Islamist terrorism in Thailand continues, (along with the chronic western media disinterest);
Two months after the coup that brought in a government that offered a kinder and gentler approach to solving the Islamic terrorism in the south, that terrorism has gotten worse. Before the coup, terrorists killed about 49 people a month. Now it’s up to 56 murders a month. There are now over twenty bombings a month down there, and about seven school a month are being destroyed. The terrorists continue to concentrate on suspected pro-government Moslems, non-Moslems and government workers. Most of the mountainous back country villages have been terrorized, and “cleansed” of infidels (non-Moslems) to such an extent, that the terrorists can move about openly in daytime.
(Previous entries on terrorism in Thailand.)
These stories just don’t fit “the narrative.”
Right. It doesn’t fit the ‘Islamophobia’ multi-culti narrative. Or as Ali Sina said:
“What is behind this paranoia and phobia of criticism? It is the inability of Muslims to counter the valid criticism of Islam. Failing that, they resort to ad hominem and try to discredit its critics by undermining their character. By classifying the criticism of Islam as a disorder, Muslims absolve themselves from responding to valid criticisms against their faith.
The neologism “Islamophobia”, is therefore the symptom of the intellectual bankruptcy of Muslim clerisy to come up with logical arguments and defend Islam against criticism in a rational way. “Islamophobia” is an ad hominen. It is a logical fallacy and an insult hurled at the critics of Islam. It highlights the fact that Islam is a lie, unable to withstand criticism. That is why Muslims need censorship and must eliminate the truth by brutal force (law suits or violence) to protect their lie.
The very existence of this neologism is a tacit confession of Muslims that Islam is a lie, which can’t be defended logically and that ad hominem and censorship are the only ways to defend it.”
“…only way to defend it…” along with the help of Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats, Liberals, the NDP and pretty much the whole MSM.
There is never a good old fashioned crusade around when you need one.
There’s “the Religion of Peace” again…
Islam does not equal naziism….but those extremists in islam do, just like there are Christian extremists and Hindu extremists….
Now imagine if the politically correct term Naziphobia was around….better yet, the Nazi’s would have tied themselves to german and italian ethnic nationalism and they would have referred to criticism as anti german, or germanophobia and anti italian and critics as italophobes.
These words do not add to the debate, they hide it.
And when did Thailand become a “muslim land”….the extremists use this ever expanding never retreating islam concept to their benefit. This is why the spainish should be concerned and why anyone in the Balkans should be worried. We are being made to relive the 15th century and then then the battle will move to the new lands….France, UK, Netherlands.
One can only hope oil money can pay for only so many wars.
Maybe we need to encourage that Muslim insurgency in China….
“Islam does not equal naziism…”
No, because it’s wrapped in religion, it’s much more subtle and pernicious. For example, all Muslims believe that Islam is the first and only religion; that there is only one God and Mohammad is his messenger. Despite being an obvious lie, this gave Mo the Allah given right to change the original writings and testimony in the Torah and NT, in order to support his claim that the Quran is the uncreated and original word of God, thus displacing and disqualifying the original and far older texts (which were tampered with by man, as the argument goes) and repositioning the older faiths as heretical.
They also believe that everybody is born a Muslim and some fall away from the faith after, which once again gives them the moral highground to kill non-Muslims as inferior moral beings and/or apostates.
Of course contained in this ideological brainwashing is that Muslims are not imperialist conquerors – because all the world is Allah’s, they are simply reclaiming it, including Thailand, for him and the faithful.
These things all Muslims share, not just extremists. Or, as somebody said, extremists are just moderates in a hurry.
With respect to Western media indifference, this is especially acute when it comes to teenage Catholic Thai schools girls, captured and beheaded on their way home from school. Photographic proof is available on the ‘net for those inclined to seek same.
What is with you idiots in the MSM?
I’m sorry Shaken, but I think those were Indonesian schoolgirls in Sulawesi. (I’m sorry, I don’t have the link at hand). Also victims of the ROP by the way.
“For example, all Muslims believe that Islam is the first and only religion”
Isn’t that the entire point of monotheism?
The main difference between Islam and Christianity is that Christians have “moved on” from the Dark Ages. Of the nations that were Christianities worst offenders half of them are pretty much athiests at this point. Most of the remaining predominately christian nations are thoroughly secular, even the US bans praying in schools.
Sooner or later Muslims will catch up and stop taking itself literaly or better yet just drop the whole religion madness altogether.
“Sooner or later Muslims will catch up”
I hope so for their sakes. The 21st Century is waiting and becoming impatient.
Jose,
And your point is? Oh, let me guess: Religion = bad. Islam and Christianity = religion, ergo both are equivalent and both are equally bad. Right?
Ever compared the Quran to the Bible, especially the NT? Ever compared Mo’s life example to that of Jesus? Ever compared the genocide executed by pious Muslims following specific commands in the Quran and justified by their prophets life example, versus, what some (not based on the NT, nor Christ’s life example or teaching, of course) have done on the Christian churches behalf?
For example – does the Albigensian Crusade compare with 80 million Hindu’s massacred by the Muslims in the conquest of India? (I could go on and on, but I won’t bother)
Now, what about your lofty opinion of completely secular societies? How about your ‘atheist’ gold standard, where not just prayer was banned, but religion was altogether banned? China, CCCP, Cambodia, etc, come to mind. Now, were these societies better or worse than, as you put it, “religion madness?”
Get a mind man, even if you have to rent one.
Sounds like another grim milestone the media won’t talk about.
“And your point is? Oh, let me guess: Religion = bad.”
It made sense in the Dark Ages as did things like feudalism. But the idea has outlived its usefulness. This isn’t a new idea, we’ve been slowly displacing the role religion plays in our lives since the Enlightenment.
I wouldn’t say Christian or Islamic texts are any better or worse than the other. Christianity has the advantage of being “fuzzier” than Islam, it basicaly means whatever you want it to mean. And Christians don’t take their texts literally. You won’t find anyone who gives any credence to things “Don’t suffer a witch to live” or the prohibition against banning meat and dairy on the same plate very seriously.
There used to be a time when a muslim nation was the most religiously tolerant and intellectualy progressive people in Europe. Unfortunately my ancestors wiped them off the map and they’ve been dominated by hardcore religious yahoos ever since.
“China, CCCP, Cambodia, etc, come to mind. Now, were these societies better or worse than, as you put it, “religion madness?”
Marxism/communism *is* a monotheistic religion. It just doesn’t include a god.
Hardline Christian hater Jose says: “This isn’t a new idea, we’ve been slowly displacing the role religion plays in our lives since the Enlightenment.”
Hey, fatally Eurocentric boy, that’s not the case in formerly atheist Russia, where Christianity is growing rapidly. Nor is it the case in formerly atheist China, where in just a few short years Christianity has cultivated one hundred million new evangelical followers. In Indonesia and other nations we see a return to fundamentalist Islam. In Africa and South America Christianity is expanding, not decreasing.
I have seen what atheism offers: Pol Pot, Stalin, Ceaucescu, Chairman Mao: the most self hating, murderous regimes ever.
“I wouldn’t say Christian or Islamic texts are any better or worse than the other.”
Of course you wouldn’t. You think everything is morally equivilent, why start using your brain now? And that’s the problem: atheism equals nihilism. No truth, nothing is better or worse than anything, just a slushy, self-aborting, truthless, loveless existence producing no beauty, and no truth. Blech.
As an atheist I would like to say that I do not agree with Jose’s relativism. The Christian religion did allow the acquisition of knowledge in a way that appears to be impossible in Islam. I do not share his breezy optimism that “Sooner or later Muslims will catch up and stop taking itself literaly or better yet just drop the whole religion madness altogether.” I sincerly hope this happens, and quickly, but I think it more likely that a large number of Muslim fanatics gain access to serious destructive weapons long before then. Shiite clergy in Iran, at the request of the government there, have recently authorized the use of nuclear weapons for jihad.
Bob projects on athiesm “loveless existence producing no beauty, and no truth.”
Exhibit A- The Beatles
Exhibit B- Christian rock in its entirety.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In my opinion it occurs in nature and as the result of human achievement. A sunset or a forest is beautiful, as is an airplane, a skyscraper or a painting. Atheism or religion has little to do with it. There is much religious music that is beautiful, and there is much beatiful secular music also. Whether a god exists is irrelevant.
And that’s the problem: atheism equals nihilism
This is just stupid. Some of the worst nihilists in the world are VERY religious and are blowing themselves up in markets as we speak.
Once again, whether a god actually exists is irrelevant.
“It (religion) made sense in the Dark Ages as did things like feudalism. But the idea has outlived its usefulness. This isn’t a new idea, we’ve been slowly displacing the role religion plays in our lives since the Enlightenment.” -Jose
I see your feelings serve as fact in your world. Rather than declining, Christianity is growing at a record pace. That, dear Jose, is a fact.
And from where did the Enlightenment come? And how in the world do you think that it displaced religion?
“I wouldn’t say Christian or Islamic texts are any better or worse than the other. Christianity has the advantage of being “fuzzier” than Islam, it basicaly means whatever you want it to mean. And Christians don’t take their texts literally. You won’t find anyone who gives any credence to things “Don’t suffer a witch to live” or the prohibition against banning meat and dairy on the same plate very seriously.”
You wouldn’t say? I would – without any information or facts to formulate and defend your opinion, you believe that Islam and Christianity are morally equivalent. But then, how redundant, I said that in the last post and all you are doing is providing the evidence. I wonder if this will work: You are a dolt, aren’t you?
“There used to be a time when a muslim nation was the most religiously tolerant and intellectualy progressive people in Europe. Unfortunately my ancestors wiped them off the map and they’ve been dominated by hardcore religious yahoos ever since.”
Where did you get that bit of misinformation? I suggest a little reading – ‘Islamic Imperialism’ by Efraim Karsh is a pretty good place to start. Also ‘Force of Reason’ by Oriana Fallaci. Either will prove more valuable in an argument than your ‘feelings.’
BTW, you are lucky your ancestors had common sense and formulated reason based on facts. It’s unfortunate that their DNA broke down on the way to you, though.