Soldier shot at National War Memorial in Ottawa

[Crazy_Ivan80]

to be more precise:

I hope the situation as Malthus described it is going to be the result without too much loss of life but I'm very pessimistic about it.
It's seems far more realistic that millions will perish before the adherents of islam figure out that maybe they need to a) stop taking their book literally, b) stop seeing muhammed as a person te be emulated and c) that the whole medina-part of the quran needs to be ditched as it abrogates the mecca-part(roughly) (which is generally considered to be the more tolerant section, due to mohammed being in a position of inferiority in relation to the other religions/political entities).
But they'll have to figure that out on their own, nothing we can do about it. But it would be preferred if they kept their shit inhouse instead of bothering the rest of the world with it, cause most of the world isn't as forgiving as the West.

[viper37]

As an aside:
it's not bigotry to say that the perps and ISIS-scum base their actions on the core handbook of islam.

True.  But there a lot of people who read other books and have commited crimes.  And not all, not even the majority of those reading the core book of Islam kill people who don't share their view of the world.  Or we do share their view of the world and they don't kill us because they feel we're on their side?  I don't know...

neither is it bigotry to say that a number of members in the anti-ISIS-coalition basically have the same goal as ISIS, but differ only in the means to achieve that goal.

True.

Same goes for a lot of muslims.

Lots of Christians too.  Look at US politics where every religious nutjob can become a Republican Senator.
They differ on the means, as they don't preach killing non believers, but they do have a similar conception of the world.

If they believe in their religion they all want that their religion/ideology to achieve world-domination. They just differ in the means (just like Stalin and Trotsky differed in the means to achieve the communist ideal).

Hitler wanted to achieve world domination, was he a communist?

There is no bigotry in stating that their so-called prophet committed numerous atrocities and adapted his 'revelation' to suit him committing these atrocities, thus presenting a nice religious dispensation for his followers (both early and later) to commit more atrocities. The difference between "what would Jesus do" and "what would mohammed do" is quite clear.

Ah, here, you have half a point.
Yes, Mohammed was a war leader.  And he committed atrocities, or what we would consider atrocities today against the non believers, more so in the case of the Jewish tribes he subdued.

However, how exactly did Christianity spread in the ancient world?  By preaching love and tolerance?  Part of it, yes.  Praying to the disenfranchised until they represented a problem for the governing body of the time, namely the Roman Empire.
And once it took over the Roman Empire, than it expanded by trampling other religions mercilessly, forbidding any other cult, destroying artifacts of pagan worship.  It burned people to the stakes, it killed non believes, it killed those who did not believe in what Rome said was the official cult.

In as much as history goes, Christianity is no different then Islam.

And given all that wanting to get rid of the religion/ideology that is islam is no more bigotted than wanting to get rid of fascism, national-socialism, communism or any other ideology that's willing to build it's utopia on the corpses of the millions that do not want to submit.

Your mistake is to assume that there is 1 billion muslim out there who want to decapitate you.
That'd be the same as saying you want to eradicate all Russians because of the communist threat.  That'd be the same as executing every German in 1945 because of the threat of national socialism.

We're fighting against an ideology, that ideology is summarized/simplified as "radical islam" because it doesn't target only non muslims, it primarly targets muslims who don't conform to their vision of what Islam should be.  Not different than the various wars of religion we had in our past.  Should we declare war on all religions?  The IRA weren't muslims.  Those who bombed abortion clinics weren't terrorists.  If you look at Europe, the majority of terrorist attacks planned/executed are either commited by the extreme-left or eco-terrorist types.  Do we declare war on all left of the center ideology?  Do we forbid all "Green" political parties in Europe?

[Razgovory]

You should take it as a compliment.  We all realize there is no point in responding to Grallon.

You people refuse to admit the nature of the enemy, which boggles the mind considering what they've already accomplished. 

No matter, in the end it is *I* who will be proven right about the Muslim filth.  And I'll be here waiting, to rub it in your collective faces.



G.

Exactly what will be "the end"?

[crazy canuck]

ah yes, the old "the christians did it too" trope. Also a favourite of the po-co brigade brigade. Wether or not Christians did this isn't relevant to the fact that there's far too many muslims doing the same.
"what Mohammad would do" is as clear as you think." -> it's clear enough. That many muslims have the decency not to do it speaks in their favour, but it doesn't make them better muslims, more the opposite. Regardless, they may be the majority

Ah yes the old if one Muslim does something wrong we must blame their relgion and taint all Muslims while not having the same standards for your own religion trope.  You and Grallon should go on the road with your act.

[viper37]

ah yes, the old "the christians did it too" trope. Also a favourite of the po-co brigade brigade. Wether or not Christians did this isn't relevant to the fact that there's far too many muslims doing the same.
"what Mohammad would do" is as clear as you think." -> it's clear enough. That many muslims have the decency not to do it speaks in their favour, but it doesn't make them better muslims, more the opposite. Regardless, they may be the majority

It is relevant when you invoke the historical figure that Muhamad was.
"What would Jesus do" has been used to promote slavery, to justify the Crusades, to bomb the British, to slaughter the Irish Catholics, to slaugther the Protestants in France, to burn witches, to exterminate american indians, to bomb abortion clinics, to burn books, to justify just about anything.
So, no, forgive, but it is relevant, and it doesn't impress me at all.

[crazy canuck]

Well said Viper, in both your posts.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

yes the old if one Muslim does something wrong we must blame their relgion and taint all Muslims while not having the same standards for your own religion trope.  You and Grallon should go on the road with your act.

not one muslim: the first muslim.


@Viper37:
Wether you're impressed or not matters nought. And while Jesus may have been invoked to do all these things he -as far as can be known- never committed similar acts. Unlike muhammed. And muhammed, being the 'prophet', is the example against which muslims nominally measure themselves. Excuse me, but he is found wanting. There are better standards than that man.

[viper37]

@Viper37:
Wether you're impressed or not matters nought. And while Jesus may have been invoked to do all these things he -as far as can be known- never committed similar acts. Unlike muhammed. And muhammed, being the 'prophet', is the example against which muslims nominally measure themselves. Excuse me, but he is found wanting. There are better standards than that man.

Muhammad went on to conquer cities&tribes in the name of Allah to spread the faith.

Aside being considered a prophet, he was no different than any ruler of his time.  It's not like there were well defined rules of war and codified treatment of prisoners of wars.  The Byzantines weren't exactly saints, nor were the Persians.  I seem to recall Richard Coeur de Lion slaughtering prisoners himself after the ransom was refused.  Is he remembered the same way as Genghis Khan or is he some kind of folk hero?

If you look at Muhamad's conquests, prisoners of wars were offered freedom in exchange for conversion and submission.  Not much different than many other empires.  Marrying with underage girls was the norm in many empires&kingdoms.  Samuel de Champlain, founder of Quebec city, was married to a 12 year old girl while he was in his 40s.

If you tell me today, muslims in the general population, are preaching for the legalization of pedophilia, you might have a point there.  But is it?

[crazy canuck]

yes the old if one Muslim does something wrong we must blame their relgion and taint all Muslims while not having the same standards for your own religion trope.  You and Grallon should go on the road with your act.

not one muslim: the first muslim.

Ah, all muslims should be blamed because you have a warped view of their religion.  Got it. 

[Crazy_Ivan80]

@Viper37:
Wether you're impressed or not matters nought. And while Jesus may have been invoked to do all these things he -as far as can be known- never committed similar acts. Unlike muhammed. And muhammed, being the 'prophet', is the example against which muslims nominally measure themselves. Excuse me, but he is found wanting. There are better standards than that man.

Muhammad went on to conquer cities&tribes in the name of Allah to spread the faith.

Aside being considered a prophet, he was no different than any ruler of his time.  It's not like there were well defined rules of war and codified treatment of prisoners of wars.  The Byzantines weren't exactly saints, nor were the Persians.  I seem to recall Richard Coeur de Lion slaughtering prisoners himself after the ransom was refused.  Is he remembered the same way as Genghis Khan or is he some kind of folk hero?

If you look at Muhamad's conquests, prisoners of wars were offered freedom in exchange for conversion and submission.  Not much different than many other empires.  Marrying with underage girls was the norm in many empires&kingdoms.  Samuel de Champlain, founder of Quebec city, was married to a 12 year old girl while he was in his 40s.

If you tell me today, muslims in the general population, are preaching for the legalization of pedophilia, you might have a point there.  But is it?

That he was no different in his doings from others 1400 years ago is hardly an issue.
But pray tell: how many of these rulers of old are considered to be the prime example to be followed, today?
Next you'll claim that it is a religion of peace...

And given the practices regarding marriage in far too many islamic countries they're not putting up much of fight against pedofilia

[crazy canuck]

@Viper37:
Wether you're impressed or not matters nought. And while Jesus may have been invoked to do all these things he -as far as can be known- never committed similar acts. Unlike muhammed. And muhammed, being the 'prophet', is the example against which muslims nominally measure themselves. Excuse me, but he is found wanting. There are better standards than that man.

Muhammad went on to conquer cities&tribes in the name of Allah to spread the faith.

Aside being considered a prophet, he was no different than any ruler of his time.  It's not like there were well defined rules of war and codified treatment of prisoners of wars.  The Byzantines weren't exactly saints, nor were the Persians.  I seem to recall Richard Coeur de Lion slaughtering prisoners himself after the ransom was refused.  Is he remembered the same way as Genghis Khan or is he some kind of folk hero?

If you look at Muhamad's conquests, prisoners of wars were offered freedom in exchange for conversion and submission.  Not much different than many other empires.  Marrying with underage girls was the norm in many empires&kingdoms.  Samuel de Champlain, founder of Quebec city, was married to a 12 year old girl while he was in his 40s.

If you tell me today, muslims in the general population, are preaching for the legalization of pedophilia, you might have a point there.  But is it?

That he was no different in his doings from others 1400 years ago is hardly an issue.
But pray tell: how many of these rulers of old are considered to be the prime example to be followed, today?
Next you'll claim that it is a religion of peace...

And given the practices regarding marriage in far too many islamic countries they're not putting up much of fight against pedofilia

Given your apparent defence of Christianity, pray tell how you reconcile your views with the events portrayed in the Old Testament?

[Valmy]

The the old testament represents the spiritual maturation of humanity tracking the growth of conciousness from the individual to the familt to the tribe to the universal.  What about it needs to be reconcilled?

[crazy canuck]

The the old testament represents the spiritual maturation of humanity tracking the growth of conciousness from the individual to the familt to the tribe to the universal.  What about it needs to be reconcilled?

The other Crazy one takes things literally.  For him killing off other tribles would be a bad thing. At least if he was going to be fair in his condemnation of religious texts 

[Sheilbh]

Ah yes the old if one Muslim does something wrong we must blame their relgion and taint all Muslims while not having the same standards for your own religion trope.  You and Grallon should go on the road with your act.

And, of course, Islam as practiced by hundreds of millions of people all over the world through history is irrelevant. They may be good people, but they're bad Muslims. The people who've got the correct interpretation are a relatively recent radical sect of extremists.

[crazy canuck]

Ah yes the old if one Muslim does something wrong we must blame their relgion and taint all Muslims while not having the same standards for your own religion trope.  You and Grallon should go on the road with your act.

And, of course, Islam as practiced by hundreds of millions of people all over the world through history is irrelevant. They may be good people, but they're bad Muslims. The people who've got the correct interpretation are a relatively recent radical sect of extremists.

good point