patrick.net

More from Islam Watch:

"Churchill wrote: "Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness."
***
Churchill noted the threat of Wahhabism on June 14, 1921 at the House of Commons..."A large number of Bin Saud's followers belong to the Wahabi sect, a form of Mohammedanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same relationship to orthodox Islam as the most militant form of Calvinism would have borne to Rome in the fiercest times of [Europe's] religious wars.

The Wahhabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what they practice themselves they rigorously enforce on others. They hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to kill all who do not share their opinions and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for simply appearing in the streets.

It is a penal offence to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette and, as for the crime of alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this country falls far behind them. Austere, intolerant, well-armed, and blood-thirsty, in their own regions the Wahhabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina."

Churchill had no fear of the truth.

Not the only thing Churchill got right...

LAND MONOPOLY is not the only monopoly, but it is by far the greatest of monopolies -- it is a perpetual monopoly, and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly. Unearned increments in land are not the only form of unearned or undeserved profit, but they are the principal form of unearned increment, and they are derived from processes which are not merely not beneficial, but positively detrimental to the general public.

Land, which is a necessity of human existence, which is the original source of all wealth, which is strictly limited in extent, which is fixed in geographical position -- land, I say, differs from all other forms of property, and the immemorial customs of nearly every modern state have placed the tenure, transfer, and obligations of land in a wholly different category from other classes of property.

Nothing is more amusing than to watch the efforts of land monopolists to claim that other forms of property and increment are similar in all respects to land and the unearned increment on land.
They talk of the increased profits of a doctor or lawyer from the growth of population in the town in which they live. They talk of the profits of a railway, from the growing wealth and activity in the districts through which it runs. They talk of the profits from a rise in stocks and even the profits derived from the sale of works of art.

But see how misleading and false all those analogies are. The windfalls from the sale of a picture -- a Van Dyke or a Holbein -- may be very considerable. But pictures do not get in anybody's way. They do not lay a toll on anybody's labor; they do not touch enterprise and production; they do not affect the creative processes on which the material well-being of millions depends.

http://www.landvaluetax.org/current-affairs-comment/winston-churchill-said-it-all-better-then-we-can.html

I can't copy and paste all that text from my monile. There's the link

General Patton's opinion of Islam was very similar to Churchill's:

"To me it seems certain that the fatalistic teachings of Muhammad and the utter degradation of women is the outstanding cause for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have kept on developing."

"But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis—as danger­ous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious blood­thirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.
—The Story of the Malakand Field Force (1898)"

Ppl, you don't even need all those quotes, just look at the following map ...



That was the Zoroastrian based, Persian Empire of the ancient world at its maximum expansion. We're talking about a region which is basically a land mass between Yugoslavia, China, Ethiopia, and central India, which included Soviet territories along with the middle east. This was not only a multicultural society but quite possibly, the largest empire in history, encompassing 40% of the world's population for its time.

Within this territory, there were Jews, Christians (Nestorian as well, not just Orthodox as in Greek Byzantine), Hindus, Buddhists, and Zoroastrians.

In other words, there was a version of the United States of America, but thousands of years ago where ppl of differing backgrounds could try to live in peace.

All it took was for Islam to show up and destroy what was left of civilization and as a result, we have the middle east of today.

Arabs do not bring peace, all they bring is turmoil and strife.

Rin says

Within this territory, there was Jews, Christians (Nestorian as well, not just Orthodox as in Byzantine), Hindus, Buddhists, and Zoroastrians.

In other words, there was a version of the United States of America, but thousands of years ago where ppl of differing backgrounds could try to live in peace.

All it took was for Islam to show up and destroy what was left of civilization and as a result, we have the middle east of today.

It was always easy in the old days for the more violent savage to conquer and slaughter a peaceful opponent. Those who survived were forced to join Islam, and become a violent savage themselves.
Today, the map you present are inhabited by dangerous and violent Islamic wackos. We don't want this sick cult to spread, nor do we want to be their victims. We have no choice but to contain this disease with any means possible.
All this reminds me of some Star Trek episodes where we go to distant planets and come face to face with primitive people. The situation we face with Islam is the same, that of.....Spacemen vs Cavemen. We could wipe out every one of these barbarians in one day, but choose not to because a more civilized approach is to civilize them. Unfortunately, some people think that can be achieved without controlling them first.

Strategist says

It was always easy in the old days for the more violent savage to conquer and slaughter a peaceful opponent. Those who survived were forced to join Islam, and become a violent savage themselves.

For some reason, due to divine mal-providence, the barbarians, led by Caliphate Abu Bakr, Mo's successor, was able to hit the Persians when they were at their weakest. They were at the tail end of a long term border dispute with the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire and didn't protect their interior well because no one expected an organized group of psychos emerging from the sands of Arabia.


Strategist says

Today, the map you present are inhabited by dangerous and violent Islamic wackos. We don't want this sick cult to spread, nor do we want to be their victims. We have no choice but to contain this disease with any means possible.

That map represents the United States of (America, sorry, Persia), back in ancient times. You may not know but Persia actually retained Plato's Academy when Orthodox Christian fundamentalists in Byzantine evicted them for being too 'pagan' in their scholarly outlook. America also took in scholars, who were oppressed in their home countries for generations.

In other words, we're in the same danger as our ancient forefathers. We're entering a time were we're completely unprepared for a barbarian invasion from the south. And no, I'm not talking about Catholic Central Americans. Islam makes Pancho Villa look like a street hustler.

Strategist says

All this reminds me of some Star Trek episodes where we go to distant planets and come face to face with primitive people. The situation we face with Islam is the same, that of.....Spacemen vs Cavemen. We could wipe out every one of these barbarians in one day, but choose not to because a more civilized approach is to civilize them.

If the barbarians develop warp drive then it's essential to nuke 'em at once.

Rin says

If the barbarians develop warp drive then it's essential to nuke 'em at once.

They already have. It's called Pakistani nukes.

HEYYOU says

Let's all make sure we believe in some imaginary God, what could go wrong?

Besides death, war, destruction, rape, murder, plunder, pillage, slavery, and torture, nothing much.
Why are you so paranoid?

Rin says

All it took was for Islam to show up and destroy what was left of civilization and as a result, we have the middle east of today.

Arabs do not bring peace, all they bring is turmoil and strife.

From what I read, the Persians and the Byzantines were so busy fighting each other and taxing their people to death to fund it, that when the Arabs shows up promising a lower tax rate, the masses went for it and the Persian empire was too weakened to fight.

Most of the Greek-speaking areas were also assimilated into Islam: Turkey, the Levant, Egypt.

Patrick says

Rin says

All it took was for Islam to show up and destroy what was left of civilization and as a result, we have the middle east of today.

Arabs do not bring peace, all they bring is turmoil and strife.

From what I read, the Persians and the Byzantines were so busy fighting each other and taxing their people to death to fund it, that when the Arabs shows up promising a lower tax rate, the masses went for it and the Persian empire was too weakened to fight.

Most of the Greek-speaking areas were also assimilated into Islam: Turkey, the Levant, Egypt.

What do you think the USA is going through, with our own endless wars, taxes to only paying the interest, etc, along with immigration policies, which isn't designed for long term assimilation but ppl living in separate enclaves?

If Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was an Orthodox Christian (or really, any denomination) from Russia-Kazakhstan, chances are, today, he'd be in a graduate program for physical therapy or some other health care field in the State of Massachusetts. By 2020, he'd be in a successful career and probably be living the American Dream like a lot of others from eastern Europe. Instead, he joined his psycho Islamist brother and became the infamous Boston Bomber, now on death row.

Look, I was born in Cambridge MA, that city (across the river from Boston) has assimilated countless ethnicities. No one growing up there will feel like an outsider if one plays by the rules.