Is Islam right for Ireland?

Hector Savage

Wibbs wrote: »

I missed this post. Jeebus...



Do you really want to go down the rabbit hole of cultural equivalence regarding rape and threats to Gay folks? Really?

What utter bollocks. What skin tone(though why that's even in the bloody mix...) was the first to widely introduce democracy, women's rights, Gay rights, racial discrimination laws, bans on slavery, freedom of religion, freedom of association, freedoms of the press and speech? Just to be going on with. Indeed who are most likely to question their own cultures, like you (I assume) do? And have that freedom to do so? Who gave us the modern world? For good and ill, mostly the former. If it weren't mostly the former then why does damned near every state on the planet you'd want to live in look more European than local. Even the rogue states run by nutters and demagogues they have the veneer of the European model. North Korea for all its isolationism and hate of "Whitey" wears clothes, goes around in cars, buses, bikes and trains, uses computers, throws up buildings etc that aren't exactly "local".

Kim Jog On earlier. In his Korean car with his lackey's wearing traditional Korean clothes.


Not.

Brilliant Wibbs!!

Hector Savage

I must say reading through this thread gives me hope, it seems lots of people have sense and there is a waking up to the reality of what Islam is.

emo72

Can't believe a poll was allowed.

Omackeral

emo72 wrote: »

Can't believe a poll was allowed.

The mod is probably a straight white male.

Brae100

Omackeral wrote: »

7 people voted Yes.

As a side project. Who are your favourite posters on boards if you were to name around a half dozen :P

I like Wibbs and yourself. I suspect I am similarly aged and I tend to find myself agreeing with most points of view you both express.

SnakePlissken

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

I write in a more colloquial manner, obviously it goes over your head.

Not knowing the difference between your and you're, there and their, etc, is not writing colloquially, it's ignorance.

Furthermore, I do believe it's written in the charter that barely legible text speak is not permitted.

Omackeral

Brae100 wrote: »

I like Wibbs and yourself. I suspect I am similarly aged and I tend to find myself agreeing with most points of view you both express.

Ha I like you too! I wasn't really asking that, was wondering if people could hazard a guess as to who voted YES in the poll Or indeed if anyone has voted YES, I'd love to hear why they believe it's right for Ireland.

SnakePlissken

bubblypop wrote: »

Proof that the justice system is doing something about terrorists & their fundraisers.
Great.

2 years for fundraiser for the decapitators of men and the stoning of women is great??? FFS

end of the road

SnakePlissken wrote: »

2 years for fundraiser for the decapitators of men and the stoning of women is great??? FFS

well it's a hell of a lot better then no sentence. yes he should have got way longer but at least he is where he belongs.

Wibbs

Hector Savage wrote: »

I must say reading through this thread gives me hope, it seems lots of people have sense and there is a waking up to the reality of what Islam is.

To be fair HS and if you will bear with me; "Islam" is a very small word for a very large set of mores and cultures. For me it's a particular subset of Islam that's the issue. The hardline Saudi version to be precise. That's the version that's the problem and one that has been exported throughout the Muslim world and beyond.

The vast majority of Muslim folks aren't nutters and just want to live their lives like anyone, like you and me. Yes of late more of them will be somewhat supportive of the Saudi and old school guff, if polled anyway. There are a few reasons for that. There's a lot of geopolitical and financial shite going on for starters. The Yanks need a boogeyman and the "Arab" is a handy one. They felt lost after the Commies thought feck this and went home(note how when the Commies were in play they loved the Mujahideen). Or their military industrial complex did. 9/11 was a godsend for the bean counters. They couldn't point to the Saudis as they were "friends", even if a goodly chunk of the players in 9/11 hailed from there and were financed from there. So they looked towards Iraq and Saddam, a dick yes, but the same dick was no friend of the Saudis or Islamic terrorists. Had a lot of oil mind you. Coincidence... Apparently also had "weapons of mass destruction". Coincidence... They went into Afghanistan, but that's proving a harder nut to crack and has feck all resources. That's a sideshow they'd only be happy to leave. Watch this space...

There's a lot of history going on too. After WW1, European powers carved up the Middle East to suit themselves. And just like Germany was made the whipping boy for that conflict and Churchill and his cronies were (in)directly responsible for someone like Hitler coming along, so the parlous state of the Islamic world is down to decisions made a century ago. And more recently. Iran under that utter retard the Shah was propped up by the moneyed vested interests and plundered while his people starved. No wonder the "old ways" were so appealing in the late 70's. When dickheads rule, the people will turn to any seemingly stable alternative. Especially if it promises a return to a "better past". A man long enough in a desert will drink his own piss, only to rue the day later on.

Then look at the immigrant population themselves. Many came from imperial vassal states looking for a better life in the imperial country. One that was often promised by said country eager and in deep need of worker bees that would toil for less than the locals. QV Germany and the Turks. The first generation worked like bloody slaves to buy into that. Their kids quickly realised that they were never really going to accepted as locals by the same imperial culture. No wonder they stuck to their own and bought into the notion of a shared better past and possible better future that fitted them. Shit, look at our own history and notions like that where both the Republicans and the Unionists looked to the same Cú Chulainn as an inspiration and cultural touchstone. Ireland might have an advantage there as we weren't directly an imperial nation. But I doubt it as human nature is what it is.



As an odd tangent I grant you, one might also consider again following the money. At least in one small area. Islam prohibits usury, that is interest on loans(as does Christianity, as did the Greeks, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, Romans and Jews*). An Islamic banking system would be quite different to the Western kind and profits would take a major hit. Hmmm....







*in Judaism it was only proscribed for fellow Jews. Even then with Gentiles there was still a moral limit

AfterLife

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe you should read a few books yourself as your library seems remarkably slanted towards "White Guilt" titles.

The Japanese have had their moments for monumental butchery and empire building. China is an empire and has been for 1500 odd years. The Islamic world went on an imperial rampage throughout the Middle East and beyond and into Europe, only stopped by the French at the battle of Tours by Charles the Hammer(well cool name). The Middle East itself has been a too and fro battlefield since cut reeds were first imprinted into clay tablets five thousand years ago. That area is soaked in blood. Native Americans were taking lumps out of each for centuries and in Central and South America often very nasty cultures were forging major empires through bouts of bloodlust. Africans weren't all sitting around being noble pastoralists either.

"Whitey" actually came late to the game. Other than the Greeks and Romans who stayed pretty much "local" in Europe(Alex the Great went further but it didn't exactly last beyond his death). It was only after around the 16th century that European powers got a head of steam up for empire building and it peaked in the 19th century. Never mind that "Whitey" was beating the crap out of "Whitey" for most of Europe's history.

"Whitey". Jesus. :rolleyes: If you're not of European stock I might understand, though think your worldview binkered, If you're of European stock my question would be along the lines of WTF. I really don't know what to say about cultural self hate. No matter the culture.

Before I read another one of your boring long faux intellectual posts maybe have a look at the context of the post I was replying to.

The poster wanted to know why people want to move to where whitey lives. His words, not mine.

AfterLife

Wibbs wrote: »

What utter bollocks. What skin tone(though why that's even in the bloody mix...) was the first to widely introduce democracy, women's rights, Gay rights

Nobody in the Middle East had any issue with gays until the Brits arrived.

Brae100

AfterLife wrote: »

Nobody in the Middle East had any issue with gays until the Brits arrived.

And there we have it.....

Ulysses Gaze

AfterLife wrote: »

Nobody in the Middle East had any issue with gays until the Brits arrived.

I assume you can back that up with some evidence?

And Google it does not count as evidence.

AfterLife

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I assume you can back that up with some evidence?

And Google it does not count as evidence.

I'm not trawling through the history of law in all the Middle Eastern countries but it was a British idea that being gay was criminal.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/04/18/theresa-may-deeply-regrets-colonial-anti-lgbt-laws

We're only getting over it ourselves now lest you forget.

Wibbs

AfterLife wrote: »

Before I read another one of your boring long faux intellectual posts maybe have a look at the context of the post I was replying to.

Boring they may be, but hard facts tend to be. Emotions not so much. They're the microwaved TV dinners of discourse.

You might of course post a rebuttal of my points. Go ahead. Please. I'd welcome it. If they're so easy to rebut... Or you could go the well worn and lazier path of the strawman and the received worldview. Observe if you will; the paucity of ideas that is the near ironic certainty in the ideologue.

AfterLife wrote: »

Nobody in the Middle East had any issue with gays until the Brits arrived.

"The gays". "The Brits". Christ on a fucking bike. I take it back. I now have no idea what books reside on your personal library's shelf.

AfterLife

Wibbs wrote: »

Boring they may be, but hard facts tend to be. Emotions not so much. They're the microwaved TV dinners of discourse.

You might of course post a rebuttal of my points. Go ahead. Please. I'd welcome it. If they're so easy to rebut... Or you could go the well worn and lazier path of the strawman and the received worldview. Observe if you will; the paucity of ideas that is the near ironic certainty in the ideologue.

What was your point in relation to the post I was replying to?

In less than 17 paragraphs please.

Roger Hassenforder

AfterLife wrote: »

Nobody in the Middle East had any issue with gays until the Brits arrived.

That has to be the dumbest post I have ever read on the site.
Ever.

Wibbs

AfterLife wrote: »

I'm not trawling through the history of law in all the Middle Eastern countries but it was a British idea that being gay was criminal.

Most people dislike internet trolls. I personally don't. Indeed they're often informative and funny with it. Other's reactions even more informative and funnier. It's where one's initial instinct thinks "troll", but then starts to worry that someone may actually be in earnest.

Roger Hassenforder

AfterLife wrote: »

I'm not trawling through the history of law in all the Middle Eastern countries but it was a British idea that being gay was criminal.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/04/18/theresa-may-deeply-regrets-colonial-anti-lgbt-laws

We're only getting over it ourselves now lest you forget.

In Islam and Judaism and Christianity, a bit of man love was "frowned on" to say the least.
Punishment by stoning or fire was recommended.

Wibbs

AfterLife wrote: »

What was your point in relation to the post I was replying to?

In less than 17 paragraphs please.

Oh how we laughed....

You. Earlier. wrote:

White men have more to answer for than any religion or culture.

A beyond idiotic statement and provably so. And I can, though it may require you to absorb more than the characters in a twitter slogan. Apologies in advance.

AfterLife

"According to Guppy, "In the pre-modern era, Western travellers were amazed to find Islam "a sex-positive religion" and men openly expressing their love for young boys in words and gestures."[3] Georg Klauda wrote that "Countless writers and artists such as André Gide, Oscar Wilde, Edward M. Forster, and Jean Genet made pilgrimages in the 19th and 20th centuries from homophobic Europe to Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, and various other Arab countries, where homosexual sex was not only met without any discrimination or subcultural ghettoization whatsoever"

https://www.webcitation.org/6QTPwSFYM?url=http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/klauda081210.html

Ulysses Gaze

AfterLife wrote: »

What was your point in relation to the post I was replying to?

In less than 17 paragraphs please.

You mentioned that white colonists destroyed continents with their savagery.

I mentioned the Mughals. Here's what they did in India.

This is not absolving white colonists of their crimes. But a little context that humanity has been knocking the **** out of each other forever - regardless of skin colour and creed.

Dr. Koenraad Elst in his article “Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?” states: - http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/irin/genocide.html

“There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty.

The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526).“

Same historian - in the Book "Negation in India"

“The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”

Will Durant argued in his 1935 book “The Story of Civilisation: Our Oriental Heritage”

“The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period.”

Francois Gautier in his book ‘Rewriting Indian History’ (1996) wrote:

“The massacres perpetuated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.”

Brae100

Wibbs wrote: »

Most people dislike internet trolls. I personally don't. Indeed they're often informative and funny with it. Other's reactions even more informative and funnier. It's where one's initial instinct thinks "troll", but then starts to worry that someone may actually be in earnest.

What's happened here is that they have gone to Google with a pre-conception and stumbled upon something that they think fits in with their prejudice. British officials telling local warlords that it was not acceptable to rape young boys does not equate to the West introducing Homophobia.

AfterLife

Brae100 wrote: »

What's happened here is that they have gone to Google with a pre-conception and stumbled upon something that they think fits in with their prejudice.

I have no prejudice. I'd say you're the one with all the preconceptions here.

The fact that Theresa May of all people can acknowledge it and the lads here who I'm sure have no real interest in the plight of homosexuals other than to use it as a stick to beat Muslims with can't is very telling.

WinnyThePoo

SnakePlissken wrote: »

Not knowing the difference between your and you're, there and their, etc, is not writing colloquially, it's ignorance.

Furthermore, I do believe it's written in the charter that barely legible text speak is not permitted.

I think it's rather you who should re-read the charter. Its up the top of the after hours. Tell me how you get on.

Brae100

AfterLife wrote: »

I have no prejudice. I'd say you're the one with all the preconceptions here.

The fact that Theresa May of all people can acknowledge and the lads here who I'm sure have no real interest in the plight of homosexuals other than to use it as a stick to beat Muslims with is very telling.

That woo and deflection won't fly with me. Theresa May is irrelevant. Please back up your claims with cited sources and stats please.

Brae100

WinnyThePoo wrote: »

I think it's rather you who should re-read the charter. Its up the top of the after hours. Tell me how you get on.

*It's

AfterLife

Brae100 wrote: »

That woo and deflection won't fly with me. Theresa May is irrelevant. Please back up your claims with cited sources and stats please.

I did. Here it is again

https://www.webcitation.org/6QTPwSFYM?url=http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/klauda081210.html

Brae100

AfterLife wrote: »

I did. Here it is again

https://www.webcitation.org/6QTPwSFYM?url=http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2010/klauda081210.html

Could you add a proper link please.

BalcombeSt4

Of course it's right for Ireland, free love & free robes. What type of fking is this? Of course not, just like Christianity or Judaism is not right for Ireland. A secular Democratic country is right for Ireland and every country.

A Muslim family moved from Bosnia moved into my estate in 1997, seemed like nice people, played football with one of the kids a few times, we were around the same age. They got this giant white satellite dish on the front of their house, a nice drive way & 2 cars.

AfterLife

Brae100 wrote: »

Could you add a proper link please.

If you can't copy and paste I'd say your comprehension of the article will be poor at best.

I hope you had a good Pride anyway!

AfterLife

AfterLife wrote: »

I have no prejudice. I'd say you're the one with all the preconceptions here.

The fact that Theresa May of all people can acknowledge it and the lads here who I'm sure have no real interest in the plight of homosexuals other than to use it as a stick to beat Muslims with can't is very telling.

It's rather telling that you would side with a politician who has made a wide range of dubious statements to the public... and then complain about posters here without doing any actual research into their posting history. And it is obvious that you haven't done any research since some of us do post to threads relating to homosexuality, although we almost definitely don't follow your very shallow SJW perspective. What am I basing that on? Well, your resistance to actually doing research and providing useful references to support your statements.

You have made statements about white people, and didn't defend them. You've since made further statements, and provided one single link to support yourself. Still, I guess we could take that as developing yourself, although I would prefer that you stick and defend your original point before moving on to another.

Lastly, as for having no prejudice.... you assigned blame to white males... where were white females in all this? No... it's ok. lets not derail the thread further... but the idea that you don't have any prejudices is flawed.

AfterLife

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

They got this giant white satellite dish on the front of their house, a nice drive way & 2 cars.

That's how they imported Sharia Law at the time. Now it's all done over dial up modems.

AfterLife

[Deleted User] wrote: »

although we almost definitely don't follow your very shallow SJW perspective.

LOL. How many resources are acceptable? 2? 3? What do you think of the two I posted?

I posted the May article because her and her party wouldn't have said what she said in a fit if it wasn't fact.

BalcombeSt4

Once you have to resort to using the phrase "SJW", you've lost the debate in the eyes of Jesus & Allah & Sapa Inca.

BalcombeSt4

AfterLife - Yeah, it's about 4 or 5 times bigger than the SKY Dish, they also have one in the back garden that's not as big but still a good but bigger than the SKY ones.
Maybe their a secret Hezbollah cell who have been tracking my movements for the last 21 years & are waiting for the right moment to murder me, gang rape my me & then dump my lifeless body in some sort of quarry, and then they'll go home and celebrate my humiliating death? And all this time I believed they were nice people. Can't believe I traded football stickers with the kid, I gave him a Karl Porborsky, do you know how rare that card was in 1997? It was like liquid gold. I LOVE YOU KARL, AVENGE MY DEATH.

Brae100

AfterLife wrote: »

If you can't copy and paste I'd say your comprehension of the article will be poor at best.

I hope you had a good Pride anyway!

I eventually got through to your poorly posted link. You're correct, I couldn't comprehend it - at least as it related to your claim that the west introduced homophobia to Islam. Exact paragraph please?

Wtf has pride, or me enjoying it or not got to do with this debate? Is it just you virtue signalling perhaps?

AfterLife

Brae100 wrote: »

I eventually got through to your poorly posted link. You're correct, I couldn't comprehend it - at least as it related to your claim that the west introduced homophobia to Islam. Exact paragraph please?

Wtf has pride, or me enjoying it or not got to do with this debate? Is it just you virtue signalling perhaps?

Here's some further reading for you

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/britain-and-middle-east-1914-present

Enjoy.

DeusVolt

Islam is here and is going nowhere whether you like it or not. Muslims tend to have big families and there will be an increasing number of Irish muslims long into the future. Islam is a part of Ireland as much as catholicism is.

You are going to have to learn to be tolerant and accept Islam for the beautiful religion that it is.

SnakePlissken

SnakePlissken wrote: »

2 years for fundraiser for the decapitators of men and the stoning of women is great??? FFS

Lol, I'm sure you're not that stupid, you know what I meant, great the justice system is doing it's job.
But you would prefer to misrepresent posts

10000maniacs

dav3 wrote: »

MSM? Leo is that you?

The reason why normal people ignore these polls is that they attract idiots using their 25 different accounts to vote.

Thankfully when it comes to actual voting in elections, you only get one vote. Although I get the feeling with these polls that most of the voters aren't actually Irish or even old enough to vote.

Why would people go to the trouble of opening many multiple accounts ensuring none of them are using the same IP address. Just to multi-vote in a poll?

2 Scoops

10000maniacs wrote: »

Why would people go to the trouble of opening many multiple accounts ensuring none of them are using the same IP address. Just to multi-vote in a poll?

Russian bots, they're everywhere, including under your bed.

AfterLife

AfterLife wrote: »

LOL. How many resources are acceptable? 2? 3? What do you think of the two I posted?

I posted the May article because her and her party wouldn't have said what she said in a fit if it wasn't fact.

I think I missed your second link, although wasn't that because someone couldn't view the first link?

As for how many, well... that would depend on how many you need to prove your point. So... what is your point? That white people are responsible for everything bad in the world, or that some Islamic people are not homophobic? Or are you claiming that all of Islam is open and warm to Gay people? You might need quite a few more links to prove that one.

AfterLife wrote: »

Here's some further reading for you

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/britain-and-middle-east-1914-present

Enjoy.

How useful. An encyclopedia account for a hundred years. And the relevance? You could have just quoted/pasted the important parts and referred to the link.

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Once you have to resort to using the phrase "SJW", you've lost the debate in the eyes of Jesus & Allah & Sapa Inca.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

Wibbs

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

In Islam and Judaism and Christianity, a bit of man love was "frowned on" to say the least.
Punishment by stoning or fire was recommended.

Officially yes. Unofficially it depended. It certainly depended on wealth. Wealth ended to insulate people from such punishments. Local attitudes varied too over time. A Spanish visitor to Elizabethan England was shocked to find English men were into kissing each other on the lips and being a bit handsy in public.

AfterLife wrote: »

I have no prejudice.

Pretty much anyone who claims this is a) lacking in self awareness, and b) almost certainly prejudiced as far as their worldview goes. In your case I'm picturing young, male, student, or recent one, on the Left end of the scale, with a hint of republicanism(though more the Brits were imperial bastards angle) happy to absorb the white guilt end of that politic when it comes up.

Here's some further reading for you

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanit...t-1914-present

Enjoy.

Me. Earlier wrote: »

There's a lot of history going on too. After WW1, European powers carved up the Middle East to suit themselves. And just like Germany was made the whipping boy for that conflict and Churchill and his cronies were (in)directly responsible for someone like Hitler coming along, so the parlous state of the Islamic world is down to decisions made a century ago. And more recently. Iran under that utter retard the Shah was propped up by the moneyed vested interests and plundered while his people starved. No wonder the "old ways" were so appealing in the late 70's. When dickheads rule, the people will turn to any seemingly stable alternative. Especially if it promises a return to a "better past". A man long enough in a desert will drink his own piss, only to rue the day later on.

I am well aware of the history of the place and the demonisation and glorification of the locals by western powers when it suited.

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

A secular Democratic country is right for Ireland and every country.

This.

smurfjed

Islam for the beautiful religion that it is.

True enough, but then man got involved and totally spoilt it.

Wibbs

smurfjed wrote: »

True enough, but then man got involved and totally spoilt it.

Eh... man invented, promoted and spread it.

smurfjed

There is a common statement that there is only one Koran unlike the Bible which has multiple versions, however there are over 100 different interpretations of the Koran, some use it for peaceful purposes, others use it to create the crap that we are seeing in the Middle East these days, others use it for controlling their citizens. So all in all, man really did spoil it.

Captain Obvious

SnakePlissken wrote: »

2 years for fundraiser for the decapitators of men and the stoning of women is great??? FFS

It was 4 years. And a brief comparison to sentences for membership of the IRA seem on par. Might seem low but a judge would have to be able to justify giving a higher sentence.

weldoninhio wrote: »

Might be disgusting to you, but it’s probably on the money.

Seems not.

Referring to suggestions on social media that the girl’s death might be linked to the presence of resettled Syrian refugees on the island, Houston said: “The people of the Isle of Bute have rallied together since Alesha was first reported missing on Monday morning and I would stress that social media speculation relating to members of the community is both misleading and inaccurate.

Roger Hassenforder

Wibbs wrote: »

Officially yes. Unofficially it depended. It certainly depended on wealth. Wealth ended to insulate people from such punishments.

Same as it ever was!