Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do you think terrorism is exclusive to one religion?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Suna123 View Post

    The article mixes neo nazis and white supremacy in a wild disorder and does not explain what white supremacy shall be. Actually all attacks are done by right extremists.

    I wonder what you think about Japanese immigration laws. Is this yellow supremacy?
    I also wonder what you would think about 120 Million Chinese immigrating to India in 2 decades (10% of India)? Maybe it would turn out brown supremacy?
    And how do you call attacks on Muslims in India? nazis? any sort of supremacy? or the Aryan ideology?
    Read about the new Japanese immigration policy and then yuu can decide if its yellow or blue. If you are talking about the Hakka community in India then they are doing fine, but the ruling government based on extreme Hinduism and Aryan ideology is a threat to the native Indians (Dravidian people) and to all other minorities. So of course this a a supremacy based on the same nazi ideology. Whether that article is mixes of things you don't like it or not, the incidents explained in that article is true and America, Europe and Australia is clearly supporting these supremacist groups.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Hades91x View Post
      India and Pakistan are 3 generations away from the British packing their bags and leaving the Indian subcontinen in 1947. The excuses for their situation resting with "colonialism" are really starting to wear thin - especially when you have places like Singapore which were former British colonies and did not turn into shitholes.

      Perhaps these places should look at the legacy of an earlier era of colonialism - Islamic colonialism - which began with what is most likely the biggest on-going genocide in history and ultimately created a population under the control of a dysfunctional cult which instilled apathy and a perchant for violence "when needed".

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Suna123 View Post
        The article mixes neo nazis and white supremacy in a wild disorder and does not explain what white supremacy shall be.
        The usual mishmash of googled instances of "attacks by whites" without any coherent form of analysis. So real racist attacks verses tit-for-tat attacks on Muslims "in revenge" for Islamist attacks are all lumped together, not to mention ones of a purely nationalistic nature. Furthermore, the author of this "article" takes attacks from over an 8-year period in order to try to pad the numbers "to make her argument".

        Again, it is worth reiterating that 14 attacks over an 8-year period amounts to about 1 1/2 attacks per year around the world. Contrast that with attacks of these magnitudes which are Islamically-inspired around the world every day

        Yes, that article is the sort of shit you'd expect from a journalist who went through a postmodernist education - unorganised, incoherent and essentially empty political sloganeering (in this case about "whites").

        Once upon a time, The Guardian used to have quality journalism - now it puts out this sort of crap. Other articles I've seen on The Guardian's website reflect that quality of writing.

        Originally posted by Suna123 View Post
        Actually all attacks are done by right extremists.
        Indeed, including Islamists.

        I'm sure that after 5 minutes of Googling, I could come up with an even far more substantial and longer list of kook far left attacks and, furthermore, could categorise and organise them far better than that piece of shit article managed to do



        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

          India and Pakistan are 3 generations away from the British packing their bags and leaving the Indian subcontinen in 1947. The excuses for their situation resting with "colonialism" are really starting to wear thin - especially when you have places like Singapore which were former British colonies and did not turn into shitholes.

          Perhaps these places should look at the legacy of an earlier era of colonialism - Islamic colonialism - which began with what is most likely the biggest on-going genocide in history and ultimately created a population under the control of a dysfunctional cult which instilled apathy and a perchant for violence "when needed".
          You are saying that India is a backward country because of islamic dynasty and you have nothing to say about the British who looted India and take everything to Britain? British colonialism is based on the supremacist agenda pf the Brits. Britishers created riots between Hindu and Muslims and they looted India a left to Britain. I don't understand why you are justifying white ideologies amd white supremacy. Maybe the white in you is getting hurt. Intentionally you are changing this topic.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Rashhash View Post

            I think you don't know about it. KKK is a white supremacist group, what is nazism about? Of course about there racial and color superiority. Varana(color) system is colour superiority and they have Aryans ideology in their scriptures.
            Kkk was originally anti immigrant organization, arian influence on nationalsocializm was nothing but decorative flavour. So tell me; if it's white supremacy thing how were russians untermensch?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              You are saying that India is a backward country because of islamic dynasty
              Yes - left with the legacy of apathy and a corruption mindset - even for those who did not convert to Islam. I've observed it first hand from having lived in the Balkans for a number of years. This is one of the stand-out legacies of centuries of Ottoman Islamist rule in the Balkans region.

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              and you have nothing to say about the British who looted India
              Yes, the British for sure exploited India with the very willing assistance of the ruling local Rajas there.

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              and take everything to Britain?
              Here we go - more unsubstantiated postcolonialist pseudo-intellectual verbal masturbation.

              No, the British didn't "take everything back to Britain". I would kindly ask you not to insult our collective intelligence. When the British pulled out in 1947, the Indian subcontinent was left with significant infrastructure such as railroads, a functioning road system and a substantial education system. I don't see images of British ships removing 1000s of km of railroad rails from India as they departed

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              British colonialism is based on the supremacist agenda pf the Brits.
              Just as earlier Islamic colonisation of India over a number of waves is based on the supremacist agenda of Islam...

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              Britishers created riots between Hindu and Muslims and they looted India a left to Britain.
              I suspect that a lasting legacy of hatred and dysfunction caused by Islamists murdering and enslaving literally 100s of millions of Indians over an ensuring millenium almost certainly plays a far greater role in that than a few mere decades of British rule...

              It was sectarian battles between Muslims and Hindus in the 1920s onwards which was the primary driver of British policy in India and not the other way around. It was ultimately these sectarian battles which made British rule in India untenable and which caused the British to completely loose control:

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

              Once the British were being kicked out of India in 1947 and had pretty much lost control, the respective sides without the British in control "got down to business" and genocided each other in the many hundreds of thousands, if not millions:

              https://www.dawn.com/news/1169309

              https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24159594

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              I don't understand why you are justifying white ideologies amd white supremacy.
              I'm not. I'm putting things into perspective and context.

              On the other hand, you are full of postcolonialist-inspired bullshit excuses for the problems in India and Pakistan when the British have been long-gone from the Indian subcontinent. In fact, these problems were the result of sectarian strife between Hindus and Muslims and the existing culture prior to the arrival of Britian - which, ironically, the British were forced to keep a lid on.

              You might want to look deeper than superficial postcolonialist theory shit to discover why the British were able to walk in, colonise and control India so easily.... It's much easier to gain control of societies which are corrupt, corrupted and dysfunctional than ones which are not. The British in turn had to police many hundreds of years of previously pent up hatred between these two groups as the occupying power.

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              Maybe the white in you is getting hurt.
              Maybe a racist pig like yourself is insulting my intelligence. I'm merely reporting the facts - whether you like it or not.

              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post
              Intentionally you are changing this topic.
              You are the one bringing up racist "it's all whites fault" shit as something of a strawman argument excusing Islamist terrorism.

              I'm merely refuting your highly racist bullshit.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

                India and Pakistan are 3 generations away from the British packing their bags and leaving the Indian subcontinen in 1947. The excuses for their situation resting with "colonialism" are really starting to wear thin - especially when you have places like Singapore which were former British colonies and did not turn into shitholes.

                Perhaps these places should look at the legacy of an earlier era of colonialism - Islamic colonialism - which began with what is most likely the biggest on-going genocide in history and ultimately created a population under the control of a dysfunctional cult which instilled apathy and a perchant for violence "when needed".
                Those societies are static compared to east asia, which were 100 years ago on the same post colonial level.
                It's only question of time till china swallows them after EU and US sink in their own created shit-swamp and will lose the global economic and military dominance.
                They can cry about 'white supremacy' so much as they want. Red-herrings never lured the reality, just minds of idiots which project their own problems on responsibility of others.

                White supremacy is a red-herring, there is no discussion necessary about it.
                People in this thread asked OP several times what is the definition of 'white supremacy' and the person gave them just insufficient and less credible answers. In all honesty I don't know what it might to be as well.
                Usually something that you can't describe exactly in two objective sentences is only a delusion

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by aussieinbg View Post

                  Yes - left with the legacy of apathy and a corruption mindset - even for those who did not convert to Islam. I've observed it first hand from having lived in the Balkans for a number of years. This is one of the stand-out legacies of centuries of Ottoman Islamist rule in the Balkans region.



                  Yes, the British for sure exploited India with the very willing assistance of the ruling local Rajas there.



                  Here we go - more unsubstantiated postcolonialist pseudo-intellectual verbal masturbation.

                  No, the British didn't "take everything back to Britain". I would kindly ask you not to insult our collective intelligence. When the British pulled out in 1947, the Indian subcontinent was left with significant infrastructure such as railroads, a functioning road system and a substantial education system. I don't see images of British ships removing 1000s of km of railroad rails from India as they departed



                  Just as earlier Islamic colonisation of India over a number of waves is based on the supremacist agenda of Islam...



                  I suspect that a lasting legacy of hatred and dysfunction caused by Islamists murdering and enslaving literally 100s of millions of Indians over an ensuring millenium almost certainly plays a far greater role in that than a few mere decades of British rule...

                  It was sectarian battles between Muslims and Hindus in the 1920s onwards which was the primary driver of British policy in India and not the other way around. It was ultimately these sectarian battles which made British rule in India untenable and which caused the British to completely loose control:

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India

                  Once the British were being kicked out of India in 1947 and had pretty much lost control, the respective sides without the British in control "got down to business" and genocided each other in the many hundreds of thousands, if not millions:

                  https://www.dawn.com/news/1169309

                  https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24159594



                  I'm not. I'm putting things into perspective and context.

                  On the other hand, you are full of postcolonialist-inspired bullshit excuses for the problems in India and Pakistan when the British have been long-gone from the Indian subcontinent. In fact, these problems were the result of sectarian strife between Hindus and Muslims and the existing culture prior to the arrival of Britian - which, ironically, the British were forced to keep a lid on.

                  You might want to look deeper than superficial postcolonialist theory shit to discover why the British were able to walk in, colonise and control India so easily.... It's much easier to gain control of societies which are corrupt, corrupted and dysfunctional than ones which are not. The British in turn had to police many hundreds of years of previously pent up hatred between these two groups as the occupying power.



                  Maybe a racist pig like yourself is insulting my intelligence. I'm merely reporting the facts - whether you like it or not.



                  You are the one bringing up racist "it's all whites fault" shit as something of a strawman argument excusing Islamist terrorism.

                  I'm merely refuting your highly racist bullshit.


                  Again you are wrong. When India was under Islamic rule native Indians were treated and some were forced to convert and all (what else you get from an Islamic ideology based ruling). How ever India's GDP was higher at this time (while Akbar was ruling). So your came makes no sense.




                  Again you masturbated and had fake brit orgasm. Read this link below to know how much they looted from India and how did they loit India

                  https://www.businesstoday.in/current...ry/292352.html

                  It is funny. Talking about white supremacy, nazism and Aryan ideology is nazism

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Rashhash View Post

                    Of course it is islam.
                    So, if you are aware of this, there is no problem with the rest. It's obvious that terrorism exist elsewhere. Historically, the first terrorists were some extrreme branches of Judaism, there had also been terrorispm from regionalists groups and 20years ago, there were still some bombs from the Basques and the Corsicans as well as there were some extremes people in Brittany.

                    Same happens with the Whites supremacists, the neonazis, the communists... Usually, terrorists are just the extreme branch of an existing ideology.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Sancta_Lux View Post
                      So, if you are aware of this, there is no problem with the rest. It's obvious that terrorism exist elsewhere. Historically, the first terrorists were some extrreme branches of Judaism, there had also been terrorispm from regionalists groups and 20years ago, there were still some bombs from the Basques and the Corsicans as well as there were some extremes people in Brittany.

                      Same happens with the Whites supremacists, the neonazis, the communists... Usually, terrorists are just the extreme branch of an existing ideology.
                      What i am saying is that most people are focusing on Islamic terrorism and what they are doing abroad. Some whites (with Aryan ideology) is secretly supporting white supremacy, neo nazism and other extreme ideology and blaming everything on Islamic ideology.
                      Last edited by Rashhash; 03-18-2019, 11:52 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Hades91x View Post

                        Those societies are static compared to east asia, which were 100 years ago on the same post colonial level.
                        It's only question of time till china swallows them after EU and US sink in their own created shit-swamp and will lose the global economic and military dominance.
                        They can cry about 'white supremacy' so much as they want. Red-herrings never lured the reality, just minds of idiots which project their own problems on responsibility of others.

                        White supremacy is a red-herring, there is no discussion necessary about it.
                        People in this thread asked OP several times what is the definition of 'white supremacy' and the person gave them just insufficient and less credible answers. In all honesty I don't know what it might to be as well.
                        Usually something that you can't describe exactly in two objective sentences is only a delusion
                        FYI read this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy

                        This is for people who have no idea about white supremacy and other color based ideology. Talking about white supremacy makes lots of people butt hurt. When you guys defend it then it sounds like a Muslim defending terrorism, because what they believe about Islam is calm and peaceful. Like this some Europeans and Americans are defending white supremacy by saying that the definition of white supremacy is not enough

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Rashhash View Post

                          You are saying that India is a backward country because of islamic dynasty and you have nothing to say about the British who looted India and take everything to Britain? British colonialism is based on the supremacist agenda pf the Brits. Britishers created riots between Hindu and Muslims and they looted India a left to Britain. I don't understand why you are justifying white ideologies amd white supremacy. Maybe the white in you is getting hurt. Intentionally you are changing this topic.
                          British are the worst thieves and bitches of the world, that's well known, yet they didn't take "everything to Britain" and were smart enough to see how to get economical benefits in India... Also, of course you can blame them but when the English "conquered" India, they did it with barely 1000 men, don't you think that they receive some help from the local dynasties? Remember that English are the worst sons of a bitch, they are extremely good at doing "coups de pute" using others to get what they want

                          Concerning the socalled supremacist agenda... no, still not. The English only used their very advanced technology to get benefit from others. There is no supremacy here, only the very basis of capitalism + never forget that, on their island, they had nothing, not even wood since they destroyed their woods like retards while buildings their fleet.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Rashhash View Post

                            What i am saying is that most people are focusing on Islamic terrorism and what they are doing abroad. Some whites (with Aryan ideology) is secretly supporting white supremacy, neo nazism and other extreme ideology and blaming everything on Islamic ideology.
                            Should people focus on something that almost never happen in comparison? The neo-nazis as you call them are often more in the east europe than in the west europe and very rarely commit terror attack here while islamists threaten us everywhere (on the trashbin that twitter is, you see them giggling when people are dying here and getting mad calling for vendetta when they get fucked) then commit a terror attack every 6months or so without counting the attacks they are doing in their own countries...

                            Take the example of France, how could you compare Corsicans terrorists, which were commiting attack by puting bomb at night on building s in villages of Corsica or kidnapping a politician and his family while bombing his home and never cease to decrease since 30 years to islamists attacks that are increasing since 20 years with sickos who blindly kill anyone while yelling "allahu akbar"?
                            There is a huge difference and no wonder why people in France would rather talk about the Islamists.

                            As for White "supremacists", people in the West are labeling you as racist, faschist if you dare to say anythign about Islam or foreigner... and don't forget the legendary :


                            White supremacists exist, but they are slapped by this kind of people

                            Ps : Being white supremacist or neo nazi doesn't mean being terrorist, one could say that white is superior to everything yet never ever want to kill a black or a yellow.
                            Last edited by Sancta_Lux; 03-18-2019, 12:12 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Rashhash View Post

                              FYI read this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_supremacy

                              This is for people who have no idea about white supremacy and other color based ideology. Talking about white supremacy makes lots of people butt hurt. When you guys defend it then it sounds like a Muslim defending terrorism, because what they believe about Islam is calm and peaceful. Like this some Europeans and Americans are defending white supremacy by saying that the definition of white supremacy is not enough
                              Racism exist and I don't want deny that, but canalizing your thought on 'white supremacy' and causing some 'butt hurt', like you wrote. Is in my opinion racism as well.
                              You feel rightful, justified and superior when whites defend themselves to your 'white supremacy' accusations, didn't you?
                              Isn't this a sign of your 'supremacy'?

                              Otherwise I don't understand your lower motives (eg. creating butt hurt). What did whites so terrible to you. Did a white chick hurt your superior feelings?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Hades91x View Post

                                Racism exist and I don't want deny that, but canalizing your thought on 'white supremacy' and causing some 'butt hurt', like you wrote. Is in my opinion racism as well.
                                You feel rightful, justified and superior when whites defend themselves to your 'white supremacy' accusations, didn't you?
                                Isn't this a sign of your 'supremacy'?

                                Otherwise I don't understand your lower motives (eg. creating butt hurt). What did whites so terrible to you. Did a white chick hurt your superior feelings?
                                Now yuu agree that white supremacy exists. I am amazed that you have no idea what white supremacists are doing. I had a second thought about white supremacy, white Nationalism and all after the recent Newzeland attack. Remember the Aryans killed millions and (still they are killing) they were really proud of their race and color. That's going to happen again like if you have a president like Trump who justify supremacist ideology and all. I am talking about this cult (white supremacy) based on the truths and facts that happened here before. You sounds like a Muslim who deny the bad side of islam even after quoting from the Islamic scriptures. This is what they say talking about Islam like that is islamophobia. White chick (sounds so Racist and misogynistic) lel

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X