Metropol

Where, exactly, is the hypocrisy? I can't see what you mean by hypocrisy.

the hypocrisy is that muslims have persecuted jews for many many years, they haven't given a toss about their rights. its a bit different when the tnt is on the other foot, though, isn't it?

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:

Where, exactly, is the hypocrisy? I can't see what you mean by hypocrisy.

the hypocrisy is that muslims have persecuted jews for many many years, they haven't given a toss about their rights. its a bit different when the tnt is on the other foot, though, isn't it?

Every religion has a questionable past (and many a questionable present).

It is not Islam which is going around stealing land, starting wars, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians and so on. Christianity and Judaism are the most powerful religions in the world, and they act like it.

The Daily Mail must be proud of the brainwashing job they've done on you.

When have the Muslims campaigned to stop Sikhs wearing their turbans? Or Jews their traditional dress?

johnnyboy wrote:

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:

Where, exactly, is the hypocrisy? I can't see what you mean by hypocrisy.

the hypocrisy is that muslims have persecuted jews for many many years, they haven't given a toss about their rights. its a bit different when the tnt is on the other foot, though, isn't it?

Every religion has a questionable past (and many a questionable present).

It is not Islam which is going around stealing land, starting wars, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians and so on. Christianity and Judaism are the most powerful religions in the world, and they act like it.

The Daily Mail must be proud of the brainwashing job they've done on you.

When have the Muslims campaigned to stop Sikhs wearing their turbans? Or Jews their traditional dress?

you are misrepresenting the facts if you say that it is 'christianity' that is stealing land, starting wars and killing civilians etc etc.

the different between that and say the atrocities of muslims is that they were commited in the name is islam, whilst the most recent wars the west were involved in were in the name of terrorism. not one and the same thing, and its important to make that distinction. (not that i am condoning the actions of the west in any way, i don't at all)

the very things some factions of islam are fighting for now, they have persecuted others for doing the very same thing in the past and the present. the whole thing is laughable when muslims have the audacity to play the 'race' or 'islamaphobia' card.

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:you are misrepresenting the facts if you say that it is 'christianity' that is stealing land, starting wars and killing civilians etc etc.

It is Christianity - 'a mission from God' - to hold on to all of the Occupied Territories because, in the Baptist interpretation of eschatology, Israel needs to exist to bring on the rapture and the return of Christ. The only problem was that people already lived there. Christianity and Judaism stole the land belonging for generations to millions of people in 1948 and 1967.

How exactly did Islam start that war? How exactly were Christainity and Judaism, the world's most two powerful religions innocent in this situation?

The entire Middle East policy of the Christian West is bent around securing the oil and securing Israel.

Try reading the Project For The New American Century, currently the Christian USA's foreign policy.

You must see that, or you really have been brainwashed by the Daily Mail.

Christianity is not all like this. It's just a bunch of right-wing nuts in America in the Baptist tradition. Unfortunately, the most powerful in America at the moment. Most churches aren't like that.

It's good that you can see the differences in shades in the Christian religion. It's just a pity you are too stupid, ignorant or both to do the same with the Daily Mail's current favourite scapegoats.

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:the different between that and say the atrocities of muslims is that they were commited in the name is islam, whilst the most recent wars the west were involved in were in the name of terrorism. not one and the same thing, and its important to make that distinction. (not that i am condoning the actions of the west in any way, i don't at all)

You have obviously done no reading at all of any depth.

Zionism wants the land for the Jews. Christians want the land for the Jews to be in Israel to help bring about the end times. Christian and Jewish businesses want to be in the Middle East because of the huge natrual resources.

The two most powerful religions in the world want to get their hands on as much Muslim land and resources as they can.

Do you not think this is just a bit provocative to the average Muslim?

And since when is going to war and killing people for oil more or less honourable/logical/justifiable than killing for a religion anyway?

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:the very things some factions of islam are fighting for now, they have persecuted others for doing the very same thing in the past and the present. the whole thing is laughable when muslims have the audacity to play the 'race' card.

So has every other religion, you frigging moron. But somehow it's more evil when the Muslims do it.

What is it, particularly, that the Muslims have done to offend you which brings out such venom? Venom that is completely missing when the Christians, Jews, Hindus etc stand up for their beliefs.

i have not been brainwashed by the daily mail anymore than say, the average suicide bomber.

the difference between, for example, christians and hindu's is generally, they don't play the race, 'islamaphobia' or anti-semitism card at almost every opportunity.


my poiny is that nearly every 'injustice' somebody of the muslim or jewish faith comes up against, they blame it on prejudice or some sort of fundamental hatred of their culture or reglion, when they themselves have been blowing up or persecuted others themselves for many years.

i've not seen many cases of hindu's or christians where the person claims that their persecution is due to faith or culture - and hindu itself is a minority faith so you can't put it down to christianity being 'powerful'.

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:i have not been brainwashed by the daily mail anymore than say, the average suicide bomber.

As you have an absolutely selective or narrow range of 'facts' upon which you draw to make such weak arguments, I have to believe you choose not to explore other opinions and learn new facts which might 'de-program' you.

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:the difference between, for example, christians and hindu's is generally, they don't play the race, 'islamaphobia' or anti-semitism card at almost every opportunity.

In terms of a defined political movement in the ethnocentric sense of the word, no-one is as well organised as the Jewish lobby groups, either here or in America. Whilst I disagree with a lot of what they say, there is no doubt that these movements are highly organised and intellectual (in a biased sense of the word) and greatly benefit the people they aim to serve.

There really exists no similar organisations for any other faith, including the Christians and the Muslims. The Christians are all over the shop, and organisations like the Muslim Council of Great Britain have little or no media savvy.

And you still haven't answered my question. Why is it more logical/justifiable etc for someone to go to war for oil than it is to defend their faith?

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:my poiny is that nearly every 'injustice' somebody of the muslim or jewish faith comes up against, they blame it on prejudice or some sort of fundamental hatred of their culture or reglion, when they themselves have been blowing up or persecuted others themselves for many years.

Because you and many like you would not speak in such vile and vicious terms about any other religious group, and seem to have singled out Muslims for your own narrow-minded reason, is it not unreasonable for them to say it's because of 'Islamophobia'?

Dr Sigmund Mohammad wrote:i've not seen many cases of hindu's or christians where the person claims that their persecution is due to faith or culture - and hindu itself is a minority faith so you can't put it down to christianity being 'powerful'.

Probably because the Daily Mail thinks that the only 'towelheads' worth demonising are Muslims.

I am not religious at all but think that ALL have their extreme "nutters", the Europeans, especially England where the ones doing it years agao as we f*cked up Israel/Palestine, Africa, Split Pakistan & Bangladesh from India, etc. etc.

What people seem to forget is that these few extremists tarnish a whole ethnic group, i.e. people who think every black person is a mugger, every white skin head is a yob, etc, etc.

Or am I missing the point here

johnnyboy wrote: And you still haven't answered my question. Why is it more logical/justifiable etc for someone to go to war for oil than it is to defend their faith?

personally, i think what the west has done to the middle east is dispicable. the whole war on terror thing in a farce (and in my opinion, a rather unsophisticated smoke screen to rob us all of our liberties), and isn't any less forgivable. but that isn't the point i'm trying to get across.