The Regressive Left and Islam -- What is happening here?

[Dogmaphobe]

Regular fact reading moment has arrived:

• Sweden: est 77% of rapes committed by 2% Muslim male population – Crime statistics
• Gap Between Migrant Contribution and Migrant Cost to UK is £17 Billion
• Denmark: 78% of criminals in capital are of “non-Western origin” and 84% of foreigners are unemployed

Praise the regression!

How Anti-Immigration Activists Misuse Rape Statistics

This article will show that according to crime victim surveys, the actual rate of sex crimes has been more or less unchanged in Sweden between 2005 and 2014, despite the fact that immigration has increased during the same time period. Instead, the increasing rates of reported rapes are influenced by expansion of the legal rape definition, an increase in the tendency to report rapes, police efforts to classify each individual rape as a separate crime and their tendency to classify any sex crime that could potentially be rape as rape. It will also demonstrate that reported rates between countries such as Sweden and Denmark cannot be naively compared to do the large difference in legal rape definition and police registration methods.​

Aren't you required by the rules of the forum to link to the page in which the quoted text appears?

There was nothing related even remotely on the page to which you linked.

 

[L.K.Eder]

That actually has nothing to do with religion since he's not an "Islamic terrorist" but a Palestinian terrorist, convicted of 5 counts of murder (compare that with Begin and Mandella) and the rationale for "why not nominate him" had to do with other matters and whether subsequent actions can overcome past actions (redemption). I realize that is a complex philosophical topic for you to handle. Barghouti is not an Islamist (not sure if you realized that) nor is he a "genocidal mass murderer" (not sure if you realized that either) but it makes for a nice deflection that has nothing to do with holding religions to standards. Now shall we go on and talk about how you idolize a rabid anti-semite who went around the country electrocuting live animals on stage?

Getting back to holding religions to different standards - again, where have I held Islam to a different standard than any other religion?

They all should obey the same laws, and they all should enjoy the same rights in this country. Is that a difficult concept for you?

Even those born outside the country?

That come in to this country? Yes.

So you think that muslim immigrants "coming into this country" should have the same rights as full blown citizens?

Got it. I am sure that by your standard anyone should be allowed to come, too.

If they are citizens - then yes.

If they are non-citizens then they should have the same rights and protections as any other non-citizen.

I don't have a problem with vetting immigrants from countries where terrorism is a problem.

Alright!! That's enough lying out of you! We all know that you are a regressive leftist and you defend Islam while attacking Christianity. Your idea of "vetting" is to lay down a welcome mat! Just look at Detroit for proof!

you are all just making mac0815's points and he keeps winning. damn, he is awesome.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Was Hitler wrong to simply condemn Jewry as a whole?

Jews were blowing up people all over the world in order to satisfy a concept in the Talmud that ordered them to spread Judaism until there was nothing else?

Goodness, I never knew!!

So you don't dispute your Islamophobia being analogous to anti-Semitism?

I often have times accepting that people are really as stupid as they appear, but there is nothing remotely similar between antisemitism and rejection of Islam.

A person would have to be nearly retarded to think there was any similarity. I mentioned the most glaring difference, but there are many more.

 

[Ravi]

I think this will serve as another excellent answer to the question posed in the OP.

How ironic that an honest liberal provides it.

I'm sure you can find more peeps that generalize and therefore make erroneous conclusions. Let's see how many you can come up with.

 

[Ravi]

Yo Dog.....

Do you agree with Trump that we should ban Muslims from entering the United States?

Yo, Lone -- I think as long as they are carefully vetted and are actual refugees instead of young, single male migrants, then they should not be banned.

Germany received an onslaught of young, single men and immediately experienced widespread rape Jihad.

Do you have any sympathy for the victims, or should they just be considered collateral damage and a necessary sacrifice to your politics?

You a politician? The answer to that question requires a "yes" or a "no". I will try to decipher your bullshit and say that you do not agree with Trump and that you are OK with Muslims ( refugees, students, business people, tourists ) entering the US.

Excellent.

Why are you supporting Islam?

See how stupid you seem?

You are incapable of comprehending what I just wrote, and you accuse ME of looking stupid?

Of course I understand what you wrote.

You answered a "yes or no" question, which was not about refugees, with some claptrap about vetting refugees. You have some kind of standard for Muslims that you don't have for others....because a small percentage of Muslims want to blow shit up.

You then brought up Germany....which also is unrelated to the question. In your view, Germany is being overrun by hordes of Muslim extremists who are posing as poor refugees. And, if we don't watch out, we will invite the same. Of course, that theory disregards the fact that we vet refugees from struggling Mulsim nations more vigorously than we vet any other class of immigrants. In other words...we won't have that problem.

Finally...you thought you'd ask the obligatory stupid question regarding whether or not I have sympathy for the victims ( of rape? ). That's you being a disingenuous blowhard asshole....and you just couldn't help yourself.

In the end....you DO NOT wish to ban all Muslims from entering the US. You are OK with innocent Muslims coming to and living in the United States. So..if I hold you to your own ridiculous standard......you are supporting Islam.

Yes?

yes. He's supporting beheadings.

 

[L.K.Eder]

is it coincidence that the honest liberals all confirm mac0815's bias?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Exactly how am I holding it to a "lower standard"?

Well, when you say there should be nothing to prevent an Islamic terrorist from receiving a Nobel peace prize nomination, adding in a catty comment that "it isn't the Mother Teresa award, you know", you are not just lowering the standard or even obliterating any standard at all, but actually elevating the worst symptoms of Islamism to heroic status.

That actually has nothing to do with religion since he's not an "Islamic terrorist" but a Palestinian terrorist, convicted of 5 counts of murder (compare that with Begin and Mandella) and the rationale for "why not nominate him" had to do with other matters and whether subsequent actions can overcome past actions (redemption). I realize that is a complex philosophical topic for you to handle. Barghouti is not an Islamist (not sure if you realized that) nor is he a "genocidal mass murderer" (not sure if you realized that either) but it makes for a nice deflection that has nothing to do with holding religions to standards. Now shall we go on and talk about how you idolize a rabid anti-semite who went around the country electrocuting live animals on stage?

Getting back to holding religions to different standards - again, where have I held Islam to a different standard than any other religion?

They all should obey the same laws, and they all should enjoy the same rights in this country. Is that a difficult concept for you?

Ah -- so he just killed five Jews. A trifling matter to be sure.

.....and he's a Tibetan Buddhist, you say?



Anything to distract people from the fact you lionize a mass murderer, I guess..

 

[Norman]

I think this will serve as another excellent answer to the question posed in the OP.

How ironic that an honest liberal provides it.

I'm sure you can find more peeps that generalize and therefore make erroneous conclusions. Let's see how many you can come up with.

Hmm... I would be interested in hearing some generalizations about white heterosexual men. Surely, no regressive would ever generalize incorrectly?

For the record, most generalizations regarding islam have turned out to be correct.

 

[Mac1958]

It has been defined. I have provided myriad examples. You don't like it because you're a part of it, and you people hate having a mirror shoved in your face.

You never do.

I'll trust this guy over you. But thanks for trying.

 

[Ravi]

Was Hitler wrong to simply condemn Jewry as a whole?

Jews were blowing up people all over the world in order to satisfy a concept in the Talmud that ordered them to spread Judaism until there was nothing else?

Goodness, I never knew!!

So you don't dispute your Islamophobia being analogous to anti-Semitism?

Hitler demonized Jews much in the same way RWNJs demonize Muslims. He had much success sadly, but eventually people realized he was evil.

 

[Ravi]

I think this will serve as another excellent answer to the question posed in the OP.

How ironic that an honest liberal provides it.

I'm sure you can find more peeps that generalize and therefore make erroneous conclusions. Let's see how many you can come up with.

Hmm... I would be interested in hearing some generalizations about white heterosexual men. Surely, no regressive would ever generalize incorrectly?

For the record, most generalizations regarding islam have turned out to be correct.

Or were they generalizations about men?

 

[Ravi]

Even those born outside the country?

That come in to this country? Yes.

So you think that muslim immigrants "coming into this country" should have the same rights as full blown citizens?

Got it. I am sure that by your standard anyone should be allowed to come, too.

If they are citizens - then yes.

If they are non-citizens then they should have the same rights and protections as any other non-citizen.

I don't have a problem with vetting immigrants from countries where terrorism is a problem.

Alright!! That's enough lying out of you! We all know that you are a regressive leftist and you defend Islam while attacking Christianity. Your idea of "vetting" is to lay down a welcome mat! Just look at Detroit for proof!

you are all just making mac0815's points and he keeps winning. damn, he is awesome.

He's the Charlie Sheen of USMB without the rational element.

 

[Coyote]

Exactly how am I holding it to a "lower standard"?

Well, when you say there should be nothing to prevent an Islamic terrorist from receiving a Nobel peace prize nomination, adding in a catty comment that "it isn't the Mother Teresa award, you know", you are not just lowering the standard or even obliterating any standard at all, but actually elevating the worst symptoms of Islamism to heroic status.

That actually has nothing to do with religion since he's not an "Islamic terrorist" but a Palestinian terrorist, convicted of 5 counts of murder (compare that with Begin and Mandella) and the rationale for "why not nominate him" had to do with other matters and whether subsequent actions can overcome past actions (redemption). I realize that is a complex philosophical topic for you to handle. Barghouti is not an Islamist (not sure if you realized that) nor is he a "genocidal mass murderer" (not sure if you realized that either) but it makes for a nice deflection that has nothing to do with holding religions to standards. Now shall we go on and talk about how you idolize a rabid anti-semite who went around the country electrocuting live animals on stage?

Getting back to holding religions to different standards - again, where have I held Islam to a different standard than any other religion?

They all should obey the same laws, and they all should enjoy the same rights in this country. Is that a difficult concept for you?

Ah -- so he just killed five Jews. A trifling matter to be sure.

.....and he's a Tibetan Buddhist, you say?



Anything to distract people from the fact you lionize a mass murderer, I guess..

You're very imaginative, you clearly take after your hero.

Now, again:
Getting back to holding religions to different standards - again, where have I held Islam to a different standard than any other religion?

They all should obey the same laws, and they all should enjoy the same rights in this country. Is that a difficult concept for you?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Was Hitler wrong to simply condemn Jewry as a whole?

Jews were blowing up people all over the world in order to satisfy a concept in the Talmud that ordered them to spread Judaism until there was nothing else?

Goodness, I never knew!!

So you don't dispute your Islamophobia being analogous to anti-Semitism?

Hitler demonized Jews much in the same way RWNJs demonize Muslims. He had much success sadly, but eventually people realized he was evil.

When I mentioned that a person had to be nearly retarded to think there was any similarity, I didn't really mean it as a roll call, Ravi.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

.



Now, again:
Getting back to holding religions to different standards - again, where have I held Islam to a different standard than any other religion?

They all should obey the same laws, and they all should enjoy the same rights in this country. Is that a difficult concept for you?

I already said.

This Mus..... oops, "Tibetan Buddhist" of yours was working to create closer ties between Fatah and Hamas, because by working together instead of working apart, they would be able to maximize the body count of dead Jews.

Not only does your attitude reveal no standards, but by elevating Musl..... oops, "Tibetan Buddhist" mass murder of Jews to such status that he qualifies for a Nobel Peace Prize (peace when all the Jews are killed), you are actually elevating Islami oops, Tibetan Buddhist barbarity to the highest possible standard.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

you people hate having a mirror shoved in your face.

I LOVE a mirror being shoved in my face.

But then again, I have that geriatric savoir faire' sort of thing goin on.

 

[flacaltenn]

Don't make me go out there and pull the "mission statements" for those 47 plagues of the planet. What does ISIS stand for? Literally? Do you think creating an orthodox Islam Caliphate is AGAINST the principles of Islam? There are certainly RADICALIZED versions of Islam given full validity by the likes of sovereign states like Saudi Arabia and Iran. And in fact --- my beef is not with Islam.. It's with the tyrannical theocratic governments that Arabs tend to prefer. The Wahabi versions of the Koran are a DIRECT EXPORT of the Saudis.

And leftists OUGHT to understand that.. Since they are all hyper about usurpations of liberty by ANY threat of combining state power with theology. THAT"s really your "regressive leftist" reality. That you want to compare the LIBERTY of this nation and it's "discussions" of keeping it secular ----- to a religion that spreads with the ASSISTANCE of established theocratic states that HAVE no liberties.

We OUGHT to be on the same page here. But SOMEHOW --- you folks are stuck on OPPOSING people who recognize and understand threats to their existence by combining religious tenets with the power of a state.

Why is that????

again, i'm no supporter of terrorists. i kind of have a zero tolerance when it comes to blowing up stuff in the name of allah.

in this country? more people have been killed by christian terrorists than muslim terrorists. i think radical religionists are dangerous.

That's a ridiculous claim backed up by incomplete factoids. If you count the American deaths ABROAD at the hands of Jihadis, airplanes, ships, contractors, diplomatic folk, etc (or even our soldiers battling ISIS right now) -- It's a MOUNTAIN of dead Americans at the hands of Islamic radicals. No comparison.

Sounds like you're going out of your way to IGNORE terrorism here..

we weren't talking about "abroad". we were talking about risk in this country. there is nothing ridiculous in presenting reality. i'm sorry if it doesn't concur with your biases.

reality: in this country.... more deaths have been caused by rightwing christian terrorists.

i say this because when the rightwingnut theocrat shot up planned parenthood, the right shrugged. there was no insane and out of proportion response. but when the pieces of garbage in san bernadine went on their little spree, the wingers and their dear leader, the drfump, thought excluding muslims from this country was the proper response.

see a problem there? with both responses?

i'll also point out that if any democrat had appointed as their liaison to the muslim community, someone who said "death to america", you would have rightfully, been appalled. yet when ted cruz appointed as his liaison to the anti-choice radical theocrats someone who said that doctors performing a legal activity should be murdered, you all didn't even flinch.

Nobody in their right mind would only count American terrorism death and carnage that ONLY occurs within our borders. There were times not too long ago where a SINGLE American death abroad brought swift and SEVERE action..

The carnage is San Bernadino came about because a Muslim RADICAL got a marriage visa without the APPROPRIATE vetting and interviews and GUIDED that attack.. You tend to ignore EXACTLY the pertinent that would allow you to understand why Americans are JUSTLY concerned about accommodating refugees from these war zones.

Ft Hood Allahu Akbar nut? ACCOMODATED by the US Army. Was known to be a bit "polarizing". Incident is STILL officially workplace violence., Your turn --- more Christian terrorists...

my point was the flaccid response from rightwingers to terrorism emanating from their own and the over-reaction to terrorism emanating from muslims.

What we're ALL trying to do is keep America free from this INTERNATIONAL problem that FAR overwhelms any of the domestic terrorism that we've seen.. The US doesn't currently have a Muslim problem. Because that "problem" is not the religion itself. It's the CULTURE that protects and empowers that religion to the point where it is unseparable from the socio-political realities of the Arab world.

When these orgs threaten to come here and do violence -- you need to take it deadly seriously. After all, the Al Queda warnings to do that were largely ignored. So we CAN'T risk an open gate policy to masses of refugees from these areas. And we have to focus on Americans that travel to these war zones and if necessary, detain them for debriefing if there is solid evidence.

Because we don't need to assume risks to demonstrate how non judgmental we are about the Muslim religion. And having large isolated cores of recent Arab immigrants who turn on you and start to hate their new country is accepting the infection that makes the news every day..

 

[flacaltenn]

An Unholy Alliance. That's the Left's relationship with Islam. They had enough in common to form a strong alliance. The main thing in common, is that they both despise Christianity and Israel. That's solidified the close relationship with the Left in Western Europe especially. Antisemitism has always been rampant in Europe. Most in Europe, especially the Left, truly wanna see Israel go.

And then came the rise of the Left's bitter hatred of Christians. They've now just about destroyed the Church in Europe. This alliance has ultimately led to the Left's destruction of Immigration Systems all across Western Europe. It's no coincidence Muslims now have such a foothold there. However, the Left may be regretting this alliance. Islam is by far the least tolerant of the major religions. In comparison, Christianity and Judaism are very tolerant of Leftist beliefs and behaviors. That's the sad and strange irony of this alliance. They're not seeing the outcome they envisioned with it.

Don't forget the academic alliance between the Israel haters and various Arab/Muslim causes. It's fashionable to be down with Hamas and Hesbollah and the Mullahs in Iran..

 

[Coyote]

Was Hitler wrong to simply condemn Jewry as a whole?

Jews were blowing up people all over the world in order to satisfy a concept in the Talmud that ordered them to spread Judaism until there was nothing else?

Goodness, I never knew!!

So you don't dispute your Islamophobia being analogous to anti-Semitism?

I often have times accepting that people are really as stupid as they appear, but there is nothing remotely similar between antisemitism and rejection of Islam.

A person would have to be nearly retarded to think there was any similarity. I mentioned the most glaring difference, but there are many more.

You seem somewhat confused. Your behavior is not a "rejection of Islam" - it's a rejection of "Muslims" using the same rhetoric and canards that the anti-semites use.


ANTI-SEMITIC and ISLAMOPHOBIC PROPAGANDA

Anti-Semitic propaganda maintained that:

—all Jews were responsible for the act of any Jew
— Judaism was not a religion
— there was an International Jewish conspiracy to influence and then control governments, media, the economy, etc. **
— the Jews hated all non-Jews and they wanted to destroy the Gentiles and dominate the world
— due to inbreeding, Jews had more negative characteristics and passed on these negative characteristics to the next generation. **
— a war against Judaism was a war against the devil **
— by distortions of the Torah and Talmud they claimed that Judaism teaches hatred **
— “The goal of the Jew is to make himself the ruler of humanity. Wherever he comes, he destroys works of culture. He is not a creative spirit, rather a destructive spirit
— “Nearly all major inventions were made by Aryans.” The Jews had no real creativity
— a good Jew could not be a good German
— “Jewish law enjoins or permits Jews to murder non-Jews whenever feasible” **
— “Jews are permitted to lie without moral or religious compunction” **
— “Judaism condones the sexual molestation of young girls
— there was no way to tell the true nature of Jews as they presented a false face. **
— Jews were uniquely violent and untrustworthy compared to all the other peoples of the world. **
— Jews could not serve loyally in the military of Germany, and they were removed. **
— anti-Semitism was a reasonable response to a clear and present danger. ** If Jews raised the issue of anti-Semitism they were doing it for devious reasons.
— there was a “Jewish problem” and that any measures taken against the Jews were reasonable and defensive. **
— Jews are a “disease” infecting any nation they inhabit.


Sound familiar? They should. They've been recycled.

 

[Tehon]

It has been defined. I have provided myriad examples. You don't like it because you're a part of it, and you people hate having a mirror shoved in your face.

You never do.

I'll trust this guy over you. But thanks for trying.

Do you agree with him that the US is a regressive nation that allies with the most repressive regime in the world and state sponsor of the most radical ideology on the planet. Will you condemn US foreign policy and give up cheap oil to keep in line with your theory about regressivism? You are an honest liberal, no?