It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

My solution to Islam (from a western POV)

page: 5
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: dmfsb

Did you read my post about how the crusades never ended?

of course you didn't. Read into things just what you want to see.




posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
I heard some people throw atomic bombs on civilians....

You don't know what you are talking about. Japan attacked America. America ended the war by dropping two bombs ... both on populations that were fully engaged in the war effort. Everyone from the elderly down to kindergardeners were working in the war factories making bullets and guns. We ended the war with as few American casualties as possible. It was justified.

Religion had NOTHING to do with it. That's the problem muslims ... they always think everything has to do with religion ... when in fact very little really does outside their self imposed world.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: dmfsb

it is not necessarily racism to criticize any kind of religion but it could be, it all depends on the way you say it.

so I am not claiming criticizm of religions is necessarily a racism...




A 2007 article in Journal of Sociology defines Islamophobia as anti-Muslim racism and a continuation of anti-Asian and anti-Arab racism. Similarly, John Denham has drawn parallels between modern Islamophobia and the antisemitism of the 1930s, so have Maud Olofsson, and Jan Hjärpe, among others. Author Doug Saunders has drawn parallels between current Islamophobia and the older discrimination and hate against Roman Catholics.


Fantastic. Except for the small fact that Muslims, like Jews, and Christians, and Buddhists, can be Asians. They can be White Europeans and Americans. They can be South Americans. They can be Africans. They can be Pacific Islanders. They can and do come from every single race, so unless Islam is to be considered a race, which for reasons I have just explained cannot happen, it is not racist to criticize Islam.

One final time. I am NOT the OP, this is NOT my thread.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: dmfsb

you said:


Islam is a religion comprised of adherents from many, many racial backgrounds.


I was just pointing out that "racism" is not only doing with "race" but that broadly generalization of any group can be considered racism and it is so.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Dear Islam, please quit cutting off people's heads and such,it is unnerving.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Are we aware what colonization is?
It’s a fancy word for slavery.

all these third world countries I mention many are Arab Muslim countries.

Considering what they went through I think they are doing okay

As well as many of these countries that have been plagued by WESTERN aggression

You people judge; you need to look at your own rotten history of death and destruction that the west has reaped on most of the planet

AND YOU DARE JUDGE PEOPLE!
Its like the rapist getting mad when the victim strikes back



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: HauntWok

LOL

I never supported any "first strike" war.

Defense is a different story.

Do you know the difference?




posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: dmfsb

for the last time - racism is not only about "race"




Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: dmfsb

you said:


Islam is a religion comprised of adherents from many, many racial backgrounds.


I was just pointing out that "racism" is not only doing with "race" but that broadly generalization of any group can be considered racism and it is so.


NO IT CAN'T. NO IT CAN'T. NO IT CAN'T.

"Honda drivers are always old and slow" = racism to you.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
remember - deny ignorance.

Take your own advice.


originally posted by: HauntWok
They live their lives on hate and intolerance, they refuse to see any other side to a debate ...

Deflection nonsense. How about the hate and intolerance inherent in Islam.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: dmfsb

for the last time - racism is not only about "race"




Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial.



Except for the bit where there is no such universal culture to the group in question. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good chance to obfuscate, like a good obedient little socialist.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

I said they threw atomic bombs on civilians killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians!

did I say something wrong?

did they or did they not killed the innocent civilians and completely obliterated two cities leaving radiation to kill for years after?



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: FlyersFan

I said they threw atomic bombs on civilians killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians!

did I say something wrong?

did they or did they not killed the innocent civilians and completely obliterated two cities leaving radiation to kill for years after?


The Rape of Nankin alone justified the use of nuclear weaponry.

As many as 300,000 innocent Chinese brutally massacred for no reason, and you talk about the innocent Japanese.

You are repulsive. Truly repulsive.
edit on 5-7-2014 by dmfsb because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: dmfsb

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: dmfsb

for the last time - racism is not only about "race"




Racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial.




Except for the bit where there is no such universal culture to the group in question. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good chance to obfuscate, like a good obedient little socialist.


so if there is no "universal culture" to the group in question what is the talk about "Islam" all the time?

if you want to criticize specific countries or ethnic groups or recent conflicts please go ahead; you'll make more sense.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
I said they threw atomic bombs on civilians killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians!

I heard you .. and again - you are wrong.

Have you ever actually read a history book? Have you ever lived in Japan or been to those places? I have. I lived in Japan. I know the history. Obviously you do not. The ENTIRE POPULATION was in the war effort ... even kindergardeners would spend half a day working in bullet making factories. The targets were legitimate. THEY started the war. WE finished it with the least number of casualties on OUR SIDE. If they didnt' want their country blown up, then they shouldn't have started the war. It's just that simple.

You are deflecting. The topic is the problem of Islam and what to do about it.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan

How would you know? The only things you let in your head are stormfrontesque sites that show only hate and intolerance.

have you ever spent time in a Muslim community? EVER?

cause i have, and i found that they are normal people. yes you find intolerant jerks just like everywhere else, but is not the majority and it's not the norm.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: dmfsb

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: FlyersFan

I said they threw atomic bombs on civilians killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians!

did I say something wrong?

did they or did they not killed the innocent civilians and completely obliterated two cities leaving radiation to kill for years after?


The Rape of Nankin alone justified the use of nuclear weaponry.

As many as 300,000 innocent Chinese brutally massacred for no reason, and you talk about the innocent Japanese.

You are repulsive. Truly repulsive.


so Japanese who massacred Chinese took shelter in Hiroshima and Nagasaki so "the good guys" had to get them there, right?

see, the problem is that you are overgeneralizing...

I mentioned innocent civilians you take it I say each and every Japanese was innocent...

Of course not, That is Your Logic!



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: demus
a reply to: dmfsb

you said:


Islam is a religion comprised of adherents from many, many racial backgrounds.


I was just pointing out that "racism" is not only doing with "race" but that broadly generalization of any group can be considered racism and it is so.

I think you're looking for the term 'discrimination based on religious beliefs'.



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan


even kindergardeners would spend half a day working in bullet making factories. The targets were legitimate.

Say that again you blood thirsty human???
Did you just approve killing innocent children who probably didn't even know what they were doing???



posted on Jul, 5 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: demus
I said they threw atomic bombs on civilians killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians!

I heard you .. and again - you are wrong.

Have you ever actually read a history book? Have you ever lived in Japan or been to those places? I have. I lived in Japan. I know the history. Obviously you do not. The ENTIRE POPULATION was in the war effort ... even kindergardeners would spend half a day working in bullet making factories. The targets were legitimate. THEY started the war. WE finished it with the least number of casualties on OUR SIDE. If they didnt' want their country blown up, then they shouldn't have started the war. It's just that simple.

You are deflecting. The topic is the problem of Islam and what to do about it.


wasn't it the same in USA?

civilians were working in factories and elsewhere and supporting war effort in numerous ways?


Nearly all the unions that belonged to the CIO were fully supportive of both the war effort and of the Roosevelt administration.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join