Islam...look in the mirror

koshergrl

Diamond Member
Aug 4, 2011
81,129
14,022
2,190
From the NYT no less:

"I don’t like to see anyone’s faith insulted, but we need to make two things very clear — more clear than President Obama’s team has made them. One is that an insult — even one as stupid and ugly as the anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this — does not entitle people to go out and attack embassies and kill innocent diplomats. That is not how a proper self-governing people behave. There is no excuse for it. It is shameful. And, second, before demanding an apology from our president, Mr. Ali and the young Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, Yemenis, Pakistanis, Afghans and Sudanese who have been taking to the streets might want to look in the mirror — or just turn on their own televisions.

They might want to look at the chauvinistic bile that is pumped out by some of their own media — on satellite television stations and Web sites or sold in sidewalk bookstores outside of mosques — insulting Shiites, Jews, Christians, Sufis and anyone else who is not a Sunni, or fundamentalist, Muslim."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/opinion/friedman-look-in-your-mirror.html?_r=2
 
From the NYT no less:

"I don’t like to see anyone’s faith insulted, but we need to make two things very clear — more clear than President Obama’s team has made them. One is that an insult — even one as stupid and ugly as the anti-Islam video on YouTube that started all of this — does not entitle people to go out and attack embassies and kill innocent diplomats. That is not how a proper self-governing people behave. There is no excuse for it. It is shameful. And, second, before demanding an apology from our president, Mr. Ali and the young Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans, Yemenis, Pakistanis, Afghans and Sudanese who have been taking to the streets might want to look in the mirror — or just turn on their own televisions.

They might want to look at the chauvinistic bile that is pumped out by some of their own media — on satellite television stations and Web sites or sold in sidewalk bookstores outside of mosques — insulting Shiites, Jews, Christians, Sufis and anyone else who is not a Sunni, or fundamentalist, Muslim."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/opinion/friedman-look-in-your-mirror.html?_r=2

Woo. I read the whole article. Friedman used to be a bit behind the curve but no more. His disgust with those who speak from both sides of their mouths and then rampage through the streets, attacking foreign embassies and slaughtering American diplomats is both measured and right on point. Kudos to Thomas Friedman.
 
I support the creation of an international comission which can examine----"INSULTS" to religions in general----collect them, catalogue them and ----create a kind of compendium to reveal to the public just who is doing the "insulting" and how they do it. I believe that such a compendium would actually diffuse anger ----and violence since lots of those people (guess who) who respond to perceived "insult" with violence------are THEMSELVES guilty of doing most of the "insulting" The compendium would also bring the issue OUT IN THE OPENED and under logical discussion. I believe that the civil rights project in the USA 1960s was successful because the TOPIC was brought out in high schools around the nation PEOPLE FACED IT------children brought it home to their parents -------Kids have a natural tendency toward "FAIR PLAY"
 
Freidman is a jew.

That basically sums up his stance on the issue. :cool:

Only if he's a bastard.
Being a Jew makes you guilty of nothing and suggests no bent either way on most political points.
That post constitutes a racist remark and I won't have anything to do with racism.
 
"I don’t like to see anyone’s faith insulted,

but most faiths have people who engage in exactly that.

We see the Christian right in America do it.
The more extreme Jews in and out of Israel and
the more extreme Muslims.

yes, some Muslims preach daft hate messages but none of the 'book' religions can claim the high ground because they all have their nut case element.
 
Freidman is a jew.

That basically sums up his stance on the issue. :cool:

Only if he's a bastard.
Being a Jew makes you guilty of nothing and suggests no bent either way on most political points.
That post constitutes a racist remark and I won't have anything to do with racism.
In Freidman's article he says that he admires the Israeli American site called MEMRI which is about as Islamophobic and hateful towards muslims as it gets.
 
Freidman is a jew.

That basically sums up his stance on the issue. :cool:


The creatures running amok and murdering people in streets and embassies
are muslims-----That, basically, explains their behavior

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dvIa4xGwKw]IDF Tanks Run Over 5 Month Old Baby & Other Children ( C-4 News ) - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfT4QrqOnYM]Heartbreakin story from Gaza 'Israeli soldiers shoot children while eating chocolate and chips' - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sY8dPGiOTGs]Israeli soldier shoots blindfolded and handcuffed Palestinian man at point blank range [VIDEO] - YouTube[/ame]

Does that mean ALL Israelis are animals?
 
Freidman is a jew.

That basically sums up his stance on the issue. :cool:

Only if he's a bastard.
Being a Jew makes you guilty of nothing and suggests no bent either way on most political points.
That post constitutes a racist remark and I won't have anything to do with racism.
In Freidman's article he says that he admires the Israeli American site called MEMRI which is about as Islamophobic and hateful towards muslims as it gets.


Memri confines itself to videos of programs created by muslims and translations of speeches and writings ---from arabic to english written by muslims In what way is
Memri "islamophobic" If someone translated the "innocence" video into French or arabic or Urdu-----would you describe that action os COPTOPHOBIC?

I have read some people claim that the translations are inaccurate-----sorry---I have relatives fluent in arabic----they are ACCURATE why are you ashamed of that which muslims write or say or televise? why do you not want people to KNOW?
 
I support the creation of an international comission which can examine----"INSULTS" to religions in general----collect them, catalogue them and ----create a kind of compendium to reveal to the public just who is doing the "insulting" and how they do it. I believe that such a compendium would actually diffuse anger ----and violence since lots of those people (guess who) who respond to perceived "insult" with violence------are THEMSELVES guilty of doing most of the "insulting" The compendium would also bring the issue OUT IN THE OPENED and under logical discussion. I believe that the civil rights project in the USA 1960s was successful because the TOPIC was brought out in high schools around the nation PEOPLE FACED IT------children brought it home to their parents -------Kids have a natural tendency toward "FAIR PLAY"

So long as there's no punishment involved, that sounds okay. I don't think it would accomplish much, however.
 
Last edited:
the US embassy in Cairo ------is there to BE DIPLOMATIC I do believe that apologizing to "the muslims" is a bit over the top in view of the fact that american citizens are REGULARLY ABUSED in the name of islam in some islamic countries A fact which should be NOTED IN THE WORLD----is that even our military kids are abused in saudi arabia in THE NAME OF ISLAM simply for being christians (i have been informed that for safety's sake----jewish military kids are simply not sent there at all) I did learn FROM MUSLIMS I HAVE KNOWN WELL that an apology for one's "group" is a clear admission that one's group is INFERIOR Anyone who has ever heard a muslim "apologize" for the actions of muslims IN THE NAME OF ISLAM has heard something very rare. We (chrisitans, hindus and jews) announce ourselves "inferior" to muslims everytime we apologize to them and we justify their disdain of us and the abuse they seem to believe that we admit is APPROPRIATE As to the apology in attempt to diffuse violence----that is even worse ------IT JUSTIFIES THE VIOLENCE in "islamo-lingo"
 
the US embassy in Cairo ------is there to BE DIPLOMATIC I do believe that apologizing to "the muslims" is a bit over the top in view of the fact that american citizens are REGULARLY ABUSED in the name of islam in some islamic countries A fact which should be NOTED IN THE WORLD----is that even our military kids are abused in saudi arabia in THE NAME OF ISLAM simply for being christians (i have been informed that for safety's sake----jewish military kids are simply not sent there at all) I did learn FROM MUSLIMS I HAVE KNOWN WELL that an apology for one's "group" is a clear admission that one's group is INFERIOR Anyone who has ever heard a muslim "apologize" for the actions of muslims IN THE NAME OF ISLAM has heard something very rare. We (chrisitans, hindus and jews) announce ourselves "inferior" to muslims everytime we apologize to them and we justify their disdain of us and the abuse they seem to believe that we admit is APPROPRIATE As to the apology in attempt to diffuse violence----that is even worse ------IT JUSTIFIES THE VIOLENCE in "islamo-lingo"

And the people who said that shit know it.
 
Indofred, Sunni Man, et al,

So what. Does being Jewish alter reality in any way?

Freidman is a jew.

That basically sums up his stance on the issue. :cool:

Only if he's a bastard.
Being a Jew makes you guilty of nothing and suggests no bent either way on most political points.
That post constitutes a racist remark and I won't have anything to do with racism.
(COMMENT)

One's religion or cultural heritage doesn't change the reality of what is acceptable behavior. And being Muslim, a follower of Islam, doesn't give the practitioner some special moral high ground, above the law, from which they can justifiably commit crimes.

The various practitioners of Islam, that willfully disregard the rights of others, adds to the infamous reputation and character that they have established for themselves.

While I disapprove of the characterization of Mohammed, as described in the video in question, I defend the Constitutional Right of the 55 year old, Egyptian-born, filmmaker (Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) to make his tasteless movie.


I find it ironic that the Arab World protests against the Western World for what one of their own did. They don't take responsibility for anything. But Arabs have the right to be stupid as well.

Most Respectfully,
R
 
The arab muslim world does not consider CHRISTIANS to be of their own------no matter what they claim In fact-----jews and christians whom the arab muslims CLAIM were part and parcel of "ARAB SOCIETY" never were
 
The Muslims don't hate us for "our freedoms" or "our way of life" they are upset with the West for invading & bombing their countries, killing their loved ones and exploiting their natural resources. Many people in the “Christian West” do not understand their culture nor do they respect it. Prior to the discovery of oil and the establishment of the state of Israel, which was established it in the midst of Muslim/Arab countries and became what many in the Middle East & elsewhere viewed as an antagonizing entity because of their de-humanizing treatment of the Palestinians and the disparaging remarks made by Israeli leaders about Palestinians/Arabs, there was never the level turmoil being seen today in the Middle East.

It was the “Christian-Jewish West” that encroached on the Muslim-Arab lands with their armies and establishing military bases (not the other way around) with which to protect/enforce the oil companies exploitation of their natural resources. The bribed leaders of the oil rich Muslim/Arab countries negotiated emigration/immigration deals with the governments of Britain, U.S. and France in exchange for SOFA (Status of Force Agreements) in the case of the U.S. military and oil company exploration & extraction agreements for big oil companies such BP, Total, and Exxon. This is the reason that Britain, France and the U.S. has seen a slow and steady rise in their population of Muslim/Arabs. Another reason contributing to the rise of Muslim/Arabs in Europe and North America are these wars of conquest waged on behalf of the wealthy avarice globalists and their oil companies coupled with wealthy avarice bankers, which has created millions of refugees. The liberal immigration policies, under the direction and control of the wealthy globalist elite, of Britain, France and the United States is intentionally creating a Clash of Civilizations.

The following is an excerpt from: ISR issue 15 | U.S. Intervention in the Middle East: Blood for Oil

Since the Second World War, the United States has been the dominant world power in the Middle East. Every U.S. policy shift, every military intervention, every CIA plot has been carried out to secure one main aim… to ensure the cheap and plentiful flow of the world’s most important energy resource…oil.

After the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France drew the boundaries of the new states in the Middle East with absolutely no input from the people of the region. All promises of Arab independence the British had made to various local leaders during the First World War were scrapped. At the 1919 peace conference, when the victorious powers sat down to divvy up the spoils, foremost in their minds was the need to keep the region divided and thereby easier to control.

Private oil concerns pushed their governments (in the national interest, of course) to renounce all wartime promises to the Arabs. For the oilmen saw only too well that oil concessions and royalties would be easier to negotiate with a series of rival Arab states lacking any sense of unity, than with a powerful independent Arab state in the Middle East.

Britain took the areas that became Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. France took Syria and Lebanon. Each state was then handed to local kings and sheiks who owed their position to British tutelage. Kuwait was handed to the al-Sabah family. After he was promised a united Arab republic, the Hashemite King Hussein was awarded Jordan. Britain gave Ibn Saud Saudi Arabia the only country in the world named after its ruling family. France put Lebanon in the hands of the Christian minority.

Journalist Glenn Frankel describes how British High Commissioner Sir Percy Cox settled boundaries between Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia at a 1922 conference in Baghdad:

The meeting had gone on for five grueling days with no compromise in sight. So one night in late November 1922, Cox, Britain's representative in Baghdad, summoned to his tent Sheik Abdul-Aziz ibn Saud, soon to become ruler of Saudi Arabia, to explain the facts of life as the British carved up the remnants of the defeated Ottoman empire.

"It was astonishing to see [ibn Saud] being reprimanded like a naughty schoolboy by His Majesty's High Commissioner and being told sharply that he, Sir Percy Cox, would himself decide the type and general line of the frontier," recalled Harold Dickson, the British military attaché to the region, in his memoirs.

"This ended the impasse. Ibn Saud almost broke down and pathetically remarked that Sir Percy was his father and mother who made him and raised him from nothing to the position he held and that he would surrender half his kingdom, nay the whole, if Sir Percy ordered."

Within two days, the deal was done. The modern borders of Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait were established by British Imperial fiat at what became known as the Uqauir Conference.

There was one unique exception to this arrangement. The 1917 Balfour Declaration had committed Britain to supporting the formation of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. When the postwar settlement made the country a British protectorate, Britain backed Jewish immigration to Palestine, hoping to create a "secure strategic outpost in an Arab world." The British ruling class could see the value of creating a colonial-settler outpost that, dependent on British support, could become a loyal protector of British interests in the area. The full significance of the role of such an outpost would not become apparent, or fully taken advantage of by the U.S., until several years after the formation of the state of Israel in 1948.

"They" Hate Us Because We Bomb Them | Weapons of Mass Distraction

"They" Hate Us Because We Bomb Them | Weapons of Mass Destraction - YouTube
 
Last edited:
They wouldn't get invaded if they would stop killing innocent people for things like movies and *insults*.

Fuck them.
 
Kosher girl go run for president if you want to invade countries. Right now you don't have any power to do anything besides dream and imagine.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top