligations with Pagans and make war on them whenever we find ourselves strong enough to do so (9:3). Our God tells us to fight the unbelievers and He will punish them by our hands, cover them with shame and help us (to victory) over them (9:14).
The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and relegates those who disbelieve in Islam to hell (5:10), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), and orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (2:193). It says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water (14:17). It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter (5:34). And tells us that for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods (22:19-22) and that they not only will have disgrace in this life, but on the Day of Judgment He shall make them taste the Penalty of burning (Fire) (22:9). The Qur'an says that those who invoke a god other than Allah not only should meet punishment in this world but the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be doubled to them, and they will dwell therein in ignominy (25:68). For those who believe not in Allah and His Messenger, He has prepared, for those who reject Allah, a Blazing Fire! (48:13). Although we are asked to be compassionate amongst each other, we have to be harsh with unbelievers, our Christian, Jewish and Atheist neighbours and colleagues (48:29). As for him who does not believe in Islam, the Prophet announces with a stern command: Seize ye him, and bind ye him, And burn ye him in the Blazing Fire. Further, make him march in a chain, whereof the length is seventy cubits! This was he that would not believe in Allah Most High. And would not encourage the feeding of the indigent! So no friend hath he here this Day. Nor hath he any food except the corruption from the washing of wounds, Which none do eat but those in sin. (69:30-37) The Qur'an prohibits a Muslim from befriending a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim (9:23), (3:28). Our holy book asks us to be disobedient towards the disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers with great endeavour (25:52) and be stern with them because they belong to Hell (66:9). The holy Prophet prescribes fighting for us and tells us that it is good for us even if we dislike it (2:216). Then he advises us to strike off the heads of the disbelievers; and after making a wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives (47:4). Our God has promised to instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers and has ordered us to smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them (8:12). He also assures us that when we kill in his name it is not us who slay them but Allah, in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself (8:17). He orders us to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies (8:60). He has made the Jihad mandatory and warns us that Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place (9:39). Allah speaks to our Holy Prophet and says O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern against them. Their abode is Hell - an evil refuge indeed (9:73).
He promises us that in the fight for His cause whether we slay or are slain we return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise he will wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones (56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There we are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what we did (56:19). He also promises boys like hidden pearls (56:24) and youth never altering in age like scattered pearls (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. We will be admitted to Paradise where we shall find goodly things, beautiful ones, pure ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor jinni (56:67-71).In the West we enjoy freedom of belief but we are not supposed to give such freedom to anyone else because it is written If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good) (3:85). And He orders us to fight them on until there is no more tumult and faith in Allah is practiced everywhere (8:39). As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (4:34). It advises to take a green branch and beat your wife, because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many 'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000 Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they believe a virgin will not go to Hell.
Dear fellow Muslims:Is this the Islam you believe in? Is this your Most Merciful, Most Compassionate Allah whom you worship daily? Could Allah incite you to kill other peoples? Please understand that there is no terrorist gene - but there could be a terrorist mindset. That mindset finds its most fertile ground in the tenets of Islam. Denying it, and presenting Islam to the lay public as a religion of peace similar to Buddhism, is to suppress the truth. The history of Islam between the 7th and 14th centuries is riddled with violence, fratricide and wars of aggression, starting right from the death of the Prophet and during the so-called 'pure' or orthodox caliphate. And Muhammad himself hoisted the standard of killing, looting, massacres and bloodshed. How can we deny the entire history? The behaviour of our Holy Prophet as recorded in authentic Islamic sources is quite questionable from a modern viewpoint. The Prophet was a charismatic man but he had few virtues. Imitating him in all aspects of life (following the Sunnah) is both impossible and dangerous in the 21st century. Why are we so helplessly in denial over this simple issue? When the Prophet was in Mecca and he was still not powerful enough he called for tolerance. He said To you be your religion, and to me my religion (109:6). This famous quote is often misused to prove that the general principle of Qur'an is tolerance. He advised his follower to speak good to their enemies (2: 83), exhorted them to be patient (20:103) and said that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256). But that all changed drastically when he came to power. Then killing and slaying unbelievers with harshness and without mercy was justified in innumerable verses. The verses quoted to prove Islam's tolerance ignore many other verses that bear no trace of tolerance or forgiveness. Where is tolerance in this well-known verse Alarzu Lillah, Walhukmu Lillah. (The Earth belongs to Allah and thus only Allah's rule should prevail all over the earth.).Is it normal that a book revealed by God should have so many serious contradictions? The Prophet himself set the example of unleashing violence by invading the Jewish settlements, breaking treaties he had signed with them and banishing some of them after confiscating their belongings, massacring others and taking their wives and children as slaves. He inspected the youngsters and massacred all those who had pubic hair along with the men. Those who were younger he kept as slaves. He distributed the women captured in his raids among his soldiers keeping the prettiest for himself (33:50). He made sexual advances on Safiyah, a Jewish girl on the same day he captured her town Kheibar and killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives. Reyhana was another Jewish girl of Bani Quriza whom he used as a sex slave after killing all her male relatives. In the last ten years of his life he accumulated two scores of wives, concubines and sex slaves including the 9 year old Ayesha. These are not stories but records from authentic Islamic history and the Hadiths. It can be argued that this kind of behaviour was not unknown or unusual for the conquerors and leaders of the mediaeval world but these are not the activities befitting of a peaceful saint and certainly not someone who claimed to be the Mercy of God for all creation. There were known assassinations of adversaries during the Prophet's time, which he had knowledge of and had supported. Among them there was a 120 year old man, Abu 'Afak whose only crime was to compose a lyric satirical of the Prophet. (by Ibn Sa'd Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Volume 2, page 32) Then when a poetess, a mother of 5 small children 'Asma' Bint Marwan wrote a poetry cursing the Arabs for letting Muhammad assassinate an old man, our Holy Prophet ordered her to be assassinated too in the middle of the night while her youngest child was suckling from her breast. (Sirat Rasul Allah (A. Guillaume's translation The Life of Muhammad) page 675, 676).The Prophet did develop a 'Robin Hood' image that justified raiding merchant caravans attacking cities and towns, killing people and looting their belongings in the name of social justice. Usama Bin Laden is also trying to create the same image. But Robin Hood didn't claim to be a prophet or a pacifist nor did he care for apologist arguments. He did not massacre innocent people indiscriminately nor did he profit by reducing free people to slaves and then trading them. With the known and documented violent legacy of Islam, how can we suddenly rediscover it as a religion of peace in the free world in the 21st century? Isn't this the perpetuation of a lie by a few ambitious leaders in order to gain political control of the huge and ignorant Muslim population? They are creating a polished version of Islam by completely ignoring history. They are propagating the same old dogma for simple believing people in a crisp new modern package. Their aim: to gain political power in today's high-tension world. They want to use the confrontational power of the original Islam to catalyse new conflicts and control new circles of power.
Dear conscientious Muslims, please question yourselves. Isn't this compulsive following of a man who lived 1400 years ago leading us to doom in a changing world? Do the followers of any other religion follow one man in such an all-encompassing way? Who are we deceiving, them or ourselves? Dear brothers and sisters, see how our Umma (people) has sunk into poverty and how it lags behind the rest of the world. Isn't it because we are following a religion that is outdated and impractical? In this crucial moment of history, when a great catastrophe has befallen us and a much bigger one is lying ahead, should not we wake up from our 1400 years of slumber and see where things have gone wrong? Hatred has filled the air and the world is bracing itself for its doomsday. Should we not ask ourselves whether we have contributed, wittingly or unwittingly, to this tragedy and whether we can stop the great disaster from happening?Unfortunately the answer to the first question is yes. Yes we have contributed to the rise of fundamentalism by merely claiming Islam is a religion of peace, by simply being a Muslim and by saying our shahada (testimony that Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his messenger). By our shahada we have recognized Muhammad as a true messenger of God and his book as the words of God. But as you saw above those words are anything but from God. They call for killing, they are prescriptions for hate and they foment intolerance. And when the ignorant among us read those hate-laden verses, they act on them and the result is the infamous September 11, human bombs in Israel, massacres in East Timor and Bangladesh, kidnappings and killings in the Philippines, slavery in the Sudan, honour killings in Pakistan and Jordan, torture in Iran, stoning and maiming in Afghanistan and Iran, violence in Algeria, terrorism in Palestine and misery and death in every Islamic country. We are responsible because we endorse Islam and hail it as a religion of God. And we are as guilty as those who put into practice what the Qur'an preaches - and ironically we are the main victims too. If we are not terrorists, if we love peace, if we cried with the rest of the word for what happened in New York, then why are we supporting the Qur'an that preaches killing, that advocates holy war, that calls for the murder of non-Muslims? It is not the extremists who have misunderstood Islam. They do literally what the Qur'an asks them to do. It is we who misunderstand Islam. We are the ones who are confused. We are the ones who wrongly assume that Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is not a religion of peace. In its so-called pure form it can very well be interpreted as a doctrine of hate. Terrorists are doing just that and we the intellectual apologists of Islam are justifying it. We can stop this madness. Yes, we can avert the disaster that is hovering over our heads. Yes, we can denounce the doctrines that promote hate. Yes, we can embrace the rest of humanity with love. Yes, we can become part of a united world, members of one human family, flowers of one garden. We can dump the claim of infallibility of our Book, and the questionable legacy of our Prophet.Dear friends, there is no time to waste. Let us put an end to this lie. Let us not fool ourselves. Islam is not a religion of peace, of tolerance, of equality or of unity of humankind. Let us read the Qur'an. Let us face the truth even if it is painful. As long as we keep this lie alive, as long as we hide our head in the sands of Arabia we are feeding terrorism. As long as you and I keep calling Qur'an the unchangeable book of God, we cannot blame those who follow the teachings therein. As long as we pay our Khums and Zakat our money goes to promote Islamic expansionism and that means terrorism, Jihad and war. Islam divides the world in two. Darul Harb (land of war) and Darul Islam (land of Islam). Darul Harb is the land of the infidels, Muslims are required to infiltrate those lands, proselytise and procreate until their numbers increase and then start the war and fight and kill the people and impose the religion of Islam on them and convert that land into Darul Islam. In all fairness we denounce this betrayal. This is abuse of the trust. How can we make war in the countries that have sheltered us? How can we kill those who have befriended us? Yet willingly or unwillingly we have become pawns in this Islamic Imperialism. Let us see what great Islamic scholars have had to say in this respect.Dr. M. Khan the translator of Sahih Bukhari and the Qur'an into English wrote: Allah revealed in Sura Bara'at (Repentance, IX) the order to discard (all) obligations (covenants, etc), and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the Pagans as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizia (a tax levied on the Jews and Christians) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (as it is revealed in 9:29). So the Muslims were not permitted to abandon the fighting against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are strong and have the ability to fight against them. So at first the fighting was forbidden, then it was permitted, and after that it was made obligatory [Introduction to English translation of Sahih Bukhari, p.xxiv.] Dr. Sobhy as-Saleh, a contemporary Islamic academician quoted Imam Suyuti the author of Itqan Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an who wrote: The command to fight the infidels was delayed until the Muslims become strong, but when they were weak they were commanded to endure and be patient. [ Sobhy as_Saleh, Mabaheth Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an, Dar al-'Ilm Lel-Malayeen, Beirut, 1983, p. 269.]Dr. Sobhy, in a footnote, commends the opinion of a scholar named Zarkashi who said: Allah the most high and wise revealed to Mohammad in his weak condition what suited the situation, because of his mercy to him and his followers. For if He gave them the command to fight while they were weak it would have been embarrassing and most difficult, but when the most high made Islam victorious He commanded him with what suited the situation, that is asking the people of the Book to become Muslims or to pay the levied tax, and the infidels to become Muslims or face death. These two options, to fight or to have peace return according to the strength or the weakness of the Muslims. [ibid p. 270]Other Islamic scholars (Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, Ga'far ar-Razi, Rabi' Ibn 'Ons, 'Abil-'Aliyah, Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn 'Aslam, etc.) agree that the verse Slay the idolaters wherever you find them (9:5) cancelled those few earlier verses that called for tolerance in the Qur'an and were revealed when Islam was weak. Can you still say that Islam is the religion of peace? We propose a solution.
We know too well that it is not easy to denounce our faith because it means denouncing a part of ourselves. We are a group of freethinkers and humanists with Islamic roots. Discovering the truth and leaving the religion of our fathers and forefathers was a painful experience. But after learning what Islam stands for we had no choice but to leave it. After becoming familiar with the Qur'an the choice became clear: It is either Islam or humanity. If Islam thrives, then humanity will die. We decided to side with humanity. Culturally we are still Muslims but we no longer believe in Islam as the true religion of God. We are humanists. We love humanity. We work for the unity of humankind. We work for equality between men and women. We strive for the secularisation of Islamic countries, for democracy and freedom of thought, belief and expression. We decided to live no longer in self-deception but to embrace humanity, and to enter into the new millennium hand in hand with people of other cultures and beliefs in amity and in peace.We denounce the violence that is eulogized in the Qur'an as holy war (Jihad). We condemn killing in the name of God. We believe in the sanctity of human life, not in the inviolability of beliefs and religions. We invite you to join us and the rest of humanity and become part of the family of humankind - in love, camaraderie and peace.
Arabic translation الترجمة العربية
See http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis and http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ for more.
Please copy this article, and distribute it as widely as possible, both online and physically. The future of humanity depends on it.