patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,259,201 comments by 15,027 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President, DOGEWontAmountToShit, HeadSet, Patrick online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 2,455 - 2,494 of 2,865 Next » Last » Search these comments
2455
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 22, 11:30am
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 22, 11:30am
Reality says
We can do that too. In fact, the Biblical minimalism has been on the backfoot because they keep finding more and more extensive buildings at earlier times where the inhabitants of the region (not just Judah or Israel) have been shown to have 2-partition walled cities, massive admin complexes, etc. going back to near 1000BC. And there's destruction layers at about the right time for... the battles reported in the Bible. Minimalists were claiming Kingdoms of the region was just a warlord with a few hundred guys with spears spread out over several hilltop villages. The scale of the towns and their defenses make that untenable.
I'll share some interesting stuff later.
Reality says
Agreed. And I enjoy your theorizing along these points. I would say that volcanic activity/climate shifts may have contributed to making the interest payments impossible (as well as constant invasions from hungry bands, in Mesopotamia the salinity of the soil, etc.) or revenue starved polities tried to skip scheduled Jubillees.
Reality says
Okay, so you're not an "orthodox" (in the sense of commonly held understanding of historical Christendom or Judaism, not as in "Eastern Orthodox") believer, or not a believer at all.
For some reason I thought you were, so apologies for boring you with Biblical proofs.
I meant physical evidence such as palace, burial tomb, workshop, etc., not 3 stone tablet
We can do that too. In fact, the Biblical minimalism has been on the backfoot because they keep finding more and more extensive buildings at earlier times where the inhabitants of the region (not just Judah or Israel) have been shown to have 2-partition walled cities, massive admin complexes, etc. going back to near 1000BC. And there's destruction layers at about the right time for... the battles reported in the Bible. Minimalists were claiming Kingdoms of the region was just a warlord with a few hundred guys with spears spread out over several hilltop villages. The scale of the towns and their defenses make that untenable.
I'll share some interesting stuff later.
Reality says
The abuse of credit banking may well have led to the circa 1300-1200BC late Bronz Age collapse.
Agreed. And I enjoy your theorizing along these points. I would say that volcanic activity/climate shifts may have contributed to making the interest payments impossible (as well as constant invasions from hungry bands, in Mesopotamia the salinity of the soil, etc.) or revenue starved polities tried to skip scheduled Jubillees.
Reality says
New Testament obviously had authors deliberately matching "prophesies" from the Old Testament.
Okay, so you're not an "orthodox" (in the sense of commonly held understanding of historical Christendom or Judaism, not as in "Eastern Orthodox") believer, or not a believer at all.
For some reason I thought you were, so apologies for boring you with Biblical proofs.
2456
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 22, 11:38am
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 22, 11:38am
Reality says
When you go from 50,000 person cities without walls to having only one or two on the whole continent (and those only possible because their pre-collapse infrastructure like sewer and water intact, like Cologne or Naples) to an assortment of walled villages and hilltop fortress towns more often chosen for their defensibility more than convenient location to fertile land... it's a collapse. Exactly what you'd expect after a Zombie apocalypse - people abandoning cities for more defensible locations. That means civil society breakdown.
Bristol, the second largest city in England, had less than 10,000 people in 1200. Or about the population of Florence, Oregon. London was 30-40k tops. Almost all London today outside the City was slowly built out starting in the 1500s. Westminister was in the furthest greenbelt of London when built.
The opposite is true: Golden-Silver age Rome was so large and spread out, that the modern suburbs of Rome were inside the ancient city borders.
There was a brief resurgence around 900-1200 but that was retarded by the Northman invasions and absolutely endemic warfare between nobility. It was the Year without a Summer and the Black Death that whacked out and consolidated the nobility and their holdings into larger polities, rather than a myriad of minor barons fighting over tiny slices of land. The houses that did survive inherited more land and wealth through deaths, and with those resources could impose more restrictions on their underlings, one of which was requiring them to get permission before they started an armed conflict.
From Commerce to Societal/Government complexity to Literacy/Literary Output to Size of Armies to Equipment of the average soldier to Scope of Authority to evidence of large population ... there was a huge drop in Western Europe between ~400 to about 900AD.
"the Dark Ages" (which was actually not dark, but that's a different topic).
When you go from 50,000 person cities without walls to having only one or two on the whole continent (and those only possible because their pre-collapse infrastructure like sewer and water intact, like Cologne or Naples) to an assortment of walled villages and hilltop fortress towns more often chosen for their defensibility more than convenient location to fertile land... it's a collapse. Exactly what you'd expect after a Zombie apocalypse - people abandoning cities for more defensible locations. That means civil society breakdown.
Bristol, the second largest city in England, had less than 10,000 people in 1200. Or about the population of Florence, Oregon. London was 30-40k tops. Almost all London today outside the City was slowly built out starting in the 1500s. Westminister was in the furthest greenbelt of London when built.
The opposite is true: Golden-Silver age Rome was so large and spread out, that the modern suburbs of Rome were inside the ancient city borders.
There was a brief resurgence around 900-1200 but that was retarded by the Northman invasions and absolutely endemic warfare between nobility. It was the Year without a Summer and the Black Death that whacked out and consolidated the nobility and their holdings into larger polities, rather than a myriad of minor barons fighting over tiny slices of land. The houses that did survive inherited more land and wealth through deaths, and with those resources could impose more restrictions on their underlings, one of which was requiring them to get permission before they started an armed conflict.
From Commerce to Societal/Government complexity to Literacy/Literary Output to Size of Armies to Equipment of the average soldier to Scope of Authority to evidence of large population ... there was a huge drop in Western Europe between ~400 to about 900AD.
2457
fdhfoiehfeoi
2024 Apr 22, 1:17pm
fdhfoiehfeoi
2024 Apr 22, 1:17pm
Reality says
I assume this is in reference to the Old Testament. See Noah's Ark, the walls of Jericho, Sodom and Gomorrah, Solomon, Sennacherib, Shroud of Turin, and the final resting place of the Pharaoh who released the Hebrews. There are more...
When I said "no archaeological evidence," I meant physical evidence such as palace, burial tomb, workshop, etc.,
I assume this is in reference to the Old Testament. See Noah's Ark, the walls of Jericho, Sodom and Gomorrah, Solomon, Sennacherib, Shroud of Turin, and the final resting place of the Pharaoh who released the Hebrews. There are more...
2458
Reality
2024 Apr 22, 1:37pm
@NuttBoxer
I was talking about evidence for the unified kingdom under David and Solomon, and then the two kingdoms after splitting.
I was talking about evidence for the unified kingdom under David and Solomon, and then the two kingdoms after splitting.
2459
Reality
2024 Apr 23, 5:46pm
@AmericanKulak
I'm not a non-believer. I actually think faith/religion is fundamental to the functioning of a society: the default most common faith / counter-factual religion people have is that crime like theft/robbery/rape/murder would get caught, whereas in reality the percentage of murders solved in cities like Chicago is in the lower teens if not single digits. While I personally wouldn't want to commit murder even if there is only 0.01% of being caught, because my own opportunity cost (of leading a productive and rewarding life) is much higher . . . the same can not be said for the bottom certain percentages of the population, therefore having a faith that crime doesn't pay is important to the continued function of a society. When the civil authority repeatedly provide counter to that basic faith in secular life, a spiritual faith can make the difference between whether a society holds together or falls apart (i.e. whether systemic non-violent division of labor can continue). For at least half of the population, any one of the numerous common religions that have been with humanity since 5th century BC is good enough. (Therefore, read the next paragraph with caution, and please don't think I'm trying to sway you from your faith).
For myself, my own faith is closest to Congregationism and Deism, similar to what the Founding Fathers (of the United States) had. Differing from the current Wikipedia definition of Deism, I'm open to the possibility of God revealing Truths to particular individuals from time to time. However, knowing how the Council of Nicea relied on secular government power to canonize the New Testament, ditching at least the Gospel of Thomas and Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) among many other early Christian witness accounts, I have no more faith in something just because "it is written" than in the "scientific consensus" on Anthropogenic Global Warming or Covid shots or the sale of Indulgences. All of those "consensus" are essentially applications of secular government power buying off easily bribable career "intellectuals" whose income/livelihood depend on continued service to their payers. Wikipedia defines Deists as those who believe God doesn't intervene and only reveal the wonder of his creation through nature. I'd add that sometimes revelations to particular individuals do happen: for example, Einstein, a mediocre student all his early life and having squandered most of college years on dating and pre-marital sex, somehow had the idea of Light Speed Constancy revealed to him, making him essentially a Prophet opening up a new understanding of the universe. However, Prophets are not always right: the same Einstein fought for decades against Quantum Physics, which was revealed to others. It takes the gathering of many different people and ideas (revelations from God) to arrive at a more accurate understanding of God's Creation. That seemed to be the modus operandi during the first couple centuries of Christianity, as we are presented with multiple different accounts as Gospels (likely also a feature of Judaist scholarship when no single sect dominates; i.e. Judaism also had "congregationist" element in its tradition). The Council of Nicea and subsequent consolidation events changed that, making religion into a state-religion and corrupting religion in the process.
The first-hand experience with AGW and Covid-scamdemic, the historical knowledge of War-Banking cycles in the last 500 years (the pattern recognition came to me a few years ago as if a revelation in the middle of the scamdemic), the knowledge of the Council of Nicea being the source of what went into the Bible and (some of) what were excluded, made me realize that the 5th century BC Ezra being sent by Persia to dominate Egyptian exiles living on the strip of land on the east coast of Mediterranean, concocting a story based on (native to Persia) Zoroastrian Creation myth and the local legend of Akhenaten/Moses, was the first instance of Aryan committing genocide and land-robbery/enslaving against Semites (just like Aryan having concocted a different myth for dominating the Indian sub-continent in the cycle before 500BC). I had always wondered why the Nazi leaders called themselves Aryans, a rather foreign name to Germans; now we know, the Aryans were myth-makers, occultists and the first anti-semites (using identity theft).
There are layers of ancient artifacts in both north and south Israel/Palestine, but nearly 200 years of digging have found nothing calling their own kingdom Israel or Judah. All 3 tablets discovered in the decade around 1870 (when Rothschild banking launched Zionism to exploit long-suffering European Jews) were located outside the alleged kingdom(s) area and allegedly referring to Israel because some vague reference to something like "YSRR," not exactly convincing. It's hard to imagine a grand kingdom like that of David and Solomon (and allegedly fielding 2000 war chariots in one battle) would have left nothing naming itself in its own territory. The 6-pointed original Star of Ishtar (also known as ISIS) in Solomon's Seal also makes Ezra's followers making up the story of Solomon sound like promoting black magic (occult) / (human cattle) fertility / mass prostitution (was "Solomon's Temple" filled with thousands of prostitutes? That may explain the story of him having thousands of wives; did Ezra and his followers create the Solomon Temple story in order to rebuild a temple to house temple prostitutes? in order to promote tourism and trade?). The Star of Ishtar/ISIS originally had 6 points: head up, feet (together) down, two arms uplifted (to the up-left and up-right) and two wings pointed to the lower left and lower right. i.e. the same six points as in the Solomon's Seal and the Star of David. It's an Aryan occult symbol, and the reason why the Nazis forced that (instead of the 7-candles Menorah) on European Jews.
As for "Dark Age," the population of Rome did not decline from hundreds of thousands to a few thousand over a thousand years. When the welfare system ended (likely due to banksters and/or government inviting barbarians to take over the city so the bank/officials could stop paying out account holders), and commerce was interrupted, most people moved out quickly. The down-turn was drastic, horrific and took place very quickly. Most of "Dark Age" is not the decline but the slow recovery. Like you mentioned, the size of the urban area of Rome did not recover to circa 200AD level until the mid-20th century; however, that fact doesn't mean people were still slowly dying of the original Roman collapse in the late 19th century. "Dark" because there wasn't a central government to pay numerous scribes. People making a living performing in the Collosium or prostituting (which was extremely widespread in late Roman Empire) may not be able to keep their old jobs, but thanks to the absence of competition from cheap imported grain from Egypt, farmers in central Italy could actually farm instead of becoming landless bankrupted farmers having to seek hand-outs in Rome.
I'm not a non-believer. I actually think faith/religion is fundamental to the functioning of a society: the default most common faith / counter-factual religion people have is that crime like theft/robbery/rape/murder would get caught, whereas in reality the percentage of murders solved in cities like Chicago is in the lower teens if not single digits. While I personally wouldn't want to commit murder even if there is only 0.01% of being caught, because my own opportunity cost (of leading a productive and rewarding life) is much higher . . . the same can not be said for the bottom certain percentages of the population, therefore having a faith that crime doesn't pay is important to the continued function of a society. When the civil authority repeatedly provide counter to that basic faith in secular life, a spiritual faith can make the difference between whether a society holds together or falls apart (i.e. whether systemic non-violent division of labor can continue). For at least half of the population, any one of the numerous common religions that have been with humanity since 5th century BC is good enough. (Therefore, read the next paragraph with caution, and please don't think I'm trying to sway you from your faith).
For myself, my own faith is closest to Congregationism and Deism, similar to what the Founding Fathers (of the United States) had. Differing from the current Wikipedia definition of Deism, I'm open to the possibility of God revealing Truths to particular individuals from time to time. However, knowing how the Council of Nicea relied on secular government power to canonize the New Testament, ditching at least the Gospel of Thomas and Gospel of Mary (Magdalene) among many other early Christian witness accounts, I have no more faith in something just because "it is written" than in the "scientific consensus" on Anthropogenic Global Warming or Covid shots or the sale of Indulgences. All of those "consensus" are essentially applications of secular government power buying off easily bribable career "intellectuals" whose income/livelihood depend on continued service to their payers. Wikipedia defines Deists as those who believe God doesn't intervene and only reveal the wonder of his creation through nature. I'd add that sometimes revelations to particular individuals do happen: for example, Einstein, a mediocre student all his early life and having squandered most of college years on dating and pre-marital sex, somehow had the idea of Light Speed Constancy revealed to him, making him essentially a Prophet opening up a new understanding of the universe. However, Prophets are not always right: the same Einstein fought for decades against Quantum Physics, which was revealed to others. It takes the gathering of many different people and ideas (revelations from God) to arrive at a more accurate understanding of God's Creation. That seemed to be the modus operandi during the first couple centuries of Christianity, as we are presented with multiple different accounts as Gospels (likely also a feature of Judaist scholarship when no single sect dominates; i.e. Judaism also had "congregationist" element in its tradition). The Council of Nicea and subsequent consolidation events changed that, making religion into a state-religion and corrupting religion in the process.
The first-hand experience with AGW and Covid-scamdemic, the historical knowledge of War-Banking cycles in the last 500 years (the pattern recognition came to me a few years ago as if a revelation in the middle of the scamdemic), the knowledge of the Council of Nicea being the source of what went into the Bible and (some of) what were excluded, made me realize that the 5th century BC Ezra being sent by Persia to dominate Egyptian exiles living on the strip of land on the east coast of Mediterranean, concocting a story based on (native to Persia) Zoroastrian Creation myth and the local legend of Akhenaten/Moses, was the first instance of Aryan committing genocide and land-robbery/enslaving against Semites (just like Aryan having concocted a different myth for dominating the Indian sub-continent in the cycle before 500BC). I had always wondered why the Nazi leaders called themselves Aryans, a rather foreign name to Germans; now we know, the Aryans were myth-makers, occultists and the first anti-semites (using identity theft).
There are layers of ancient artifacts in both north and south Israel/Palestine, but nearly 200 years of digging have found nothing calling their own kingdom Israel or Judah. All 3 tablets discovered in the decade around 1870 (when Rothschild banking launched Zionism to exploit long-suffering European Jews) were located outside the alleged kingdom(s) area and allegedly referring to Israel because some vague reference to something like "YSRR," not exactly convincing. It's hard to imagine a grand kingdom like that of David and Solomon (and allegedly fielding 2000 war chariots in one battle) would have left nothing naming itself in its own territory. The 6-pointed original Star of Ishtar (also known as ISIS) in Solomon's Seal also makes Ezra's followers making up the story of Solomon sound like promoting black magic (occult) / (human cattle) fertility / mass prostitution (was "Solomon's Temple" filled with thousands of prostitutes? That may explain the story of him having thousands of wives; did Ezra and his followers create the Solomon Temple story in order to rebuild a temple to house temple prostitutes? in order to promote tourism and trade?). The Star of Ishtar/ISIS originally had 6 points: head up, feet (together) down, two arms uplifted (to the up-left and up-right) and two wings pointed to the lower left and lower right. i.e. the same six points as in the Solomon's Seal and the Star of David. It's an Aryan occult symbol, and the reason why the Nazis forced that (instead of the 7-candles Menorah) on European Jews.
As for "Dark Age," the population of Rome did not decline from hundreds of thousands to a few thousand over a thousand years. When the welfare system ended (likely due to banksters and/or government inviting barbarians to take over the city so the bank/officials could stop paying out account holders), and commerce was interrupted, most people moved out quickly. The down-turn was drastic, horrific and took place very quickly. Most of "Dark Age" is not the decline but the slow recovery. Like you mentioned, the size of the urban area of Rome did not recover to circa 200AD level until the mid-20th century; however, that fact doesn't mean people were still slowly dying of the original Roman collapse in the late 19th century. "Dark" because there wasn't a central government to pay numerous scribes. People making a living performing in the Collosium or prostituting (which was extremely widespread in late Roman Empire) may not be able to keep their old jobs, but thanks to the absence of competition from cheap imported grain from Egypt, farmers in central Italy could actually farm instead of becoming landless bankrupted farmers having to seek hand-outs in Rome.
2460
Reality
2024 Apr 24, 1:13pm
Persian == "Iran" == Aryans. Ezra was sent by the Persian Empire to "enforce Torah" in what is today Israel/Palestine. Given the Genesis Creation story was entirely lifted from Zoroastrianism then dominating Persian Empire, it should be quite clear that Ezra was using Persian army as the basis for "the consensus" for writing Torah (just like the Coucil of Nicea was using Constantine's army to enforce what went into the Bible, Midieval church enforcing the faith in "Indulgences", and the police for enforcing both AGW religion and Covidiot religion recently). Culturally Ezra didn't sound Jewish, as he lifted the Zoroastrian Creation story whole cloth; he may or may not have had ancestors that were invited to Babylon a few generations earlier but most Jews certainly did not go to Babylon as Ezra raged on finding local Jews in what is today Palestine/Israel marrying women from other tribes, even inventing the story of Moses having a hissy fit breaking the tablets from God when witnessing Jews worshipping the golden calf. Ezra wrote in the style of suggestive prequals/pre-runs for what he wanted to do, fabricating events of 13th century BC based on what he wanted to do in 5th century BC. It's quite possible that Ezra had no real ancestor from southern Levant at all, but a through-and-through Aryan inventing the entire identity "Jew" to describe the Egyptians exiles that had followed Akhenarten out of Egypt some 800 years earlier to settle in southern Levant, in order to justify why he had the right to take over land belonging to existing "Jews" already farming the land: he was allegedly "returning" to land promised to him by his God. It's classic Aryan myth-making, just like Aryan myth-making some 1500 years earlier in the "Vedic" caste system for conquering Indian sub-continent. This time, the Aryan myth-makers created in southern Levant "Jews" as a caste of "chosen people" and "Levites" as a core superior caste among "Jews." Rejecting Ezra's writings (such as the command to kill "all men, women, children and livestock" and the story of David deliberately sending his general to die in battle in order to seduce the latter's wife) as fabrications actually make the early Jewish history much less rapacious.
Here is a link to the image of the Goddess Ishtar: https://www.thecollector.com/ishtar-goddess-of-love-mesopotamia/
As you can see, her head, feet, arms and wings form a 6-pointed star, just like in the Solomon's Seal and the Star of David. Ishtar is also known as ISIS in ancient Egypt. It's an Aryan occult symbol. That's why the Nazis forced it on the Jewish victims instead of the 7-candles Menorah that has been a part of Jewish tradition long before the late 19th century birth of Zionism.
Here is a link to the image of the Goddess Ishtar: https://www.thecollector.com/ishtar-goddess-of-love-mesopotamia/
As you can see, her head, feet, arms and wings form a 6-pointed star, just like in the Solomon's Seal and the Star of David. Ishtar is also known as ISIS in ancient Egypt. It's an Aryan occult symbol. That's why the Nazis forced it on the Jewish victims instead of the 7-candles Menorah that has been a part of Jewish tradition long before the late 19th century birth of Zionism.
2461
Patrick
2024 Apr 24, 1:34pm
Patrick
2024 Apr 24, 1:34pm
The story of Noah and the flood was also taken from the pre-Jewish Gilgamesh story from Babylon. Or if you're devout, you could say they both describe the same events.
The "ner tamid", meaning "eternal light" of the original Jewish Temple also looks adopted from the Zoroastrian eternal flame idea.
Another oddity is that the Torah thanks the Persian king Cyrus for allowing them to "return" to Israel after Babylonian captivity:
This supports the idea that Ezra was part of a Persian creation of Israel.
The "ner tamid", meaning "eternal light" of the original Jewish Temple also looks adopted from the Zoroastrian eternal flame idea.
Another oddity is that the Torah thanks the Persian king Cyrus for allowing them to "return" to Israel after Babylonian captivity:
Thus said, Cyrus king of Persia – for all the kingdoms of the earth, has given me the YHWH God of heaven; and He commanded me to to build for Him a house in Jerusalem which is in Judea.
This supports the idea that Ezra was part of a Persian creation of Israel.
2462
fdhfoiehfeoi
2024 Apr 25, 6:36am
fdhfoiehfeoi
2024 Apr 25, 6:36am
The Torah is not cannon, and denies Christ, the entire focus of both books.
Yes, almost all religions reference the same historical events because they really happened. But that's history, not devotion.
Yes, almost all religions reference the same historical events because they really happened. But that's history, not devotion.
2463
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 8:25am
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 8:25am
NuttBoxer says
Really, the old Testament isn't Canon?
Why does Christ and the Apostles keep referring back to the Old Testament repeatedly? I don't mean once or twice.
Who is the Suffering Servant in the Book of Isaiah?
What promises does the Lord make to David in 2 Samuels?
Who is Immanuel and where and when is he first mentioned in the Bible?
I had the funniest Twitter encounter the other day. Guy said something like "JUDEO-Christian?! That's outrageous. Hebrews have NOTHING to do with Western Civilization"
You know what the guy's username was? It was like DavidRoarke88 or something.
David. Yes, a guy named David, told me that the Hebrews had no impact on Western Civilization.
I wonder if his mom was named Debbie, or one of his brothers was named Josh.
Donatello's Bronze David, Florence, 1440 AD. Commissioned by the Medicis.
(Scene From the Book of Shemu'el or "2 Samuels")
The Torah is not cannon, and denies Christ, the entire focus of both books.
Really, the old Testament isn't Canon?
Why does Christ and the Apostles keep referring back to the Old Testament repeatedly? I don't mean once or twice.
Who is the Suffering Servant in the Book of Isaiah?
What promises does the Lord make to David in 2 Samuels?
Who is Immanuel and where and when is he first mentioned in the Bible?
I had the funniest Twitter encounter the other day. Guy said something like "JUDEO-Christian?! That's outrageous. Hebrews have NOTHING to do with Western Civilization"
You know what the guy's username was? It was like DavidRoarke88 or something.
David. Yes, a guy named David, told me that the Hebrews had no impact on Western Civilization.
I wonder if his mom was named Debbie, or one of his brothers was named Josh.
Donatello's Bronze David, Florence, 1440 AD. Commissioned by the Medicis.
(Scene From the Book of Shemu'el or "2 Samuels")
2464
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 8:35am
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 8:35am
I don't know why all these ZIOCUCKS keep saying "Judeo-Christian Civilization!"
Rembrandt, Moses Smashing the Tablets , 1669 (story from the Sefer Shemot, also known as the OT "Book of Exodus")
They're SHEEP who don't THINK CRITICALLY! Zionized by Mossad as Mental Slaves to Israhell!
Michaelangelo, :The Creation of Adam, 1512 (story from Beresheit or "In the Beginning", also known as the OT "Book of Genesis"
(Just a minor piece of art almost nobody knows about, that adorns a little known building called the Sistine Chapel.)
Jews have never had any influence on EUROPE until the ROTHSCHILDS!
People don't KNOW HISTORY LIKE I DO!
THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL for you "Judeo-Christians"!
The Jew Claim that he influenced Western Civ stands on FEET OF CLAY!
We must pursue these lies TO THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH!
We must PUT OUR HOUSE IN ORDER!
RISE AND SHINE, MORONS!
Rembrandt, Moses Smashing the Tablets , 1669 (story from the Sefer Shemot, also known as the OT "Book of Exodus")
They're SHEEP who don't THINK CRITICALLY! Zionized by Mossad as Mental Slaves to Israhell!
Michaelangelo, :The Creation of Adam, 1512 (story from Beresheit or "In the Beginning", also known as the OT "Book of Genesis"
(Just a minor piece of art almost nobody knows about, that adorns a little known building called the Sistine Chapel.)
Jews have never had any influence on EUROPE until the ROTHSCHILDS!
People don't KNOW HISTORY LIKE I DO!
THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL for you "Judeo-Christians"!
The Jew Claim that he influenced Western Civ stands on FEET OF CLAY!
We must pursue these lies TO THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH!
We must PUT OUR HOUSE IN ORDER!
RISE AND SHINE, MORONS!
2465
Reality
2024 Apr 25, 11:12am
IMHO:
Torah, the first 5 books of Old Testament, was the core starting point of the Old Testament. It was the first "canonized" scripture, as enforced by the Persian/Aryan contingent led by Ezra to subjugate the people living in southern Levant during the early to mid- 5th century BC; threatening them with total anilation/genocide (the purpose of those made-up genocidal stories like Jericho etc.) if they didn't submit to his religion and imposing a caste system (banning inter-marriage, inventing a probably new term "Jews" as "the chosen people" and making (likely his close associates) "Levites" the superior caste among "Jews"; a system uncannily similar to how Aryans imposed the Vedic caste system on Indian Subcontinent some 1500 years earlier through a set of myths on top of force of arms.) The 5 books were largely derived from Zoroastrian myths then popular back in Persian Empire, amalgamated with the local southern Levant legend of former Pharoah Akhenarten inventing monotheism and leading his followers out of Egypt some 800 years earlier. How do we assess its historical value to Western Civilization (and to humanity)? I see it similar to: Universities were church institutions to train pastors for farming people but they also produced scientists like Galilleo and Newton, among numerous others; Aristotle made the mistake of assuming objects in motion would stop if no force acts on it, but that doesn't invalidate his position as one of the first scientific minds analyzing dynamics; Newton corrected Aristotle's error, and came up with the other ideas (or received revelations / revealed knowledge) that made classical mechanics and much of industrialization possible (with many scientific discoveries by other mostly university scholars, in some cases even clergymen doing science on the side); Einstein's Relativity and later Quantum Theory further corrected insufficiencies in the Newtonian / Cartesian Universe. It would be wrong to condemn church-sponsored early universities in the middle ages, Ptolemei's University of Alexandria (the largest university in the world during Roman Empire) or Aristotle/Plato's Academy as worthless just because they all made mistakes and "canonized" mistakes; OTOH, it would also be wrong to insist that Earth is the center of the universe and all the other planets made small circles in their orbits around the earth just because Ptolemei "canonized" that theory at the largest and most dominant place of learning at that time. Human beings are imperfect; our knowledge is imperfect. Our recent experience with the AGW religion and Covidiot religion should have proven plenty that "canonizing" anything using secular force of arms can be quite dangerously wrong.
BTW, according to the dominant religious theories (at the time), most if not all the paintings and sculptures created during "Renaissance" to show biblical characters were sacrilege, comparable to worshipping the golden calf (idolatry). The Italian city states and their banking house backers commissioning those works were deliberately doing that in order to undermine their theoretical religious overlord in Rome. That's why they chose those religious subjects for the paintings and sculptures, and making the characters "scandulously" humanistic while carrying the various holy names from the scripture, making it difficult for the church to object, yet at the same showing naked human bodies in public, which had been taboo after the end of the Classical Time.
Torah, the first 5 books of Old Testament, was the core starting point of the Old Testament. It was the first "canonized" scripture, as enforced by the Persian/Aryan contingent led by Ezra to subjugate the people living in southern Levant during the early to mid- 5th century BC; threatening them with total anilation/genocide (the purpose of those made-up genocidal stories like Jericho etc.) if they didn't submit to his religion and imposing a caste system (banning inter-marriage, inventing a probably new term "Jews" as "the chosen people" and making (likely his close associates) "Levites" the superior caste among "Jews"; a system uncannily similar to how Aryans imposed the Vedic caste system on Indian Subcontinent some 1500 years earlier through a set of myths on top of force of arms.) The 5 books were largely derived from Zoroastrian myths then popular back in Persian Empire, amalgamated with the local southern Levant legend of former Pharoah Akhenarten inventing monotheism and leading his followers out of Egypt some 800 years earlier. How do we assess its historical value to Western Civilization (and to humanity)? I see it similar to: Universities were church institutions to train pastors for farming people but they also produced scientists like Galilleo and Newton, among numerous others; Aristotle made the mistake of assuming objects in motion would stop if no force acts on it, but that doesn't invalidate his position as one of the first scientific minds analyzing dynamics; Newton corrected Aristotle's error, and came up with the other ideas (or received revelations / revealed knowledge) that made classical mechanics and much of industrialization possible (with many scientific discoveries by other mostly university scholars, in some cases even clergymen doing science on the side); Einstein's Relativity and later Quantum Theory further corrected insufficiencies in the Newtonian / Cartesian Universe. It would be wrong to condemn church-sponsored early universities in the middle ages, Ptolemei's University of Alexandria (the largest university in the world during Roman Empire) or Aristotle/Plato's Academy as worthless just because they all made mistakes and "canonized" mistakes; OTOH, it would also be wrong to insist that Earth is the center of the universe and all the other planets made small circles in their orbits around the earth just because Ptolemei "canonized" that theory at the largest and most dominant place of learning at that time. Human beings are imperfect; our knowledge is imperfect. Our recent experience with the AGW religion and Covidiot religion should have proven plenty that "canonizing" anything using secular force of arms can be quite dangerously wrong.
BTW, according to the dominant religious theories (at the time), most if not all the paintings and sculptures created during "Renaissance" to show biblical characters were sacrilege, comparable to worshipping the golden calf (idolatry). The Italian city states and their banking house backers commissioning those works were deliberately doing that in order to undermine their theoretical religious overlord in Rome. That's why they chose those religious subjects for the paintings and sculptures, and making the characters "scandulously" humanistic while carrying the various holy names from the scripture, making it difficult for the church to object, yet at the same showing naked human bodies in public, which had been taboo after the end of the Classical Time.
2466
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 11:59am
AmericanKulak
2024 Apr 25, 11:59am
Reality says
That's not my understanding of iconography and imagery in the Church, both Early Church and Church as in Catholicism.
Pictures have always been used, particularly in the early Churches to illustrate Biblical scenes, for a mostly non-literate congregation. It was common enough for Saint Augustine to caution against directing prayer or excessive respect to them.
This is the famous Duros-Europos Church near Palmyra, Syria, dating to the 3rd Century has explanatory frescos/murals.
https://www.pinterest.com/amykristin/dura-europos-house-church/
All but the most radical Reformationists left clear illustrations of Biblical Scenes alone.
I was going to get into a long rant about one of my most hated characters in history, Empress Irene of Athens, but I've probably bitched about her already.
Suffice to say that in the 8th Century, Queen Irene terminated a dynasty that had a what historians generally agree was a modest view of Iconography, though blamed by later defenders (mostly Monks who $$$ on Pilgrimages) of Queen Irene as enraged Iconclasts.
Check her out if you haven't done so: Not only almost lost the Eastern Empire, but almost all of Christendom, and murdered the last universally (East and West) Emperor of the Romans, her own son, Constantine VI. If you like a rising Phoenix of hope, one great leader is Nikephoros II Phocas, with the awesome name: Pale Death of the Saracens
Anyway, the Western Church was less enthusiastic than the eastern for icons and imagery, but it was very much a common part of Christendom long before the Florentines and the Renaissance.
The Camino de Santiago - the Way of St. James - was a well-established part of Catholicism in Medieval Europe, centuries before the Renaissance when Vikings were still raiding Europe, and encapsulated many shrines with statues, icons, etc. along the way.
Reality says
Absolutely.
BTW, according to the dominant religious theories (at the time), most if not all the paintings and sculptures created during "Renaissance" to show biblical characters were sacrilege, comparable to worshipping the golden calf (idolatry).
That's not my understanding of iconography and imagery in the Church, both Early Church and Church as in Catholicism.
Pictures have always been used, particularly in the early Churches to illustrate Biblical scenes, for a mostly non-literate congregation. It was common enough for Saint Augustine to caution against directing prayer or excessive respect to them.
This is the famous Duros-Europos Church near Palmyra, Syria, dating to the 3rd Century has explanatory frescos/murals.
https://www.pinterest.com/amykristin/dura-europos-house-church/
All but the most radical Reformationists left clear illustrations of Biblical Scenes alone.
I was going to get into a long rant about one of my most hated characters in history, Empress Irene of Athens, but I've probably bitched about her already.
Suffice to say that in the 8th Century, Queen Irene terminated a dynasty that had a what historians generally agree was a modest view of Iconography, though blamed by later defenders (mostly Monks who $$$ on Pilgrimages) of Queen Irene as enraged Iconclasts.
Check her out if you haven't done so: Not only almost lost the Eastern Empire, but almost all of Christendom, and murdered the last universally (East and West) Emperor of the Romans, her own son, Constantine VI. If you like a rising Phoenix of hope, one great leader is Nikephoros II Phocas, with the awesome name: Pale Death of the Saracens
Anyway, the Western Church was less enthusiastic than the eastern for icons and imagery, but it was very much a common part of Christendom long before the Florentines and the Renaissance.
The Camino de Santiago - the Way of St. James - was a well-established part of Catholicism in Medieval Europe, centuries before the Renaissance when Vikings were still raiding Europe, and encapsulated many shrines with statues, icons, etc. along the way.
Reality says
Our recent experience with the AGW religion and Covidiot religion should have proven plenty that "canonizing" anything using secular force of arms can be quite dangerously wrong.
Absolutely.
2467
Patrick
2024 Apr 25, 7:59pm
Patrick
2024 Apr 25, 7:59pm
AmericanKulak says
That particular statue of David was made right after Florence had become a hotbed of pedophilia/gayness, the two sides of the same homo disease.
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-point-one-worlds-famous-sculptures
Donatello's Bronze David, Florence, 1440 AD. Commissioned by the Medicis.
That particular statue of David was made right after Florence had become a hotbed of pedophilia/gayness, the two sides of the same homo disease.
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-point-one-worlds-famous-sculptures
Florence had such a reputation for being accepting of homosexuality that the French called gay sex the “Florentine Vice,” and in Germany, Florenzer was slang for a sodomite. ...
The academic Michael Rocke has even suggested that David’s floppy hat might have been a coded reference to the “hat game,” a seduction ploy where Florentine men would steal the hats of boys they fancied on the street, refusing to give them back until the object of their desire agreed to gratify them.
2469
Patrick
2024 Apr 29, 8:53pm
Patrick
2024 Apr 29, 8:53pm
https://actu17.fr/faits-divers/mathis-15-ans-poignarde-a-mort-a-chateauroux-le-suspect-etait-sous-controle-judiciaire.html
A 15-year-old teenager was killed at knifepoint this Saturday afternoon in Châteauroux (Indre). The police officers quickly arrested an Afghan minor who is the same age. The latter is already known to the justice system and had been indicted on Monday for "aggravated robbery with violence" before being released under judicial supervision.
2471
Patrick
2024 May 2, 5:26pm
Patrick
2024 May 2, 5:26pm
Just a reminder of the true nature of Islam:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-shooting-10-killed-as-shots-fired-at-satirical-magazine-headquarters-according-to-reports-9962337.html
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/charlie-hebdo-shooting-10-killed-as-shots-fired-at-satirical-magazine-headquarters-according-to-reports-9962337.html
Charlie Hebdo shooting: At least 12 killed as shots fired at satirical magazine's Paris office
Police say two officers and 10 journalists are dead, with five others in critical condition, following what President Hollande calls a 'terrorist attack of the most extreme barbarity'
Adam Withnall
John Lichfield
Wednesday 07 January 2015
2472
AmericanKulak
2024 May 4, 10:51am
AmericanKulak
2024 May 4, 10:51am
Islamicist (Green Ribbon) wins City Counselor election in Leeds.
Notice the AWFL smiling behind the men. The same woman who would scream if a White Male held the door for her.
Notice the AWFL smiling behind the men. The same woman who would scream if a White Male held the door for her.
2473
gabbar
2024 May 4, 1:20pm
gabbar
2024 May 4, 1:20pm
AmericanKulak says
As of 2022, in Leeds, Christianity was the most common religion, with 343,311 people choosing the response, while 325,334 people selected “no religion”. After this, the most common answers were “Muslim” (63,054 people), “Sikh” (10,047 people) and “Hindu” (9,217 people). SO, how does a goat boy win in an election?
Islamicist (Green Ribbon) wins City Counselor election in Leeds.
As of 2022, in Leeds, Christianity was the most common religion, with 343,311 people choosing the response, while 325,334 people selected “no religion”. After this, the most common answers were “Muslim” (63,054 people), “Sikh” (10,047 people) and “Hindu” (9,217 people). SO, how does a goat boy win in an election?
2474
AmericanKulak
2024 May 4, 1:22pm
AmericanKulak
2024 May 4, 1:22pm
gabbar says
Easy: The Muslims are united, the elections are by district so while overall the area may not be majority Muslim, one area is, and a lot of Christians aren't really all that Christian and some might be more Left than Christian.
After this, the most common answers were “Muslim” (63,054 people), “Sikh” (10,047 people) and “Hindu” (9,217 people). SO, how does a goat boy win in an election?
Easy: The Muslims are united, the elections are by district so while overall the area may not be majority Muslim, one area is, and a lot of Christians aren't really all that Christian and some might be more Left than Christian.
2475
gabbar
2024 May 5, 3:54am
gabbar
2024 May 5, 3:54am
These people over and over say: 'Hey, if you don't like it here, you can leave.' How many times have you heard that? Now with all the protests, they say: 'You don't like it here, you can leave. Go back to Gaza, go back to this, go back to that...' I have heard that 100 times in the past two weeks. These people don't actually mean that. They will not leave you alone. The proof is in the pudding. Look at all of our [Muslim] countries. They are not happy leaving us alone. They have been pillaging our resources for as far back as we can remember, stealing all of our resources, they don't let us... Any time we have any type of self-governance, what do they come in and do? They come in and bring democracy, right? But it's not really democracy, right
The same thing you see with Palestine. The devils, the Zionists, have no interest in leaving the Muslims alone over there. They don't care which borders you go back to, they are going to keep taking and taking and taking. This is the envy that is in their hearts. The envy, the hatred, and just the evil that is in their hearts.
"This is their nature. This is why we don't believe in turning the other cheek in Islam. That is not an Islamic concept, because once you show too much weakness to dastardly people, people who are foul, they just step all over you. They are like: 'All right, fine, I'll take one more, and one more...'
Source: https://www.memri.org/tv/mas-staten-island-imam-abdelrahman-badawy-zionist-devils-envy-hatred-evil-hearts-sneaky-conniving-foul-jewish-tribe
The same thing you see with Palestine. The devils, the Zionists, have no interest in leaving the Muslims alone over there. They don't care which borders you go back to, they are going to keep taking and taking and taking. This is the envy that is in their hearts. The envy, the hatred, and just the evil that is in their hearts.
"This is their nature. This is why we don't believe in turning the other cheek in Islam. That is not an Islamic concept, because once you show too much weakness to dastardly people, people who are foul, they just step all over you. They are like: 'All right, fine, I'll take one more, and one more...'
Source: https://www.memri.org/tv/mas-staten-island-imam-abdelrahman-badawy-zionist-devils-envy-hatred-evil-hearts-sneaky-conniving-foul-jewish-tribe
2477
Patrick
2024 May 8, 4:48pm
Patrick
2024 May 8, 4:48pm
https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1788196563052875995
@TRobinsonNewEra
The next time someone brings up the Crusades or slavery against the West.
Show them this.
Speakers corner Bob spitting facts.
2478
Patrick
2024 May 8, 4:51pm
Patrick
2024 May 8, 4:51pm
https://twitter.com/RadioGenoa/status/1788040950020751633
@RadioGenoa
Gad Saad: "The West is a woman to be mounted." This is what Arab and Muslim "asylum seekers" think, who see Western compassion, empathy and kindness as a weakness. Anyone who doesn't understand that this is a huge problem is either stupid or corrupt and profiting from invasion.
2480
gabbar
2024 May 9, 2:16am
gabbar
2024 May 9, 2:16am
Patrick says
Its the liberals who are stupid; profiting from invasion belongs to politicians and their parties who are often liberal or uniparty members and people elect them. So, the system is fooked and there is no fix in sight.
Anyone who doesn't understand that this is a huge problem is either stupid or corrupt and profiting from invasion.
Its the liberals who are stupid; profiting from invasion belongs to politicians and their parties who are often liberal or uniparty members and people elect them. So, the system is fooked and there is no fix in sight.
2481
richwicks
2024 May 9, 2:49am
richwicks
2024 May 9, 2:49am
Patrick says
Islam wasn't making war against the West, the West is making war against them
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia.
Did we have a problem with Muslim immigrants before those?
You know we didn't. You know this, so what you are doing is blaming the wrong victimizer.
You know what Cuba did in revenge for their sanctions? They released all their criminals to the United States. Don't you realize the counties our government attacks does the same thing?
There's a concept called weaponized immigration. It's a warfare tactic. If you want to understand the situation, you have to understand the methods of war against us, which our criminal government started. They are cleaning out their prisons, and our criminal government accepts them with open arms.
The next time someone brings up the Crusades or slavery against the West.
Islam wasn't making war against the West, the West is making war against them
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia.
Did we have a problem with Muslim immigrants before those?
You know we didn't. You know this, so what you are doing is blaming the wrong victimizer.
You know what Cuba did in revenge for their sanctions? They released all their criminals to the United States. Don't you realize the counties our government attacks does the same thing?
There's a concept called weaponized immigration. It's a warfare tactic. If you want to understand the situation, you have to understand the methods of war against us, which our criminal government started. They are cleaning out their prisons, and our criminal government accepts them with open arms.
2482
Reality
2024 May 9, 3:48am
There are significant problems with this argument regarding the Crusades:
The Muslim threat to Western Europe ended at the Battle of Tours in 732AD/CE, 364 years before the First Crusade in 1096AD/CE relying mostly on Frankish knights (heavy tanks of the time). How long is a 364-year gap? Dutch purchased Manhattan for 60-guilder worth of trinkets in 1626, 394 years before the riots and chaos in 2020; The argument is about as stupid as justifying the riots and chaos in 2020 on European colonization of north America nearly 400 years earlier . . . when the real purposes were to bring down NYC property value (creating buying opportunities for big money), destroy the middle-class, and steal the election.
The 4th Crusade even invaded and took over the capital of Eastern Orthodox church instead of fighting the Muslims, so the simplistic view that the Crusades being a war against Muslims (who had invaded Western Europe nearly 400 years earlier) was very wrong. The Crusades were disastrous to Christians in the Mideast, just like Zionism has been disastrous to Jews living in the Mideast. While Muslim regimes had previously tolerated Christian and Jewish minorities (in exchange for paying a special tax for exercising religious freedom), and gradually grew to be dependent on the special tax paid by the wealthy religious minorities, the Crusades (and Zionism) made their nominally co-religious into "5th columnists," an untenable position.
The Crusades were never meant to succeed in the long-run: unlike the later Christian re-conquest in Spain overthrowing Muslim regimes there and taking back land for holding under Christian kings, the Crusades to Jerusalem never had a chance for holding for much longer than a banking cycle: the Crusade was designed to suck in deposits from pilgrims brainwashed into travelling, risking their lives on perilous journeys so as to increase the chance of dying and abandoning the account balance to the bankers (Knight Templar re-introduced banking to Western Europe, and 90% of its "brothers" were not fighting knights but financial advisors all over Western Europe who likely had taken in massive amount of deposits from their feudal lord clients since the restoration of trade in Western Europe after the 9th century, and wanted to kill their clients after mismanaging funds and/or running ponzi scams by promising untenable returns on deposits, just like Bernie Madoff did). Their colleague the Knight Hospitalars were the precursors to the organizations that implemented the Covid jabs, the Asprin-overdose pretending to be "the Spanish Flu" a century / full banking-cycle before the Covid scam, and the sudden popularity of "blood-letting therapy" bleeding patients to death a century / full banking-cycle before that.
The Northern Crusades even waged war against newly converted Christians, pretending the latter were still heathens, in order to rob and exterminate them.
BTW, this is by no means praising Islam, which has a similar banking/pilgrim scheme to Mecca. Also, the guy was correct in stating that Christian can find peace in Christ. It's the defense of the Crusades that went off the rails. It made little strategic sense to send lone armies to Jerusalem when the same force could have easily taken back Spain and parts of North Africa. The Crusade was a scam pretending to be a war against Muslims but in reality a thorough robbing of Christians.
https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1788196563052875995
TRobinsonNewEra
The next time someone brings up the Crusades or slavery against the West.
Show them this.
Speakers corner Bob spitting facts.
There are significant problems with this argument regarding the Crusades:
The Muslim threat to Western Europe ended at the Battle of Tours in 732AD/CE, 364 years before the First Crusade in 1096AD/CE relying mostly on Frankish knights (heavy tanks of the time). How long is a 364-year gap? Dutch purchased Manhattan for 60-guilder worth of trinkets in 1626, 394 years before the riots and chaos in 2020; The argument is about as stupid as justifying the riots and chaos in 2020 on European colonization of north America nearly 400 years earlier . . . when the real purposes were to bring down NYC property value (creating buying opportunities for big money), destroy the middle-class, and steal the election.
The 4th Crusade even invaded and took over the capital of Eastern Orthodox church instead of fighting the Muslims, so the simplistic view that the Crusades being a war against Muslims (who had invaded Western Europe nearly 400 years earlier) was very wrong. The Crusades were disastrous to Christians in the Mideast, just like Zionism has been disastrous to Jews living in the Mideast. While Muslim regimes had previously tolerated Christian and Jewish minorities (in exchange for paying a special tax for exercising religious freedom), and gradually grew to be dependent on the special tax paid by the wealthy religious minorities, the Crusades (and Zionism) made their nominally co-religious into "5th columnists," an untenable position.
The Crusades were never meant to succeed in the long-run: unlike the later Christian re-conquest in Spain overthrowing Muslim regimes there and taking back land for holding under Christian kings, the Crusades to Jerusalem never had a chance for holding for much longer than a banking cycle: the Crusade was designed to suck in deposits from pilgrims brainwashed into travelling, risking their lives on perilous journeys so as to increase the chance of dying and abandoning the account balance to the bankers (Knight Templar re-introduced banking to Western Europe, and 90% of its "brothers" were not fighting knights but financial advisors all over Western Europe who likely had taken in massive amount of deposits from their feudal lord clients since the restoration of trade in Western Europe after the 9th century, and wanted to kill their clients after mismanaging funds and/or running ponzi scams by promising untenable returns on deposits, just like Bernie Madoff did). Their colleague the Knight Hospitalars were the precursors to the organizations that implemented the Covid jabs, the Asprin-overdose pretending to be "the Spanish Flu" a century / full banking-cycle before the Covid scam, and the sudden popularity of "blood-letting therapy" bleeding patients to death a century / full banking-cycle before that.
The Northern Crusades even waged war against newly converted Christians, pretending the latter were still heathens, in order to rob and exterminate them.
BTW, this is by no means praising Islam, which has a similar banking/pilgrim scheme to Mecca. Also, the guy was correct in stating that Christian can find peace in Christ. It's the defense of the Crusades that went off the rails. It made little strategic sense to send lone armies to Jerusalem when the same force could have easily taken back Spain and parts of North Africa. The Crusade was a scam pretending to be a war against Muslims but in reality a thorough robbing of Christians.
2483
gabbar
2024 May 9, 6:52am
gabbar
2024 May 9, 6:52am
richwicks says
The world is better off if the west is making war against them.
Islam wasn't making war against the West, the West is making war against them
The world is better off if the west is making war against them.
2484
HeadSet
2024 May 9, 10:08am
HeadSet
2024 May 9, 10:08am
Reality says
The Muslims held Spain until 1492 and the Ottoman Empire was expanding into central Europe (as far west as Vienna) for a thousand years after the Battle of Tours. Muslims also raided ships in the Med and even raided coastal towns as far west as Ireland taking slaves and booty. Just because the Muslims failed to take France did not mean they were not a threat.
The Muslim threat to Western Europe ended at the Battle of Tours in 732AD/CE
The Muslims held Spain until 1492 and the Ottoman Empire was expanding into central Europe (as far west as Vienna) for a thousand years after the Battle of Tours. Muslims also raided ships in the Med and even raided coastal towns as far west as Ireland taking slaves and booty. Just because the Muslims failed to take France did not mean they were not a threat.
2485
richwicks
2024 May 9, 10:12am
richwicks
2024 May 9, 10:12am
gabbar says
Just how so?
I'm asking you to explain this because I know you can't.
We are far worse off as a result of our interference in the Middle East. Our continual interference in foreign nations is why we have a border crisis. We create the "refugees".
Countries dump their criminals into our nation..
By screwing in other nations we've destroyed our currency of this nations, the demographics of this nation, and our Constitution.
richwicks says
Islam wasn't making war against the West, the West is making war against them
The world is better off if the west is making war against them.
Just how so?
I'm asking you to explain this because I know you can't.
We are far worse off as a result of our interference in the Middle East. Our continual interference in foreign nations is why we have a border crisis. We create the "refugees".
Countries dump their criminals into our nation..
By screwing in other nations we've destroyed our currency of this nations, the demographics of this nation, and our Constitution.
2486
gabbar
2024 May 9, 11:23am
gabbar
2024 May 9, 11:23am
richwicks says
No. richwicks says
No, American politicians are greedy.richwicks says
Nope but if they are Muslims then yes.richwicks says
We screwed ourselves.
We are far worse off as a result of our interference in the Middle East.
No. richwicks says
Our continual interference in foreign nations is why we have a border crisis. We create the "refugees".
No, American politicians are greedy.richwicks says
Countries dump their criminals into our nation..
Nope but if they are Muslims then yes.richwicks says
By screwing in other nations we've destroyed our currency of this nations, the demographics of this nation, and our Constitution.
We screwed ourselves.
2487
richwicks
2024 May 9, 11:38am
richwicks
2024 May 9, 11:38am
gabbar says
Explain to me how the US is better off for attacking 7 Muslim nations.
Don't just say "no" and disagree with me.
Our foreign policy is a disaster and you're a fool if you defend it if we didn't go to war in Afghanistan all that would have happened is what happened, except we'd have a lot more money and there would t be so many people dead
richwicks says
We are far worse off as a result of our interference in the Middle East.
No. richwicks says
Our continual interference in foreign nations is why we have a border crisis. We create the "refugees".
No, American politicians are greedy.richwicks says
Countries dump their criminals into our nation..
Nope but if they are Muslims then yes.richwicks says
By screwing in other nations we've destroyed our currency of this nations, the demographics of this nation, and our Constitution.
We screwed ourselves.
Explain to me how the US is better off for attacking 7 Muslim nations.
Don't just say "no" and disagree with me.
Our foreign policy is a disaster and you're a fool if you defend it if we didn't go to war in Afghanistan all that would have happened is what happened, except we'd have a lot more money and there would t be so many people dead
2488
Reality
2024 May 10, 7:12am
HeadSet says
Ottoman Empire was founded in 1299, did not exist at the time of the First Crusade in 1096. In fact, it was the 4th Crusade in 1202-04 invading and taking over the East Roman Empire (Byzantium Empire, Eastern Orthodox Christian) fundamentally weakening the latter that caused the chaos in Anatolia that gave rise to the Ottoman Empire. The rise of Islamic fleet, its domination of the Mediteranean and raiding of Irish coast all came later under Ottoman Empire, which was a result of the Crusades weakening Christian influence in east Mediteranean.
The muslim regimes in Spain in the 11th and 12th century were a cluster of small kingdoms/principalities (emirates) after the splintering of the Cordoba Caliphate, which itself was formerly a division of the Umayard Caliphate that had been overthrown by the Fatimid state (founded in 909) in the Mideast. So the muslims in Spain were enemies to the muslims in the Mideast. Instead of sending Frankish human heavy tanks to take back the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) when the muslim occupiers there were weak and splintered, the Crusades sent the Frankish human heavy tanks a long distance away to the middle east to establish a hopeless colony in southern Levant / Palestine fundamentally weakening Christianity in the east, eventually giving rise to a far more robust Muslim empire in the form of the Ottoman Empire.
The Muslims held Spain until 1492 and the Ottoman Empire was expanding into central Europe (as far west as Vienna) for a thousand years after the Battle of Tours. Muslims also raided ships in the Med and even raided coastal towns as far west as Ireland taking slaves and booty. Just because the Muslims failed to take France did not mean they were not a threat.
Ottoman Empire was founded in 1299, did not exist at the time of the First Crusade in 1096. In fact, it was the 4th Crusade in 1202-04 invading and taking over the East Roman Empire (Byzantium Empire, Eastern Orthodox Christian) fundamentally weakening the latter that caused the chaos in Anatolia that gave rise to the Ottoman Empire. The rise of Islamic fleet, its domination of the Mediteranean and raiding of Irish coast all came later under Ottoman Empire, which was a result of the Crusades weakening Christian influence in east Mediteranean.
The muslim regimes in Spain in the 11th and 12th century were a cluster of small kingdoms/principalities (emirates) after the splintering of the Cordoba Caliphate, which itself was formerly a division of the Umayard Caliphate that had been overthrown by the Fatimid state (founded in 909) in the Mideast. So the muslims in Spain were enemies to the muslims in the Mideast. Instead of sending Frankish human heavy tanks to take back the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal) when the muslim occupiers there were weak and splintered, the Crusades sent the Frankish human heavy tanks a long distance away to the middle east to establish a hopeless colony in southern Levant / Palestine fundamentally weakening Christianity in the east, eventually giving rise to a far more robust Muslim empire in the form of the Ottoman Empire.
2489
richwicks
2024 May 10, 7:36am
richwicks
2024 May 10, 7:36am
richwicks says
Hey @gabbar - no response, what a goddamned surprise. SOMEHOW the wars have been good in SOMEWAY. It's good for our enemies, it's tremendously weakened the United States, has wasted enormous amounts of resources and time, and it's such bullshit to so many people, that our military has to recruit the mentally ill to join, because you've have to be insane to join a military that just starts useless fucking wars at the drop of a hat.
Our military didn't go woke because they believe in any of this DEI shit, they need people, and nobody wants to go off to 3rd world shithole and die for no fucking reason, after we've been lied into Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and bombing Libya. What good does this do for our nation? Makes some sleazebag offense contractors some money, and politicians get rich off from the graft of "aid", that's it.
Explain to me how the US is better off for attacking 7 Muslim nations.
Don't just say "no" and disagree with me.
Hey @gabbar - no response, what a goddamned surprise. SOMEHOW the wars have been good in SOMEWAY. It's good for our enemies, it's tremendously weakened the United States, has wasted enormous amounts of resources and time, and it's such bullshit to so many people, that our military has to recruit the mentally ill to join, because you've have to be insane to join a military that just starts useless fucking wars at the drop of a hat.
Our military didn't go woke because they believe in any of this DEI shit, they need people, and nobody wants to go off to 3rd world shithole and die for no fucking reason, after we've been lied into Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and bombing Libya. What good does this do for our nation? Makes some sleazebag offense contractors some money, and politicians get rich off from the graft of "aid", that's it.
2490
Patrick
2024 May 10, 8:48am
Patrick
2024 May 10, 8:48am
Reality says
Technically correct, but it was preceded by similar Islamic Turkish states, like the Rum and Sejuk states.
Ottoman Empire was founded in 1299, did not exist at the time of the First Crusade in 1096.
Technically correct, but it was preceded by similar Islamic Turkish states, like the Rum and Sejuk states.
2491
gabbar
2024 May 10, 12:10pm
gabbar
2024 May 10, 12:10pm
richwicks says
Our experience with Islam is different. I don't want to respond to you because nothing good will come out of it. You won't change your perspective and I won't change mine either.
Hey gabbar - no response, what a goddamned surprise. SOMEHOW the wars have been good in SOMEWAY. It's good for our enemies, it's tremendously weakened the United States, has wasted enormous amounts of resources and time, and it's such bullshit to so many people, that our military has to recruit the mentally ill to join, because you've have to be insane to join a military that just starts useless fucking wars at the drop of a hat.
Our military didn't go woke because they believe in any of this DEI shit, they need people, and nobody wants to go off to 3rd world shithole and die for no fucking reason, after we've been lied into Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and bombing Libya. What good does this do for our nation? Makes some sleazebag offense contractors some money, and politicians get rich off from the graft of "aid", that's it.
Our experience with Islam is different. I don't want to respond to you because nothing good will come out of it. You won't change your perspective and I won't change mine either.
2494
krc
2024 May 10, 4:59pm
Anyone who sees the crusades as anything other than a defensive war is trolling.
LOL - Muslims controlled large swathes in Europe up to the mid 8th century ( until iirc Martel) and
for close to 200s year after were a constant threat. Those 3-4 centuries are always ignored by the muslim apologists.
Yes - the lack of a cohesive response within Europe kept the muslim kingdoms in the south around far longer than one would have thought.
Once you hit the 14th century, the "crusades" were defensive in nature primarily protecting the eastern med and the southern Europe flank.
Not until the battle of Lepanto could you say that the West was safe (from Ottoman naval power, etc..).
The naval defeat gave pause. What the muslim countries (particularly O) were doing to the West, the West
started doing to the East. This was recapture of territory that was Christian originally and where there was mistreatment in many (but not all) cases.
But, no worries, Europe is giving it all back anyway. Demographics, as the Crusaders were slow to learn, is everything. Even when they captured territory and established governments and institutions, they could not really alter the direction (towards reversion to muslim rule) in any substantive way.
And the idea that there were these specific Crusades obscures the many "little" crusades that were constant through the centuries. It was a true war for cultural domination. And suggesting anything other than a legitimate world struggle really disrespects the strength of the various muslim empires.
When you travel throughout Israel, you see very large orthodox families (6+ kids). They understand: the future is determined by demographics.
LOL - Muslims controlled large swathes in Europe up to the mid 8th century ( until iirc Martel) and
for close to 200s year after were a constant threat. Those 3-4 centuries are always ignored by the muslim apologists.
Yes - the lack of a cohesive response within Europe kept the muslim kingdoms in the south around far longer than one would have thought.
Once you hit the 14th century, the "crusades" were defensive in nature primarily protecting the eastern med and the southern Europe flank.
Not until the battle of Lepanto could you say that the West was safe (from Ottoman naval power, etc..).
The naval defeat gave pause. What the muslim countries (particularly O) were doing to the West, the West
started doing to the East. This was recapture of territory that was Christian originally and where there was mistreatment in many (but not all) cases.
But, no worries, Europe is giving it all back anyway. Demographics, as the Crusaders were slow to learn, is everything. Even when they captured territory and established governments and institutions, they could not really alter the direction (towards reversion to muslim rule) in any substantive way.
And the idea that there were these specific Crusades obscures the many "little" crusades that were constant through the centuries. It was a true war for cultural domination. And suggesting anything other than a legitimate world struggle really disrespects the strength of the various muslim empires.
When you travel throughout Israel, you see very large orthodox families (6+ kids). They understand: the future is determined by demographics.
« First « Previous Comments 2,455 - 2,494 of 2,865 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.