Islam is an insidious threat more dangerous than Communism

komatiite

Pelican
Gold Member
Edit, reply to Sextus Inpericus not Lucky.

^ Yes that is obvious, but think deeply, and ask why the US and Europe has enabled this by giving them the keys to the oil infrastructure that they built? It's not easy to discover, produce and get oil to market, it takes solid scientific training. The Saudis are blessed to sit on the easiest to produce oil reserves on Earth, they have these beautiful carbonate reservoirs.

To me there are two options, deliberate or accidental:

1) Elites want to see the disorder caused by rising Islamism in the West funded by Saudi Arabia, which has long term implications on the health of an established Western style democracy when you have Jihadists causing all sorts of bullshit. A fearful population is an easy to control population.

2) Loyalty: during the Cold War, the Saudis were an American ally as Communism spread through the world. The Kingdom showed loyalty to the Americans and as the British began to pull out of their colonial holdings, the Americans allowed for more Saudi control of their own resources as an act of goodwill with the hope that the Saudis would act in American interests with their newfound wealth and power in the region. A military relationship formed with American sales of weapons to their Saudi allies, and we even saw the Saudis in the same side as the Americans in the Persian Gulf War in the 90s. This backfired because giving a country with an average IQ of 83 and a psychopathic sect of Islam the lowest-margin oil reserves in the world has bankrolled the rise of Islam we see today.

Are there any other scenarios? Second one is more plausible but first one is fair game now that I have been red pilled regarding elitist puppet masters...
 
Islam, especially Salafist variety, is not just a religion, it is also a political system. Communism was another political system that posed a threat to Western civilization in the past. However, while it was possible to be critical of communism, because of the climate of political correctness and "multiculturalism" it is much more difficult to publicly criticise Islam, which being a religion, is thus able to shield itself behind "religious tolerance" in a way communism never could.

Hi,

I am from India and even though the majority here are Hindus, there is still a proportion of Muslims here who are also subjected to anti-minority propaganda which is not right.

Many people feel that the Muslims are not patriotic for their country.

However, looking at the way so many Muslims are unable to integrate with whichever society they are part of, be it in Europe / Australia or anywhere else, I am starting to get suspicious now.

My sympathies would have been with them had this problem of integration been present only in India.

But it is clear that wherever they go, they are unable to assimilate. Why should that be ?

On one hand, Muslims claim that their societies are very cultured, on the other hand, they can't help themselves when it comes to migrating to Europe and America.
 

y2k

Sparrow
Hi,

I am from India and even though the majority here are Hindus, there is still a proportion of Muslims here who are also subjected to anti-minority propaganda which is not right.

Many people feel that the Muslims are not patriotic for their country.

However, looking at the way so many Muslims are unable to integrate with whichever society they are part of, be it in Europe / Australia or anywhere else, I am starting to get suspicious now.

My sympathies would have been with them had this problem of integration been present only in India.

But it is clear that wherever they go, they are unable to assimilate. Why should that be ?

On one hand, Muslims claim that their societies are very cultured, on the other hand, they can't help themselves when it comes to migrating to Europe and America.

Hi,

Muslims can and do integrate, but they do not assimilate. For example a Muslim can integrate within a community and learn the language, culture etc and contribute, but cannot start worshiping the same gods and doing the same ritual practices that contradict Islam (they cannot assimilate and lose their religion), whether these gods are secular or not.

They cannot simply do as the Romans and Egyptians (and their subjects) and other polytheistic communities did and adopt other gods and merge.

There are certain teachings in Islam that can cause it to be recognized as a threat. These are:
  • Absolute monotheism - Threatens regimes that seek to deify men (personality cults) and ideas (communists etc.)
  • Equality - Threatens the established hierarchies of socially stratified societies (race systems, caste systems etc)
  • Ban on compound interest - Threatens some established economic institutions
  • etc
These points are not unique to Muslims and Islam, other proselytizing religions such as Christianity can also be an insidious threat because of their teachings and Christianity itself has been historically banned/suppressed in some socially stratified (at some times) Asian countries.

Christians also cannot simply adopt other gods and merge with other communities, it is incompatible with their theology.

If you would like to learn more about Islam, check out the links in my signature.
 

EgoDeath

Pigeon
Afaik islam doesnt even exist these days, only islamism, creates by a jew about 300 years after the death of Mohammed.

Also seen that meme about how muslims worship Moloch, not sure if those are referring to islam or also islamism but mislabeled as islam.
 

tractor

Robin
Roosh is right when he calls Muslims useful idiots used by the Jews to destroy the West cos they are the next.

However, my observation from Germany is that Muslims are already on their way to Hell. I've never seen anyone more obsessed with sneakers, style, muscles, cars, girls etc. Every Turkish or Arab guy I see on the street looks like he just left the barber shop. I may be wrong but those guys don't look like they may eventually replace the ethnic Germans since they too pursue wrong goals.
 
As a muslim I would agree that many "muslims" that are migrating to various countries are causing problems. IMO this is because Islam in their home countries has become one of two things. An off shoot of strict wahhabism spread by Saudia funded madrasahs (islamic schools) and/or pure nationalism/culturalism meaning in my country of Somalia,Turkey,Egypt etc we do things this way regardless of what Islam says. The second is harder to notice unless you've studied the religion and are present in these communities in which case its glaringly obvious that the only ties to Islam some of these people have is being named Mohammed. The law abiding practicing Muslims of these various countries are either staying because their productive members of society or being given work visas because of their skills in tech,health,engi etc. These Muslims unfortunately usually also fall into the cultural trap as well. Case in point two immigrants from India regardless of religion will fraternize, shop, and dress almost identical with the only exception being one goes to a mosque and the other a Hindu temple. Thus to the average "merican" there all the same, and in behavior and culture I would agree.This also explains why so much of the youth flooding these countries are no better than the tik tok, twerking obsessed "Christians" of the west. Most here will admit that the youth of the christian west have been brainwashed away from and about their religion, why would you think the youth of other religions in other countries wouldn't be brainwashed too?
 

tractor

Robin
This also explains why so much of the youth flooding these countries are no better than the tik tok, twerking obsessed "Christians" of the west. Most here will admit that the youth of the christian west have been brainwashed away from and about their religion, why would you think the youth of other religions in other countries wouldn't be brainwashed too?

FACT!
 

gework

Ostrich
Gold Member
Tweet from the Prime Minister of Malaysia.


Must give some credit to Macron for lifting a finger against Islam. It has clearly shown that the Islamic world sides with Islamic terror.

And using the logic of the PM that would mean Europeans have a lot of permitted murder to tap into with the hundreds of Islamic incursions into Europe.
 
Last edited:

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Macron is a POS opportunist, the beheading had large elements of a psyop, which is designed to reinforce the harsh current curfew in France which bans people from going out of their residence after 9pm. For example the killer's statement, written is very good French, was supposed to be written by the 18yr old FOB Chechen culprit, it is most likely written by his handlers. His lawyer and handlers have ties with French president Sarkozy and the deep state.

Malysian PM Mahatir is way out of line with that statement above, that's a terrible statement to make, ruining what could have been a good message overall, here is the body of that message:

Dr Mahathir Mohamad

RESPECT OTHERS

1. A teacher in France had his throat slit by an 18-year-old Chechen boy. The killer was angered by the teacher showing a caricature of Prophet Muhammad. The teacher intended to demonstrate freedom of expression.

2. The killing is not an act that as a Muslim I would approve. But while I believe in the freedom of expression, I do not think it includes insulting other people. You cannot go up to a man and curse him simply because you believe in freedom of speech.

3. In Malaysia, where there are people of many different races and religions, we have avoided serious conflicts between races because we are conscious of the need to be sensitive to the sensitivities of others. If we are not, then this country would never be peaceful and stable.

4. We often copy the ways of the West. We dress like them, we adopt their political systems, even some of their strange practices. But we have our own values, different as between races and religions, which we need to sustain.

5. The trouble with new ideas is that the late comers tend to add new interpretations. These are not what the originators intended. Thus, freedom for women, meant the right to vote in elections. Today, we want to eliminate everything that is different between men and women.

6. Physically we are different. This limits our capacity to be equal. We have to accept these differences and the limitations that are placed on us. Our value systems is also a part of human rights.

7. Yes, sometimes some values seem to be inhuman. They cause some people to suffer. We need to reduce the sufferings. But not by force, if the resistance is great.

8. The dress code of European women at one time was severely restrictive. Apart from the face no part of the body was exposed. But over the years, more and more parts of the body are exposed. Today a little string covers the most secret place, that’s all. In fact, many in the west are totally naked when on certain beaches.

9. The West accepts this as normal. But the West should not try to forcibly impose this on others. To do so is to deprive the freedom of these people.

10. Generally, the west no longer adhere to their own religion. They are Christians in name only. That is their right. But they must not show disrespect for the values of others, for the religion of others. It is a measure of the level of their civilisation to show this respect.

11. Macron is not showing that he is civilised. He is very primitive in blaming the religion of Islam and Muslims for the killing of the insulting school teacher. It is not in keeping with the teachings of Islam. But irrespective of the religion professed, angry people kill. The French in the course of their history has killed millions of people. Many were Muslims.

12. Muslims have a right to be angry and to kill millions of French people for the massacres of the past. But by and large the Muslims have not applied the “eye for an eye” law. Muslims don’t. The French shouldn’t. Instead the French should teach their people to respect other people’s feelings.

13. Since you have blamed all Muslims and the Muslims’ religion for what was done by one angry person, the Muslims have a right to punish the French. The boycott cannot compensate the wrongs committed by the French all these years.
 
The issue people have, is Mohammedanism is it not so much a religion where the adherents may incidentally be involved in politics, rather it is an political system with a religion. Now if if their political system is so great, why do they try so hard to leave Mohammedan countries? Generally, those countries are not good to live in, so they move to non-Mohammedan countries and then dream of turning it into a country just like the one they left. Usually playing the part of the cry-bully, outraged that their hosts had the audacity to defend themselves in earlier centuries.

All religions have moral demands on their respective adherents that most can not live up to at all times. The question then is violent behavior a failure to live up to the religion, or is it a direct result of taking that religion seriously? People cry out that some European country did some bad thing, but was it in spite of or because of Christianity? When Mohamedians invaded Spain, France, North Africa, Palestine, Austria, Eastern Europe, etc., was it in spite of or because of Mohamedisim?

And, what is so inherently wrong about hate? Is it wrong to hate Hitler? Wrong to hate Ted Bundy? Wrong to hate child molesters? Wrong to hate smallpox? I think this whole hate canard grew from when George H.W. Bush was re-running for the presidency in 1992. He tried running on "family values" and the media accused him constantly of being mean-spirited (an odd accusation against one of the last gentleman politicians). A snarky bumper sticker at the time said "hate is not a family value." I think the whole hate stupidity grew from there. Hate is "bad", so define what is hate and you can control everything. Then there was "hate crime" legislation, which was odd, as is there such a thing as a "love crime?" "Dude, I love you bro, but I just had this urge to kill someone today, sorry." It was absorbed into the political correctness movement of the 1990's to remove the need to ever actually debate anything. Just have the pimps in the media call the opposite side hateful, and argument over.
 

redpillage

Ostrich
Gold Member
And, what is so inherently wrong about hate? Is it wrong to hate Hitler? Wrong to hate Ted Bundy? Wrong to hate child molesters? Wrong to hate smallpox? I think this whole hate canard grew from when George H.W. Bush was re-running for the presidency in 1992. He tried running on "family values" and the media accused him constantly of being mean-spirited (an odd accusation against one of the last gentleman politicians). A snarky bumper sticker at the time said "hate is not a family value." I think the whole hate stupidity grew from there. Hate is "bad", so define what is hate and you can control everything. Then there was "hate crime" legislation, which was odd, as is there such a thing as a "love crime?" "Dude, I love you bro, but I just had this urge to kill someone today, sorry." It was absorbed into the political correctness movement of the 1990's to remove the need to ever actually debate anything. Just have the pimps in the media call the opposite side hateful, and argument over.

You can't legistlate or outlaw an emotion. As you have already described, there are many things and people in life worth hating.

But of course we all know that this has nothing to do with 'hate' really. After all Muslims are permitted to hate and kill Christians while Marxists are allowed to hate, castigate, and persecute religious conservatives. It's a bit like the n-word that only blacks are supposedly permitted to use. It's an attempt to gaslight the public by controlling speech and thus control the conversation. It's the subversion of dialectic.

Of course that is only at first - then moral outrage travels downstream and becomes official and unofficial policy in the form of supposed 'hate crime laws' and lopsided application of online discourse.

The good news is that the vast majority of the population supports free speech. Watch what happens on Nov. 3rd. Or as I'm currently telling my liberal acquaintances:

SEE YOU NEXT TUESDAY ;-)
 

get2choppaaa

Woodpecker
You can look up the connection between USSR funding and ISLAM. Good ole Yuri Bezmanov had a slideshow that has been scrubbed demonstrating the connection of arms and goods to these countries. Some good photos of Yassar Arafat for example.
 

Louis IX

Pelican
Muslims should leave Europe. They were given so many decades to integrate but still wonder why they are hated - just like their Jewish cousins.

They can stay in Bosnia or Albania which are the only 2 countries who don't mind cohabitate with very moderate muslims.

In all other countries we have to take care of the problem.
 
Top