Truck Drives Through Crowd in Nice, France

[Stucco Houses]

I don't see how I'm a hypocrite. I don't hardly hate white people at all. I'm pretty white myself. I just try not to fool myself about how race relations work in a way that excuses imperial forces.

You've constantly fooled yourself into believing European colonialism dismisses colonialism enacted by Non-European Powers are innocent, despite their acts; that's pretty hypocritical. seeing as I don't hate Muslims, How am I a racist, as you've said? (not to mention Muslims aren't a race)

I've never said that at all. In fact, I remember saying quite clearly that all colonialism is bad, but that it's clear that European colonialism has far more influenced the current global power structure.

I don't understand how you can possibly conflate Islam and terrorism without an economic and political explanation, thereby explicitly arguing that Muslims and their religion are inherently violent, and not have a prejudice against Muslims. It's not a personal attack so much as an observation of implications.

[Minzerland]

Just looked up /pol/. They are celebrating for the driver being a muslim. This shows who in fact have benefits from this incidents.

Can you substantiate, please.

[Dameth]

Just looked up /pol/. They are celebrating for the driver being a muslim. This shows who in fact have benefits from this incidents.

Another bright day for White Nationalism and Neofascism. Disgusting the way that bigots prosper off of chaos and sadness.

You're doing the exact same thing by trying to prop up BS like white guilt since a number of pages. You're not fooling anyone, you know.

[The Alexanderians]

Just looked up /pol/. They are celebrating for the driver being a muslim. This shows who in fact have benefits from this incidents.

Another bright day for White Nationalism and Neofascism. Disgusting the way that bigots prosper off of chaos and sadness.

Based on France's track record this event will only serve to strengthen them...

[The Celtic British Isles]

The war on terror results in more terrorism. If Saddasm Hussein still ruled Iraq , Islamic state would never came to power. If Gadaffi still ruled Libya , Libya would still be the richest country in Africa. The bombing of middle eastern countries creates hate against the west which terrorist groups use to gain more supporters.
The west should stop intervening around the world.

But Muh Freedom!

In all seriousness, this is true. Once these nations stablised, democracy would slowly take power, or atleast a less oppresive regime. Democratisation is a process that can not be forced of rushed

[Unified Governments]

Just looked up /pol/. They are celebrating for the driver being a muslim. This shows who in fact have benefits from this incidents.

Another bright day for White Nationalism and Neofascism. Disgusting the way that bigots prosper off of chaos and sadness.

You seem more mad at the white nationalists than you do at the terrorists.

[Dameth]

Based on France's track record this event will only serve to strengthen them...

Edit : Wohoho. Misread the post. Nevermind I'm tired.

[Unified Governments]

The war on terror results in more terrorism. If Saddasm Hussein still ruled Iraq , Islamic state would never came to power. If Gadaffi still ruled Libya , Libya would still be the richest country in Africa. The bombing of middle eastern countries creates hate against the west which terrorist groups use to gain more supporters.
The west should stop intervening around the world.

But Muh Freedom!

In all seriousness, this is true. Once these nations stablised, democracy would slowly take power, or atleast a less oppresive regime. Democratisation is a process that can not be forced of rushed

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

[Patridam]

And what exactly do you want the rest of Muslims to do? Do you want hundreds of millions of them to grab a rifle and march into Mosul?

Well, now that you mention it, that would definitely be nice, yes.

Fair enough, because for it to really be infinity, Muslims would need to be infinitely religiously violent, which isn't possible; or Jews and Christians would need to be never ever religiously violent. Ah, math. Perhaps "Jews and Christians are doing a much, much, much better job of refuting the bad parts of their teachings than Muslims" would be more apt.

A bit more apt... but still very much debatable. For one, the largest Christian denomination continues to treat homosexuality as a sin (when not as a disease of sorts)

You're a little behind the times.

The Catholic Church respects and loves the homosexual person the same as it does the heterosexual. Catholicism teaches that homosexual people must be treated with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every act or thought of hatred, violence, or persecution toward the homosexual is condemned.

The Church opposes same-sex unions based on Genesis 1:25–28: "God created man in his own image….male and female he created them… and God said, 'Be fruitful and multiply' " and Genesis 2:24, " a man shall be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Jesus himself uses these same quotation in Mark 10:6–9 when asked about marriage.

and continues to encourage anti-scientific practices that only serve to worsen the HIV/AIDS pandemic in several regions of the world. And Orthodox Judaism remains orthodox and numerous.

Gonna need some facts and specifics for that one, because Catholicism is certainly not anti-science as a whole

Historically, Catholics are numbered among the most important scientists of all time, including Rene Descartes, who discovered analytic geometry and the laws of refraction; Blaise Pascal, inventor of the adding machine, hydraulic press, and the mathematical theory of probabilities; Augustinian priest Gregor Mendel, who founded modern genetics; Louis Pasteur, founder of microbiology and creator of the first vaccine for rabies and anthrax; and cleric Nicolaus Copernicus, who first developed scientifically the view that the earth rotated around the sun.

One might try to explain such distinguished Catholic scientists as rare individuals who dared to rebel against the institutional Church, which opposes science. However, the Catholic Church as an institution funds, sponsors, and supports scientific research in the Pontifical Academy of Science and in the departments of science found in every Catholic university across the world, including those governed by Roman Catholic bishops, such as The Catholic University of America. This financial and institutional support of science by the Church began at the very birth of science in seventeenth-century Europe and continues today. Even Church buildings themselves were not only used for religious purposes but designed in part to foster scientific knowledge. As Thomas Woods notes:

[Stucco Houses]

I don't see how I'm a hypocrite. I don't hardly hate white people at all. I'm pretty white myself. I just try not to fool myself about how race relations work in a way that excuses imperial forces.


Because there is a very clear message about what Muslim means in our modern discourse about Muslims. We aren't talking about Bosnians or Indian Muslims or Burmese Muslims, we are talking about Middle Eastern Muslims. It is a racist mind that says that terrorism stems from a religion of hate and evil followed by and large by nonwhite people affected by poverty and colonization, rather than the poverty and colonization themselves. It's pointlessly reactionary not to understand the root causes or to pretend like our discourse on terrorism isn't dictated by race.

Who the hell said that they're terrorists because of their ethnicity, regardless of which Muslims we're talking about? I'm sure that a lot of people would agree that the Middle East would be a very different place with another religion in place. It's not at all about the race, now take your "everything is racist" spewings elsewhere or actually defend the religion beyond "if you don't support Islam you're a racist imperialist bastard", please.

And my argument is that it clearly would not. Burma is a poor, largely Buddhist nation, and they experience Buddhist terrorism. Ireland was a poor Christian nation and it experienced sectarian terrorism too. Remove the political instability and economic issues, and the terrorism leaves too.

If you don't agree with the fact that these root causes are the problem, you've said that Islam is the problem and Muslims are dull for believing it, or that Muslims are the problem and that they are intrinsically worse, more violent people. Tell me why that doesn't hold up.

[MERIZoC]

Very sad. Let us hope the French do not meet hate with hate.

[The Celtic British Isles]

But Muh Freedom!

In all seriousness, this is true. Once these nations stablised, democracy would slowly take power, or atleast a less oppresive regime. Democratisation is a process that can not be forced of rushed

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

MONEY MONEY MONEY! Saddam had tons of oil, but also backed up his currency with gold. Qaddafi did the same with his currency, also Libya just had massive gold reserves in general

[Koninkrijk Zeeland]

But Muh Freedom!

In all seriousness, this is true. Once these nations stablised, democracy would slowly take power, or atleast a less oppresive regime. Democratisation is a process that can not be forced of rushed

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

To gain power and so that we control their oil.

[Stucco Houses]

And what exactly do you want the rest of Muslims to do? Do you want hundreds of millions of them to grab a rifle and march into Mosul?

Well, now that you mention it, that would definitely be nice, yes.

A bit more apt... but still very much debatable. For one, the largest Christian denomination continues to treat homosexuality as a sin (when not as a disease of sorts)

You're a little behind the times.

The Catholic Church respects and loves the homosexual person the same as it does the heterosexual. Catholicism teaches that homosexual people must be treated with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every act or thought of hatred, violence, or persecution toward the homosexual is condemned.

The Church opposes same-sex unions based on Genesis 1:25–28: "God created man in his own image….male and female he created them… and God said, 'Be fruitful and multiply' " and Genesis 2:24, " a man shall be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." Jesus himself uses these same quotation in Mark 10:6–9 when asked about marriage.

and continues to encourage anti-scientific practices that only serve to worsen the HIV/AIDS pandemic in several regions of the world. And Orthodox Judaism remains orthodox and numerous.

Gonna need some facts and specifics for that one, because Catholicism is certainly not anti-science as a whole

Historically, Catholics are numbered among the most important scientists of all time, including Rene Descartes, who discovered analytic geometry and the laws of refraction; Blaise Pascal, inventor of the adding machine, hydraulic press, and the mathematical theory of probabilities; Augustinian priest Gregor Mendel, who founded modern genetics; Louis Pasteur, founder of microbiology and creator of the first vaccine for rabies and anthrax; and cleric Nicolaus Copernicus, who first developed scientifically the view that the earth rotated around the sun.

One might try to explain such distinguished Catholic scientists as rare individuals who dared to rebel against the institutional Church, which opposes science. However, the Catholic Church as an institution funds, sponsors, and supports scientific research in the Pontifical Academy of Science and in the departments of science found in every Catholic university across the world, including those governed by Roman Catholic bishops, such as The Catholic University of America. This financial and institutional support of science by the Church began at the very birth of science in seventeenth-century Europe and continues today. Even Church buildings themselves were not only used for religious purposes but designed in part to foster scientific knowledge. As Thomas Woods notes:

Don't forget that time the Catholics completely dismissed science for centuries and required Muslim scholars to rewrite their classics, advance math and science, and then give it back to them. But Islam is a stupid religion for violent stupid people, unlike the constantly warring (and comparatively poor) Catholics of medieval Europe.

Oh wait, the violence of medieval Europe corresponded with its poverty and focused on consolidation of political power with religion as a faulty pretext just like modern Islam!

[Unified Governments]

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

MONEY MONEY MONEY! Saddam had tons of oil, but also backed up his currency with gold. Qaddafi did the same with his currency, also Libya just had massive gold reserves in general

Which we don't seem to be getting any of.

[Patridam]

We're just going to ignore the centuries of violence and prejudice furthered under Christian pretenses for political purposes and economic reasons? Poverty is the connector, not any religion.

I'm not saying it didn't take some time for Christians and Jews to deal with the ideological problems in their religions. They certainly were in the midst of working on it 300 years ago, and hadn't really started it during the age of the Crusades. Hell, they're still ironing the smaller stuff out and will be for a while. Just that Islam has to catch the f*ck up with them.

[Minzerland]

You've constantly fooled yourself into believing European colonialism dismisses colonialism enacted by Non-European Powers are innocent, despite their acts; that's pretty hypocritical. seeing as I don't hate Muslims, How am I a racist, as you've said? (not to mention Muslims aren't a race)

I've never said that at all. In fact, I remember saying quite clearly that all colonialism is bad, but that it's clear that European colonialism has far more influenced the current global power structure.

You've constantly dismissed the actions of Islamic colonialism as not 'worse', and you may be correct, however you go on to say that France, and other European colonisers , have a historical guilt, this implies that the current French population must carry guilt implicitly; you fail to do the same for Islamic colonisation, therefore you are a hypocrite.

[Mericoa]

The Religion of Peace strikes again.
And the media will do same bullshit that they all ways do " Not all Muslims" Islam is Peace" and "Pray for Nice" But i know that a lot of Muslim do not support this but lot of them do like
90% Muslim Teens in Brussels call jadiist hero, 23% Uk Muslims want Sharia,27% Young French Muslims back ISIS. Islam needs to change.

[Novus America]

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

To gain power and so that we control their oil.

Except we lost power and never got any of their oil. Which we do not need anyway.

[The Celtic British Isles]

MONEY MONEY MONEY! Saddam had tons of oil, but also backed up his currency with gold. Qaddafi did the same with his currency, also Libya just had massive gold reserves in general

Which we don't seem to be getting any of.

It's not about GETTING the gold, it is about making sure THEY don't back their currency up with it. Saddam also only traded with nations that would trade in GOLD backed currency, so he would not sell oil to nations that paid in USD, So america put on its freedom hat and decided to put in a government that would not do that

[Unified Governments]

Well, now that you mention it, that would definitely be nice, yes.



You're a little behind the times.






Gonna need some facts and specifics for that one, because Catholicism is certainly not anti-science as a whole

Don't forget that time the Catholics completely dismissed science for centuries and required Muslim scholars to rewrite their classics, advance math and science, and then give it back to them. But Islam is a stupid religion for violent stupid people, unlike the constantly warring (and comparatively poor) Catholics of medieval Europe.

Oh wait, the violence of medieval Europe corresponded with its poverty and focused on consolidation of political power with religion as a faulty pretext just like modern Islam!

Riiigghhhtttt, so because several hundred years ago that happened in Catholicism that somehow justifies what's going on now? Thanks for the history overview, but can we please focus on modern times? Why are medieval practices occurring today? And why are you so hellbent on defending Islam?

[Stucco Houses]

I've never said that at all. In fact, I remember saying quite clearly that all colonialism is bad, but that it's clear that European colonialism has far more influenced the current global power structure.

You've constantly dismissed the actions of Islamic colonialism as not 'worse', and you maybe correct, however you go on to say that France, and other European colonisers , have a historical guilt, this implies that the current French population must carry guilt implicitly.

Yes, it is certain that European powers have caused terrorism by their strategic exploitation of the other peoples of the world. That doesn't mean I condone terrorism, nor that I think French people deserve to pay for the guilt of people they have little to do with. Simply that there is an easy cause and effect that blames, not Middle Easterners nor French people, but rather inequality for the plight of all groups.

[Patridam]

Don't forget that time the Catholics completely dismissed science for centuries and required Muslim scholars to rewrite their classics, advance math and science, and then give it back to them. But Islam is a stupid religion for violent stupid people, unlike the constantly warring (and comparatively poor) Catholics of medieval Europe.

Oh wait, the violence of medieval Europe corresponded with its poverty and focused on consolidation of political power with religion as a faulty pretext just like modern Islam!

If we accept your twisted view that all violence comes from people being poor (never mind the fact that wealthy nations are often violent, often in the pursuit of further wealth), then what exactly do you do to solve the poverty and magically make all muslims middle class nonreligious peaceniks?

Aid? Western countries are going bankrupt, can barely help themselves, and whenever we make infrastructure for them it inevtiably gets blown up. Plus aid is imperailism, which is ebul!

[Novus America]

So why do we keep wanting to bump off dictators like Qaddafi and Assad?

MONEY MONEY MONEY! Saddam had tons of oil, but also backed up his currency with gold. Qaddafi did the same with his currency, also Libya just had massive gold reserves in general

So where is the money? We lost money on Iraq.

It was misguided and stupid. But not about money to for the US. It only hurt us.

[Stucco Houses]

Don't forget that time the Catholics completely dismissed science for centuries and required Muslim scholars to rewrite their classics, advance math and science, and then give it back to them. But Islam is a stupid religion for violent stupid people, unlike the constantly warring (and comparatively poor) Catholics of medieval Europe.

Oh wait, the violence of medieval Europe corresponded with its poverty and focused on consolidation of political power with religion as a faulty pretext just like modern Islam!

Riiigghhhtttt, so because several hundred years ago that happened in Catholicism that somehow justifies what's going on now? Thanks for the history overview, but can we please focus on modern times? Why are medieval practices occurring today? And why are you so hellbent on defending Islam?

Because the history overview I provided you with shows that the underlying factors behind terrorism are poverty and political instability, not any creed.

The reason I'm hellbent on defending Islam is because Islam and Muslims are not to blame for terrorism, poverty and colonialism are. That's how we really stop terrorism, not by playing to the fear and bigotry that empower terrorist groups but by combating the factors that let them get powerful.