Slashdot Mirror

Some interesting reading for others not so familiar with the BS Scientology promotes.

To "compare and contrast" try reading about dhimmi and dhimmitude.

The hardcore Muslims are trying to deflect your attention. The real racism is contained in the Qur'an against the Jews. Mohammed really, really hated Jews because they rejected him (no wonder, he was an evil warlord that at 54 years of age married six year old Aisha over the objections of her father). This hatred is no because of the creation of Israel (in 1948), but has existed for 1400 years since the founding of Islam. No matter what the Israelis do or do not do, or whether you are and Israeli Jew or and American Jew or a British Jew or a Canadian Jew then you the Muslims want to kill you because the Qur'an commands genocide against the Jews will precede the Muslim Day of Judgement (any Muslim that kills a Jew will be blessed by Allah - how evil is that).

The deflection is that Muslims are the victims of racism (when their doctrine is explicitly racist against Jews; and violent and discriminatory against all non-Muslims). Muslims also claim they are the victims of 'crusader' aggression, but when you look around the Muslims are the aggressors to non-Muslims and other Muslim sects/more secular Muslims (eg. in Thailand, Indonesia, Phillipines, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Egypt, Sudan, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Turkey, etc).

It is very very important to understand that the manufactured rage against Lego has *nothing* to do with the cultural symbols. It is all about power and subjugation. The Muslims (especially the OIC and Muslim Brotherhood) want to condition the Free West into 'dhimmitude' where we are sufficiently subjugated and obey their wishes. The politically correct crowd and media are duped into reinforcing this message. The correct message Lego and others should be to say, "In the West we practice Free Speech". If Lego do not give in we can expect violence - the police can handle this. If Lego give in then the Muslims will continue to be emboldened and will press for more and more, to make us feel like dhimmis . This is called, 'cultural jihad' and most Free People don't understand how insidious and clever the Muslim Brotherhood is with this, far far smarter than 'libtard' politicians like Clinton (who promoted destruction of Free Speech when she co-sponsored UN HRC Resolution 16/18; against the First Amendment of the US Constitution).

Google is your friend if you want to find out about the 'cultural jihad'. It is far far more dangerous to the long term health of the Free World than regular violent jihad (which only stiffens our will to resist and overcome the evil ideology of Islam). Here are some starting links:
http://muslimbrotherhoodinamerica.com/
http://www.jihadwatch.org/
http://www.dhimmitude.org/

Even if you don't oppose the ideology of Islam (which means you haven't researched it yet) you must still understand that Muslim demands for special treatment (eg. the right to determine what Lego is or is not Sharia compliant in their view) will never stop until they have subjugated the Free World. Giving in only postpones the day of reckoning when they seize control (and if you care to look, they are quite open about this). If they ever did get control they believe the World would be at peace. This is completely deluded, the Muslim regions of the world are continually in violent turmoil, because the Muslim-on-Muslim violence then gets unleashed and it is non-stop:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

The only solution is to stop Islam before we get to that point. We have to say "We believe in Free Speech" and really mean it. We also have to enact laws that explicitly prohibit Sharia being introduced as state/nantion law, "No Sharia in the West!" (which parts of the US is doing, although the Obama Administration is trying to stop the state governments in this - Obama has a Leftist agenda where he wants to deconstruct America as

Because when islam was the progressive religion driving greatest scientific minds of its time, christian Europe was hell bent on killing and enslaving as many muslims as possible. Crusading was a great way to earn money, fame and reputation. Read about that stuff sometime.

Let's see what some other sources say:

'Tyranny of Clichés' Excerpt: The Truth About the Crusades

. . . Until fairly recently, historically speaking, Muslims used to brag about being the winners of the Crusades, not the victims of it. That is if they talked about them at all. “The Crusades could more accurately be described as a limited, belated and, in the last analysis, ineff ectual response to the jihad—a failed attempt to recover by a Christian holy war what had been lost to a Muslim holy war,” writes Bernard Lewis, the greatest living historian of Islam in the English language (and perhaps any language).5 Historian Thomas Madden puts it more directly, “Now put this down in your notebook, because it will be on the test: The crusades were in every way a defensive war. They were the West’s belated response to the Muslim conquest of fully two-thirds of the Christian world.”6

At first the larger Muslim world didn’t much care about the Christian reclamation of Jerusalem and the Holy Land. The jihad to repel the crusaders didn’t start in earnest until the European forces pressed on into the Muslim Holy Lands approaching Mecca and Medina. Even then the Muslim world considered the fight to reclaim Jerusalem a sideshow. The real fight was in the East, where caliphs were rolling up victory after victory in the old Byzantine Empire. In 1291, the Muslims expelled the last of the crusaders, and all remaining Christians and Jews in the Islamic world lived as second-class citizens (though often better than Muslims or Jews might have in many parts of Christendom). By the sixteenth century, Islam’s empire covered all of North Africa, Asia Minor, Arabia, and much of southern Europe. Had Islamic forces not been turned back outside the Gates of Vienna, Christianity itself may not have survived. (The battle ended in victory for the Christians on September 12, but it was the day before, marking the apex of Muslim rule, that would stick in the minds of many Muslims for the next 318 years.)
   

The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism

The Status of Non-Muslim Minorities Under Islamic Rule

The Golden Age of Islam is a Myth

Islam has a reeeeeeeeeeally long way to go if it actually wants to even compete for #1. Even discounting WW1 and WW2, christians have long held the trophy, and they're not going to be relinquishing it any time soon.

a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.

The atheist Communists killed 100,000,000 people in the last 100 years.

Just a suggestion, but stop fucking up peoples shit around the world and people wont have a grudge against you and you wont have to intimidate people. . . . Contrary to popular opinion in the US, the reason for extremists from the middle east and areas of asia isn't because "they hate freedom", . . . . I swear, how people don't see the cause and effect in all this is beyond me...

The reason it's beyond you is that you really don't understand what is going on. Here is some starter material. Yes, they do hate our freedoms - including the freedom of religion, and self governance under the Constitution. Their ultimate goal is to restore the Caliphate, which existed up until ~ 1924, and conquer the world for Islam.

bin Laden's 'letter to America'
Goal - coerced religious conversion, replacement of Constitution with Sharia law, with an end to drinking, gambling, fornication, etc., etc.. Noncompliance means they will keep attacking.

What al-Qaida Really Wants

Given your handle, you might find this interesting.

First of all, America is not a Christian country. That sort of thing is banned by the Constitution. Mosques are protected here. As a matter of fact, more churches have been burned down in Alabama this week than Mosques have been in the entire US.

Yeah 12% of the country is a member of a non-christian religion. In any case I don't see your point. Most countries that are primarily muslim are also composed of some non-muslims and most have laws that ensure equal rights based upon religion. The US is as much a "christian nation" as most middle eastern countries are "muslim nations." Certainly from the point of view of a muslim whose country has been invaded, the fact that the majority of the invaders are christians, not unlike the the historical crusades where christians invaded and tried to conquer/convert them, is a significant fact. Think of it from someone in the middle east's point of view.

Christianity teaches to turn the other cheek, not burn down an embassy.

So does islam for that matter. But you still see plenty of christians killing others because they are gay or for numerous other reasons. Hell, one of the primary tenets of christianity is "thou shall not kill." How many people did the primarily christian US army kill when they invaded Iraq? Christians and muslims both do things their religions don't approve of, what a surprise.

According to Islaam, it's OK to enslave those who are not Muslims (see http://www.dhimmitude.org/)

According to the bible it is ok to get your father drunk and screw him if you want a kid. So what? Christianity has alternately approved of and spoke against slavery many times. Currently slavery is illegal in most all of the middle east as it is in the US.

How long do you think such a picture of Mohammed would last anywhere, especially in the Arab world? How long do you think the artist would live, or the museum director, or the mayor of that town?

It all depends upon the town and the people. In many cases it would be regarded as distasteful and perhaps the subject of boycotts. Same as the US, when someone puts up a blasphemous piece of art. It is fine in the big city, but in the country you're likely to get shot by some redneck who watches the 700 club.

And yes, there have been a few murders committed by those who call themselves Christian, but those are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and Christains agree with this prosecution. Besides, how many gays and abortion doctors have been murdered this week? Can you point to one story? I can tell you about at least 18 Christians who were murdered in Nigeria this weekend. A Jewish man in France was tortured for three weeks and killed in France by several muslims. How many gays died again?

...not having access to all the news everywhere I wouldn't know. How many people have the US killed since invading Iraq? 100,000? 200,000? It doesn't matter. The point is both christians and muslims regularly commit violent acts sometimes for religious reasons. There are plenty of other factors, like education, relative wealth, and how many of their relatives have been killed by foreign bombs that come into play. Muslims are no more inherently violent than christians.

How many riots have there been because muslims are burning red banners with crosses on them (the Danish flag). How would muslims respond if we were burning flags with a koran on it?

You know the red cross on a white background was also the symbol of the crusades right? That is why the red cross is called the red crescent there. In any case if we were burning flags with pictures of a book on it I imagine they would be confused.

Need I go on? Now, stop being ignorant. Stop comparing the true religion of peace with that of murderous thugs.

"The true religion of peace" as you call it is responsible for more death than almost any other in history. Between crusades, biological w

First of all, America is not a Christian country. That sort of thing is banned by the Constitution. Mosques are protected here. As a matter of fact, more churches have been burned down in Alabama this week than Mosques have been in the entire US.

I also recognize that christianity is in the same boat. They are actually very similar religions.
Bullshit!

Christianity teaches to turn the other cheek, not burn down an embassy.
According to Islaam, it's OK to enslave those who are not Muslims (see http://www.dhimmitude.org/)
I've seen pictures of the Virgin Mary made from Elephant dung, right here in America. How long do you think such a picture of Mohammed would last anywhere, especially in the Arab world? How long do you think the artist would live, or the museum director, or the mayor of that town?
And yes, there have been a few murders committed by those who call themselves Christian, but those are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and Christains agree with this prosecution. Besides, how many gays and abortion doctors have been murdered this week? Can you point to one story? I can tell you about at least 18 Christians who were murdered in Nigeria this weekend. A Jewish man in France was tortured for three weeks and killed in France by several muslims. How many gays died again?
How many riots have there been because muslims are burning red banners with crosses on them (the Danish flag). How would muslims respond if we were burning flags with a koran on it?

Need I go on? Now, stop being ignorant. Stop comparing the true religion of peace with that of murderous thugs.

This is similar to why American newspapers won't publish the Danish Jyllands-Posten "Mohammed" cartoons, and why American TV networks won't show them. To that end, here's some insightful commentary by DailyPundit commenter "Jack" on this issue (as quoted in this thread):

There is a thing about the reason that the Muhammed cartoons not being published that seems to have been left unsaid.

An important thing.

Newspapers and Television news shows are not showing the cartoons out of fear of what that might cause. Terror at what might happen to them, their homes, their lives.

Terror, as in 'Terrorism'.

The West's shining fundamental tenet, the First Amendment, has been attacked by Islam, terrorized.

And it fell faster than the World Trade Center.

No planes were needed, no bombs. No innocent victims needed to have their heads sawn off.

They used our foolish nature, our tolerance, our multiculturalism, our determination to believe the best about people and fashioned it into a spear--and rammed it into our heart.

They didn't merely destroy buildings this time. They took aim--and hit, our very souls.

I would say rise up. I would say, arm yourself, fight for your country.

But it's too late. Our government, our press--our allies are already accepting the scimitar at their necks. They're already sold us all down the river--just to buy a few more moments to allow themselves to milk the status quo.

Just remember the famous quote from Strictly Ballroom, Yahoo!: "A life lived in fear is a life half-lived."

And we smeared them with fake menstrual blood, and - get this - we actually went so far as to scare them with dogs! The utter, inhumane horror of it all!

And then we took pictures of them, so they would be ashamed to go home.

And now we get to hear "THE US TORTURED PEOPLE!!! THEY'RE WORSE THAN HITLER. HE ONLY KILLED SIX MILLION EVIL JOOOOS! THE US IS SO EVIL!!! WAHHH FUCKING WAHHH, MY PUSSY HURTS!!!!"

Cry me a fucking river, you limp-wristed, overly-sheltered, cowardly candy ass.

You post is nothing more than a thinly-veiled anti-American rant fueled by your inane rage, goaded on by anencephalic DUmmies and KosKids (and remember, Kos went 0-fer-the-last election. HAHA!). Brainless twits like you actually want the US to fail in Iraq, for some insane reason. And you're downright dumb for wanting that.

And get this - I'll VOTE for any candidate who openly says that doing the above "torture" is OK to use on medeival fanatical Islamist "Religion of Peace" members who think murdering kindergarteners on their first day of school is an acceptable practice just because they're "infidels".

Hell, I'll even vote for someone who openly claims that we should take the remains of any suicide bomber or the live body of any funder or Imam or other supporters of suicide bombers and bury 'em alive with a bunch of pigs - on worldwide TV. And I mean that - those fuckers want to kill me and my family, I say we do unto them before they do unto us.

All you arrogant, stupid (and I mean that literally because anybody who doesn't understand that being against US success in Iraq means you're objectively in favor of the mullahs in Iran and the Baathists in Syria and terrorists in general and therefore can't be anything but stupid) multiculturalist progressives who think your "compassion" and "understanding" and "tolerance" make you better than "republitards" and take every chance you get to bash the US need to realize that you're actually rooting for a misognynistic culture that thinks women shouldn't drive or even leave the house, much less vote, a completely intolerant culture that buries homosexuals alive, a culture of death that (misogynistically, imagine that) promises the services of 72 virgins for all eternity to anyone who can kill a few 5-year-old "infidels".

But lucky for you, there's a helluva lot more people like me than there are of you in the good ole US of A. Heck, even California elected Arnie, and Hillary! herself won't even say anything against the US in Iraq - she's too smart for that. (Which certainly says a lot about those openly rooting for US failure, now doesn't it?)

And shut the fuck up with that "We support our troops, too" crap. You do not. And drop the "You can't question my patriotism" dodge - it's not there to begin with.

If it weren't for people like me you yellow cowards too afraid to risk anything - heck, afraid of life itself - would already be getting measured for dhimmitude.

So fuck you and all the idiots who "think" like you.

Also note that Muslims have a religious imperative to conceal information from and deceive the Infidels. (Look up the words "al-taqiyya" and "kitman") Moreover, in Islam there is no concept of "civilian". Non-muslims are either subjigated Dhimmis, when they live under Muslim rule ("Dar al-Islam"), or enemies, when they live elsewhere ("Dar al-Harb"- that is, "House of War")

Such fatwas are disingenuous and intended to placate the Infidels.

Read http://www.jihadwatch.org/ for more information.

Their often one sided view of issues in the middle-east has garnered them a great following in said area amongst people who support the destruction of "infidels" and would love to enforce Dhimmitude

Read this article for a good overvue of why this is no big loss.

Good Riddance to AFP!

Bande de cons, allez vous faire encule.

The Reverend Franklin Graham called Islam a 'very evil and wicked religion' and said the Qur'an, Islam's revealed text, 'preaches violence.'

Converts are usually the most enthusiastic members of any faith. They often try the hardest to share what they now have with others. But you'll have to look a long, long time before you find another faith which motivates its converts to try to blow up airliners.

You'll find plenty more examples here, including examples of broad support for terrorism among Muslims even in the west. Also see The Middle East Media Research Institute.

... the responses have shown me that you, as a community, are ignoring the rotting buffalo carcass in the living room that is the very real hate-mongering within your ranks.

Defending the indefensible is great training for second-class citizenship under Islam (dhimmi status; also see here).

Over the last few hundred years and in particular in the 1900s most islamic countries were occupied and humiliated by the western superpowers of the period. Since oil became the strategic commodity, Middle-East (where all the holiest sites of islam are located) has been under extreme manipulation by the US and UK in particular.

Try imagining god-fearing Americans experiencing such occupation, control and manipulation of the United States, its culture and resources, by some islamic superpower and you might find a few Americans starting to hate their new overlords. Some might even take up arms as a last resort.

Your themes are: Domination and Occupation exacerbated by Oil causes Terrorism.

Not exactly. You are ignoring the impact of wealth, of Islam, and the fall of the Caliphate.

The west has also poured billions of dollars (and pounds and lira...) into the Islamic societies of the mideast and this has caused great distortion. Saddam would only have been a tin-pot dictator had he not been able to buy weapons from the major powers. Saudi Arabia would not have been able to spread its message of Islamic Radicalism and hatred of the West had it remained a poor nation of pearl divers and camel drivers.

The populations of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the smaller Gulf states have become used to unearned wealth and often astonishing levels of sloth and luxury. This is not what is usually understood as "Imperialism". That the wealth is not more widely shared is the result of indigenous political processes, not Western intervention.

The Mideast, like the entire rest of the world, was a battleground in the Cold War between the Warsaw Pact and NATO, or, if you prefer, between the Soviet Union and the US. Yet global terrorism arose only in the Islamic Mideast. Colonialism was equally widespread and lasted longer elsewhere. Your formulation fails to take this into account.

In order for the West to become wealthy it had to change its medieval world view to a modern scientific world view. The Islamic Radicals are unwilling to do this and it is their swift empowerment by oil money that has made a crisis out of the situation.

Egypt was a colony for over a hundred years and terrorism is a great problem. Yet Saudi Arabia was never invaded and has spawned a lot of terrorism worldwide. Each country is different. What is common is the ideology of Islamic world domination, and the impact (even in poor Egypt) of Islamic oil money to get the whole jihad moving.

Even in the Palestinian areas they have had many opportunities for a Palestinian State and real peace, yet prefer endless war and bloodshed because the Israelis are a different religion. When Jordon and Egypt conquered the Palestinian areas there was no peep of protest because these were Islamic countries. Don't underestimate the importance of the Islamic ideology of domination.

If you doubt the power of Islamic religious intolerance take a look at the history of the Bahai faith, and the treatment of the Sufi at the hands of the mainstream Muslims. For that matter look at the way the Sunni treat the Shiite. See also this site for more information.

An important response of the Mideastern Islamic world to modernity was Nasserite Arab Nationalism. That idea competed with and complemented Islamic radicalism, which is now more powerful than Nationalism, because Nationalism was seen as a failure. Arab Nationalism favored traditional wars between nations as a means of domination. Islamic radicalism likes war but has also developed a taste for Kamikazi tactics.

The stage was set for all this instability by the fall of the Turkish-dominated Caliphate at the end of the First World War. Huge areas of the Mideast were without government, spawning wars of succession as the political vacuum was filled during the rise of Hitler and through the development of the Cold War. The 500 years of Calipha