Isis as an entity of course couldn't exist without at least the dormant support of a large percentage of muslims

Mate, i can guarantee that that man did not get martyrdom, at least not according to Islam.

Let me know when you are back up in the UK, maybe we can meet up and ill shout you a drink.

Theres good and evil in every race creed and religion known to man. Sadly the minority have given a bad wrap to the innocent ones

No one is talking censorship. This discussion started by saying it would be good if "off-topic" comments that add nothing were removed to stop threads derailing into insult shitfights.

Within a few weeks posters would stop bothering derailing threads because they'd be deleted.

My experience is that Muslims are wonderful people when you talk about normal daily things, but to find their inner motivations, you must ask specific questions. For example, I was invited for dinner with a Muslim suburban family in an upper middle class Australian suburb, who came from professional background. It was a wonderful multi-cultural experience that would send lefties into raptures as what multiculturalism is all about.

And then I asked them what they thought about Osama Bin Laden - this was before he was killed. And they said, "Actually, Bin Laden is a good man".

Here are some specific questions to ask your Muslim friends:

- If you were given a choice, would you (1) want to see Sharia law established in Australia, or (2) not established?

- If you were given a choice, would you (1) want to see a worldwide Caliphate established, or (2) not established?

- If the eventual establishment of Sharia law in Australia could only be established by terrorism such as ISIS, would you begrudgingly accept that?

If you just talk about football and the weather, of course everyone seems to have nice attitudes.

Regarding your comment that "The amount of muslims that are willing to go kill innocent people is small", check out this youtube video.

https://youtu.be/Ry3NzkAOo3s



Edited by uncle sepp: 20/11/2015 09:38:18 AM

Edited by uncle sepp: 20/11/2015 09:38:42 AM

Great clip and she makes some solid points but the 15 to 25% she quotes as radicals seems waaay high.

Mind you even 1% is 12 million radicals.

I would say a figure of 15% might not be those who're willing to strap on an explosive vest but would cover those who sympathise with the goals that ISIS and Al Quaeda are aiming for. They might not feel easy with the terrorism but they agree that the aim of achieving Sharia law and the Caliphate are what their Allah wants. Using that criteria the 15% is not so outrageous.

Remember, to have teenagers like the guy who killed Curtis Cheng, you need a large population of people around him who feel positively about terrorism to let the teenage kids feel they are doing the right thing. Even if we're conservative and put the number of Muslims who feel sympathetic but aren't going to strap on a bomb at 5%, that's 5% of 1.6 billion which is 80 million people, about the population of Turkey, or 4x the population of Australia.

It is also reasonable to say that at least 5% of the refugees pouring across the European borders are at least sympathetic to aim of establishing Sharia law in Western countries.

And 5% is conservative.

Edited by uncle sepp: 20/11/2015 09:56:41 AM

Deconstruction of that sheila's arguments here.

[youtube]2MrtjdEyNtc[/youtube]

Wahleed Aly and his wife need to answer this question: Do you feel positive about the idea of establishing Sharia law in Australia?

People of Australia, don't you recognise SPIN when you see it? When Aly says ISIS is weak because they can't resist the fighter jets, do you believe that explains that ISIS is weak?

Think of the insurgent forces that have resisted modern armies without having air power, e.g. the Viet Cong overcoming US, the jihad fighers resisting the US army in Iraq by guerrilla warfare. Modern armies can't cope with guerrilla warfare.

ISIS is weak as a conventional army, but is storng as a guerrilla warfare.

I don't know if you can realise that almost the entire Australia was hoodwinked with that fast one by Aly.

That weak comment wasn't exclusively about their military forces. It was about their propaganda and shrinking influence and how they would claim they controlled the rainbow lorikeet that flew in to my window if they could get attention for it. If that is all you got from his segment then i suggest you take some critical thinking and text deconstruction courses.

Ok, you want to act as if you're great at critical thinking?

Here are two scenarios that ISIS do both:

(1) -- For some terror activities, ISIS initiated them.

(2) -- For other terror activities, ISIS did not initiate them, but their manual says they should claim responsibility.

This is the key to thinking this through - that ISIS does both strategies.

So after the Paris attacks, Aly points to ISIS manual, and infers that the Paris attacks were number (2), i.e. ISIS didn't do it, but merely claimed them.

Where's Aly's slip shod logic?

Using Aly's logic, he has reduced a dual-scenario into a single-scenario. ISIS do both -- they initiated some terror acts, and they falsely claim responsibility for others. Aly refers to the ISIS manual, and hoodwinks Australia into thinking that ALL that ISIS do is to falsely claim responsibility.

I don't know if you are so blinded by your supposed ability to think clearly that you can't see how Aly got that one past you.

When you reply, can you reassure me that you understand that ISIS do both scenarios, but Aly argued that they only do ONE scenario.

I question that argument on the basis that they were born out of the collapse of the Iraqi state.

They do provide the skeleton of a welfare state to some people (although they amplify this in their propaganda). Much like the Taliban in Afghanistan, people in the areas they control acquiesce often because in their absence there was simply no functioning state in their areas.

And obviously many acquiesce under the threat of execution.

Just look at how many Germans lived under the Nazis - they provided dormant support. Does that mean there is something inherent to the beliefs or characters of Germans? No.

Unfortunately it is a human trait to follow the path of least resistance. It is not something specific to muslims.

I think the issue with a lot of this is that while muslims might be peaceful, just ask them how they feel about Jews and gays and watch the intolerance flow.

With regards to the violence of religions their scripture is a product of the time of their conception. Medieval words for a medieval audience.

While I agree the common criticism against the German people is that they did nothing and let the atrocities happen.

Now we're seeing it again and humanity clearly hasn't learnt anything.

Edited by MrBrisbane: 17/3/2016 10:05:40 PM

Warning: thread is about to be derailed.

Without being an expert in German culture, I would argue that there are, shall we say, characteristics that were common in German culture which enabled Nazism to thrive. This doesn't mean that all Germans were/are predisposed to Nazism. We have to remember that individuals aren't necessarily unduly shaped by their culture/nationality, but certainly trends appear. Let's not forget that many a brave German sacrificed his life in the fight against Nazism.

I think it would have been more difficult for something like Nazism to take hold in the UK, or Australia. Not impossible, but more difficult. Some folk here would have loved Nazism. But given the history of constitutionalism in the UK/Australia, our sarcastic ways and our scepticism about political figures, it would have been far more difficult.

Even examining the respective languages of English and German. Remember that language often reflects cultural attitudes. English language, and literature, is littered with irony. Irony is one of the best defences against tyranny. German language has terms which are frankly brutal and which could not possibly exist in English.

Backpfeifengesicht

I'm not a German speaker. We have fluent German speakers on here who might be able to help out. But that, I'm told, means 'a face that needs to be punched'. We don't have words like this in English.

Edited by quickflick: 20/11/2015 05:01:56 PM

I know Muslims who have no issues with Jews.

It's easy to conflate anti-Israeli sentiment with anti-Semitism. Most sensible people I know abhor what the state of Israel does. I refer to Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, atheists and agnostics. Small wonder that Muslims do too. I know Muslims whose families are from Palestine. Well given that Israel was established by way of going through villages and shooting every Arab man, woman or child in sight, it's not surprising that they don't like Israel. Israel's behaviour today is little better than it was over 60 years ago. So no surprise they don't like what Israel does.

And frankly, why should they? Hardcore Israelis, such as Netanyahu, would love nothing more than for all Arabs in the region to be smited off the face of the planet. The Israeli settlements are basically no better than Nazi lebensraum.

To oppose this does not mean one is opposed to Jews living prosperously in our own societies. We need that. But being opposed to Zionism is often confused with anti-Semitism.

Then I suppose there are people who have actively become anti-Semitic because of the disgraceful behaviour of Israel. No country, since Nazi Germany (or perhaps the USSR), has done more to foster anti-Semitism than Israel.

Edited by quickflick: 20/11/2015 05:23:29 PM

That is some incredible insight you have there. How did you come to this conclusion? Was it the fact that there were once Nazis' in Germany?

But in all seriousness I do agree with your conclusion and like the Nazis' in Germany, the Islamic culture in the Middle East (Nigeria, North Africa, Pakistan, South East Asia) has allowed terrorism and terrorist groups to flourish.

Just to clarify when I said the hatred of Jews is heavily entrenched among Muslims, I was not talking about anti-israel sentiment.

I'm saying that a lot of those Muslims don't actually hate Jews. They hate Israel. But people labour under the misapprehension that they hate Jews. People cannot draw the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

As for those who do hate Jews. For a lot of them, they, themselves, cannot differentiate between Jews and Israel. Their hatred of Jews has a lot to do with the cruel and mind-bogglingly stupid actions of Israel.

Assuming you mean that Muslims hate Jews/Israel because of the current politics? If so, that would be typical leftist, liberal "if it makes sense to me then it might be true" approach to studying history.

Israel and the Jews have lived in the land for at least 3,000 years or more.

Islam, as a group of people, only came into existence around 600 A.D. during Mohammed's lifetime.

The Muslims have hated the Jews for most of that 1,400 years, and that hatred is written into their Koran by Mohammed. So it is fatuous to suggest it started recently.

A testimony of a Muslim who was taught by his mother to hate Jews.

https://youtu.be/m2zP1Ri60Eg

Have a chat to ex-British Army officers who served in Palestine in the late 40s. Not suggesting there was no animosity towards the Jews, on the part of Muslims, back then. But it was very different to the way it was now. Muslims co-existed peacefully enough in Palestine with Jews and with the British. Low and behold. Jewish refugees rock up. They (or at least the vast majority) had no intention of living peacefully with Arabs.

After the horrors of the Holocaust, many, many Jewish people who arrived in Palestine (and not just extremists elements, even moderates) were hellbent on slitting the throats of everybody who might pose a threat to their establishment of an entirely Jewish, non-secular state.

British troops, who had fought and died for (among other things) the security of Jewish people during the Second World War, were fair game.

As for Arabs. Man, woman or child, they were to be killed or chased away.

These things brought about high levels of anti-Zionism (among the more reasonable) and anti-Semitism (among the less reasonable). Before that, many Muslims weren't unduly bothered by the Jews.

Israel was born out of an ideology of "never again". Never again would they permit the horrors of the Holocaust to be repeated.

Well, I'm sorry but this is a misguided and dangerous way in which to establish a country. It doesn't focus on values of equality, liberty, brotherhood and human/civic rights. Those kind of things can be pissed on in the name of "never again". It's all about "us" and "them".

The biggest mistake Britain made in the 20th Century was to gift the Jews Palestine. They should have told them to go to hell. Accept Jewish refugees, yes. Give them an exclusively Jewish state, no way. The world, especially the Middle-East, would be tenfold more stable and safe today if the British had stood firm.

Are you willing to admit you have fallen for propaganda?

Have you heard about the Balfour Treaty?

That treaty was meant to implement in Israel something similar to what happened in India and Pakistan, i.e. when the British pulled out, they gave land each to the Muslims and Hindu nations.

Why didn't it happen in Palestine, as was intended by the Balfour Treaty?

You need to research it.

Suffice it to say, not one Arabic or Muslim person ever tells you about the Balfour Treaty.

Ask yourself: why didn't the Palestinians accept the land that they were given by the British? If the Muslims accepted the land in Pakistan, how come the Muslims in Palestine rejected the British offer of land?

It goes something like this: The British intended to do in Palestine what they did in India, i.e. give land to the Muslims and land to the Jews. The Palestinians rejected the deal because the surrounding Arab nations told them they were going to attack Israel the moment the Jewish state came into being. The Arab nations told the Palestinians to move out, and then when the Jews were defeated, they could have the whole lot. That, my friend quickflick, is how the Palestinians moved over the Jordan. But it never went to plan. Rather than the Arab nations defeating the new nation of Israel, the Jews successfully defended themselves against the Arabs. That is how the Jews came to get everything, when the Balfour Treated intended it to be split between the Palestinians and the Jews.

Why is it that no Palestinian ever mentions this? Instead they use emotive terms such as Jewish occupation.

quickflick, are you willing to admit that your statements about the British giving 100% of Israel to the Jews indicates that you are a product of decades of propaganda that the left wing has swallowed?

Even with the above history lesson, I bet that no lefties will be persuaded. That's because they're driven by an underlying agenda that is not based on the facts of history.

[youtube]oCKWDarNdGw[/youtube]

Germans were at the doorstep to witnessing the great horrors of Jewish Bolshevik communism slaughtering millions and spreading through Eastern Europe. Germans were under an oppressive weimar republic where Jews occupied the majority of the power structure of politics, banking, media and industry. Ive read publishings and newspaper clippings from the time Where jews openly boasted their power and mocked the German people and their Christian values. The banking cartels had essentially destroyed the nation so when a political party came along and liberated the country of crushing debt and issued its own currency not backed by gold you could understand why the brutally oppressed would jump onboard. "For every mark issued, we required the equivalent of a mark's worth of work done, or goods produced." The Economy subsequently thrived, and of course the bankers weren't happy.


Note the date.

Then you also had jews around the world pouring fuel on the fire.


I don't condone the actions of Hitler, World war 2 was horrible for everyone there were no victors. Well, except Zionism and bankers still collecting debt on that war.

An attack in Mali at a hotel, over 100 still inside.

Thanks it means a lot. Death is an escape for the bastards that took the lives of two people I knew, and the countless others who are missed dearly by loved ones. I didn't want that fucker to get his escape from a worse fate. It's not a kindness from me, the things I imagine me doing to him make me feel like a sick sadistic prick.

And zimbos, if I'm ever around Leeds I'll drop you a message.

Their is a growing movement in the Muslim community to educate people that we do not hate Jews. We do not hate any religion. Its more a dislike towards Anti-Zionism. Unfortunately jews get generalised, which is very wrong and must stop.



I know anger can fill you over these moments. I do not discount your grief. I grieve with you for as long as you wish to do so.

Do not let that anger overwhelm you though. If you need a shoulder or a hand, you will always have me here.

You could probably find muslims who aren't opposed to homosexuality as well, they are likely a minority.



Wat annoys me about people who seem to hate Israel over their aggression is that they seem to ignore how many times the arab league has joined up to try and wipe them out.

People always seem to focus on what Israel does and completely ignore what Israel's arab neighbours contribute to the shit storm.

I think Israel has innocent blood on its hands of course, but the blame has to be shared. Singling out Israel is ignoring so so much.



Honestly can you blame them for this sentiment? Their neighbours want them annihilated. Funny how people chose to bring up Israel's extremism whilst ignoring the other side of the coin.....




People tend to hide behind 'Zionism' to mask their anti-semitism.



Once again it's ironic how much flak Israel cops. If they weren't a dominant military force it's quite obvious that the arab league would have wiped them out by now. Oh wait, I can't say that right.....l