American Consulate Officer Killed, Libya

[Icarus]

Timothy McVeigh

McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City wasn't done in the name of religion, though. It was, in his mind, payback for how the government handled the Waco Siege back in 1993.

 

Furthermore, McVeigh wrote before his death that he was an agnostic.

[Typhus]

 

Let's not act like we are the good civilized guys cause we are not.

Compared to people willing to kill over a movie, I'd say that we're clearly superior.

But by all means, keep defending murderous bigots.

To be fair, from the years 1991 to 2003 (when the figures were released) the TV event that garnered the most complaints in the UK was a showing of The Last Temptation of Christ. Not the mention the fire bomb attacks on Saint Michel theatre in Paris because it showed the film.

 

Just saying, while Christian fundamental extremists might not be as violent as extremists from other religions, they aren't pacifists who don't get fired up about art..

You're right of course, but my point is that using incidents like this to take a shot at another religion is usually an intentional ploy to divert attention from the real culprits.

There are certain elements who consistently defend Islamic extremists because of how much they hate Western civilisation. Constantly trying to cast us as the monsters even as their Jihadist pals show themselves willing to commit murder over a cartoon or a film.

Does that make sense? Defending misogynistic, homophobic fascists and still having the audacity to call another culture barbaric?

 

When things like this happen, we should be judgemental, we should provoke them and we should be angry. The sheer effrontery, to believe that they can simply murder people and all those nasty criticisms of their religion will just disappear. This is not how adults act, this is the mentality of a spoiled little girl crying because someone told her that fairies weren't real.

It's pathetic and deep down you all know it's pathetic.

 

So why defend them? Why continue this masochistic cycle of questioning your own values when faced with obvious, naked cruelty? Is it so hard to accept that they're bad people? Do we have to take this weak, insipid view that 'there are no bad people, just different opinions'?

 

We rightly judge the likes of David Koresh and Jim Jones as charlatans and parasites, but why is it that when it's some mob of Islamists we hear the same dreary line of excuses again and again? Why can't we just call a horse a horse and stop defending the indefensible?

[El Zilcho]

 

When things like this happen, we should be judgemental, we should provoke them and we should be angry. The sheer effrontery, to believe that they can simply murder people and all those nasty criticisms of their religion will just disappear. This is not how adults act, this is the mentality of a spoiled little girl crying because someone told her that fairies weren't real.

It's pathetic and deep down you all know it's pathetic.

 

So why defend them? Why continue this masochistic cycle of questioning your own values when faced with obvious, naked cruelty? Is it so hard to accept that they're bad people? Do we have to take this weak, insipid view that 'there are no bad people, just different opinions'?

 

We rightly judge the likes of David Koresh and Jim Jones as charlatans and parasites, but why is it that when it's some mob of Islamists we hear the same dreary line of excuses again and again? Why can't we just call a horse a horse and stop defending the indefensible?

Absolutely spot on. Barbaric and backward customs that cause as volatile reactions as we see from the Islamist's should be derided, laughed at and positively picked apart in full view of the public. Christianity is much less harmful and it is consistently marginalised (and in my opinion, as a religion, this is for a good reason). Yet Islam is a sort of violent, rampant elephant in the room. It's stamping all over everyone, but we're seemingly scared to challenge it as we would our own customs for fear of provocation or political incorrectness. That isn't free speech, nor is it the correct attitude that challenged the Church and advanced us all so many years ago.

[Captain VXR]

Timothy McVeigh

McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City wasn't done in the name of religion, though. It was, in his mind, payback for how the government handled the Waco Siege back in 1993.

 

Furthermore, McVeigh wrote before his death that he was an agnostic.

Ok I'll take that one back but the others still stand.

[Robinski]

You're right of course, but my point is that using incidents like this to take a shot at another religion is usually an intentional ploy to divert attention from the real culprits.

There are certain elements who consistently defend Islamic extremists because of how much they hate Western civilisation. Constantly trying to cast us as the monsters even as their Jihadist pals show themselves willing to commit murder over a cartoon or a film.

Does that make sense? Defending misogynistic, homophobic fascists and still having the audacity to call another culture barbaric?

 

When things like this happen, we should be judgemental, we should provoke them and we should be angry. The sheer effrontery, to believe that they can simply murder people and all those nasty criticisms of their religion will just disappear. This is not how adults act, this is the mentality of a spoiled little girl crying because someone told her that fairies weren't real.

It's pathetic and deep down you all know it's pathetic.

 

So why defend them? Why continue this masochistic cycle of questioning your own values when faced with obvious, naked cruelty? Is it so hard to accept that they're bad people? Do we have to take this weak, insipid view that 'there are no bad people, just different opinions'?

 

We rightly judge the likes of David Koresh and Jim Jones as charlatans and parasites, but why is it that when it's some mob of Islamists we hear the same dreary line of excuses again and again? Why can't we just call a horse a horse and stop defending the indefensible?

Yeah, I didn't mean to put words in anyone's mouth. I don't think anyone's in the topic has attacked any person or group specifically because of their religion. I just wanted to make sure nobody singled out Islam as the problem here. The problem here is extremism, hate and the willingness to use violence instead of discourse. These things aren't anchored to a particular religion.

 

It should go without saying but it's these specific people that were/are the problem rather than anything inherent in the religion (as evidenced by the millions of Muslims functioning perfectly well in Western countries). These type of people exist in all religions (e.g. the Christian example I gave).

 

I know the type of people you mean, though. I'm sure a lot of people here would say I'm one of them because of the extent that I criticise most types of nationalism in Britain and the US but don't rag on other societies around the world, but that's only because I know I don't know sh*t about them. The sort of views those people advocate generally results from an imbalance in how closely they scrutinise each side: they know a sh*t load about Western culture and as such see all the imperfections clearly, but are willing to gloss over those on the other side because they don't know it well at all. These sorts of people only reveal themselves to be ignorant and uneducated about what it really is they're talking about.

[El Zilcho]

Can we really defend a faith that has such a disproportionate amount of extremists? I can't think of any religions that come near Islam in these terms, and this isn't something we can magic away to make ourselves feel better about such demographics... Islam is as barbaric as Christianity was 800 years ago, detached from a modern, liberalising or moderate influence. If anything, extremism seems to be gaining speed. And it's making citizens of many of these countries live an existence of horrific proportions: Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia to name a few. Of course they aren't all bad, but again, what other cultural influences create so many theological conflicts and death today?

Edited September 12, 2012 by El Zilcho

[Robinski]

Personally I think it's less to do with the religion and more to do with the societies that are home to it. I don't mean this to deride any group or country, but most of the Islamic nations are either only just catching up to, or rather converging on, (traditionally Christian) Western countries in terms of acceptance of capitalism and more liberal ideals. Just look back at how oppressive Christianity was before the advent of the Western market: witch trials, burning homosexuals, the works. And that was when there was no external enemy. Throw in the encroachment of alien ideologies (both militarily and economically) and violence is bound to flare up with more regularity.

 

Haha, reading this post back I guess I my opinion is that I don't give capitalism enough credit in how much freedom it has brought us. But that said, in answer to:

 

Of course they aren't all bad, but again, what other cultural influences create so many theological conflicts and death today?

I'd have to say money. EDIT:Woops. Turns out I'm an idiot who can't see the word "theological".

 

Bear in mind that I have literally zero actual education on any of these things, this entire post is purely personal conjecture.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Robinski

[El Zilcho]

 

Personally I think it's less to do with the religion and more to do with the societies that are home to it. I don't mean this to deride any group or country, but most of the Islamic nations are either only just catching up to, or rather converging on, (traditionally Christian) Western countries in terms of acceptance of capitalism and more liberal ideals. Just look back at how oppressive Christianity was before the advent of the Western market: witch trials, burning homosexuals, the works. And that was when there was no external enemy. Throw in the encroachment of alien ideologies (both militarily and economically) and violence is bound to flare up with more regularity.

 

Haha, reading this post back I guess I my opinion is that I don't give capitalism enough credit in how much freedom it has brought us. But that said, in answer to:

 

Of course they aren't all bad, but again, what other cultural influences create so many theological conflicts and death today?

I'd have to say money.

 

Bear in mind that I have literally zero actual education on any of these things, this entire post is purely personal conjecture.

Money is the only practical method of exchanging value, so I can't agree it has a worse influence. As a symbol of humanity vying for material goods, (which of course is a larger issue as it is a universal one) it is relevant. But again, it is a sign of greed and a multi-faceted issue of how altruistic we are / should be morally. All very subjective. EDIT: And just saw your mistake there too lol, still, worship the dollar and all that?

 

Islam isn't. It is quite blatantly a bane on the existence of millions, responsible for prolonging ignorance, violence and practices which should have long ago been consigned to a historical scrapheap. Although I am obviously speaking with some antipathy on religions as a whole, we can argue Buddhism, modern Christianity and other lesser religions are harmless within secular societies. Not only is Islam volatile within secular areas, but it propagates the disgusting practice of modern day theocracies, or at least religiously legislated countries. There is no case for open aggression towards it, or hatred to its practitioners. But anyone who unreasonably attacks Western people or institutions for very truthfully critiquing its role in the modern world deserves the full force of condemnation and vilification.

Edited September 12, 2012 by El Zilcho

[Typhus]

I know the type of people you mean, though. I'm sure a lot of people here would say I'm one of them because of the extent that I criticise most types of nationalism in Britain and the US but don't rag on other societies around the world, but that's only because I know I don't know sh*t about them. The sort of views those people advocate generally results from an imbalance in how closely they scrutinise each side: they know a sh*t load about Western culture and as such see all the imperfections clearly, but are willing to gloss over those on the other side because they don't know it well at all. These sorts of people only reveal themselves to be ignorant and uneducated about what it really is they're talking about.

I don't consider myself nationalistic either. It's not that that these people are anti-patriotic but, as I said, masochistic. That's the only way I can describe it.

Here they sit, in a free nation, enjoying free speech, with almost completely private access to information, they can vote, minorities are respected, those with different sexual orientations are protected. We live in a golden age, a new enlightenment. A world of tolerance and stunning technological advances.

 

And yet, they call us savages. They call us barbaric. Us.

And they call us these things when comparing us to these backwards Philistines. These women haters and purveyors of ignorance. The kind of people who beat children in the street for merely wearing the wrong clothes. The kind of people so perverse that they banned ice cream because the action of eating it reminded them of a sexual act. So intellectually stunted that they banned chess.

The Jihadists are the heirs of Cromwell and Savonarola. They are lunatics and hucksters, nothing more.

 

So what, apart from masochism, could cause a Westerner to defend them? It must stem from self-hatred. Because we have given them everything, we have given our people a quality of life that makes them the envy of the entire planet and they would defend the right of uneducated thugs to murder, rape and suppress human thought.

 

You're right, this is not about any one religion. Rather, the problem lies with a world that has seemingly lost all sense of self respect. How shameful it is to see terror and brutality met with appeasement and grovelling apologies.

[GTA_stu]

 

Timothy McVeigh

McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City wasn't done in the name of religion, though. It was, in his mind, payback for how the government handled the Waco Siege back in 1993.

 

Furthermore, McVeigh wrote before his death that he was an agnostic.

Ok I'll take that one back but the others still stand.

Breivik was a far-right extremist. Religion was a small contributing factor in his actions, but he can't really be described as having committed his actions based on religious grounds. At the core of his beliefs was a hatred of Muslims and a hatred of multiculturalism, he was more bothered about ethnicity and European nationalism than he was about religion. He wasn't a Christian fundamentalist, far from it.

 

In his manifesto he even stated "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie". He also criticised Christian missionaries in India and praised Indian nationalism.

 

And the conflict in Northern Ireland is not a religious one. It is at it's heart a political one. Nationalists are mainly composed of Catholics because that was the predominant denomination of the native Irish, whereas the immigrants sent by the British and the British supporters were Protestant. It's a conflict between 2 differing political movements, and has very little to do with religion. They may be Christian but they don't commit their acts based on anything to do with that.

[Moth]

Also The_mittani gamer was killed, he was in the Embassy too.

No he wasn't. The Mittani knew one of the guys that got killed in the attack. The guy who got killed was named Vile Rat aka Sean Smith.

 

There was an interview with the Mittani here

[Robinski]

 

Breivik was a far-right extremist. Religion was a small contributing factor in his actions, but he can't really be described as having committed his actions based on religious grounds. At the core of his beliefs was a hatred of Muslims and a hatred of multiculturalism, he was more bothered about ethnicity and European nationalism than he was about religion. He wasn't a Christian fundamentalist, far from it.

 

In his manifesto he even stated "I'm not going to pretend I'm a very religious person, as that would be a lie". He also criticised Christian missionaries in India and praised Indian nationalism.

 

And the conflict in Northern Ireland is not a religious one. It is at it's heart a political one. Nationalists are mainly composed of Catholics because that was the predominant denomination of the native Irish, whereas the immigrants sent by the British and the British supporters were Protestant. It's a conflict between 2 differing political movements, and has very little to do with religion. They may be Christian but they don't commit their acts based on anything to do with that.

It's pretty clear he had that list tucked away in his head for whenever a vague need for "Religious Christian killers" list popped up. It makes me seem like a big head but I think if you want to draw a parallel to this with Christian violence the example I posted earlier with the Saint Michel theatre is probably as close as you'll get.

 

For anyone who doesn't know (I didn't before I looked it up today), the theatre was showing this film called The Last Temptation of Christ. This is essentially some very well crafted Bible fanfiction: while on the cross Jesus is offered life as a mortal man by a child who later turns out to be the devil. In his remaining life he does some things like marry Mary Madelene, shag her, kiss some men on the lips and build crosses, presumably for the Romans to crucify people on (just going off what I'm reading, I haven't seen it btw). Obviously, this didn't sit well with Christian fundamentalists, and one particular group in France, heavily linked with the French National Front, decided to firebomb one of the theatres showing the film. Many were injured, some serious. It was the worst of many attacks that included other theatres being hit with teargas and moviegoers being assaulted when leaving the theatre.

 

So yeah, if anyone wants to compare this incident to a violent retaliation to inflammatory artistic work done by Christians, use the St. Michel one. It's probably the most similar, despite not being an attack on governments and nobody being killed.

 

Can't be comparing apples to oranges now, can we?

Edited September 12, 2012 by Robinski

[Doc Rikowski]

 

Let's not act like we are the good civilized guys cause we are not.

Compared to people willing to kill over a movie, I'd say that we're clearly superior.

But by all means, keep defending murderous bigots.

If a person thinks a people/religion/culture is "clearly superior" to another, then we have a clear example of the typical western superiority complex that caused hundreds of millions of deaths in the past 10 centuries...

 

Before talking about how civilized the West is don't forget to mention how much the Islamic culture actually contributed to our own western progress by basically holding our hand and helping us leave the dark Middle Ages behind and enter the path of modernity that lead us to what we are now.

Truth is all modern cultures are the result of historical processes in which different cultures interacted and improved thanks to communication and exchange of knowledge.

Nowadays ignorant media and dishonest economical and political interests try to create in the mind of the naive average person the idea that some kind of clash of civilizations is all around us. But it's all bs fed to the masses on both sides.

 

---

 

Anyway, I'm not defending any "murderous bigot". I'm against all extremism no matter from where it comes from.

 

As I said each religion has/had its share of murderous bigots.

 

Just to make a "western superiority" example, the Vatican is one of the main shareholders of Beretta, a major weapon manufacturer.

How about that? A little classier and indirect maybe, but truth is that the Vatican makes money selling things that kill people.

When it comes to murder fueled by religion Christianity is still the undisputed number 1 in history standings. Fact, not opinion.

After all who organized the Crusades in the first place.

 

 

EDIT: "Last Temptation of Christ" is a great movie by Scorsese. I couldn't see any blasphemy when I watched it. It is actually a deeply religious and respectful film that brings people closer to religion rather than push them away.

Anyway the part of the movie that was controversial was near the end. While on the cross Jesus dreams about how his life would have been as a normal man, so he gets married and have kids (he doesn't kiss any man on the lips lol). Near the end of his dream the disciples accuse him of betraying his mission. The movie ends with Jesus still on the cross. He dies. It was just a dream. Great movie. Maybe too intelligent for the mind of a Christian bigot.

Edited September 12, 2012 by docrikowski

[GTA_stu]

I don't think anyone is denying that other religions commit violent acts in their name, but it's that Islam is just in a league of it's own in terms of the extremist element to it. That example of the theatre being firebombed and other theatres also being subject to vandalism, is one of the more notable examples of Christian fundamentalism acting violently in recent years, and there are even better examples such as the 1996 Olympic park bombing or the killing of Dr. George Tiller. Which were both committed by Christian persons and were acts which were carried out in opposition to abortion.

 

Those examples are very rare and exceptional, whereas Islamic extremism and Islamic extremist violence is much more widespread and occurs daily and is even state sanctioned. That's the difference. When I was living in Amsterdam I used to have a friend in my class named Lieuwe, I went round to his house a couple of times to play and he came to mine. In 2004 his father, Theo Van Gogh, was assassinated by a Muslim man who disagreed with his outspoken and critical views of Islam. He shot him in the middle of a busy street, tried to decapitate him and pinned notes to his body containing the usual Islamic denunciations of western culture.

 

When a Danish newspaper printed pictures of the prophet Muhammad, and other organisations reprinted them in support, the reaction on the part of Muslims was incredible. The Danish embassy in Pakistan was bombed, multiple European embassies across the Islamic world were stormed and set fire to and citizens of these countries were threatened. All that over a f*cking cartoon.

 

You can say it's just a small proportion of Muslims who carry out these acts and support them, but I honestly don't think it is. Do you really think the majority of the citizens of Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia were against the "revenge" attacks which were in response to these cartoons. I don't think they were. The majority of Muslims living in the western world maybe didn't support these acts, but they aren't the majority of Muslims worldwide.

 

 

 

 

[Adler]

Well these photos from Libya might shed some light on what they think of the attacks. This one in particular I can't help but smile at.

 

 

By the way, some photos of the embassy after the attack.

[Captain VXR]

I don't think anyone is denying that other religions commit violent acts in their name, but it's that Islam is just in a league of it's own in terms of the extremist element to it. That example of the theatre being firebombed and other theatres also being subject to vandalism, is one of the more notable examples of Christian fundamentalism acting violently in recent years, and there are even better examples such as the 1996 Olympic park bombing or the killing of Dr. George Tiller. Which were both committed by Christian persons and were acts which were carried out in opposition to abortion.

 

Those examples are very rare and exceptional, whereas Islamic extremism and Islamic extremist violence is much more widespread and occurs daily and is even state sanctioned. That's the difference. When I was living in Amsterdam I used to have a friend in my class named Lieuwe, I went round to his house a couple of times to play and he came to mine. In 2004 his father, Theo Van Gogh, was assassinated by a Muslim man who disagreed with his outspoken and critical views of Islam. He shot him in the middle of a busy street, tried to decapitate him and pinned notes to his body containing the usual Islamic denunciations of western culture.

 

When a Danish newspaper printed pictures of the prophet Muhammad, and other organisations reprinted them in support, the reaction on the part of Muslims was incredible. The Danish embassy in Pakistan was bombed, multiple European embassies across the Islamic world were stormed and set fire to and citizens of these countries were threatened. All that over a f*cking cartoon.

 

You can say it's just a small proportion of Muslims who carry out these acts and support them, but I honestly don't think it is. Do you really think the majority of the citizens of Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia were against the "revenge" attacks which were in response to these cartoons. I don't think they were. The majority of Muslims living in the western world maybe didn't support these acts, but they aren't the majority of Muslims worldwide.

It depends on the country, I reckon. Turkey, Bangladesh, Tunisia and Morocco don't strike me as being hotbeds of fundamentalism, for example. However you then have theocratic sh*tholes like Saudi Arabia and Sudan and places partly controlled by terrorists like Somalia. Places like Pakistan and Nigeria could easily become one or the other.

 

Islamic fundamentalism is quite clearly the most dangerous and hostile religious fundamentalism at the moment, however if most Muslims were scimitar waving, ranting, Wahabist, murderous mobs then the entire world, or at least large sections of it, would be a caliphate by now.

[darthYENIK]

I think it's pretty obvious from what I've seen that most of the Islamic world has condemned these acts. I really wish more people would acknowledge that this was a conflict between dipsh*t Christians and dipsh*t Muslims(not saying that all Christians and muslims are dipsh*ts, a very small percentage are), that sadly ended in the deaths of people who were neither dipsh*ts or Chistians/Muslims.

 

I just hope that the perpetrators are caught and punished.

 

As for the people who made the film. They're definitely assholes. But they have the right to make that film. There are few political issues I am passionate about, but freedom of speech is one of them. And I believe those cocksuckers did nothing illegal.

[Captain VXR]

As much as the "SPORT ARE TROOP'S" EDL etc brigade disgust me, they do have their right to freedom of speech, and Islamic fundamentalist morons too should have the right to peacefully protest that the video insulted their beliefs.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if these murders lead to some American skinhead killing innocent Muslims (or Sikhs they believe to be Muslims) in retaliation, too.

[Bellic 4 life]

Well these photos from Libya might shed some light on what they think of the attacks. This one in particular I can't help but smile at.

 

 

By the way, some photos of the embassy after the attack.

 

This has made me gain a little hope for the world.

[Mike Tequeli]

As much as the "SPORT ARE TROOP'S" EDL etc brigade disgust me, they do have their right to freedom of speech, and Islamic fundamentalist morons too should have the right to peacefully protest that the video insulted their beliefs.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if these murders lead to some American skinhead killing innocent Muslims (or Sikhs they believe to be Muslims) in retaliation, too.

Considering there was hardly any violence of that sort after 9/11 I wouldn't count on it. There were literally a handful of attacks on Sikhs of all people, and that was it.

[GeorgieNJ]

I don't think anyone is denying that other religions commit violent acts in their name, but it's that Islam is just in a league of it's own in terms of the extremist element to it. That example of the theatre being firebombed and other theatres also being subject to vandalism, is one of the more notable examples of Christian fundamentalism acting violently in recent years, and there are even better examples such as the 1996 Olympic park bombing or the killing of Dr. George Tiller. Which were both committed by Christian persons and were acts which were carried out in opposition to abortion.

 

Those examples are very rare and exceptional, whereas Islamic extremism and Islamic extremist violence is much more widespread and occurs daily and is even state sanctioned. That's the difference. When I was living in Amsterdam I used to have a friend in my class named Lieuwe, I went round to his house a couple of times to play and he came to mine. In 2004 his father, Theo Van Gogh, was assassinated by a Muslim man who disagreed with his outspoken and critical views of Islam. He shot him in the middle of a busy street, tried to decapitate him and pinned notes to his body containing the usual Islamic denunciations of western culture.

 

When a Danish newspaper printed pictures of the prophet Muhammad, and other organisations reprinted them in support, the reaction on the part of Muslims was incredible. The Danish embassy in Pakistan was bombed, multiple European embassies across the Islamic world were stormed and set fire to and citizens of these countries were threatened. All that over a f*cking cartoon.

 

You can say it's just a small proportion of Muslims who carry out these acts and support them, but I honestly don't think it is. Do you really think the majority of the citizens of Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia were against the "revenge" attacks which were in response to these cartoons. I don't think they were. The majority of Muslims living in the western world maybe didn't support these acts, but they aren't the majority of Muslims worldwide.

It depends on the country, I reckon. Turkey, Bangladesh, Tunisia and Morocco don't strike me as being hotbeds of fundamentalism, for example. However you then have theocratic sh*tholes like Saudi Arabia and Sudan and places partly controlled by terrorists like Somalia. Places like Pakistan and Nigeria could easily become one or the other.

 

Islamic fundamentalism is quite clearly the most dangerous and hostile religious fundamentalism at the moment, however if most Muslims were scimitar waving, ranting, Wahabist, murderous mobs then the entire world, or at least large sections of it, would be a caliphate by now.

In regards to Saudi Arabia, i noticed that we never hear about them protesting or being offended because of some stupid things, whether it was quran burning, muhammad cartoons or now this movie, there never seemed to be any reactions from them and considering that SA is the most conservative islamic state i find it really surprising.

[Greenline]

In regards to Saudi Arabia, i noticed that we never hear about them protesting or being offended because of some stupid things, whether it was quran burning, muhammad cartoons or now this movie, there never seemed to be any reactions from them and considering that SA is the most conservative islamic state i find it really surprising.

It's because that place is blocked off from the rest of the world. So, they wouldn't know.

 

Another interesting thing is that the reason Islam has much more violence is because it occupies the more 'uncivilized' part of the world, mostly. For example, as another person already stated, the Christian extremists in Uganda do similar things. It's just the third world, and sadly, it happens that most of it is united under Islam.

[GTA_stu]

Another interesting thing is that the reason Islam has much more violence is because it occupies the more 'uncivilized' part of the world, mostly. For example, as another person already stated, the Christian extremists in Uganda do similar things. It's just the third world, and sadly, it happens that most of it is united under Islam.

What similar things would these be?

 

I'm not saying your point isn't true, but I think you're overplaying the significance a little bit. Poverty does in many cases lead to the adoption of more conservative ideals and beliefs due to a lack of education, as well as a tendency for those in poverty to be pulled towards religion as it appeals to those who have very little. But at the same time, it's not as though Islam holds anything like a monopoly on poverty stricken countries, there are still plenty of non-Islamic nations with large populations in poverty. And yet in these nations you don't see extremism, religious or otherwise, anywhere near the levels that you see in Islamic countries. In fact many extremists come from wealthy or educated backgrounds. The 9/11 hijackers themselves had degrees and were university educated.

[El Dildo]

religion of peace my ass.

 

bottom line is that religion makes otherwise good people do crazy things.

and unfortunately not all religions are created equal.

 

lets stop beating around the bush or trying to be politically correct and admit what we all know: Islamic fundamentalists are the worst. hands down.

sure, sometimes you get Christian fundamentalists who try to bomb an abortion doctor, but that's really as bad as they get (in modern times). Islamic fundamentalists are more extreme and out of control than anyone else.

 

you know Jesus Christ gets made fun of and parodied more than any other prophet of any other faith.

there have been more dirty jokes and dirty pictures and slanderous blasphemies committed against Jesus than the figureheads of every other religion combined. Jesus gets bitch slapped on a daily basis; especially here in the United States.

 

but you don't see Christians rioting en mass or killing innocent people indiscriminately in retaliation.

they just kind of brush it off and move on with their day.

 

why does Islam get to hold the world hostage?

why is Muhammad the only religious figurehead who is totally off limits?

why do these people get so angry when you make light of their prophet?

 

I don't have the answers, only questions.

but not all extremists are created equal. Muslims are the worst and they have no one to blame for this but themselves. they need to chill the f*ck out.

[Audiophile]

 

religion of peace my ass.

 

bottom line is that religion makes otherwise good people do crazy things.

and unfortunately not all religions are created equal.

 

lets stop beating around the bush or trying to be politically correct and admit what we all know: Islamic fundamentalists are the worst. hands down.

sure, sometimes you get Christian fundamentalists who try to bomb an abortion doctor, but that's really as bad as they get (in modern times). Islamic fundamentalists are more extreme and out of control than anyone else.

 

you know Jesus Christ gets made fun of and parodied more than any other prophet of any other faith.

there have been more dirty jokes and dirty pictures and slanderous blasphemies committed against Jesus than the figureheads of every other religion combined. Jesus gets bitch slapped on a daily basis; especially here in the United States.

 

but you don't see Christians rioting en mass or killing innocent people indiscriminately in retaliation.

they just kind of brush it off and move on with their day.

 

why does Islam get to hold the world hostage?

why is Muhammad the only religious figurehead who is totally off limits?

why do these people get so angry when you make light of their prophet?

 

I don't have the answers, only questions.

but not all extremists are created equal. Muslims are the worst and they have no one to blame for this but themselves.

I agree and the reason I agree is because I don't see any Christians or any other religion in modern times doing something like this:

 

 

I am not here to add to the flames but I just want to ask how Islamic fundamentalists can claim theirs is a religion of peace and then go and do something like this?

In addition, to burn the flags of other countries, to knock down graves of Western soldiers (saw a video of some of them knocking down Australian war graves) and do various other acts previously stated? Every religion has their extremes but in these modern times why is this tolerated and allowed? I can only imagine the uproar had this been Christians in that video or if it were Christians bombing embassies and burning flags but when Islamic fundamentalists do this it's more or less tolerated while silently judged in order to not be hit with the discrimination/racism and so on card.

 

I am sick and tired of reading about these fundamentalists doing honour killings. Just last year there was a big case in Canada over a Muslim family (the Shafia case: father, mother and son) that killed their 3 daughters and the father's first wife in a polygamous marriage. They use their religion as an excuse; that they must "avenge" their family's honour because their daughters wanted to have a Western way of life. What is so wrong with that? Why move to a Western country and then refuse to integrate and go on living under your old country's laws and views. Had it been any of us who came to a Islamic country and refused to follow their ways...well.

 

I just do not understand how a human-being can justify killing their own flesh and blood in order to restore honour to their family as a result of their religion. This is one case of many in recent years in Canada and I have read of others in the US and Australia.

 

Note: not sure if the video belongs in this discussion so if it isn't and should be removed then please let me know and I will edit it out.

[Typhus]

Let's not act like we are the good civilized guys cause we are not.

Compared to people willing to kill over a movie, I'd say that we're clearly superior.

But by all means, keep defending murderous bigots.

If a person thinks a people/religion/culture is "clearly superior" to another, then we have a clear example of the typical western superiority complex that caused hundreds of millions of deaths in the past 10 centuries...

But it's not a superiority complex, it's an accurate statement.

Our values are based on equality and tolerance. Can you say the same for the Islamic world? Tell me, how many great artists and philosophers have been eradicated due to their campaign of terror against any poor soul unlucky enough to have an idea they find 'offensive'?

It's a Hell of their own making and I will always claim we're superior when comparing us to them. As I said, we're not subjugating women to the point where they're glorified sex slaves, we're not stringing up homosexuals, we're not censoring free expression on a massive scale.

So yes, we are superior.

 

Maybe when we start stoning people to death you'll have a better time convincing me otherwise.

[GunWrath]

 

Let's not act like we are the good civilized guys cause we are not.

Compared to people willing to kill over a movie, I'd say that we're clearly superior.

But by all means, keep defending murderous bigots.

If a person thinks a people/religion/culture is "clearly superior" to another, then we have a clear example of the typical western superiority complex that caused hundreds of millions of deaths in the past 10 centuries...

 

Before talking about how civilized the West is don't forget to mention how much the Islamic culture actually contributed to our own western progress by basically holding our hand and helping us leave the dark Middle Ages behind and enter the path of modernity that lead us to what we are now.

Truth is all modern cultures are the result of historical processes in which different cultures interacted and improved thanks to communication and exchange of knowledge.

Nowadays ignorant media and dishonest economical and political interests try to create in the mind of the naive average person the idea that some kind of clash of civilizations is all around us. But it's all bs fed to the masses on both sides.

 

---

 

Anyway, I'm not defending any "murderous bigot". I'm against all extremism no matter from where it comes from.

 

As I said each religion has/had its share of murderous bigots.

 

Just to make a "western superiority" example, the Vatican is one of the main shareholders of Beretta, a major weapon manufacturer.

How about that? A little classier and indirect maybe, but truth is that the Vatican makes money selling things that kill people.

When it comes to murder fueled by religion Christianity is still the undisputed number 1 in history standings. Fact, not opinion.

After all who organized the Crusades in the first place.

 

 

EDIT: "Last Temptation of Christ" is a great movie by Scorsese. I couldn't see any blasphemy when I watched it. It is actually a deeply religious and respectful film that brings people closer to religion rather than push them away.

Anyway the part of the movie that was controversial was near the end. While on the cross Jesus dreams about how his life would have been as a normal man, so he gets married and have kids (he doesn't kiss any man on the lips lol). Near the end of his dream the disciples accuse him of betraying his mission. The movie ends with Jesus still on the cross. He dies. It was just a dream. Great movie. Maybe too intelligent for the mind of a Christian bigot.

Doc is just trying to point out that Christianity rolled as a massive violent religion in it's early days, I mean look at The Crusades.. clearly, anything standing in the way of their God or ways of Christianity, they were ordered to kill in the name of God. This was people simply against the belief or anyone against The Crusades primarily. Dark history.

 

I'm not a religious person, but I know about the bible and if there were and is a "God", he/she/it would never condone any killing in his name. Although now, Christianity still has it's past, but not it's actions. Superior to others? No, because we're not sure even if their truly is a creator.. Religion is always a grand spectacle of hate, prejudice and debate. People have different views, beliefs and some have no choice as they were born and raised into their religions.

 

Do I think the extremists are abit harsh? Absolutely, do I hate them for it? No. They have free will, just like any of us. I just wish they went about things in a more humane and reasonable way rather than death and violence. I will admit, before 9/11 I didn't understand Muslims and the extremists, then after 9/11, I've learned alot and even enlisted and witnessed it first hand. Before deployment I learned to hate them, after being over there.. I've learned there are two WAY different sides to their religion. You have the Muslim and you have the Extremists. Christianity has it's extremists as well, I call them Catholics, , atleast the devout Catholic. But I haven't seen any mobs of Catholics or Christians raid an Embassy and kill it's Ambassador, neither attack, bomb or declare holy war. (That I'm aware of anyways).

 

I do agree that I'm not afraid to say that the extremists are bad people. I despise their actions, though I do not mean, "JOIN CHRISTIANITY!" in any ways, but I'm sure the Quran is misinterpreted by their leaders. Just like, I've heard instead of 72 Virgins, that the Quran actually refers to it as, "grapes". (Not 100%, just what I've heard). I don't know.. I hate debates, especially those of religions. Y'all have fun, but keep it legit and responsible.

 

Anywho, RIP to the Ambassador and I hope the injured recover well.

[Doc Rikowski]

 

....you know Jesus Christ gets made fun of and parodied more than any other prophet of any other faith.

there have been more dirty jokes and dirty pictures and slanderous blasphemies committed against Jesus than the figureheads of every other religion combined. Jesus gets bitch slapped on a daily basis; especially here in the United States.

 

...

 

why does Islam get to hold the world hostage?

why is Muhammad the only religious figurehead who is totally off limits?

why do these people get so angry when you make light of their prophet?

 

I don't have the answers, only questions.

True, but it is also true that you'll never see Muslims bashing on Jesus in any way cause, guess what, Jesus is considered a prophet by Islam.

 

So, to answers your questions, Muslims get possibly very angry when the West or anyone else bashes their prophet cause they are very respectful of Jesus and find it very offensive that their prophet is treated like a joke. They probably find it also very offensive that the West bashes on its own prophet.

They do respect Jesus so why the West doesn't respect Mohammad?

The fact that Jesus is made fun of by his own "civilization" does it mean that every religion has to go down the same path of disrespect?

Then, if you want, you can add to the frustration level a couple of centuries of crusades, a couple of centuries of colonization crimes and the recent decades in which the West (and Soviet Union of course) systematically financed and supported all Arab dictators no matter if they were non religious (like Saddam and Gaddafi) or fundamentalist/conservative (like Saudi Arabia and all the Arabic peninsula "monarchies"). Once you did the math you might understand a little bit more why angry mobs are so common nowadays.

Damn, I would be very pissed off myself after centuries of oppression.

 

World hostage? That's just ridiculous. The West (+ China and Russia) holds pretty much hostage the rest of the world.

I don't recall any Muslim country in the Security Council...

 

----

 

 

But it's not a superiority complex, it's an accurate statement.

Our values are based on equality and tolerance. Can you say the same for the Islamic world? Tell me, how many great artists and philosophers have been eradicated due to their campaign of terror against any poor soul unlucky enough to have an idea they find 'offensive'?

It's a Hell of their own making and I will always claim we're superior when comparing us to them. As I said, we're not subjugating women to the point where they're glorified sex slaves, we're not stringing up homosexuals, we're not censoring free expression on a massive scale.

So yes, we are superior.

 

On paper they are but in the reality of facts and of history they aren't.

The West taught the world how to eradicate great artists and philosophers during the Inquisition and even in recent times quite often.

In Italy it is still very dangerous for a writer or a journalist to investigate the economical filth and the ties that the political/economical world and the church have with the Mafia.

Roberto Saviano, a writer, lives under escort still today for a book he wrote, just like Salman Rushdie.

Statistics about violence against women in the Western countries are high everywhere and we're the ones that invented and run the prolific business of child pornography.

Prostitution (read sex slavery) fueled by human trafficking is visible in every corner of any major city of Europe.

Just 50 years ago homosexuals were mass murdered in concentration camps.

Violence against homosexuals is growing and many episodes happen on a daily basis and are reported in the news.

The mainstream media are indeed censored in a way or another and every time citizens actually get together to protest about something they are beaten down by the police (I coulkd post hundreds of examples about this).

 

So yes, we are very superior... in hypocrisy.

 

Just open your eyes...

Edited September 13, 2012 by docrikowski

[Captain VXR]

 

As much as the "SPORT ARE TROOP'S" EDL etc brigade disgust me, they do have their right to freedom of speech, and Islamic fundamentalist morons too should have the right to peacefully protest that the video insulted their beliefs.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if these murders lead to some American skinhead killing innocent Muslims (or Sikhs they believe to be Muslims) in retaliation, too.

Considering there was hardly any violence of that sort after 9/11 I wouldn't count on it. There were literally a handful of attacks on Sikhs of all people, and that was it.

There were those recent murders in Wisconsin.

 

I wonder if some of the posters on this thread skipped the part with the pictures of some Muslims protesting in support of the embassy? And also, part of the reason I brought up Saudi Arabia is that I'm pretty sure I read that the mob were incited by a Saudi cleric, and the fact that lots of Islamic terrorism comes from or can be linked to Saudi people.

[Gtaghost22]

 

The kind of people so perverse that they banned ice cream because the action of eating it reminded them of a sexual act. So intellectually stunted that they banned chess.

What are you? 12? Do you really think this sh*t happens in the middle east? Wow.

Do you have muslim friends? Ever met a real muslim or interacted with one? Ever been to a middle eastern country (or any islamic country)? No, shut the hell up then, you don't know sh*t about those people to talk like this, i have a muslim mother, lots of muslim frineds and i have been to Dubai twice, Riyadh once, and more than 5 times i have visited Egypt, i know real nice muslims more than you do, don't talk sh*t about people you have never met, ok?

 

docrikowski said it best, we are very superior indeed, in hypocrisy that is, wake up and open your f*cking eyes please.