IS destroying another ancient archaeological site in Iraq

originally posted by: Christosterone

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Just for clarification, OP, it is your statement that all of Islam, all Muslims, all 1.6 billion of them, are responsible for the actions of this terrorist group in Iraq.

Do I have that right?

To clarify, their actions are related to Islam in the EXACT same fashion that the Inquisition era Spaniards actions were related to Christianity.
Does that answer your question as to my "statement" or, more accurately,,my tone?

-Christosterone

No, the accurate word was statement.

I was interested in making sure I understood WHAT you were saying not HOW you were saying it.

Thanks for highlighting precisely just how your statement is biased and more than a bit ignorant without further prompting, though.

(BTW, if you're looking for a more apt comparison, you might choose the Lord's Resistence Army in Uganda, for the example of Christian terrorists. Somehow though, I bet you're not really going for accuracy.)

a reply to: Christosterone

OP, why don't you just come to your point? Muslims and Muhammad are the problem, right?


When Israel bombs a school full or children, just imagine the outrage if mainstream media came out with a headline like this:

"JEWS BOMB SCHOOL FULL OF CHILDREN IN PALESTINE"

That is basically equating Zionism to Judaism and blaming all Jews for the actions of Zionists.
And that's exactly what you're doing here. Blaming ISIS atrocities on all Muslims and the Prophet Muhammad.

a reply to: Christosterone

The title of the thread, as well as your opening post do not seem to be making that differentiation at all!

So forgive my jumping to conclusions, but it sounded like you were goading me to jump.

originally posted by: Boeing777
a reply to: Christosterone

OP, why don't you just come to your point? Muslims and Muhammad are the problem, right?

My op is related to the destruction of antiquities and the rationale behind it.
ISIS, as its acronym belies, is based in Islam.
Since their own self-assessment is that of a muslim organization then why am i not allowed to question that affiliation's driving force? Which is mohammed.

It is astounding to me that savages are destroying humanity's history and I am debating whether or not their own description of their motives is accurate.
If I say I eat because I'm hungry then one could reckon that I ate because I'm hungry. I told you why I ate and the evidence was that I chewed up and swallowed my food.
You could therefore surmise but I ate because I was hungry, as I told you and showed you.
Why am I the subject of so much judgement when I am simply restating what the savages have already stated their motives to be?

I don't care who is doing it, destroying artifacts and historical sites is wrong. Makes me sad

a reply to: Christosterone

funny how no one wants to offend the muslims ........oh i mean muslim radicals not peacefull muslims what a bunch of wimps lol
if this thread was call christians destroy history every insu;lt under the sun would be thrown out.
But people want to be pc and you cant say bad things about muslims .....just christians lol
i think its funny ........................oh well pc your self right into an early grave
as for me ill call em as i see em

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Christosterone

The title of the thread, as well as your opening post do not seem to be making that differentiation at all!

So forgive my jumping to conclusions, but it sounded like you were goading me to jump.

I will cede your point that my title was incorrect.
"Radicals" should have been included.
As you can see in many of my posts, there are many errors, mainly grammatical...
I am using speech-to-text and iOS cannot decipher my texas accent

But i do want to address predominately muslim ruled countries for a moment....and perhaps give you a glimpse into why i harbor such a disdain for theocracies and specifically their modern incarnation(s)....known as islamist "republics".
My sibling was genetically coded to be a homosexual. This is inarguable to me.
Humanity's ability to decipher the great swathes of code in genetic material is the only hinderance in pronouncing homosexuality a heritable set of genes expressed....
In short, i have the genes but they did not express. Where and how that particular set of coding exists and is expressed will be uncovered in this century imho.

So with that in mind, can you understand my horror at countries such as iran who stone homosexuals?
It is an enforced law that acting upon these 'deviant' behaviors is punishable by death.
It is 2015, not 1015.
Christians went through this though as a continually evolving society it is becoming almost accepted...even with the american zealots, i rarely fear for my siblings safety.
And if harm came to their family by the hands of zealots, our laws would punish the offenders.
In Texas, it would be a capital offense to kill a person based on his or her sexual preference...and I can assure you that texas is not at the tip of the spear in the fight for homosexual rights.
But even here, in the heart of the bible belt, there is punishment for those who wish to rid the world of my sibling's ilk.
In iran, there is no such set of laws protecting people like my sibling...
Why am i forced to debate obvious facts about islamic theocracies that are bent on the subjugation of women and the genocide of homosexuals? This is inarguable.
---go log cabin republicans!!!

Again I will cede your point that "radicals" could/should have been included in the title but keep in mind that islamic republics, for all their supposed social egalitarianism, still remain largely based in the sensibilities of their 7th century inventor.

originally posted by: sweets777
a reply to: Christosterone

funny how no one wants to offend the muslims ........oh i mean muslim radicals not peacefull muslims what a bunch of wimps lol
if this thread was call christians destroy history every insu;lt under the sun would be thrown out.
But people want to be pc and you cant say bad things about muslims .....just christians lol
i think its funny ........................oh well pc your self right into an early grave
as for me ill call em as i see em

Then do you call yourself a pedophile? Seeing how you want to just paint all Muslims as radicals then we can just paint all Christians as pedophiles seeing how Priests have a sexual taste for young children. That's right only Christians are allowed to whine when they are labeled wrongly huh?

originally posted by: sweets777


funny how no one wants to offend the muslims ........oh i mean muslim radicals not peacefull muslims what a bunch of wimps lol
if this thread was call christians destroy history every insu;lt under the sun would be thrown out.
But people want to be pc and you cant say bad things about muslims .....just christians lol
i think its funny ........................oh well pc your self right into an early grave
as for me ill call em as i see em

funny? actually no it's not funny because the title is misleading, it states all Muslims are destroying history not Radical Muslims. If the title was Christians destroy history, I would jump in and say title is wrong. Peaceful Muslims a bunch of wimps? So Insults start get thrown around to try and make a point? Point being if it were Christians that did this people would be throwing insults all over the place? But your point is not valid because some people like to keep is civil. Not a school yard full of insults and name calling.

War is brutal on all sides. Sick and uncalled for most times. But there is never a justifiable reason to destroy history as far as i am concerned. But this has happened throughout history and is nothing new. Especially when religion is involved. As far as i know there has not been large war that hasn't destroyed or stolen relics. Schools, hospitals, farms, infrastructure the list goes on to /0. They don't want any Independence when they are done. They want them to count on the invader to survive. That way they can have control an can manipulate them afterwards.

a reply to: Christosterone

Yes I can agree that certain laws in some Islamic countries are backward...


I would also point out that nowhere in the Quran does it say homosexual behaviour is punishable by death...

That comes from the Hadith...
Which need to be put to the side by every Muslim imo...


Quranism is the future of Islam, if we are to appear undivided and righteous to the Word of Allah!

Until then, sectarian problems and outrageous laws put forward as "Sharia" will continue I'm afraid!


I'd go as far as to say that most Muslims, even Sunni & Shia are actually Quranists at heart...

But it is the leadership that create the rules/laws of countries, not the people!
So it would appear that Hadith take priority over the Quran for "justice"...


Which is blasphemy!

Quran;
Apostasy, not punishable by death...
Homosexuality, not punishable by death...
Non-belief, not punishable by death...

Hadith;
Apostasy, punishable by death...
Homosexuality, punishable by death...
Non-belief, punishable by death...



I could add more, but they appear to be the major "gotchas" of the undereducated who's catchphrase is "well it's in the Quran"...

Sadly it isn't...
The expected infiltration of Islam is in the Quran...


Those are who reign for now!

And change will come soon... Inshallah!

originally posted by: sweets777
a reply to: Christosterone

funny how no one wants to offend the muslims ........oh i mean muslim radicals not peacefull muslims what a bunch of wimps lol
if this thread was call christians destroy history every insu;lt under the sun would be thrown out.
But people want to be pc and you cant say bad things about muslims .....just christians lol
i think its funny ........................oh well pc your self right into an early grave
as for me ill call em as i see em

The double standard is obvious but it's skewed in the opposite direction you are claiming.

For example, when we talk about the "Lords Resistance Army" in Africa who participate in child slavery and mutilations, do we write headlines that state "CHRISTIANS TERRORIZING REGION WITH CHILD SEX SLAVE ARMY"? No. When we discuss the Klu Klux Klan, do we just collectively refer to them as "Christians"? No. When the Sikh church or Unitarian church was bombed by fundamentalist Christians, did the headlines say "CHURCH MASSACRED BY CHRISTIANS"? No. The list goes on and on.

If anything, Christians (and Judaism) get a pretty sweet deal in all this. They get the privilege of dictating to the world who does or does not represent the whole of a particular faith. And people generally believe them.

a reply to: Christosterone

So with that in mind, can you understand my horror at countries such as iran who stone homosexuals?

Wow with all the beheading's Saudi Arabia does the best you could think of was Iran stoning homosexuals? Oh yeah SA is an "ally" of America so what they do is ok huh? What about the Christian nations in Africa that executes homosexuals?

In Texas, it would be a capital offense to kill a person based on his or her sexual preference...and I can assure you that texas is not at the tip of the spear in the fight for homosexual rights.

When it comes to fighting for homosexual rights Texas isn't even holding the spear.
Texas Lawmaker Wants Constitutional ‘License To Discriminate’ Against LGBT Workers And Customers

Why am i forced to debate obvious facts about islamic theocracies that are bent on the subjugation of women and the genocide of homosexuals? This is inarguable. ---go log cabin republicans!!!

Except for the executing of gays Iran isn't that much different from Texas.

Again I will cede your point that "radicals" could/should have been included in the title but keep in mind that islamic republics, for all their supposed social egalitarianism, still remain largely based in the sensibilities of their 7th century inventor.

Nothing could be further from the truth. In some Islamic nations they have had women as their heads of state how many times has America had a woman as President? There are only a few Islamic nations that have people that have the 7th century mentality running them guess which ones those are? The ones that America keeps attacking for no reason in the ones America doesn't attack moderate Muslims rise to power.

originally posted by: roth1
War is brutal on all sides. Sick and uncalled for most times. But there is never a justifiable reason to destroy history as far as i am concerned. But this has happened throughout history and is nothing new. Especially when religion is involved. As far as i know there has not been large war that hasn't destroyed or stolen relics. Schools, hospitals, farms, infrastructure the list goes on to /0. They don't want any Independence when they are done. They want them to count on the invader to survive. That way they can have control an can manipulate them afterwards.

The British fire bombing of dresden was a non military destruction on par with anything ever visited upon an enemy's constituents.
The reasoning for this was to break the will of the german citizenry. The british rightfully elected to inflict damage to the civilian population for the greater goal of winning the war.

There is no such reasoning with ISIS' destruction of historical treasures.
Religious zealotry is the only motive. Museums and ancient cities pose no threat nor do they contribute to any greater goal.
Unless that goal is to silence all traces of humanity's marvelous pre-seventh century achievements.
We are a species that mastered the land, air, water, and space....all of these achievements were due to earlier lessons from our forefathers.
It is the goal of these savages to erase history and relegate all things non-muslims to simple legends.
Without proof in the form of antiquities then how can you argue against their pathetic world view that life began and ended with the prophet's wisdom.
Whatever god is, he predates everything and everyone...sorry allah, but humanity thrived prior to your entrance into the world.
Unfortunately, humanity will not persist as it has because the radical cult of death which sprouted from Muhamed's teachings will subjugate the world and force conversion and those of us unwilling to do so will be met with sword and stone.

a reply to: Christosterone

I find it horrific that a historical and cultural site was distroyed by anyone. I find it equally horrific that the US allowed the Bagdad musceum to be looted after the invassion when it could have been easily secured.

But I don't blame Islam for the first nor Chistianity for the second. I blame greed and opportunism in the midst of chaos for both outcomes and that has nothing to do with a person's religion.

I find it disgusting that I open up ATS and find, on the front page, 'weaponized Islam' and then this hate piece blaming Islamic culture for the distruction of a cultural site.

Both speak of individuals acting poorly but more of the author's ignorance and poor character.

originally posted by: buster2010
Except for the executing of gays Iran isn't that much different from Texas.

Oil-rich desert regions filled with religious extremists? Hell yeah. In fact, if they ever seceded like they want to, we'll be having UN talks about keeping nukes out of their hands.

No offense to the Texans out there. Much in the flavor of this debate, I fully understand that the extremists in your state don't represent all Texans.

you would think the "99% of good muslims" could round up the measly 1% no problem. Oh wait they are good at shouting but that is about it.

originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: Christosterone

Except for the executing of gays Iran isn't that much different from Texas.

PLEASE give me an example of the state executing gays for being homosexual in Texas.
As a lifetime resident of the state I would love to know how i missed that one.

And out of curiosity, are you able to defend muslim theocracies' progressive attitudes with a straight face?
I am genuinely curious how defending saudi arabias and irans laws regarding homosexuality and womens rights is actually a position any person would/could take.

Again, please provide a link to the state of texas executing a person for being gay and whether or not you defend SA & Irans record on gay/womens rights with a straight face.

So, we have a 15 year long (so far) western campaign to single out and discredit Islam. Now we have a new "terror" group that is going around destroying anything they can find Islamic. But, I am not supposed to believe that ISIS is NOT part of the western campaign to single out and discredit Islam? Why?

If I change the description of the west's 15 year long (so far) campaign from "single out and discredit Islam" to "completely eradicate Islam and it's historical significance", then ISIS would fit right into the western plot. like peas in a pod.

How do you eradicate one of the worlds oldest religions held by more than a billion people? Watch. It is happening. I predict in less than 20 years from now, Islam will be all but completely outlawed. That means that more than a billion people will be persecuted.

originally posted by: DrakeINFERNO

you would think the "99% of good muslims" could round up the measly 1% no problem. Oh wait they are good at shouting but that is about it.

Fixed it for you
you would think the "99% of good Humans" could round up the measly 1% no problem. Oh wait they are good at shouting but that is about it.