Brainwashing...."Dont Hurt The Good Muslims" Every Time A Bomb Goes Off

Good muslims. I read several times that if all muslims were bad, then we'd have an all out war.
The same is also true with us normal people who are constantly called racist or islamophobes. If we were all like that, then you'd see muslims being murdered or beaten up daily.
So there is your proof that not all of us are what some here call us.

So shut up you, who call us names even though we just want an honest and intelligent discussion about a very real thread originating from islamists.
I am not a racist, I do not hate all muslims, I am intelligent enough to know the difference between a terrorist and a Pakistani grandma who is really nice to me, but I also know about parts of the koran speaking about spreading islam across the world, by any means necessary.

That means either by jihad or really, really slowly with peacefulness and persistancy. It doesn;t matter how, I don't want it!

Yet I am supposed to shut up and accept and be nice and believe that all non terrorists are 'good muslims'.

How about all muslims changing their opinion that all infidels, western people, women etc are also ALL good people?
Why not teach muslims how nice we all are and that not everyone is a whore or a bigot or [enter whatever you like].

Because...I know from personal experience that a lot of muslims here in the UK are here in person only. Their mindset is still exactly the one they had when they came here and whilst they just want to work and live in peace with us, doesn't mean that they like us or value our beliefs, nor do they want to integrate or mingle [bar a few educated youngsters]. Because they don't. It's not because they are nasty or terrorists, it is because they have grown up with different values, may I even say incompatible values with the western world.

That is the truth. I personally had it with being insulted trying to discuss a very real danger to our western values.
"You are a bigot" means exactly the same as if I say to a muslim "you are a terrorist". Both are wrong.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: kaylaluv

So when an African American shoots up a place, would you go around screaming about all the good African Americans?

See how sort of wrong and insulting that implication is? There is demonstrably a double standard.

I would if after the shooting everyone was trying to say that all black people are violent criminals that need to be put down.

Good, good. Then you will understand how violence works. How the violent stereotype is used to achieve unrelated ends. This gives birth to professional race hustlers and shake down artists. The guilt ridden running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

a reply to: ketsuko

Are you? I don't recall calling you a racist, but if you insist... There is no shame in recognizing that you may have been swept up into media sensationalism when a thought such as "all muslims are terrorists" or even an innocuous one such as "why don't good muslims stand up to the bad ones and denounce them?" crosses your head. But the key to overcoming it is to understand that it IS media sensationalism that is driving that attitude and to know to rise above it.

a reply to: Logarock

How so? Can you prove that all muslims that get bombed are bad muslims? Do you honestly believe that?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Just to add to your ideas here:

Reza Aslan: Anyone who asks why Muslims have not condemned terrorism can’t use Google

~Tenth

a reply to: Logarock

I do understand these things. That is why I don't buy into media hype and sensationalism.

I really am wondering about muslims, when I read on news sites ordinary muslims congratulating the Paris terrorists on a job well done, burning Christians in brick kilns, burning churches, killing Christians by the hundreds, am I reading the wrong news sites? 'They' even kill, torture and imprison each other, Gaza as an example (rantburg and atlas shrugs among others) is you want sources, those are direct into my inbox.

a reply to: pikestaff

What makes you believe that they are "ordinary muslims"? The ordinary muslims I know and work for haven't celebrated any of these attacks. In fact the conversations I have had with my Muslim boss and coworkers was very negative towards the terrorists.

a reply to: Logarock

Did you ever thing that the peaceful Muslims that are being killed are simply fodder, an acceptable cost long term? By their own?

No I didn't and that is a pretty ignorant thing to say , I suggest you educate yourself on the subject .
Peaceful Muslims are being killed for the same reason peaceful westerners are being killed , because they don't agree with the Islamists ideology or particular brand of fundamentalist Islam.
Sectarian murders are nothing new nor are they exclusive to Islam , we in the UK lived with it for decades.

And you are harping about division?

One reply is hardly harping.

originally posted by: pikestaff
I really am wondering about muslims, when I read on news sites ordinary muslims congratulating the Paris terrorists on a job well done, burning Christians in brick kilns, burning churches, killing Christians by the hundreds, am I reading the wrong news sites? 'They' even kill, torture and imprison each other, Gaza as an example (rantburg and atlas shrugs among others) is you want sources, those are direct into my inbox.

Those guys don't sound like ordinary Muslims! Or ordinary people for that matter!

The problem is believing ANY news outlet. To have any valid personal opinion you can believe you must have the knowledge first hand - empirical knowledge or something.

a reply to: Logarock

Loga, my friend, I was calling the media Islamophobe apologists not you, sir/ma'am!

Apologies if it appeared that way...


The only part that was directed at you was the tongue-in-cheek first sentence & the more serious interpretation of the offensive assumptions of the media that think people are stupid Neanderthals who don't know that good Muslims are not to blame...


I thought you could have worded your OP a little better, but I got the jist of your point and decided there was no point making it seem confrontational.

originally posted by: masqua
a reply to: Logarock

Easy thinking? So, tell me, how did those countries come into being? One needs to go back a bit further than 40 years

Quoting from Margaret MacMillan's historical book 'Paris 1919, Six Months that Changed the World, Chapter 27, Arab Independence, page 381:

One day, during the Peace Conference, Arnold Toynbee, an advisor to the British delegation, had to deliver some papers to the prime minister. "Lloyd George, to my delight, had forgotten my presence and had begun to think aloud.'Mesopotamia... yes... oil... irrigation... we must have Mesopotamia; Palestine... yes... the Holy Land... Zionism... we must have Palestine; Syria... h'm... what is there in Syria? Let the French have that.' Thus the lineaments of the peace settlement in the Middle East were exposed: Britain seizing its chance; the need to throw something to the French; a homeland for the Jews; oil; and the calm assurance that the peacemakers could dispose of the former Ottoman territories to suit themselves.

Did anyone really expect western concerns to just walk out and leave a vacuum after the fall of the Ottomans? It may have been the boy scout thing to do but look at the vacuums now. The sort of writing above is well done by folks that have a dizzyingly stupid grasp on reality, spiked with false righteous indignation and come at western actions from a Marxist model.

So what did we get during the purge of Iran? Islamic/nationalist theocrats. Yea that always good for the world.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs


I apologize......but that hardly seems adequate after the level of ripping. My sincerer apologies.

a reply to: Hecate666

The operative thing is that they don't have to live Western Values themselves to assimilate. All they have to do is learn to tolerate them and accept that those values are the ones that will prevail in society.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Logarock

Did you ever thing that the peaceful Muslims that are being killed are simply fodder, an acceptable cost long term? By their own?

No I didn't and that is a pretty ignorant thing to say , I suggest you educate yourself on the subject .
Peaceful Muslims are being killed for the same reason peaceful westerners are being killed , because they don't agree with the Islamists ideology or particular brand of Islam.
Sectarian murders are nothing new nor are they exclusive to Islam , we in the UK lived with it for decades.

And you are harping about division?

One reply is hardly harping.

I mean that bad Muslims kill regular peaceful business minding sort of Muslims as fodder in the war.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pikestaff

What makes you believe that they are "ordinary muslims"? The ordinary muslims I know and work for haven't celebrated any of these attacks. In fact the conversations I have had with my Muslim boss and coworkers was very negative towards the terrorists.

Did you happen to go to your boss and ask him how he felt and state that you would end your employment with then or did they just volunteer the information.

I was reading a book about social engineering recently that sparked a thought.

In order to unify the world, into a peaceful NWO sort of existence.

One needs to have an identifiable threat to the entire world, one that lasts for years.

Could Islam be that identifiable threat?

Within the pages of the holy books are instructions or sanctions
to kill unbelievers. The seeds of these thoughts are in the Old Testament, true, but
the Jews and Christians have roundly denounced these passages as not relevant to today. Christians
say that the New Testament supersedes the Old so the "love they neighbor" becomes the overriding
principle and living a peaceful life the overriding command.
However, in Islam the peaceful writings are superseded by the commands to kill unbelievers and
to forcibly convert the world.

Also, it is well known in sociology that when there is polygamy in a society, nearly half the men go without wives and socially sanctioned sexual outlets. Islam allows polygamy and the claiming of wives before puberty and allows men to give women no choice in whom they wed.
Islam also forbids homosexuality and imposes a death penalty for engaging in it.
While other religions may "forbid" homosexuality, Islam is the only one that commands physical punishment and allows for death as a punishment.
Leaving up to 50% of the males with no sanctioned outlet for sexuality, or sanctioned availability to obtain love (wife/children/life partner). Which historically/sociologically/and psychologically leads directly to violence/ a sense of hopelessness/ and a desire for a life where they can find love (one of the human beings strongest needs). The Islamic State promises endless sexual fulfillment and love for the jihadist.

Then comes the OP question, why train the masses to not engage in reprisals and to leave the breeding grounds for the jihadists alone?
Because the NWO needs a scapegoat and has found it in Islam.
Many on this site have commented that the funding and encouragement of jihadism seems to come from and be sanctioned by the powers that be.
Could this be why?

I am left with a burning question in my mind.

Is Islam being used
intentionally to create so much pain and suffering on the world
that the world is willing to unite
to put an end to the seemingly endless pain and suffering
inflicted in the name of Muhammad and Islam
(which unfortunately for the peaceful Muslim - means in the end
eradicating Islam itself)



a reply to: ketsuko
a reply to: Daedal

a reply to: Krazysh0t

My point here is that there is demonstrably a double standard in how these things are treated.

No one assumes that when an African American does something bad that every other member of his group is also at fault. This is because the media bends over backward to make sure they report on him as an individual. No criticism must ever fall upon the African American community as a whole from any incident. It is the narrative. There are other "victim" groups that are handled the same way.

However, apparently other groups are groups that when one of their number does something, all are reported on as part and parcel. Christians are treated this way. Muslims are treated this way. Gun owners are treated this way. In these cases, it apparently serves the narrative for the group to be treated in that manner as one monolithic whole all of one mind. The public should be tempted to perceive them as such from the media accounts.

Now when it comes to Muslims, I am unsure of just exactly why they are being treated as the monolith. There are two reasons. The easy answer as far as most on this board are concerned is so that we will continue to justify WAR WAR WAR, but since people are tired of that and no longer want to fight, I think this is false. I think the second, more complicated answer might be the one we should be wary of.

In this case, I think they want us to think of Muslims as unfairly victimized, creating a new victim group. This allows the terrorists to move freely in Western Nations. Their actions then can strike and create fuel on the fire justifying new and ever more oppressive law enforcement measures leading to tighter and tighter police state. After all, most of the world is "good Muslims," what is there to go to WAR against? Terror, therefore, is a law enforcement issue, and can I see your papers, please?

a reply to: ketsuko

Semantic, yes?

What does homophobe mean?
Fear, yes?

But what is it used for as an allegation?
Hatred, yes?


I understand your point...

If it's Arabs then it's actually anti-Semitism.

For Muslims we use Islmophobe!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Logarock

I do understand these things. That is why I don't buy into media hype and sensationalism.

All that I am saying then is that they are seeking ends that are not obvious. Certain know that westerners are tolerant like angels in comparison to the tolerance of radical Muslims. Its just something to think about anyway.