What is going on in Burma?

I dislike Christianity too, but I am not so stupid that I hate Christians too. Christians are merely patients who have contracted the disease of Christianity. Not all of them show the same symptoms and when they do they manifest in different degrees.

I know lots of Christians and they truly believe that Christianity is against slavery, that it teaches universal love and see it as a basis for human rights, etc.

Some know the truth about Christianity and it complements their evil natures. Others know the truth and leave Christianity.
You can say more or less the same about every religion and it will be true.
 
You can say more or less the same about every religion and it will be true.

Exactly my point. Ironic that your universal love and slavery bit sounds even funnier with Christianity inserted than Islam.
 
So its ok when christians genocide people but not ok when Muslims do it?
No, it's not as black and white as that. You also need to consider the reasons for the atrocities. Is it for vengeance or for religious reasons or for resourses such as gold or oil?
Mohamedans slaughter and rape not because they need to but because their ideology tells them to, just like the Nazis.

I dislike Islam too, but I am not so stupid that I hate Muslims too. Muslims are merely patients who have contracted the disease of Islam. Not all of them show the same symptoms and when they do they manifest in different degrees.

I know lots of Muslims and they truly believe that Islam is against slavery, that it teaches universal love and see it as a basis for human rights, etc.

Some know the truth about Islam and it complements their evil natures. Others know the truth and leave Islam.
I totally agree. Most moslems are illiterate morons who couldn't tell a quoran verse from a bible or torah verse. Just like the Hitler jugend they have been indoctrinated since childhood to have their despicable faith.
And then of course you have the intelligent mohamedans, who are purebred psychopaths. Just like the top nazis who had 120+ IQ. Just pure evil there.
 
No, it's not as black and white as that. You also need to consider the reasons for the atrocities. Is it for vengeance or for religious reasons or for resourses such as gold or oil?
Mohamedans slaughter and rape not because they need to but because their ideology tells them to, just like the Nazis.

I totally agree. Most moslems are illiterate morons who couldn't tell a quoran verse from a bible or torah verse. Just like the Hitler jugend they have been indoctrinated since childhood to have their despicable faith.
And then of course you have the intelligent mohamedans, who are purebred psychopaths. Just like the top nazis who had 120+ IQ. Just pure evil there.

I disagree with your classification. I work with some very intelligent Muslims and they have an ideal version of Islam. They truly believe that Islam is a religion of peace. Then you also have stupid Muslims who see Islam the way it is and how it was followed by Mohammed and his followers back then.
 
No, it's not as black and white as that. You also need to consider the reasons for the atrocities. Is it for vengeance or for religious reasons or for resourses such as gold or oil?
Mohamedans slaughter and rape not because they need to but because their ideology tells them to, just like the Nazis.
First, as I said, cant take you seriously when you use that term. You just undermine your own credibility.

So whenever a Muslim attacks someone, its his religion. But when a christian does it its for something else?

So when Spain force converted and then banished all muslims and jews from spain in 1492, it wasnt religiously motivated? When Charlamagne said any anglo-saxon who refused baptism is put to death, it wasnt religiously motivated? When the Spanish were converting native americans it wasnt religiously motivated? When Christians burn people accused of witchcraft in the central african republic, its not religiously motivated?


And what about biblical justifications for slavery?
 
I disagree with your classification. I work with some very intelligent Muslims and they have an ideal version of Islam. They truly believe that Islam is a religion of peace. Then you also have stupid Muslims who see Islam the way it is and how it was followed by Mohammed and his followers back then.
If they believe that and are intelligent (and aren't lying), they are uneducated of Islams history. Ask them to explain how Islam is a religion of peace when it was started by a warlord and has always, still to this day 1400 years later, been spread be the sword.
 
First, as I said, cant take you seriously when you use that term. You just undermine your own credibility.
I really don't care. For me the difference between muslim and mohamedan is exactly the same as the difference between nazi and national socialist. None.

So whenever a Muslim attacks someone, its his religion. But when a christian does it its for something else?
Let me know when a Christian yells "praise jesus" or "god is great" before blowing up a bunch of innocent civilians.

So when Spain force converted and then banished all muslims and jews from spain in 1492, it wasnt religiously motivated? When Charlamagne said any anglo-saxon who refused baptism is put to death, it wasnt religiously motivated? When the Spanish were converting native americans it wasnt religiously motivated? When Christians burn people accused of witchcraft in the central african republic, its not religiously motivated?
The reconquista was glorious and the following inquisition a necessity.
All colonisation is bad so I agree with you on your other points.

And what about biblical justifications for slavery?
What about it? White Europeans were the ones who first ended slavery, long before the Arab mohamedans did.
 
I really don't care. For me the difference between muslim and mohamedan is exactly the same as the difference between nazi and national socialist. None.
So colored and black has the same meaning to you too? Do you call a jew an Israelite too?

Let me know when a Christian yells "praise jesus" or "god is great" before blowing up a bunch of innocent civilians.
How about christian militias massacring muslims and blowing up mosques and conducting witch hunts?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-balaka
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ic-burnt-witches-at-stake-says-UN-report.html


The reconquista was glorious and the following inquisition a necessity.
All colonisation is bad so I agree with you on your other points.

All dependent on your perspective. You seem to take personal delight in the fact that people died, which seems sickening. But thats how it is for edgy americans who grew up with no exposure to real violence.

What about it? White Europeans were the ones who first ended slavery, long before the Arab mohamedans did.

Irrelevant. The bible justified slavery. Its terrible. So unless youre gonna be out here condemning the christians as much as Muslims, youre just a pathetic hypocrite
 
What is happening in Burma is shame its a shame that in this day and age people have not learned the lessons, its shame that government still kills people with impunity.
 
So colored and black has the same meaning to you too? Do you call a jew an Israelite too?
Same same but different.

How about christian militias massacring muslims and blowing up mosques and conducting witch hunts?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-balaka
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ic-burnt-witches-at-stake-says-UN-report.html
The difference is that it is usually Muslims who start these atrocities while the victim peoples are the ones who eventually get fed up and retaliate.

All dependent on your perspective. You seem to take personal delight in the fact that people died, which seems sickening. But thats how it is for edgy americans who grew up with no exposure to real violence.
I'm Polish and despise nazis, commies and jihadis equally. The Ottoman moslems are on the rise again but most people seem oblivious.

Irrelevant. The bible justified slavery. Its terrible. So unless youre gonna be out here condemning the christians as much as Muslims, youre just a pathetic hypocrite
Christians aren't the ones that to this day are spreading like the plague using terrorism and rape as the means of conquest. If they were I would certainly be calling them out, but they don't. Moslems do, and have been for the last 1400 years.
 
Same same but different.

Im gonna give you a pass because you're polish and Polish people don't know any better.

The difference is that it is usually Muslims who start these atrocities while the victim peoples are the ones who eventually get fed up and retaliate.

Did you even read what I linked? Now i know you have no clue what you're saying
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
enjoy

I'm Polish and despise nazis, commies and jihadis equally. The Ottoman moslems are on the rise again but most people seem oblivious.

The polish explains you not comprehending certain concepts. And you talking about Erdogan? There is a strong muslim undercurrent right now in Turkey that I also don't like. but claiming its trying to regain the glory of the ottoman empire? Thats a bit of a stretch.

Christians aren't the ones that to this day are spreading like the plague using terrorism and rape as the means of conquest. If they were I would certainly be calling them out, but they don't. Moslems do, and have been for the last 1400 years.

You're right the christians just did it for 1500 years and then stopped a hundred years ago. That makes it all better. and theres still christians in the modern era doing it. go look at that wiki page i linked.
 
Did you even read what I linked? Now i know you have no clue what you're saying
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
enjoy
I've never said that there hasn't been christian terrorists. I've said that the atrocities they commit is usually due to previous violence by others, i.e. defensive. Mohammedans use terror as an offensive weapon. I think that's a big difference.
Take that African militia group in your link for example. They were formed as a response to Muslims terrorizing civilians.


The polish explains you not comprehending certain concepts. And you talking about Erdogan? There is a strong muslim undercurrent right now in Turkey that I also don't like. but claiming its trying to regain the glory of the ottoman empire? Thats a bit of a stretch.
I'm not the one who chooses to ignore the basic concepts of Islamic jihad.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ys-all-he-wants-is-same-powers-as-Hitler.html

Mohammedan leaders have numerous times stated that they realize that they cannot hope to conquer Europe by force and that they intend to do it via mass migration and more child births than the Europeans. Here's Ottoman Erdogans similar thoughts on the matter:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/world/europe/erdogan-turkey-future-of-europe.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-families-have-five-children-bulwark-against/

You're right the christians just did it for 1500 years and then stopped a hundred years ago. That makes it all better. and theres still christians in the modern era doing it. go look at that wiki page i linked.
There are no terrorists in the world that are using their religion as a justification for using terrorism as an offensive weapon to gain land. Except moslems.
 
Last edited:
It's not all Burmese
Not all buddhists
Can't judge the whole faith based on the actions of a few
What about the crusades
 
It's not all Burmese
Not all buddhists
Can't judge the whole faith based on the actions of a few
What about the crusades
The thing is people agitating about this aren't smearing all Buddhists, just the ones in Myanmar that are responsible like the demagogues pushing for this, the military for doing it, and the government for letting it happen.

So its a cute joke but also a false equivalency.
 
I've never said that there hasn't been christian terrorists. I've said that the atrocities they commit is usually due to previous violence by others, i.e. defensive. Mohammedans use terror as an offensive weapon. I think that's a big difference.
Take that African militia group in your link for example. They were formed as a response to Muslims terrorizing civilians.


I'm not the one who chooses to ignore the basic concepts of Islamic jihad.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ys-all-he-wants-is-same-powers-as-Hitler.html

Mohammedan leaders have numerous times stated that they realize that they cannot hope to conquer Europe by force and that they intend to do it via mass migration and more child births than the Europeans. Here's Ottoman Erdogans similar thoughts on the matter:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/world/europe/erdogan-turkey-future-of-europe.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-families-have-five-children-bulwark-against/

There are no terrorists in the world that are using their religion as a justification for using terrorism as an offensive weapon to gain land. Except moslems.

Go back, read the link I posted. If you have, then we can move forward. Your babbling just proved you didn't read shit and are just parroting the same uninformed opinion
 
The thing is people agitating about this aren't smearing all Buddhists, just the ones in Myanmar that are responsible like the demagogues pushing for this, the military for doing it, and the government for letting it happen.

So its a cute joke but also a false equivalency.
I read something about the fact that the government is set-up so the military has all the power and who ever is in charge has basically no power. I'm just starting to tear into this mess but do you know if this is true?
 
I read something about the fact that the government is set-up so the military has all the power and who ever is in charge has basically no power. I'm just starting to tear into this mess but do you know if this is true?
From the little I know Burma was directly ruled by the military not long ago and so even if they are not now the military likely retains a lot of power independent of the civilian government. People are calling for the Prime Ministers Peace Prize to be stripped but if she really doesn't have control over the military I do find it harder to blame her. She could risk her position by confronting the military but that is a scary proposition and likely not popular one in Burma right now given the anti-Rohingya sentiment.
 
How about christian militias massacring muslims and blowing up mosques and conducting witch hunts?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-balaka
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ic-burnt-witches-at-stake-says-UN-report.html
Dude... you know that the Muslims of CAR are the ones who instigated that conflict? They were a minority that immediately attacked Christians & Animists when they came into power.

From what I've read, that conflict has stopped being sectarian and more about control over resources anyways.
 
When muslims are victims you never hear that in the news. It's not even considered ethnic cleansing by the leader.

We only hear muslims are aggressors in Fox news and CNN. We are played by the media on a daily basis.

Im a Southern American, I know I'm being played by the media.
It all over the news here in Aus maybe you need better media.
 
Back
Top