< 1 2 3 > 
 
   
 

Why ISIS Are Right

 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
26 September 2016 14:40
 
Twissel - 25 September 2016 11:25 AM

@Barry

it is not the religion itself that is doing the infiltration, it is the governments that support certain mosques in the West and send their own Imans to them. They make it purposefully hard for Muslims to integrate.


The total number of Muslims would be worrisome if a) they would be a homogeneous group and b) if they stopped fighting long enough to get their shit together.
But the economy of the Middle East is about to collapse due to the low oil prices. And even though oil has been very cheap for a long time (and through many crises), Western countries are trying hard to become less oil-dependent.
We will not have another US-led Iraq war because there is no economic gain in that.
What might happen is that China, which still needs the oil, could send troops - it has a massive problem with radical Muslims, as does Russia.

The mass migration to the West is the clear sign that the Islam has failed and the people know it: why else would they become the lowest of the low in a country of infidels?
I’m for migration, because it is obviously the sane ones who quit the endless cycle of tribalism and move away: those who stay are the crazy ones.

Dude, you’ve totally missed the point of the OP. They don’t NEED to be one homogeneous group.

The ones doing the infiltration are muslims. It’s that simple. They all know what the ultimate goal is and do their bit towards achieving it.

Yes Islam creates shit societies, and some of our meddling in certain countries hasn’t helped, but the migrants coming to Europe are not coming to be the lowest of the low. Most are not from Syria, they are taking advantage of that situation and Merkel’s genocidal invitation to come for free money, houses and bitches. Or to wage jihad and collect the jizya. Tomaytoes tomahtoes.

You’ll have to define what you mean by sane on that point please, prisons are full of rapists and murderers who are sane…

Again your view just doesn’t seem to reflect the reality of the situation in Europe, and is actually very dangerous as it sounds plausible and is an excuse to do nothing. You still seem to be thinking too conventionally in terms of warfare, I highly rcommend you check out Dr Bill Warner’s YT channel and keep an eye on Sweden.

Here’s another clip to warm the heart.

Just consider this: what if you’re wrong and I’m right?

 

 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
26 September 2016 14:44
 
Twissel - 25 September 2016 11:12 AM
icehorse - 25 September 2016 08:29 AM

Hey Twissel,

It’s not an actual “guns and bombs” sort of war that concerns me. It’s the slower, softer chipping away of secularism that concerns me. Things like: introducing blasphemy laws, small curtailments of free speech (which of course often lead to large curtailments), reversals of women’s rights and safety, increase in homophobia and anti-semitism, that sort of thing.

as I said, for a country like, say France, this is not a caving-in to Sharia law: it’s a strategy to make it easier for religious Muslims to integrate.
France is fanatically secular, and Germany is by Constitution Christian (so is the UK).
These countries are not at risk to lose any of their humanistic achievements.

Have you never wondered why we haven’t had to mess about with our laws and freedoms to accommodate other religious groups e.g. Sikhs, Hindus?

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3164
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
26 September 2016 15:54
 
Twissel - 25 September 2016 11:25 AM

I’m for migration, because it is obviously the sane ones who quit the endless cycle of tribalism and move away: those who stay are the crazy ones.

Not sure who is more insane you or them, anymore!

Image Attachments
 
poll4.JPG
 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2813
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
27 September 2016 01:04
 
Barry0tter - 26 September 2016 02:40 PM

Dude, you’ve totally missed the point of the OP. They don’t NEED to be one homogeneous group.

The ones doing the infiltration are muslims. It’s that simple. They all know what the ultimate goal is and do their bit towards achieving it.

Yes Islam creates shit societies, and some of our meddling in certain countries hasn’t helped, but the migrants coming to Europe are not coming to be the lowest of the low. Most are not from Syria, they are taking advantage of that situation and Merkel’s genocidal invitation to come for free money, houses and bitches. Or to wage jihad and collect the jizya. Tomaytoes tomahtoes.

You’ll have to define what you mean by sane on that point please, prisons are full of rapists and murderers who are sane…

Again your view just doesn’t seem to reflect the reality of the situation in Europe, and is actually very dangerous as it sounds plausible and is an excuse to do nothing. You still seem to be thinking too conventionally in terms of warfare, I highly rcommend you check out Dr Bill Warner’s YT channel and keep an eye on Sweden.

Here’s another clip to warm the heart.

It’s helpful to compare the mass migration into Europe to other was migrations, for example at the turn of the 20th century to the US. the result was a time of very heightened tension, more violence, neighborhoods that essentially policed themselves and kept their traditions ... for a time.
Of course we would be naive to expect Muslims to instantly become secular and humanist citizens. But by every measure they are more law-abiding than the average citizen. And over time, 3rd and later generation Muslims are fully integrated into their host countries, just like any other group.

great efforts are taken to keep refugees in the region, to fund and stock camps near their countries of origin. And that is the right thing, of course: we will need the people to rebuild their homes.
What we see in the the West is what every country is obligated to do under international law: grant asylum to those at risk for their lives. We would have to renegotiate international deals (any maybe we should) to be able to opt out of this obligation.
The vast majority of people admitted to Europe, including Sweden, are there temporarily . Once their home countries are safe, they will be send back. They won’t be allowed to settle there. Each month, thousands are being send back, as they did not get permission to even temporarily stay.
No doubt Sweden bit of more than it can chew, or just too fast, but it probably was a knee-jerk reaction to Brevik. But there is no danger of Sharia subverting Sweden: they about the least religious people on earth. 

Barry0tter - 26 September 2016 02:40 PM

Just consider this: what if you’re wrong and I’m right?

If you are, there is nothing you can do: if Islam can subvert other countries, it is a matter of time until the entire globe prays 5x a day.

The reason why Islam is going strong is not because it is such a powerful, insidious religion. The reason is because many Muslim countries massively subsidize their religion at home and abroad, at a massive cost to their economies: if everything has to be vetted from the perspective of religion, you get shit all done.
Sooner rather than later, Muslim countries will realize that they can no longer afford their religion.
There are just too many forces opposing it:
- the concept of a god-given text the protection of which is more important than lives is a hilarity in times of ebooks and massive file-sharing.
- the power of censorship or modesty rules are eroded to nothing by the internet
- giving up half your workforce (women) for the sake of your religion is a luxury no country can afford
- global warming will make it impossible for Middle Eastern countries to feed themselves: the conflict in Syria is at the core a war caused by Climate Change. More will follow, and they will disproportionately affect the Middle East

In summary: Islamism doesn’t have a chance compared to the forces of technology and environmental change. The only question is whether all of the Middle East has to end up like Syria before enough people there realize it.
But the people coming here have realized it a long time ago.

 
 
OneStepUp
 
Avatar
 
 
OneStepUp
Total Posts:  6
Joined  27-09-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 02:29
 
Barry0tter - 26 September 2016 02:44 PM

Have you never wondered why we haven’t had to mess about with our laws and freedoms to accommodate other religious groups e.g. Sikhs, Hindus?

You mean like with Creationism being taught in schools?? Or hate speech generated by homophobic Christians? Or for hate speech by neo-Nazis? Or having “So help me God” removed from oaths of allegiance? Or no longer having ‘Christmas’ or ‘Haukkah’ - but ‘Happy Holidays”?? Or allowing Native Americans their freedoms on their own land? Or their own religious freedom of practice…

The fact is, there have been MANY instances of religious (and other cultural) accommodations. So there is nothing unusual about such things.

 
OneStepUp
 
Avatar
 
 
OneStepUp
Total Posts:  6
Joined  27-09-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 03:07
 
Barry0tter - 24 September 2016 09:02 AM
icehorse - 24 September 2016 08:48 AM

I agree with the history. I disagree that the situation is unfixable.

For example, now that the world is connected in real-time via the internet, we can all marginalize Islam at the same time.

I don’t think he said it’s unfixable?

For the record I don’t think that either, but I do think the hardest part of the battle will be convincing enough non-muslims of the reality of what we’re up against.

“A meaningful or permanent reformation of Islam is impossible, ” 

I’d classify that as saying it’s ‘unfixable’.

I think the hardest part is accepting that the VAST majority of Muslims are not into violence, terrorism or other atrocities - especially those that are being targetted by the mainstream media. Also, the problem of getting people to accept that we are not in an ‘us and them’ situation. This is extremely difficult when one reads accounts of the London Mayor putting in policies (whcih were PASSED by the council) which are seen as Muslim direct interference and influence… rather than as a concerned parent responding to social concerns about the stereotyping of women (in this, a patriarchal society).

I have a very strong impression that anything that this new mayor of London is going to be constantly under scrutiny, and any policies or speeches that may just hint or can be loosely connected to his Muslim beliefs will be jumped upon as being yet another attack on our freedoms for the sake of Islam. Ie, everything he does is due solely to his religion. However, Khan is not the first Muslim political leader in the western world…Rotterdam and Calgary both have Muslim mayors (who have both been re-elected, and with damn high percentages!!!) - yet I don’t see a large change towards Islam in those cities… Nor do I see beheadings, FGM, stonings going on or being called for…

Islam WILL change… when they stop being bombed, and start having education and technology. AS has been indicated already, Iran is looking at its last generation of ‘traditional’ Muslims with ‘outdated’ ideas. We will find that Islam will still be a popular religion in the world, but like it’s done in the past, will have a bit of a cultural revolution. Different interpretations of their books will take hold - as they did in the past.

 
OneStepUp
 
Avatar
 
 
OneStepUp
Total Posts:  6
Joined  27-09-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 03:15
 

“The mass migration to the West is the clear sign that the Islam has failed and the people know it:”

Rubbish!

The mass migration to the west is because they’re getting bombed and shot at! Do you really think people enjoy picking up only what they can carry and walk (if they’re lucky, get on a truck or rickety boat) to head to a country with almost nothing to their name???

I think everyone needs to take a HUGE step back and look at what’s really going on… Very rich and influential people are providing the weapons, money, and media support in order to ensure energy (oil) reserves for the next decade or two, til it all runs out in the Middle East… after which, other sources (such as gas) will be tapped dry - and then the US will control the oil market completely (for a very brief period of time!) It is NOT a coincidence that all of this warfare and involvement by western forces is happening in the Middle East, and yet similar atrocities in Nigeria by Boko Harem are being fairly well ignored. (not to mention that the situation in Yemen is also being downplayed even though it’s again Muslim attacking Muslim… oh, but their ‘our’ Muslims doing the killing - so it’s ok!!)

What we’re seeing in the Middle East (in particular) is not about religion or a rise in Islam… it’s all about politics and greed!

 
Lausten
 
Avatar
 
 
Lausten
Total Posts:  268
Joined  12-09-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 03:38
 

The OP assumes ISIS was created with a long term and rational goal. Domination and fulfillment of a prophecy is not a goal for the future in the same way that the goal of creating a better society that supports more people is. The kingdoms of 500 years ago used a similar system, the way communism was implemented did it too. You assume that there is some sort of mind behind ISIS that has a plan. ISIS, and fanatical organizations like it morph as circumstances change. You can’t deal with them rationally. They are dealt with by educating people about how to care for each other, by showing that learning how the universe works is not connected to a particular city in a desert somewhere and some purity laws.

You’re right that people will refer to holy books and attempt to use them as solutions, but you can change the holy books and that type of thinking won’t go away. The problem of people making bad choices is solved by people making good choices. If people turn to a mythological being after being raised in oppressive and prejudicial environments and watching their elders get killed, then we need to create places that aren’t oppressive and leaders that don’t bomb countries to get their resources.

 
 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 12:58
 
OneStepUp - 27 September 2016 02:29 AM
Barry0tter - 26 September 2016 02:44 PM

Have you never wondered why we haven’t had to mess about with our laws and freedoms to accommodate other religious groups e.g. Sikhs, Hindus?

You mean like with Creationism being taught in schools?? Or hate speech generated by homophobic Christians? Or for hate speech by neo-Nazis? Or having “So help me God” removed from oaths of allegiance? Or no longer having ‘Christmas’ or ‘Haukkah’ - but ‘Happy Holidays”?? Or allowing Native Americans their freedoms on their own land? Or their own religious freedom of practice…

The fact is, there have been MANY instances of religious (and other cultural) accommodations. So there is nothing unusual about such things.

Your line about Christmas just seems to prove my point?

I don’t care about the other stuff because no other religion has curbed MY freedoms and impinged on MY life the way Islam has.

 

 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
27 September 2016 13:54
 
OneStepUp - 27 September 2016 03:07 AM
Barry0tter - 24 September 2016 09:02 AM
icehorse - 24 September 2016 08:48 AM

I agree with the history. I disagree that the situation is unfixable.

For example, now that the world is connected in real-time via the internet, we can all marginalize Islam at the same time.

I don’t think he said it’s unfixable?

For the record I don’t think that either, but I do think the hardest part of the battle will be convincing enough non-muslims of the reality of what we’re up against.

“A meaningful or permanent reformation of Islam is impossible, ” 

I’d classify that as saying it’s ‘unfixable’.

I think the hardest part is accepting that the VAST majority of Muslims are not into violence, terrorism or other atrocities - especially those that are being targetted by the mainstream media. Also, the problem of getting people to accept that we are not in an ‘us and them’ situation. This is extremely difficult when one reads accounts of the London Mayor putting in policies (whcih were PASSED by the council) which are seen as Muslim direct interference and influence… rather than as a concerned parent responding to social concerns about the stereotyping of women (in this, a patriarchal society).

I have a very strong impression that anything that this new mayor of London is going to be constantly under scrutiny, and any policies or speeches that may just hint or can be loosely connected to his Muslim beliefs will be jumped upon as being yet another attack on our freedoms for the sake of Islam. Ie, everything he does is due solely to his religion. However, Khan is not the first Muslim political leader in the western world…Rotterdam and Calgary both have Muslim mayors (who have both been re-elected, and with damn high percentages!!!) - yet I don’t see a large change towards Islam in those cities… Nor do I see beheadings, FGM, stonings going on or being called for…

Islam WILL change… when they stop being bombed, and start having education and technology. AS has been indicated already, Iran is looking at its last generation of ‘traditional’ Muslims with ‘outdated’ ideas. We will find that Islam will still be a popular religion in the world, but like it’s done in the past, will have a bit of a cultural revolution. Different interpretations of their books will take hold - as they did in the past.

Icehorse and I were talking about the situation being unfixable, Matt Bracken and you are talking about Islam being unfixable. It is.

The Koran is perfect, complete, universal and eternal, and Mohammed was the perfect muslim. Anyone who tries to reform Islam gets killed for blasphemy. Those that haven’t been killed yet have pitifully small folllowings.

It IS them or us. There are muslims and kafirs, and that’s their dichotomy not mine.

If you think that a cessation of western bombs will calm everything down then I refer you to the last line of the OP and advise you to read the whole thing again. Was Charlie Hebdo a result of western bombing campaigns in the middle east? Theo Van Gogh? Salman Taseer? The Iraq war and Syria came after 9/11. When has Thailand ever bombed the M/E?

As for Calgary and Rotterdam, give it time. FGM in UK and they attempted to behead the old priest in France so these things have already arrived in Europe.

“AS has been indicated already, Iran is looking at its last generation of ‘traditional’ Muslims with ‘outdated’ ideas.” I’d like to see some evidence for this assertion please otherwise it’s just wishful thinking.

I tend to assume that everyone who posts here has heard SH talk at length on the subject, but I’m starting to realise that can’t be the case. Most muslims may be peaceful but that doesn’t automatically mean they share our values. Ask a Jew.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  7686
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
27 September 2016 19:37
 
Lausten - 27 September 2016 03:38 AM

The OP assumes ISIS was created with a long term and rational goal. Domination and fulfillment of a prophecy is not a goal for the future in the same way that the goal of creating a better society that supports more people is. The kingdoms of 500 years ago used a similar system, the way communism was implemented did it too. You assume that there is some sort of mind behind ISIS that has a plan. ISIS, and fanatical organizations like it morph as circumstances change. You can’t deal with them rationally. They are dealt with by educating people about how to care for each other, by showing that learning how the universe works is not connected to a particular city in a desert somewhere and some purity laws.

You’re right that people will refer to holy books and attempt to use them as solutions, but you can change the holy books and that type of thinking won’t go away. The problem of people making bad choices is solved by people making good choices. If people turn to a mythological being after being raised in oppressive and prejudicial environments and watching their elders get killed, then we need to create places that aren’t oppressive and leaders that don’t bomb countries to get their resources.

I appreciate the compassionate sentiments. That said, problems must be honestly named, and don’t be guilty of soft bigotry.

 
 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
30 September 2016 15:56
 
Twissel - 27 September 2016 01:04 AM

It’s helpful to compare the mass migration into Europe to other was migrations, for example at the turn of the 20th century to the US. the result was a time of very heightened tension, more violence, neighborhoods that essentially policed themselves and kept their traditions ... for a time.
Of course we would be naive to expect Muslims to instantly become secular and humanist citizens. But by every measure they are more law-abiding than the average citizen. And over time, 3rd and later generation Muslims are fully integrated into their host countries, just like any other group.

great efforts are taken to keep refugees in the region, to fund and stock camps near their countries of origin. And that is the right thing, of course: we will need the people to rebuild their homes.
What we see in the the West is what every country is obligated to do under international law: grant asylum to those at risk for their lives. We would have to renegotiate international deals (any maybe we should) to be able to opt out of this obligation.
The vast majority of people admitted to Europe, including Sweden, are there temporarily . Once their home countries are safe, they will be send back. They won’t be allowed to settle there. Each month, thousands are being send back, as they did not get permission to even temporarily stay.
No doubt Sweden bit of more than it can chew, or just too fast, but it probably was a knee-jerk reaction to Brevik. But there is no danger of Sharia subverting Sweden: they about the least religious people on earth. 

Barry0tter - 26 September 2016 02:40 PM

Just consider this: what if you’re wrong and I’m right?

If you are, there is nothing you can do: if Islam can subvert other countries, it is a matter of time until the entire globe prays 5x a day.

The reason why Islam is going strong is not because it is such a powerful, insidious religion. The reason is because many Muslim countries massively subsidize their religion at home and abroad, at a massive cost to their economies: if everything has to be vetted from the perspective of religion, you get shit all done.
Sooner rather than later, Muslim countries will realize that they can no longer afford their religion.
There are just too many forces opposing it:
- the concept of a god-given text the protection of which is more important than lives is a hilarity in times of ebooks and massive file-sharing.
- the power of censorship or modesty rules are eroded to nothing by the internet
- giving up half your workforce (women) for the sake of your religion is a luxury no country can afford
- global warming will make it impossible for Middle Eastern countries to feed themselves: the conflict in Syria is at the core a war caused by Climate Change. More will follow, and they will disproportionately affect the Middle East

In summary: Islamism doesn’t have a chance compared to the forces of technology and environmental change. The only question is whether all of the Middle East has to end up like Syria before enough people there realize it.
But the people coming here have realized it a long time ago.

Previous mass migrations did not involve adherents of an ideology whose very purpose is conquest and domination.

Weren’t a lot of the people involved in Bataclan and Brussels etc. 2nd & 3rd generations of muslim immigrant families? Not much sign of total integration there.

Unfortunately most of the people who came to Europe at Merkel’s behest are neither refugees or genuine asylum seekers and have no intention of leaving, they’ll have to be forcibly removed. I’m going to start a new thread on Sweden sometime so I don’t want to get bogged down on that, but the Swedes are being trained to be dhimmis.

If I am right then there is another option: to fight back. Geert Wilders has the right idea. If I’m wrong what would we stand to lose if all western countries adopted his policies? I’d say not a lot and gain a whole lot more.

 

 
Barry0tter
 
Avatar
 
 
Barry0tter
Total Posts:  218
Joined  25-08-2016
 
 
 
30 September 2016 16:18
 
icehorse - 27 September 2016 07:37 PM
Lausten - 27 September 2016 03:38 AM

The OP assumes ISIS was created with a long term and rational goal. Domination and fulfillment of a prophecy is not a goal for the future in the same way that the goal of creating a better society that supports more people is. The kingdoms of 500 years ago used a similar system, the way communism was implemented did it too. You assume that there is some sort of mind behind ISIS that has a plan. ISIS, and fanatical organizations like it morph as circumstances change. You can’t deal with them rationally. They are dealt with by educating people about how to care for each other, by showing that learning how the universe works is not connected to a particular city in a desert somewhere and some purity laws.

You’re right that people will refer to holy books and attempt to use them as solutions, but you can change the holy books and that type of thinking won’t go away. The problem of people making bad choices is solved by people making good choices. If people turn to a mythological being after being raised in oppressive and prejudicial environments and watching their elders get killed, then we need to create places that aren’t oppressive and leaders that don’t bomb countries to get their resources.

I appreciate the compassionate sentiments. That said, problems must be honestly named, and don’t be guilty of soft bigotry.

I agree with ice’s response to this post but just wanted to add something: I just heard SH today on Joe Rogan say something I’d never previously realised regarding the Iraq war, and specifically the notion that I’ve emboldened above.

If it was just about getting the oil it would’ve been a hell of a lot cheaper to just buy it!

 
RIS
 
Avatar
 
 
RIS
Total Posts:  135
Joined  19-09-2016
 
 
 
01 October 2016 08:16
 

I thought ISIS was an invention of the corporate sponsored media propaganda of the west. A continuous need for a boogie man for the timid trigger finger of the paranoid American fragile eggshell mind. In reality poor farmers who’s families the Anglo-Americans murdered and who’s land they destroyed.

 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  2813
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
01 October 2016 08:56
 
RIS - 01 October 2016 08:16 AM

I thought ISIS was an invention of the corporate sponsored media propaganda of the west. A continuous need for a boogie man for the timid trigger finger of the paranoid American fragile eggshell mind. In reality poor farmers who’s families the Anglo-Americans murdered and who’s land they destroyed.

Well,  you will never know for sure until you go there in person…

 
 
 < 1 2 3 >