Truck Drives Through Crowd in Nice, France

[The Lone Alliance]

You know, I always wondered how long it'd take before someone did something like this... I hate being right.

The insinuation that Islam is culturally backward is ignorant and bigoted. I will not debate it.

Sorry it's also true.

[Islamic Empire of Europe and Arabia]

"Don't aide Muslims, don't aide refugees." My God you are dumb, you are either incredibly racist and Islamophobic, or incredibly stupid. What do you think the refugees and impoverished Muslims are going to do when they see that the west truly is bent on their destruction? THEY WILL TAKE ARMS AGAINST THE WEST! In my experience, people like you claim that we play the victim, when in fact YOU are playing the victim. You march into their countries, take their resources, enslave the population, terrorize the rest, and when they do the same to you you cry "terrorist!" Well yes, but aren't you the terrorist as well?

How many slaves were in Imperator Hollande's Triumph following Operation Serval?

Also, how many aircraft carriers have these refugees got?

NONE! Who said they have aircraft carriers? And France had no right to be in Mali in the first place!

[Gauthier]

Some people are always going to treat people like shit, in every and any country, with or without Le Penn.

Le Sean Penn?

He's too busy hiding from El Chapo.

[Confederation de Shyra]

I am a Frenchman , just watched RMC Découverte which is broadcasting a special breakfast news session , and just a few minutes ago they said the official death count was now of exactly 84 people dead and about twenty persons in critical health condition , according to the official spokesperson of the Interior Ministry.

This is awful.

Absolutely disgusting and awful, indeed . Quite a lot of TV channels are broadcasting special news session about this attack and those who do not have a special session at least put a " bandeau " on the screen with the news scrolling .
We're expecting a press conference in a few hours , and for the moment there are only the " témoignages " of the folks on the scene .
They say they were dozens of bodies on the ground ; they showed on TV the frontpage of the local newspaper, Nice-Matin , for this morning ...
It shows a child puppet on the foreground with white tissues on bodies as far as the horizon goes , guarded by crying police(wo)men ...

[Islamic Empire of Europe and Arabia]

In a word, terrorism is absolutely as rampant in South America and Asia.

The insinuation that Islam is culturally backward is ignorant and bigoted. I will not debate it.

The fact that you can't see it is astounding, A religion that treats women as half a man, A religion that encourages its followers to kill non-believers and gays, A religion that stones a women after she was raped is a culturally backwards religion.

I can provide quotes from the Quran itself if you like.

Where the hell are you getting this. Islam does not treat a women as half a man. We are not encouraged to kill non believers and gays. I never heard about killing gays (unless there are four male witnesses to the fact that two men are engaged in homosexual activity- do you know how hard that is? Last I checked, Christianity did not love gays either...) the verse about killing disbelievers was circumstantial. Nothing in Islam says stone a women after she is raped. She provides evidence, the perp is killed.

[Stadenwick]

How many slaves were in Imperator Hollande's Triumph following Operation Serval?

Also, how many aircraft carriers have these refugees got?

NONE! Who said they have aircraft carriers? And France had no right to be in Mali in the first place!

BUT MUH IMPERIALISM!

[Othelos]

The fact that you can't see it is astounding, A religion that treats women as half a man, A religion that encourages its followers to kill non-believers and gays, A religion that stones a women after she was raped is a culturally backwards religion.

I can provide quotes from the Quran itself if you like.

Last I checked, Christianity did not love gays either...

Depends on the denomination.

[Dameth]

NONE! Who said they have aircraft carriers? And France had no right to be in Mali in the first place!

BUT MUH IMPERIALISM!

> Malian government is retarded
> Muh revolution, let's destroy our standing army, because our local militias don't like them
> All those tuaregs in the north, shit, where is our army
> All our militias are disbanding and ISIS is joining the Tuaregs
> How can this happen ! France help !
> Ok now it's over let's revert back to hating the dirty colonialist

Fuck.

[Braecland]

You're kidding, right? You're using medieval Europe as an example for what is going on today? Tell me, if poverty and colonialism are to blame, why is terrorism not also rampant in South America or Asia for that matter? This level of terrorism is unique to the Middle East, especially considering that the Middle East by and large tends to be a middle income area. The Middle East is simply culturally backwards. Islam has yet to go through a Reformation or and Enlightenment like Christianity did.

In a word, terrorism is absolutely as rampant in South America and Asia.

The insinuation that Islam is culturally backward is ignorant and bigoted. I will not debate it.

Islam is culturally backward. From the death penalty for being gay, the stoning of raped women, the forced wearing of head covers to honour killings, forced marriages, blasphemy laws, jihadis, global terrorism carried out in it's name. Ever heard of any of this? You cannot say that these are not found in Islam and Islamic countries around the world.

So tell me, which argument is more ignorant?

[Aryavartha]

Definitely a terror attack, timing pretty much says it.

Now I'm waiting for a Trump tweet doubling down on calling for armed civilians and ejection of all suspected Muslims.

80 people died and your first worry is "islamophobia"

[New Chalcedon]

Wealthy nations are statistically less violent than poor ones.

The fact is that there is no easy way to end world poverty, but we can start by identifying colonialist practices and stopping them and seeking more equitable societies and international relations. I don't have all the answers for you, but jumping to bigotry is not one of them, and interventionism is not another.

Hell, if you're method of dealing with the problem terrorism is solving the impossible to solve problem of globabl poverty, gee, why don't you share that with the US government!

Why is it impossible? No, really. The end to global poverty is within our reach; the single biggest obstacle to it now is corporate greed.

Hell you could sooner remove Islam from existance than you could remove global poverty. And removing islam is a shoe in to stop islamic terror, whereas the results of removing poverty is up in the air.

And removing Christianity is a "shoo-in" to stop bombings of abortion clinics. Yet somehow, I never see that mentioned as a solution...

And believe it or not colonialism isn't the source of global poverty.

Source? No. But it is undeniable that colonialism exacerbated poverty, deliberately hindered economic development (imperial economics was built on the concept of colonies producing raw materials & shipping them to the imperial heartland, which would use them to manufacture finished goods - leading to imperial powers deliberately discouraging industrialization in their colonies) and created hosts of social ills, especially through their frequently-used "divide and rule" policies.

Hell, it probably has made plenty of colonies richer and more developed in a shorter time than they ever would have done now,

Name one. Just one. Even "model colonies" would have almost certainly done better without the "benevolent" oversight of their imperial power.

in which case continued failure of ex colonial countries to succeed economical by themselves is just them falling back to where they would have been without colonialism in the first place.

Conjecture. What's more, conjecture totally unsupported by even inferential evidence.

So, if interventionism is not a solution, well, we just let ISIS grow and don't try to stop them, don't help those who fight back against them, don't provide aid to the impoverished Muslims, don't take any refugees (is that non interventionism, not taking refugees? Or is taking infinite refugees non interventionism?) just go all star trek prime directive on them even as they blow our civilians up every other week as they slowly engulf the entire middle east and probably Europe. Great, I'm sure they'll work it out eventually, probably about 50 years after the world is destroyed by nuclear fire.

What a pathetic strawman of an argument. To take it apart in order:

So, if interventionism is not a solution

Careless interventionism is certainly not a solution. Thinking that we can impose Western ideas of civic society at bayonet-point is not a solution. That way of thinking was attempted in Iraq, and led to ISIS' very formation.

we just let ISIS grow and don't try to stop them

By bombing their chief opponents, the Assad regime. Remind me, how does the Western world's effort at removing Assad help stop ISIS?

don't provide aid to the impoverished Muslims,

You're arguing for that exact policy, at least by inference, when arguing that attempts to end global poverty are futile. Make up your mind.

don't take any refugees (is that non interventionism, not taking refugees? Or is taking infinite refugees non interventionism?)

What nonsense. Ever hear of this thing called a "happy middle ground"? Ever hear of providing support to refugees as they resettle, to help them integrate (no, I don't mean throwing money at them - I mean providing counseling, assistance in learning the local language, enrolling their kids in integrated schools, etc. etc.)?

Didn't think so.

just go all star trek prime directive on them even as they blow our civilians up every other week as they slowly engulf the entire middle east and probably Europe.

Your alarmism is as pathetic as it is uninformed. Just remember: Right now, by attempting to overthrow Assad, the West is aiding ISIS. No, seriously: Attacking ISIS' enemy #1 is effectively aiding them. Hence, calls for a change in policy.

When the usa was on the gold standard inflation was low.

1) Not really:



Please note that since Volcker brought inflation under control in the early 1980s, inflation has been historically low and stable.

2) When the USA was on the gold standard, electronics accounted for far less usage of gold. With that as a competing use for gold, returning to the gold standard would be absurdly deflationary as less currency-available gold attempts to cover more output. On top of that, the prices of almost all electronics would spike, resulting in (paradoxically) an inflationary spike followed by long, steady deflation.

We dropped gold backed currency for a reason. There is not nearly enough gold to back it. You would have to make the gold value so absurdly below the face value as to be pointless.

Plus gold prices are very unstable. Your currency would rapidly inflate and deflate.

Ok, but is currency backed up by NOTHING more stable then currency backed up by GOLD

Yes. See the graph above. Remember: all it would take would be discovery of a major gold deposit (or, conversely, news that one had been tapped out) to send a gold-backed currency yo-yo'ing all over the place. Not to mention, what happens if/when asteroid mining (which is being researched by many different concerns) becomes viable?

[Braecland]

The fact that you can't see it is astounding, A religion that treats women as half a man, A religion that encourages its followers to kill non-believers and gays, A religion that stones a women after she was raped is a culturally backwards religion.

I can provide quotes from the Quran itself if you like.

Where the hell are you getting this. Islam does not treat a women as half a man. We are not encouraged to kill non believers and gays. I never heard about killing gays (unless there are four male witnesses to the fact that two men are engaged in homosexual activity- do you know how hard that is? Last I checked, Christianity did not love gays either...) the verse about killing disbelievers was circumstantial. Nothing in Islam says stone a women after she is raped. She provides evidence, the perp is killed.

Do Christians throw gays off buildings or hang them from cranes? Also, do you deny that in some muslim countries, raped women are stoned to death for adultery if they do not provide numerous male witnesses?

[Felrik]

The fact that you can't see it is astounding, A religion that treats women as half a man, A religion that encourages its followers to kill non-believers and gays, A religion that stones a women after she was raped is a culturally backwards religion.

I can provide quotes from the Quran itself if you like.

Where the hell are you getting this. Islam does not treat a women as half a man. We are not encouraged to kill non believers and gays. I never heard about killing gays (unless there are four male witnesses to the fact that two men are engaged in homosexual activity- do you know how hard that is? Last I checked, Christianity did not love gays either...) the verse about killing disbelievers was circumstantial. Nothing in Islam says stone a women after she is raped. She provides evidence, the perp is killed.

Quran (4:11) - (Inheritance) "The male shall have the equal of the portion of two females" (see also verse 4:176). In Islam, sexism is mathematically established.

Quran (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man's testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman's, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they make more reliable witnesses.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" - An account that is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom. Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" on the town as meaning that homosexuals should be stoned, since no other reason is given for the people's destruction. (Inexplicably, the story is also repeated in suras 15:74, 27:58 and 29:40).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ltery.html
Keep in mind that this is from a news paper I don't fully trust.

Also while Christians don't like Gay people at least they don't throw them of roofs like Muslims did.

[Islamic Empire of Europe and Arabia]

"Don't aide Muslims, don't aide refugees." My God you are dumb, you are either incredibly racist and Islamophobic, or incredibly stupid. What do you think the refugees and impoverished Muslims are going to do when they see that the west truly is bent on their destruction? THEY WILL TAKE ARMS AGAINST THE WEST! In my experience, people like you claim that we play the victim, when in fact YOU are playing the victim. You march into their countries, take their resources, enslave the population, terrorize the rest, and when they do the same to you you cry "terrorist!" Well yes, but aren't you the terrorist as well?

How did the west enslave the population, your certainly making a absurd claim there.

Is imperialistic occupation of the entire Muslim world not enslaving the population? Is dividing up their nations to keep them from binding together as a superpower not enslavement? Is installing corrupt dictators who give you all of their countries natural resources, and in turn provide poor living conditions for their people not enslavement? Lets list a few. The Saudis. The Kuwaitis. The Qataris. Now the really bad ones: Saddam Hussein for example. Back to how the west enslaved and is constantly enslaving the population: lets talk about how they plotted to reinstate the Shah of Iran when the people clearly did not want him in 1979. Lets talk about how the West (actually, I shall now start referring to the West as we) is still in Iraq and Afghanistan when most of the population clearly detests our presence. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3Z_Kskl_U) Lets talk about how we are not leaving them be, to decide their own government. Lets talk about how whenever a "terrorist organization" pops up that will likely never effect us, we feel the need to be the world police, and occupy that country. Oh, and by the way, we also indirectly or directly created nearly all of the groups we see today. (technically, we should forget Bush did 9/11. Ronald Reagan did 9/11...)

[Dameth]

Double.

[Dameth]

Do Christians throw gays off buildings or hang them from cranes? Also, do you deny that in some muslim countries, raped women are stoned to death for adultery if they do not provide numerous male witnesses?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

The Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) is also a Christian[55] Naga nationalist Militant group operating in North India.[56][57] The main aim of the organization is to establish a sovereign Christian state, "Nagalim"[58] unifying all the areas inhabited by the Naga people in Northeast India and Burma.[59] The organization's slogan is "Nagaland for Christ".[60][61][62][63][64][65] Its manifesto is based on the principle of Socialism for economic development and a Baptist Christian religious outlook ‘Nagaland for Christ’.[66] In some of their documents the NSCN has called for recognizing only Christianity in Nagalim.[67] They believe in Christian theocracy.[68] The NSCN has been declared a terrorist organisation in India under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.[69] It is believed that the organisation primarily raises funds through trafficking drugs from Burma and selling smuggled weapons to other insurgent groups in the region.[70] The group reportedly indulges in kidnapping, extortion and other terrorist activities.[71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79] NSCN is accused of carrying out the 1992–1993 ethnic cleansing of Kuki tribes in Manipur, said to have leave over 900 people dead. During that NSCN-IM operation, 350 Kuki villages were driven out and about 100,000 Kukis were turned into refugees[80]

On 3 August 2015 NSCN leader T. Muivah signed a peace accord with the Government of India in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Rajnath Singh, and NSA Ajit Doval.[81]

I'm not sayin I'm just sayin'

[Islamic Empire of Europe and Arabia]

Where the hell are you getting this. Islam does not treat a women as half a man. We are not encouraged to kill non believers and gays. I never heard about killing gays (unless there are four male witnesses to the fact that two men are engaged in homosexual activity- do you know how hard that is? Last I checked, Christianity did not love gays either...) the verse about killing disbelievers was circumstantial. Nothing in Islam says stone a women after she is raped. She provides evidence, the perp is killed.

Quran (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man's testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman's, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they make more reliable witnesses.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Read this book:https://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Life-Based-Earliest-Sources/dp/1594771537

Oh, wait you won't. Because it is Muslim propaganda. Muhammad (SAW) and his followers made a deal with the Qurash, that would allow them to go to Mecca to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca, which is not a luxury, it is an obligation. They violated the treaty, thus declaring war. They never "drove them out of their city", in fact, they allowed them to stay in peace!
For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" - An account that is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom. Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" on the town as meaning that homosexuals should be stoned, since no other reason is given for the people's destruction. (Inexplicably, the story is also repeated in suras 15:74, 27:58 and 29:40).

Well then that's the fault of the people who interpreted it isn't it?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ltery.html
Keep in mind that this is from a news paper I don't fully trust.

ISIS are not Islam, they are criminals, so I don't give a damn what they do.
Also while Christians don't like Gay people at least they don't throw them of roofs like Muslims did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_An ... _Act,_2014

[Felrik]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

The Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) is also a Christian[55] Naga nationalist Militant group operating in North India.[56][57] The main aim of the organization is to establish a sovereign Christian state, "Nagalim"[58] unifying all the areas inhabited by the Naga people in Northeast India and Burma.[59] The organization's slogan is "Nagaland for Christ".[60][61][62][63][64][65] Its manifesto is based on the principle of Socialism for economic development and a Baptist Christian religious outlook ‘Nagaland for Christ’.[66] In some of their documents the NSCN has called for recognizing only Christianity in Nagalim.[67] They believe in Christian theocracy.[68] The NSCN has been declared a terrorist organisation in India under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.[69] It is believed that the organisation primarily raises funds through trafficking drugs from Burma and selling smuggled weapons to other insurgent groups in the region.[70] The group reportedly indulges in kidnapping, extortion and other terrorist activities.[71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79] NSCN is accused of carrying out the 1992–1993 ethnic cleansing of Kuki tribes in Manipur, said to have leave over 900 people dead. During that NSCN-IM operation, 350 Kuki villages were driven out and about 100,000 Kukis were turned into refugees[80]

On 3 August 2015 NSCN leader T. Muivah signed a peace accord with the Government of India in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Rajnath Singh, and NSA Ajit Doval.[81]

I'm not sayin I'm just sayin'

Fair enough then.

[Islamic Empire of Europe and Arabia]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... mosexuals/
Some more

[Felrik]

Quran (2:282) - (Court testimony) "And call to witness, from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not found then a man and two women." Muslim apologists offer creative explanations to explain why Allah felt that a man's testimony in court should be valued twice as highly as a woman's, but studies consistently show that women are actually less likely to tell lies than men, meaning that they make more reliable witnesses.

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...
but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun(the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Read this book:https://www.amazon.com/Muhammad-Life-Based-Earliest-Sources/dp/1594771537

Oh, wait you won't. Because it is Muslim propaganda. Muhammad (SAW) and his followers made a deal with the Qurash, that would allow them to go to Mecca to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca, which is not a luxury, it is an obligation. They violated the treaty, thus declaring war. They never "drove them out of their city", in fact, they allowed them to stay in peace!
For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.... And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone)" - An account that is borrowed from the Biblical story of Sodom. Muslim scholars through the centuries have interpreted the "rain of stones" on the town as meaning that homosexuals should be stoned, since no other reason is given for the people's destruction. (Inexplicably, the story is also repeated in suras 15:74, 27:58 and 29:40).

Well then that's the fault of the people who interpreted it isn't it?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ltery.html
Keep in mind that this is from a news paper I don't fully trust.

ISIS are not Islam, they are criminals, so I don't give a damn what they do.
Also while Christians don't like Gay people at least they don't throw them of roofs like Muslims did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_An ... _Act,_2014

Already read the book.

Doesn't change the fact that I put quotes that are directly from the Quran right in front of you.

[Braecland]

Definitely a terror attack, timing pretty much says it.

Now I'm waiting for a Trump tweet doubling down on calling for armed civilians and ejection of all suspected Muslims.

80 people died and your first worry is "islamophobia"

Well we wouldn't want dead innocent people to overshadow Gauthier's motherly virtue signalling concern for muslims now would we?

[Felrik]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/19/gaffe-century-nyt-says-st-paul-ordered-christians-execute-homosexuals/
Some more

Yes while this will forever taint my view of him, doesn't change the fact that Christians aren't the ones throwing gay people of roofs.

[The East Marches]

Your flakiness and unwillingness to debate is not on racism or whether we should oppress brown people. It is on the fundamental ideals which underpin your ideology. That is what I wish to debate. You will not defend them because you can't defend them. You'd rather cry "racist" and take the easy route out.

I have always provided sources for my claims as well as solid examples. It is not baseless in the slightest. I will not step off you until you address the accusations made to both myself and those of us in the West by your broad brushstroke of guilt. Your insult to those who live in the poverty countries by claiming they all lack agency and can't decide why they do things. If anybody is a racist here, it is yourself.

I've very much debated the underpinnings of my ideology, like opposition to colonialism and focus on root causes rather than jumping to the familiar arms of racism when scary brown people do scary brown things. Sorry, but sometimes when racism gets called on you, it's your fault, not the stupid dumb liberal's for insinuating that maybe you've said something racist.

Oh, the classic "liberals are the real racists for saying that maybe brown people are poor because white people stole all their things". I'm not denying anyone agency, just saying that terrorism happens because of the languishing poverty left in the wake of colonialist activities like the US war in Iraq which directly led to the foundation and prosperity of ISIS.

Don't for a second think you've got the facts on me. The facts say all human beings are largely the same and only our situations define us. Muslims are not dumb and neither their religion nor their ethnicity makes them terrorize.

Its not racism to realize that ideology is the driving factor behind the sustained opposition of insurgencies. You can't shoot ideas. This is what I have been trying to explain to you but you seem to not understand. Its not racist to point that out. I've explained how it exists in Northern Ireland, I've explained how money does not automatically make you immune to stupid ideas. I've not said it doesn't apply to white people. What I have said is that you are trying to disguise the weakness in your argument by crying "racism" when it suits you.

You are infact denying people agency by putting all their wrong doing on environment alone. You continually defend this narrative that the brown person is some how inferior and can't control their emotions/reasoning.

Dude, you posted a guy and defend the view that black people are unironically more oppressed today than they were under slavery. I've got plenty of facts on you and your retarded ideas. Brown people can do no wrong, brown people who don't agree with you (like myself) are Uncle Tom's and everybody is shaped only by environment. Agency does not exist.

[New Chalcedon]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

The Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN)*snips Wiki article*

I'm not sayin I'm just sayin'

The Nagalim? Pikers. Try the Lord's Resistance Army on for size.

[NERVUN]

You're delusional, I should've noticed you're a Nazi before even attempting to respond to your claims.

"Don't aide Muslims, don't aide refugees." My God you are dumb, you are either incredibly racist and Islamophobic, or incredibly stupid. What do you think the refugees and impoverished Muslims are going to do when they see that the west truly is bent on their destruction? THEY WILL TAKE ARMS AGAINST THE WEST! In my experience, people like you claim that we play the victim, when in fact YOU are playing the victim. You march into their countries, take their resources, enslave the population, terrorize the rest, and when they do the same to you you cry "terrorist!" Well yes, but aren't you the terrorist as well?

Both of you, *** One day ban for flamming ***.