Islam is an insidious threat more dangerous than Communism

RexImperator said:
Islam, especially Salafist variety, is not just a religion, it is also a political system.

I would say that the problem is not Islam as a whole, since there are many Muslims who do not behave badly. The problem is Wahhabism.

Here is an article I found through a quick google search:

It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.

This appears to be a monumental campaign to bulldoze the more moderate strains of Islam, and replace them with the theo-fascist Saudi variety. Despite being well aware of the issue, Western powers continue to coddle the Saudis or, at most, protest meekly from time to time.

For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” She continues: “More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups.” And it’s not just the Saudis: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are also implicated in the memo. Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html

The ruling class in Saudi Arabia has spent up to or even more than 100 billion dollars financing the spread of the Wahhabi strain of Islam. Even in that article parallels were drawn between communism and Wahhabism itself.

The goal of this is clear. It is to convert otherwise normal people who follow the Muslim faith into militant followers of an ultra-orthodox sect of Islam.

This is why I think Saudi Arabia is borderline straight up evil because they are essentially diametrically opposed to the culture I come from and are actively engaging in subversive behavior by essentially transforming normal Sunni Muslims into what could be seen as foreign nationalists beholden to the Saudi state through the use of Wahhabi Mosques spread throughout western countries.
 

godfather dust

Ostrich
Gold Member
All or Nothing said:
RexImperator said:
Islam, especially Salafist variety, is not just a religion, it is also a political system.

I would say that the problem is not Islam as a whole, since there are many Muslims who do not behave badly. The problem is Wahhabism.

Here is an article I found through a quick google search:

It would be troublesome but perhaps acceptable for the House of Saud to promote the intolerant and extremist Wahhabi creed just domestically. But, unfortunately, for decades the Saudis have also lavishly financed its propagation abroad. Exact numbers are not known, but it is thought that more than $100 billion have been spent on exporting fanatical Wahhabism to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide over the past three decades. It might well be twice that number. By comparison, the Soviets spent about $7 billion spreading communism worldwide in the 70 years from 1921 and 1991.

This appears to be a monumental campaign to bulldoze the more moderate strains of Islam, and replace them with the theo-fascist Saudi variety. Despite being well aware of the issue, Western powers continue to coddle the Saudis or, at most, protest meekly from time to time.

For instance, a Wikileaks cable clearly quotes then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton saying “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.” She continues: “More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaeda, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups.” And it’s not just the Saudis: Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates are also implicated in the memo. Other cables released by Wikileaks outline how Saudi front companies are also used to fund terrorism abroad.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabism-islam-terrorism_b_6501916.html

The ruling class in Saudi Arabia has spent up to or even more than 100 billion dollars financing the spread of the Wahhabi strain of Islam. Even in that article parallels were drawn between communism and Wahhabism itself.

The goal of this is clear. It is to convert otherwise normal people who follow the Muslim faith into militant followers of an ultra-orthodox sect of Islam.

This is why I think Saudi Arabia is borderline straight up evil because they are essentially diametrically opposed to the culture I come from and are actively engaging in subversive behavior by essentially transforming normal Sunni Muslims into what could be seen as foreign nationalists beholden to the Saudi state through the use of Wahhabi Mosques spread throughout western countries.

I disagree. Islam is evil.

Based on my limited understanding (better than 95% of Westerners I would wager, I have read portions of the texts) well behaved Muslims are doing it wrong. Isis are the most "pious" Muslims.
 
godfather dust said:
I disagree. Islam is evil.

Based on my limited understanding (better than 95% of Westerners I would wager, I have read portions of the texts) well behaved Muslims are doing it wrong. Isis are the most "pious" Muslims.

The text itself is not as important as how it is interpreted and practiced.

I will say that Islam was most likely developed as a warring religion, but you can see evidence that there are people who either believe or who grew up with that religion that don't adhere to the warring aspects of the religion. The "doing it wrong" part is simply adapting the religion to modern times where large scale war and growth of empires is no longer a major part of civilization.

Even in the Bible there are verses in it that condones sex slavery and mistreatment of women. When I went to church, I never even heard of those verses and was taught stuff that mostly revolved around good social behavior. Again the religion has been adapting to the evolution of society.

This is why I believe that Wahhabism is the source of this issue. Wahhabism espouses an ideology that appears to turn back time by promoting a more literal interpretation of the texts and promoting an outward physical form of jihad, which is maladapted to modern civilization over an internal spiritual awakening form of jihad, which is better adapted to modern civilization.

I don't have all of the pieces put together yet, but this is how I perceive things right now.

As an aside, I want to clarify "well behaved" and maybe go with "moderate" or "assimilated" Muslims.
 

Ghost Tiger

Ostrich
Gold Member
All or Nothing said:
godfather dust said:
I disagree. Islam is evil.

Based on my limited understanding (better than 95% of Westerners I would wager, I have read portions of the texts) well behaved Muslims are doing it wrong. Isis are the most "pious" Muslims.

The text itself is not as important as how it is interpreted and practiced.

I will say that Islam was most likely developed as a warring religion, but you can see evidence that there are people who either believe or who grew up with that religion that don't adhere to the warring aspects of the religion. The "doing it wrong" part is simply adapting the religion to modern times where large scale war and growth of empires is no longer a major part of civilization.

Even in the Bible there are verses in it that condones sex slavery and mistreatment of women. When I went to church, I never even heard of those verses and was taught stuff that mostly revolved around good social behavior. Again the religion has been adapting to the evolution of society.

This is why I believe that Wahhabism is the source of this issue. Wahhabism espouses an ideology that appears to turn back time by promoting a more literal interpretation of the texts and promoting an outward physical form of jihad, which is maladapted to modern civilization over an internal spiritual awakening form of jihad, which is better adapted to modern civilization.

I don't have all of the pieces put together yet, but this is how I perceive things right now.

As an aside, I want to clarify "well behaved" and maybe go with "moderate" or "assimilated" Muslims.

Islam isn't merely a religion, which is why there is no equivalence between Islam and Christianity. Islam is also a political system that regulates every minute aspect of the lives of both Muslims and non-Muslims (the kuffar). No other religion in the world does this. Every other religion has a Golden Rule: treat other people as you would yourself be treated. Islam does not. Islam has a rule that says: treat other Muslims as you yourself would be treated, and then goes on to issue a massive number of commands on how to treat the kafir (non-Muslim), and the treatment ain't very nice. You cannot only look at the Koran when you observe Islam, you must also consider other relevant documents like the Sira, which is Mohammed's biography, and the Hadith, which is basically a bunch of supplementary sharia legal documents. There is more Islamic doctrine devoted to the mistreatment of the kuffar than any other subject. This is unheard of in other religions. Islam is unique. Islam is cancer.
 
Ghost Tiger said:
Islam isn't merely a religion, which is why there is no equivalence between Islam and Christianity. Islam is also a political system that regulates every minute aspect of the lives of both Muslims and non-Muslims (the kuffar). No other religion in the world does this. Every other religion has a Golden Rule: treat other people as you would yourself be treated. Islam does not. Islam has a rule that says: treat other Muslims as you yourself would be treated, and then goes on to issue a massive number of commands on how to treat the kafir (non-Muslim), and the treatment ain't very nice. You cannot only look at the Koran when you observe Islam, you must also consider other relevant documents like the Sira, which is Mohammed's biography, and the Hadith, which is basically a bunch of supplementary sharia legal documents. There is more Islamic doctrine devoted to the mistreatment of the kuffar than any other subject. This is unheard of in other religions. Islam is unique. Islam is cancer.

There is an equivalence. Christianity in the west was state driven and controlled the minutia of western people's lives for hundreds of years.

Luther was one of the first people to defy the Catholic Church and it's obscene level of power over Western Europe. He led the way to reformation and the breaking up of the Catholic Church's power.

State driven Church is the reason why we have the First Amendment establishing the separation of the Church and State.

As a note, I just want to provide some contrary evidence here because I think the perception of Islam being evil is too broad. There are specific sects of Islam that convert Muslims into militant believers like Wahhabism that are the problem. Damning an entire religion is not as useful as focusing on specific sects and figuring out how to excise those sects of the religion from Western society in order to throw a bucket of water over the rising militancy of the followers and get them to assimilate into society.
 

dain_bramage

Woodpecker
Islamic hordes have been trying to invade and control Europe/ Christendom for centuries. Their tactics may have changed but the same goal is in mind. Spread, spread, spread like cancer, kill the infidels or force them to convert. Enough beating around the bush. Islam is a cult, its a dangerous cult that has killed many men and desecrated places like Hagia Sophia. The majority of Islam's history has been of conquest with the exception of the 20th century when the Ottoman rule ended. I assume some of the hardcore leaders know they can't take on Europe's military might in a head on battle. But subversion and steady invasion by means of migration and immigration plus the use of their weapon called the womb will eventually snuff out Europe. They will use democracy against us and then when there's no real incentive to use democratic means of government they will take over just be means of numbers. Europe is going to die unless some kind of miracle happens or I think from what I have gathered from Samseau and other reading a better case scenario is mass civil unrest and possible civil war.

I actually did a presentation on the Brexit/ and possible collapse of the EU for my course I've taken. I made the point that a smaller alliance say that of Poland, Czech, Slovakia, and Hungary could emerge, maybe a central Europe alliance. I think best case scenario Europe falls apart and a shit ton of violence along religious and racial lines will explode and then some kind of forced stability followed by flare ups here and there. We live in interesting times gentlemen.

Islam is a threat because its a part of life for more than a billion people. Its a daily grind, a great invasion of the mind from the early moments of childhood. It is something that has a far longer history than socialism or communism. Its what people have based their identity on and shit post on some pages about how its going to end the European way of living. Its a cancer that will take massive, massive, immense amount of chemo and radiation over generations to put the host body into remission, if at all.
 

Ghost Tiger

Ostrich
Gold Member
All or Nothing said:
Ghost Tiger said:
Islam isn't merely a religion, which is why there is no equivalence between Islam and Christianity. Islam is also a political system that regulates every minute aspect of the lives of both Muslims and non-Muslims (the kuffar). No other religion in the world does this. Every other religion has a Golden Rule: treat other people as you would yourself be treated. Islam does not. Islam has a rule that says: treat other Muslims as you yourself would be treated, and then goes on to issue a massive number of commands on how to treat the kafir (non-Muslim), and the treatment ain't very nice. You cannot only look at the Koran when you observe Islam, you must also consider other relevant documents like the Sira, which is Mohammed's biography, and the Hadith, which is basically a bunch of supplementary sharia legal documents. There is more Islamic doctrine devoted to the mistreatment of the kuffar than any other subject. This is unheard of in other religions. Islam is unique. Islam is cancer.

There is an equivalence. Christianity in the west was state driven and controlled the minutia of western people's lives for hundreds of years.

Luther was one of the first people to defy the Catholic Church and it's obscene level of power over Western Europe. He led the way to reformation and the breaking up of the Catholic Church's power.

State driven Church is the reason why we have the First Amendment establishing the separation of the Church and State.

As a note, I just want to provide some contrary evidence here because I think the perception of Islam being evil is too broad. There are specific sects of Islam that convert Muslims into militant believers like Wahhabism that are the problem. Damning an entire religion is not as useful as focusing on specific sects and figuring out how to excise those sects of the religion from Western society in order to throw a bucket of water over the rising militancy of the followers and get them to assimilate into society.

You really need to watch both of the videos below. Your level of denial is epic.



There is no equivalence. Islam is evil. Islam is cancer. I fucking HATE Islam.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Claiming Islam is only a problem because of Saudi princes is rather foolish. Their money simply allows them to magnify Islam's problems and paste them across vast regions.

At best the argument could be summarised that Islam is evil when given resources and alternately simply tragic when left to wallow in its own self induced poverty.
 

El Chinito loco

Crow
Gold Member
Leonard D Neubache said:
Claiming Islam is only a problem because of Saudi princes is rather foolish. Their money simply allows them to magnify Islam's problems and paste them across vast regions.

At best the argument could be summarised that Islam is evil when given resources and alternately simply tragic when left to wallow in its own self induced poverty.

There tends to be no winners with true evil. It punishes all who come into contact. So by definition Islam does fit that definition.
 

Bolly

Pelican
All or Nothing said:
Even in the Bible there are verses in it that condones sex slavery and mistreatment of women. When I went to church, I never even heard of those verses and was taught stuff that mostly revolved around good social behavior. Again the religion has been adapting to the evolution of society.

What verses or events are you referring to?
 

Mage

 
In my life I have made a lot of research about all the major worlds religions to try and understand what they have in common, what is different in them, what is right what is wrong.

I have came to a very interesting conclusion about Islam and why it is so strictly different from Christianity, why Islam is very aggressive and Christianity is much more peaceful.

My conclusion is that you cannot understand the differences of dynamics in these religions by comparing only the two of them. You must look outside the box and see the other players in this game. To some extent this refers to Judaism, but what I am really thinking about is Paganism!

The major difference between Christians and Muslims is not the difference in their religions - it is the fact that most Christians are actually half-christians, half pagans, while Muslims are strict monotheistic non-pagans.

This is the most important reason why Christians are more tolerant to other cultures - because 99% of them are a mix of Christianity and Paganism.

To those who consider themselves pure Christians and are surprised or in denial about being actually half pagans you must explain why do you:

-Bring Christmas three to your home and even put it near altars in your churches when Bible explicitly prohibits you from doing this. (Jeremiah 10)
-Create graven images of things found in nature and even of your "monotheistic" God in a pagan fashion when Bible explicitly prohibits you from doing this.
-Paint eggs for Easter
-Put flowers on your graves instead of stones like Jews do. (Muslims are in controversy whether this is permitted radicals do not allow it, but some paganism creeps in islam too)
-Tell your children fairy tales like Red riding hood, Cinderella that are actually zipped and compressed pagan theology which can be autoextracted by experiance of those who come close to nature and realize what they talk about.
-Why you observe local and national pagan feast like Mardi Gras, carnivals, summer solstice and others depending on your nationality.
-Enjoy Greek and Norse myths as great literature that holds valuable insights instead of condemning them as lies and blasphemy.
-Numerous other things you don't realize are pagan and unbiblical to the core.

Christianity is literally filled with pagan imaginary, pagan holidays, pagan customs and many things that are considered idolatery by Jews and Muslims. Christians defend these things like they came from Bible or Jesus, but they came from white European pagan heritage instead.

The truth is that when some Christian movement does get rid themselves of all pagan heritage and becomes pure Biblical monotheists they become as fanatical, intolerant and aggressive as radical Muslims. But this happens rarely therefore Christianity has but a few examples of violence, but history shows that Christianity has been violent against pagans many times until it mixed with paganism and paganism continued to dwell under Christianity in this cryptic hidden form that most people are unaware of although they do practice paganism themselves.

If you were a true Christian you would be much more hostile against other opinions, because you would consider them dangerous heresies that bring souls to eternal death that is much worse then the insignificant physical deaths and suffering caused by your intolerant actions - your intolerance and aggression against unbelievers would come very close to that one displayed by radical Muslims.

If however you think different beliefs can coexist and religious freedom must be respected then I got news for you - you are far less a Christian then you think and you are far more a pagan and/or an atheist then you realize.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Mage said:
...
If you were a true Christian you would be much more hostile against other opinions, because you would consider them dangerous heresies that bring souls to eternal death that is much worse then the insignificant physical deaths and suffering caused by your intolerant actions - your intolerance and aggression against unbelievers would come very close to that one displayed by radical Muslims.
...

So Christ dying for all our sins was... what? Pointless? Because our eternal souls are still in peril, not just if we strayed from his teachings but if we even tolerated others doing so?

I don't think so.
 

Mage

 
Leonard D Neubache said:
Mage said:
...
If you were a true Christian you would be much more hostile against other opinions, because you would consider them dangerous heresies that bring souls to eternal death that is much worse then the insignificant physical deaths and suffering caused by your intolerant actions - your intolerance and aggression against unbelievers would come very close to that one displayed by radical Muslims.
...

So Christ dying for all our sins was... what? Pointless? Because our eternal souls are still in peril, not just if we strayed from his teachings but if we even tolerated others doing so?

I don't think so.


And what if those others force you to worship Mammon at gunpoint or let homosexuals marry at your children-friendly family restaurant? What if they spread lies about your Lord, teach rebellion and ways of whoredom to your wife and your daughters, what if they mold your sons to grow as blasphemous infidels indulgent in perverse carnal pleasures?

No man is an island.

Surely you can cuddle with your savior in your obscure filthy corner and take delight in your imagination of others being punished for not being afraid enough and burning in hell, while you alone will be saved for keeping up the faith and will get your pat on the back from the savior who loves us all.
You see - such a worldview is such a hypocrisy that even most historical Christians didn't subscribe to that and understood the value of fighting for their faith so that it would reach all nations and all generations.
Only today Christians are happy to sit back and see their neighbors and even family members walk into eternal damnation while they themselves idly sing love songs to Jesus at their secluded churches.
And this also is because today's Christians are not purely Christians at all. They are a mix of things, a mix of ideologies. And the ideology that allows them to sit back and hope for salvation while their neighbors walk the wide path to hell is nothing else but western individualism. Another biblicaly unsupported paradigm.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Mage said:
Leonard D Neubache said:
Mage said:
...
If you were a true Christian you would be much more hostile against other opinions, because you would consider them dangerous heresies that bring souls to eternal death that is much worse then the insignificant physical deaths and suffering caused by your intolerant actions - your intolerance and aggression against unbelievers would come very close to that one displayed by radical Muslims.
...

So Christ dying for all our sins was... what? Pointless? Because our eternal souls are still in peril, not just if we strayed from his teachings but if we even tolerated others doing so?

I don't think so.


And what if those others force you to worship Mammon at gunpoint or let homosexuals marry at your children-friendly family restaurant? What if they spread lies about your Lord, teach rebellion and ways of whoredom to your wife and your daughters, what if they mold your sons to grow as blasphemous infidels indulgent in perverse carnal pleasures?

No man is an island.

Surely you can cuddle with your savior in your obscure filthy corner and take delight in your imagination of others being punished for not being afraid enough and burning in hell, while you alone will be saved for keeping up the faith and will get your pat on the back from the savior who loves us all.
You see - such a worldview is such a hypocrisy that even most historical Christians didn't subscribe to that and understood the value of fighting for their faith so that it would reach all nations and all generations.
Only today Christians are happy to sit back and see their neighbors and even family members walk into eternal damnation while they themselves idly sing love songs to Jesus at their secluded churches.
And this also is because today's Christians are not purely Christians at all. They are a mix of things, a mix of ideologies. And the ideology that allows them to sit back and hope for salvation while their neighbors walk the wide path to hell is nothing else but western individualism. Another biblicaly unsupported paradigm.

For starters, I'm not on the God squad. I'm just discussing these things academically. Secondly, there is a world of difference between fighting to keep your own lands free of sin and the muslim way, which is to declare that all lands not under islam are the dar al harb and fair game for jihad.

And yes, Christians are starting to determine that they have to push back or they're going to be steamrolled, but frankly I don't think they're going to be shooting 50 people dead in a gay nightclub any time soon. All they really have to do is to secede and wall up. Sodom and Gomorrah would collapse in on themselves quite quickly.

Sadly many Christians mistake forgiveness for tolerance, and in any case their hierarchies are addicted to their tax exempt status and not willing to rock the political boat. Having said that, there are plenty of individual Christians these days that are preparing to have to resist progressivism by any and all means necessary.

Regardless, as said before, that is a far cry from going into the lands of the infidel and killing women and children in the name of God and Jesus.
 

The Beast1

Peacock
Gold Member
Mage, sorry bud but your analysis of Christian theology is woefully incorrect.

First off, Jesus left us with two new laws that supercede the old ones. The laws you're citing in particular are superceded by this:

"Love the Lord your God with all of your heart and with all of your soul and with all of your mind and with all of your strength. The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself." There is no commandment greater than these."
Mark 12:30-31

That leaves you open to use Christmas trees, eat pork, paint eggs on Easter, etc.

The old testament was included to tell a prophecy of Jesus' return. It was not included to tell you that you shouldn't make graven images, avoid pork, or kill homosexuals. As a Christian, you only need to read the New Testament to understand what it means to be a Christian.

That doesn't mean to skip the old testament, there is value in it its lessons but to be a proper Christian it doesn't mean you have to follow the laws or customs outlined in it. The old testament is more of value to Judaism as its proof that God fulfilled his promise to Abraham.

This is a common error made by many people and it is a shame that more pastors don't attempt to dispell this.

As Samsaeu pointed out in another thread: your neighbor means your immediate neighbor. It doesn't mean brown people on another continent nor people in another state. It's your neighbor that you see right now.

On a side note: Turning the other cheek is referring to not escalating attacks on our dignity (IE calling you a cuck doesn't mean to call someone back a cuck or escalate it). It does not mean we can't respond to attacks on our so sovereignty as a nation or responding to physical attacks with self defense.

A great article I constantly cite on the golden rule:
http://www.returnofkings.com/33060/the-golden-rule-works

If Muslims want to attack us, then it is only fitting within Jesus' law to strike back. It is a fallen world after all.

With that in mind, we shouldn't be celebrating Christmas on the 25th of December. Jesus was born in March/April. This was a pagan holdover to spur conversions to Catholicism.

As Leonard said: forgiveness does not equal tolerance. Good Christians know to remove themselves from people and situations that could potentially cause sin. Nothing wrong with fighting against it.
 

Mage

 
Leonard D Neubache said:
Regardless, as said before, that is a far cry from going into the lands of the infidel and killing women and children in the name of God and Jesus.

Yes Christianity is inherently less violent then Islam, I am not arguing otherwise. What I was saying is that Christianity can still be rather violent, not as violent as Islam but still much more violent then most people would approve of. And the major reason contemporary Christianity is not violent at all is because contemporary Christians are not purely Christians but are also something else ideologically and culturally most of time.

Most Christians are also:
-Pagans
-Patriots or at least descendants of their country with their history
-Believers in Democracy
-Believers in Capitalism and free trade
-Have some subculture they belong to

Muslims generally don't have anything else but Islam. Islam is both a religious, political and economical system. Their country history in most cases is the same as history of Islam. Music and many other forms of self expression which could create subcultures is prohibited. They don't have anything else but Islam therefore are so violent, because no other ideology binds them to peaceful society. This is not true for all Muslims. Some Muslim countries have some national customs which split their identities and make them less violent. T

The more radical a person is the less identities and ideologies he has, other then his sole religion, that is what you can observe.

You can even observe this on liberals - stripped from any cultural and religious heritage, stripped from patriarchal traditions, from knowledge accumulated by their fathers these cultural bastards are aggressive and obnoxious people that march on Bernie rallies attacking different minded people, suing people for tweets and similar.

If a person has only one program in himself he will become a violent fanatic, be he a liberal, a Christian or a Muslim.
 
Top