History of Islamic Hostility and an Analysis of Current Threat Potential

[granfire]

Some people need to actually read their Christian Bibles.
The whole thing.
Not the 'pick and choose' stuff.

As to the rest...facts don't matter when one is busy justifying their wet pants, and squishy butts while carrying torches and pitchforks in a crowd of like minded folks.
Facts, perspective, rational and level headed thinking. Nah.

Can we just pass a law requiring all Muslims to report to camps already? It's make some folks so happy..and I'm all about happiness today.

You mean, like, holding hands and sing Kumbaya while we dance around the burning stakes?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

There's a point where one just says "you know, arguing this point, just annoys me. Nothing will change the other persons mind. Not facts. Not evidence. Not statistics. Not reality. Nothing. All that happens is, I get annoyed." Which is why I'm rarely debating this whole anti-muslim thing anymore. Because despite the fact that 99% of reality says "No need to panic", there's always that 1% of dumbasses out there (ie the subjects of the OP) that start the sky falling again, and the damn pants panic dance going again. Me, I give up. It's not worth my health n all that.

 

[granfire]

There's a point where one just says "you know, arguing this point, just annoys me. Nothing will change the other persons mind. Not facts. Not evidence. Not statistics. Not reality. Nothing. All that happens is, I get annoyed." Which is why I'm rarely debating this whole anti-muslim thing anymore. Because despite the fact that 99% of reality says "No need to panic", there's always that 1% of dumbasses out there (ie the subjects of the OP) that start the sky falling again, and the damn pants panic dance going again. Me, I give up. It's not worth my health n all that.

Al Gore invented the ignore list for that!


:lfao:

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I'm staff. I can't put anyone on ignore.

 

[Ken Morgan]

There's a point where one just says "you know, arguing this point, just annoys me. Nothing will change the other persons mind. Not facts. Not evidence. Not statistics. Not reality. Nothing. All that happens is, I get annoyed." Which is why I'm rarely debating this whole anti-muslim thing anymore. Because despite the fact that 99% of reality says "No need to panic", there's always that 1% of dumbasses out there (ie the subjects of the OP) that start the sky falling again, and the damn pants panic dance going again. Me, I give up. It's not worth my health n all that.

Bob, it's like the whole atheist vs. religion debates. Does anyone really think Dawkins or Hitchens or an Imam or priest or rabbi will actually change their minds by the evidence presented by the others? It's not about them, it's not about you or I. It's about the 95% of the people who watch these debates from the sidelines, those are the people you are trying to convience. If you can convince just one person watching to actually look at evidence and think, then the debate was worth while.

 

[granfire]

I'm staff. I can't put anyone on ignore.

Poor thing! ^_^

 

[Sensei Payne]

because just like christianity, most people dont take religion all that seriously

the difference is, the bible doesnt really compel it's followers to go kill people

the koran does

Thats a real load.

Ever hear of the Crusades? Ever hear of about abortion clinics being pipe bombed or..

Restoration of the 10 Commandments



The full name of this cult is the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God. The Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God was a breakaway group from the Roman Catholic Church that formed in Uganda in the late 1980s. As the name implies the group strongly emphasized the Ten Commandments. This emphasis meant they even discouraged talking: out of fear of breaking the commandment about giving false witness. They also believed that their strict adherence to the Ten Commandments would be advantageous after the apocalypse.

This proved significant as the group had a strong emphasis on the apocalypse, highlighted by their booklet A Timely Message from Heaven: The End of the Present Time. New members were required to study it and be trained in it, reading it as many as six times. They also taught that Mother Mary had a special role in the apocalypse, and communicated to the leadership. They saw themselves as like Noah’s Ark, a ship of righteousness in a sea of depravity.

The group tended to be secretive and as mentioned above, was literally silent. Therefore it was relatively unknown to the outside world until 2000, although in 1998 the school they ran was sanctioned by the government due to unsanitary conditions and violation of child labor statutes.

In March of 2000, around 300 followers died in a fire in what is considered a cult suicide. Investigations conducted after the fire discovered mass graves, raising the death toll to over 1,000. This may mean it was larger than the Jonestown murder/suicide in 1978, but some speculate the death toll was around 800. There are also allegations that the event was more of a mass murder by the leadership.

or

Kansas City, MO — 33-year-old Peggy Ross was taken into custody early Tuesday morning after police say she stabbed her 8-year-old son multiple times as he lay sleeping in his grandmother’s bed.
Ross’ mother told investigators she and the child were sleeping when she woke to find Ross stabbing the boy with a knife. The woman told police her grandson attempted to ward off the blows with his hands.
The woman grabbed her daughter and told her to stop, at which point Ross reportedly screamed, “I’m going to finish it! God made me do it!” She then fled the house on foot.
Arrested a short time later, Ross was booked into jail on charges of child endangerment and second-degree assault. A bond amount has not yet been made available.
The boy suffered cuts and wounds to his hands and wrist, scratches on his left shoulder and bruises on his left elbow and side. He was stitched up at the hospital and released.

 

[yorkshirelad]

Your arguement is a straw man for bigotry. If your arguement was valid then you would also admitt to Christians as being slavers and violent. Both the Bible and the Quran have commands to be non-violent. They also have commands for violence. Religion is used by too many as a justification for violence. What you are espousing is no different.

Yep, Christians have behaved violently! In fact anyone who targets the innocent because of their backward fundamental beliefs is a nutcase and has no place in society. I find it amazing though that a thread is started about a Muslim attack on a recruiting station and the first thing you do is point out to us that Christians have been violent too.
Yes, Christians have been violent, but right now, in this day and age in the US, the enemy is Islam. 9/11, Cobalt towers, 1st WTC bombing, US embassies in Africa, USS Cole. The enemy is Islam, those who appease them and those who support them by trying to justify bad behaviour, by pointing out the bad behaviour of other groups.

 

[yorkshirelad]

[cough]Sabra and Shatila massacres[cough cough]. Kingsmill massacre. Karatina massacre. Tel-al Zaatar massacre. Khojaly massacre. Greysteel massacre. Cave of the Patriarchs massacre. Gulbarg Society massacre.

In fact, it would appear that Muslims attack Christians and Jews and Hindus, Hindus attack Muslims, Christians attack Muslims, Jews attack Muslims and Christians, and Protestants attack Catholics and Catholics attack protestants on a fairly regular basis; if we're just looking religion.

But people will see just exactly what they want to see.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Have a nice evening gents. Stew well in those juices. I have a tournament to prepare for.

So, let's just condemn religion altogether. Let's just call it supernatural cohersion and therefore evil by design.
Again, let's just say that religious nutjobs are wrong, but let's not start a thread about an attempted Muslim attack and then try to divert attention by focusing on other religions.
As you guys know, I've no time for religion in general, so let's just condemn it all!

 

[Archangel M]

WHAT ABOUT THE CRUSADES?!?!? (or any other of these examples)

Dude those happened what 1000 years ago? Thats like expecting me to pay reparations for slavery. One I wasn't around...two my ancestors were not slave owners or even American citizens at the time.

What group is the largest risk at THIS time?

 

[billc]

Everyone seems to get the crusades wrong. The crusades were defensive wars against muslims moving into christian territory. The muslims led an expedition into france, from conquered spain, 50 years before the first crusade was called. The muslims were expanding at the time of the crusades and were annoying everyone even back then.

 

[Archangel M]

Everyone seems to get the crusades wrong. The crusades were defensive wars against muslims moving into christian territory. The muslims led an expedition into france, from conquered spain, 50 years before the first crusade was called. The muslims were expanding at the time of the crusades and were annoying everyone even back then.

Point.

Nobody ever seems to mention the Moorish invasions of Europe as a debate point.

 

[Sukerkin]

It is true that the Moorish invasion and various military adventures are seldom mentioned at all - I am pleasantly surprised to hear them spoken of :nods:.

Mind you, I am convinced that the reason they are seldom spoken of is because it showed that not only the West was capable of establishing and maintaining an empire. It's akin to why so little is widely known about the magnificent Hindu temples in the South of India - they were 'discovered' by Victorian British army officers and their sensibiltiies were so shocked by them the information was largely suppressed.

Religion is bad. Empires are bad. Anyone different than us is bad.

Oh wait ... it's not that simple is it?

History is a melange of twisted tales, some of which change their meaning depending on who you ask. The tends to be true no matter how recent that history is.

 

[Twin Fist]

Thats a real load.

Ever hear of the Crusades? Ever hear of about abortion clinics being pipe bombed or..

uneducated idealism

the poster seems like a nice educated guy, like the average American democrat, but the post (like most liberal ideals) is full of asinine garbage.

the crusades were, as has been PROVEN, a response to MUSLIM agression, because that is what thier book tells them to do.

 

[elder999]

the crusades were, as has been PROVEN, a response to MUSLIM agression, because that is what thier book tells them to do.

Nothings been PROVEN-somebody (billi) just said it was

The 1st Crusade, at the order of Pope Urban II, was launched-in part-to aid the Byzantine emperor in repelling Turkish invaders, but it's primary goal rapidly became the taking (or retaking) of Jerusalem.

The Crusade of 1101 was a mission to reinforce the holding of Jerusalem.

THe Second Crusade of 1145 was a response to the fall of the first of the Crusader Kingdoms to Islamic invasion-it ultimately failed, though it coincided with the Reconquista of the Iberian peninsula, and may have aided in the taking of Lisbon.

The Third Crusade of 1189 was an attempt to reretake the Holy Land from Saladin, after the surrender of Jerusalem. While they did not rerecapture Jerusalem, it did allow for a continued Christian rule in Syria and Cyprus.

THe Fourth Crusade of 1202 was an attempt to rerereconquer Jerusalem by invading through Egypt. Instead, the Chrisitians-predominantly Roman Catholics-conquered Constantinople, the kingdom in the east-Byzantium.

The FIfth Crusade of 1213 was one last gasp of an attempt at taking Jerusalem through Egypt. It failed.

Which of these, aside from the first, could properly be called "a response to MUSLIM aggression?" Were not the MUSLIMS trying to retake their homeland, in each instance?

 

[Sukerkin]

As earlier noted, nothing is ever as simple as it seems when you're dealing with the narrative of history.

By-in-large, the Crusades had little to do with faith and a lot to do with money, power and prestige.

The concepts of "The Short Victorious War" and "Waving the Bloodied Shirt" have been with us a long time, sad to say.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Which side was it again that had the bright idea to send kids to war? Where most of them were killed or sold into slavery as a result?

As to hostilities...which faith is older again?

Since Spain was brought up...which faith was it again that ran the Inquisition?

Never mind. Facts are called for, and what we want is just more reasons to spew bigotry and justify hatred. That's all.

 

[Twin Fist]

justifying (or ignoring) bad behavior by pointing out other bad behavior is beneath you Bob

why even bring up the inquisition? to distract from the facts and to diffuse the blame from islam to others....

you want to talk about how bad christianity and it's history is? make a new thread, i will pitch in, but trying to hide the truth about islam under a smear job of christianity is simply sad and lame

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Perspective John. I'm adding perspective you the witch hunt. I know, that's not wanted, what with all the finger pointing and rabble rousing and all that stuff.

Funny thing...we don't hear much about all the Wiccan terrorists. Not much on the Apache's lately either. Somalian pirates still make the news every 2-3 months.

You started this topic being a bit of a sarcastic git.
I'm just more so.

But lets go back to the 'bash islam and paint muslims as rabid dogs' theme that a few folks like so much.

the crusades were, as has been PROVEN, a response to MUSLIM aggression, because that is what their book tells them to do.

Now, I corrected the spelling above, but the meaning is the same,

The Crusades.
These were "The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns, called by the pope and waged by kings and nobles who volunteered to take up the cross with the main goal of restoring Christian control of the Holy Land. The crusaders came from all over western Europe, and fought a series of disconnected campaigns between 1095 and 1291;"
(Source: Wikipedia)

You said "a response to MUSLIM aggression"
Wiki says "the main goal of restoring Christian control of the Holy Land"

ok. So how did the Christian's lose control of the Holy Land?
"The Muslim presence in the Holy Land began with the initial Muslim conquest of Syria in the 7th century under the Rashidun Caliphs. The Muslim armies' successes put increasing pressure on the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire which had originally claimed the region (part of the Eastern Roman Empire which the Byzantines inherited) as their territory – this included eventual incursions by the Seljuk Turks. "
(Source: Wikipedia)

ok...

So, the Byzantine Empire lost the lands in a war over territory...a territory containing "the third most sacred site in Islam."

Where?

Jerusalem.

Sacred city to -3- religions.

John. Let me ask something here. Which religion was there first?

So, the Christians lost holy ground, to another faith who also considered it holy ground, while both took great fun in slaughtering the actual original people, who also considered it holy ground.

Now, as to their book saying 'go out and kill', yes it does. Especially when you take large parts out of context. Of course, I've read the entire thing. Have you? Has anyone here other than me read the entire Koran? Have you read your bible lately? Not the 'add on book', but the real one? The one that tells you when to beat your kids to death, and how many times it's ok to smack your wife?

Bluntly put, if you take the Christian Bible at a literal, by-the-book read, it's a pretty ****ed up thing. Just as ****ed up as you make the the Koran out to be. Considering that there are large groups of so called Christians active today who are engaged in the same **** a few bring up about Muslims over and over again yet choose to ignore, explain or minimize it, well, that's pretty selective in my view.

So, lets try a new game here. Put the goddess damned broad paint brush down, and start dealing in actual specifics for a change.

Because the broad brush strokes are the actions of someone with no real argument.

Histories pretty complicated. The Mid-East has had more changes of ownership that the average nickle. So, get specific and actually do some real research dealing with credible resources.

You want to keep harping on how evil Islam is. How wrong it is. How ****ed up it is.
Hey, why don't you join a religion that doesn't have a ****ed up history?
Is there one?
I doubt it.
Christianity's got just as much blood on it's hands.
Perspective.

So you made 3 claims here.

1 - the crusades were, as has been PROVEN,
2 - a response to MUSLIM aggression,
3 - because that is what their book tells them to do.

I dispute all 3.

So, lets see your proof.


Oh, and how did the Christians get control of the Holy Land?
The Romans conquered it, and converted.
Ironic the Jews ended up with it anyway.
I wonder what the Macedonians would say....

 

[granfire]

Perspective John. I'm adding perspective you the witch hunt. I know, that's not wanted, what with all the finger pointing and rabble rousing and all that stuff.

Funny thing...we don't hear much about all the Wiccan terrorists. Not much on the Apache's lately either. Somalian pirates still make the news every 2-3 months.

You started this topic being a bit of a sarcastic git.
I'm just more so.

But lets go back to the 'bash islam and paint muslims as rabid dogs' theme that a few folks like so much.



Now, I corrected the spelling above, but the meaning is the same,

The Crusades.
These were "The Crusades were a series of religiously sanctioned military campaigns, called by the pope and waged by kings and nobles who volunteered to take up the cross with the main goal of restoring Christian control of the Holy Land. The crusaders came from all over western Europe, and fought a series of disconnected campaigns between 1095 and 1291;"
(Source: Wikipedia)

You said "a response to MUSLIM aggression"
Wiki says "the main goal of restoring Christian control of the Holy Land"

ok. So how did the Christian's lose control of the Holy Land?
"The Muslim presence in the Holy Land began with the initial Muslim conquest of Syria in the 7th century under the Rashidun Caliphs. The Muslim armies' successes put increasing pressure on the Eastern Orthodox Byzantine Empire which had originally claimed the region (part of the Eastern Roman Empire which the Byzantines inherited) as their territory – this included eventual incursions by the Seljuk Turks. "
(Source: Wikipedia)

ok...

So, the Byzantine Empire lost the lands in a war over territory...a territory containing "the third most sacred site in Islam."

Where?

Jerusalem.

Sacred city to -3- religions.

John. Let me ask something here. Which religion was there first?

So, the Christians lost holy ground, to another faith who also considered it holy ground, while both took great fun in slaughtering the actual original people, who also considered it holy ground.

Now, as to their book saying 'go out and kill', yes it does. Especially when you take large parts out of context. Of course, I've read the entire thing. Have you? Has anyone here other than me read the entire Koran? Have you read your bible lately? Not the 'add on book', but the real one? The one that tells you when to beat your kids to death, and how many times it's ok to smack your wife?

Bluntly put, if you take the Christian Bible at a literal, by-the-book read, it's a pretty ****ed up thing. Just as ****ed up as you make the the Koran out to be. Considering that there are large groups of so called Christians active today who are engaged in the same **** a few bring up about Muslims over and over again yet choose to ignore, explain or minimize it, well, that's pretty selective in my view.

So, lets try a new game here. Put the goddess damned broad paint brush down, and start dealing in actual specifics for a change.

Because the broad brush strokes are the actions of someone with no real argument.

Histories pretty complicated. The Mid-East has had more changes of ownership that the average nickle. So, get specific and actually do some real research dealing with credible resources.

You want to keep harping on how evil Islam is. How wrong it is. How ****ed up it is.
Hey, why don't you join a religion that doesn't have a ****ed up history?
Is there one?
I doubt it.
Christianity's got just as much blood on it's hands.
Perspective.

So you made 3 claims here.


I dispute all 3.

So, lets see your proof.


Oh, and how did the Christians get control of the Holy Land?
The Romans conquered it, and converted.
Ironic the Jews ended up with it anyway.
I wonder what the Macedonians would say....

Nice summary of 2000 years (actually way more) of 'stuff'