Brief history lesson on Islam - Fwd: ALA Senate candidate Bernard Gaynor struts his stuff in a powerful speech.
From an aspiring Australian senate candidate who I and many others admire, Bernard Gaynor. Hopefully he is observant enough to not get imprisoned on trumped up charges like Pauline Hanson did some years back due to a united effort (it turned out) between our two major ("left" and "right") political parties.
Good luck Bernard, Zenaan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:32:09 +1100 Subject: ALA Senate candidate Bernard Gaynor struts his stuff in a powerful speech. FW: ALA SENATE CANDIDATE STRUTS HIS STUFFThis is one of the best political speeches I have read from a man who is a true Australian patriot and not a typical brain-dead Australian politician. Bernard's speech is full of facts and truth about Islam and politics in Australia. He was given a rough deal by the ADF and NSW Anti-Discrimination Board and successfully defended himself against both of them. My only criticism is that Bernard didn't go far enough in calling out the Liberal and Labor parties as the Islamic lap dogs, gutless snivelling cowards and traitors they truly are. Get ready for the major parties and the slimy Greens to launch attacks against Bernard Gaynor, the ALA and Pauline Hanson. I hope they have have the determination, resilience and endurance for a long political battle to win seats in Parliament. I don't think the Liberal party will be able to have the leader of ALA imprisoned on trumped up charges like they did with Pauline. With today's social media it will be far more difficult to substantiate false claims against Gaynor and the ALA. Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Admin To: POLITICIANS ; C.Q. FREE STATE GROUP ; SENATORS ; CHURCH MILITANTS Sent: Monday, November 30, 2015 7:07 AM Subject: FW: ALA SENATE CANDIDATE STRUTS HIS STUFF ALA SENATE CANDIDATE STRUTS HIS STUFF THE PICKERING POST Larry Pickering Fri 27 Nov 2015 http://pickeringpost.com/story/-ala-senate-candidate-struts-his-stuff/5620 Outspoken ex-military Senate candidate, Bernard Gaynor, faced a large crowd on Queensland’s Gold Coast this week to launch his campaign for the newly-formed Australian Liberty Alliance party which is looming as a force in the upcoming Federal election. Mr Gaynor spoke mainly about public concern over Islamic immigration. There is certainly a world-wide movement gaining political momentum on this issue and the current Labor and liberal parties are certain to join in moving against any viable threat to their comfortable duopoly, as they have with ruthless efficiency in the past. This is the text of what Mr Gaynor had to say: Ladies and gentleman, Australia is facing a crisis. It is a crisis that threatens all of us right now. And it is a crisis that threatens our children most of all because they will have to live with the decisions we make today. This crisis comes from Islamic ideology. For far too long, our government has pretended that Islamic ideology is peaceful. Our political leaders have pretended that this ideology can be integrated safely into our society. But they have been wrong. Any student of history knows that this belief is wrong. Islam was founded by a man who brilliantly merged politics with religion and created an empire where the church was the state. In the process, an army was raised, wars were fought, and populations were enslaved, forcibly converted or executed. This man was Mohammad and the Islamic religion teaches that he was perfect and that his example is to be followed. There should be no surprises, therefore, that the Islamic religion leads to violence. It idolises a warlord. It should also come as no surprise that this religion advocates immigration into non-Islamic lands as a means of conquering them. The Islamic calendar itself is based on the first successful conquest undertaken by Islamic immigration: the conquest of Medina. For much of the last three centuries, all of this has been forgotten. Then September 11 happened. Unfortunately, the Western world believed that September 11 was something new. But it was not. It was something old. In fact, in the first battle of September 11 was in 1683. This was the first September 11. On that first September 11, European forces defeated an invading Islamic army that had been besieging Vienna for two months. Those of you who know Europe will know that the city of Vienna is right in the middle of the continent. It is not an understatement to say that this victory saved Europe. After this first battle of September 11, the Islamic threat to Europe receded due to the efforts of those who protected Western civilisation, until it was forgotten. But before this first battle of September 11, Europe was constantly threatened by Islam, just as it is today. In fact, Vienna was under constant attack for 150 years prior to that first battle of September 11 in 1683. The Battle of Lepanto occurred in 1571. It saved Europe from an Islamic fleet sent to invade Italy. In 1453, the city of Constantinople fell. It has been the capital of the Byzantine Empire since Roman days. It finally succumbed after a 700 year fight against Islamic aggression. Now this empire and its culture is gone. The Spanish also battled Islam for about 700 years. That’s how long it took to remove Islam after it arrived with the Caliph’s armies shortly after Mohammad’s death. The year that Columbus discovered America was also the year that Islam was eventually removed from Spain. Now it is walking in again via Europe’s open borders. Mohammad died in the year 632. Within five years, Jerusalem had been captured and in the next century Islam had conquered the Persians, the Egyptians, all of North Africa, Spain and had even reached into the heart of France. In 732, at a place called Tours in Northern France, this first Islamic invasion was finally stopped but as we can see through history, it was not the last. We face another invasion today. September 11 shows that we are once again under attack. So does Bali. And Madrid. And London. So do the terrorist atrocities on our home soil, in Melbourne, in Sydney’s Martin Place and at Parramatta. And two attacks in Paris this year show that appeasing the enemy only makes things worse. Yet our politicians, our government and our security organisations remain obstinately and wilfully determined to ignore the reality of this crisis and the threat that we face. Let me give you three examples. The first example is that of our Prime Minister. Our Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has been talking a lot about Islam lately. And every time he does, he shows how ill-equipped and unprepared he is for the task at hand of protecting Australia and Australians. In early October, Prime Minister Turnbull announced that he was going to ‘reset’ relations with the Islamic community. By the end of the day, a police worker lay dead outside Parramatta police station as a result of an attack launched from the Parramatta mosque. Undeterred, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced a National Day of Unity in late October, where Australians were invited to welcome the Islamic community. The very next day, Hizb ut Tahrir held a conference attended by nearly 1000 people and announced that they rejected Australia, and rejected our values, our laws, our flag and our anthem. Just so you know, this organisation, Hizb ut Tahrir, has been supported by almost every Islamic organisation or imam in Australia, including the Grand Mufti, Australia’s highest ranking Islamic figure. The truth is that Hizb ut Tahrir is the political wing of an Islamic insurgency intent on overthrowing our system of government. Then the Prime Minister flew to Europe and rejected calls for European nations to shut their borders to an Islamic invasion. Within a couple of days, 130 people lay dead in Paris and hundreds more were wounded. These attacks were carried out by immigrants who lived in France, but who never became French. And now, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull wants us to negotiate a political settlement in Syria. He thinks the Islamic State can be dealt with by nothing more than words. As such, it is clear that the Prime Minister, installed by the majority of his Liberal party colleagues, has simply no idea about the nature of Islamic ideology or how we should confront its attacks on us. The second example relates to government funding of Islam in this country. This is just a small example of how your taxes are spent: The federal government has provided millions over the last five years to ‘deradicalisation’ programs. Only one out of 87 of these programs actually deals with radicalised individuals. The remainder actually promote Islam. Some of these programs over the last 12 months are: $120,000 has been provided for an Australian Rules Football competition open only to Islamic schools. $114,820 has been provided to tackle violence between Islamic sects within the Islamic community. $115,700 has been allocated to a program called People Against Violent Extremism. It tackles extremism by trying to ‘deradicalise’ those who oppose the construction of new mosques in their local community. $56,500 was allocated to SalamCare. This group is led by a person who wrote Allahu Akbar on their Facebook page when the Islamic State announced that it had formed the caliphate and it campaigns against radicalisation by trying to stop people like the courageous Dutch politician, Geert Wilders, from coming to Australia. Over $1 million has been allocated by the Attorney-General’s Department to pay for the legal fees of those facing terrorism charges or who are being questioned by ASIO. Over $15 million was allocated to improve school security last year. Islamic schools made up the vast majority of schools to receive funding for this project. $66,000 was provided by the Australian Federal Police to the Lebanese Muslim Association. This organisation has hosted a US-based imam who has stated: “If we put a nationwide infrastructure in place and marshalled our resources, we’d take over this country in a very short time….What a great victory it will be for Islam to have this country in the fold and ranks of the Muslims.” Over $165 million was given to Islam-sympathetic groups by Centrelink to help resettle migrants in Australia in the last 12 months. And the Queensland government is now funding mosque open days. The list goes on. The Prime Minister doesn’t understand the threat. And our government uses our taxes to fund and promote Islam. This helps to explain why, despite the billions that we spend on this problem, it is only getting worse. The third example is that of our Australian Army. It is now removing a motto from the hat badges of its Christian chaplains because it has been deemed offensive to Muslims. This motto is “In this sign conquer”. The appeasement within the military comes just a few months after the appointment of the first imam in the Australian Defence Force, Sheikh Mohammadu Nawas Saleem. Saleem is one of Australia’s most prominent imams. He is the treasurer of the Australian National Imams Council and works very closely with the Grand Mufti. And Sheikh Saleem has called for Sharia law to implemented in Australia. He has supported Hizb ut Tahrir publicly. This is the same Hizb ut Tahrir that says Muslims must not attend Anzac Day because it represents an attack on the caliphate. This is the same Hizb ut Tahrir that defends the concept of honour killings. Sheikh Saleem has opposed military action against the Islamic State. And he has condemned laws that prohibit the advocation of terrorism on the basis that they limit the free speech of Islamic preachers. And the Liberal government appointed this imam to the military. His job is to help increase recruitment from the Islamic community. Just so you know, the Islamic community has more of its sons fighting for the Islamic State than for Australia. All of these examples highlight how unprepared our political leaders, our government and our military is to deal with the threat of Islamic violence. And if they won’t defend against Islamic violence, then we are also wide open for subversion in other ways: through the implementation of halal certification, through the acceptance of polygamy via Centrelink, through the indoctrination of our children in the national curriculum. If our government cannot bring itself to understand the violence of Islam, it will never be able to defend itself against the non-violent but equally subversive political threat that Islam poses in a democracy. But I have not come here today to tell you how bad things are. You already know it. Australians everywhere already understand this. What we desperately need is a solution and that is why I am here because the Australian Liberty Alliance is that solution. The Australian Liberty Alliance will stand up to the threat of Islam and we will do this while Australia still has time to act. It is important to understand this. The problems in Australia are there, but they are not as great as those faced by Europe. So we have a window of opportunity to act and for the future of our children, we must. This is the Australian Liberty Alliance’s plan. The Australian Liberty Alliance will stop Islamic immigration. It will do this by imposing a moratorium on immigration from any countries that are members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, with exceptions only for persecuted non-Muslims from those countries. The Australian Liberty Alliance will axe the halal certification tax. It will do this by scrapping all halal certification fees and forcing the Islamic community to pay for its own religious offices. That will kill the profit taking. And it will force producers to clearly label their products and explain to Australians that the food they buy – especially meat – has been produced as part of an Islamic animal sacrifice. This will kill demand and halal certification will simply disappear. The Australian Liberty Alliance will reject any government support for Sharia law, in law and in practice. That means there will be no more welfare for polygamous Islamic families, no segregation of women, no female genital mutilation and none of the other Islamic practices that are incompatible with Australian culture and society. The Australian Liberty Alliance will put an end to the construction of dangerous new mosques and Islamic schools. It will force Islamic organisations to sign up to a Charter of Muslim Understanding, which will require these organisations to reform Islam so that it no longer acts as a violent political ideology, if they wish to be classified as religious organisations. And the party will work with local governments to introduce proper and stringent risk assessments into the development planning process. This means that without reform of Islam, and I doubt that will ever happen, there will be no new mosques and existing mosques will face the prospect of being shut down. The Australian Liberty Alliance will also address the threat of terrorism by addressing the problem: Islam. Our intelligence and security agencies will be directed to gain a true understanding of Islam, rather than the politically-correct version that they pretend into existence today. These organisations will no longer be allowed to promote this religion or its ideas. And the Australian Liberty Alliance will start using treachery laws against those who support the Islamic State and other Islamic terrorist groups against our own Defence Force. All of these measures could be implemented today. And if they were, the problem we face would not grow and the serious troublemakers within the Islamic community would be neutralised, while the remainder of the Islamic community would soon get the message: get on board with Team Australia, or face the full force of the law. Most of them want to and we welcome that. The situation within Australia is containable if we act today. If we wait until 2020 or 2025, it may well be too late. Unfortunately, these decisions are not being taken because our current leaders do not understand the problem and they do not have the will to act. They are lethargic in the face of the enemy. Australians deserve much better and that is what the Australian Liberty Alliance will provide: an energy to act, driven by a proud and uncompromising belief in our Western Christian civilisation. Unlike the others, the Australian Liberty Alliance is proud that it is proud of Australia. As a result, the Australian Liberty Alliance is not just addressing the big picture. Its policies, intent and resolve will also address the problems that Australians face in their local communities: like right here on the Gold Coast. For instance, the Gold Coast Mayor, Tom Tate, has been quoted in Islamic webpages outlining a vision where entire suburbs convert to Islam in order to bring in Islamic tourists. I say this: Tom Tate might as well strap a suicide vest to the Gold Coast’s tourism industry. I grew up in Southport. I love this city and I know why people come here. It is not because of Islam. Sharia tourism will kill the Gold Coast. These ideas must be stopped and as the Australian Liberty Alliance grows it will work with local Gold Coast residents to run strong campaigns for good local representatives to be elected to council so that they can fight this dangerous political correctness. This is how we must protect ourselves from Islam: and not just Islam’s threat of violence, but the danger it also offers against our economic security and our social fabric. Of course, the Australian Liberty Alliance is more than a party focused on Islam. It is not a single issue party. It has a conservative philosophy and policies that will help Australians in other ways. Its vision is for a smaller, decentralised government that does not leave a legacy of debt for future generations. It believes in reform of the tax system. At the moment debate is focused solely on new taxes. The Australian Liberty Alliance believes that it is more important to look at how current taxes are spent and how the grants system allows government funds to flow into projects that have no responsibility, accountability or oversight. It will sell the SBS to the highest bidder and put a broom through the ABC. The Australian Liberty Alliance will support natural families and reform welfare so that it is not used as a substitute for work, but so that it also provides Australian families with more choice and opportunity to spend time with their children raising them. It will not waste billions trying to control the level of the oceans, yet the Australian Liberty Alliance’s environmental policies will have the exact same impact on the climate as those of other parties. The Australian Liberty Alliance will address the flaws in our education system and refocus our schools so that they teach the basics exceptionally well and this will set the foundation for exceptional higher educational studies. These are all ideas that the Australian Liberty Alliance will champion. And our political system needs debate about these ideas. At the moment, the major parties have a monopoly on debate. They are the Coles and Woolworths of politics, screwing down on the voters. Their efforts and endeavours are not about providing customer service or better products. Instead, they focused solely on maintain their monopoly on power. We desperately need an Aldi to come and shake up the system. That is what the Australian Liberty Alliance will do and by doing so, it will provide Australians with a brighter future. That future starts at the next election. Between now and then I will be working night and day to campaign for the Australian Liberty Alliance and I hope you will join me in that campaign. We need to build a strong team on the Gold Coast and across Queensland. This campaign will not be successful if it is a one man band. But it will succeed if we work as a team and the turn out tonight shows that we are well and truly on the way to building this team, this army of patriotic Australians. I look forward to growing that team on the Gold Coast from tonight. I also thank you for coming tonight. I thank for you for already standing tall and fighting hard for Australia. And I thank you for your support of the Australian Liberty Alliance. Source: http://pickeringpost.com/story/-ala-senate-candidate-struts-his-stuff/5620
From an aspiring Australian senate candidate who I and many others admire, Bernard Gaynor. Hopefully he is observant enough to not get imprisoned on trumped up charges like Pauline Hanson did some years back due to a united effort (it turned out) between our two major ("left" and "right") political parties.
Good luck Bernard, Zenaan
Hello Zenaan, I'm afraid that Islam, and Islamic ideology, although undoubtedly founded in the midst of violence and chaos and closely linked to quite violent and bloody wars throughout much of history, is not a violent religion. Texts in the Qur'an, as in the bible, promote and glorify the violence of it's followers when perceived in the context of historic events. Such is the nature of holy texts, advocating the victory of their followers in battle over the followers of other religions pertaining to foreign cultures. To say that Islam is a violent religion by referencing battles that occurred hundreds of years ago completely negliges the positions members of other religions and faiths, such as Christians, took throughout the course of history. Christian movements such as the crusades and the idea of spreading religion through missionaries to be a noble act caused damage in the same way that Islamic movements did by conquering swathes of land in order to spread their ideology and economic power. Such a comparison clearly reflects the nature of religions based on interpretative scripture without so much as delving into the violence caused as a result of more modern colonialism, closely linked with Christian ideology and capitalism. An even more modern example of tragedy motivated by religious interpretation is that of Australia's "stolen generations", where, by means of the Christian religion, Australian society itself separated up to 30% of indigenous children from their families. Evidently, no religion is immune to acts of violence perpetrated in the name of religion or "protection of religion", taking as an example the persistent Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Judaism and the fear of Jewish people being oppressed is used as an excuse for the colonization of Palestinian territory. To blindly accuse "Islam" as the root of all violence perpetrated by those proclaiming to be of Islamic faith is a broad and particularly callous generalization, especially when addressing the issue of immigration. Regardless of one's religion, if a person is conditioned to react with violence, violence will ensue. Preventing any group of people based on their faith from immigrating to a country is simply discrimination issuing from a stereotype propagated by members of a society acting out of fear. Instead of screening immigrants (refugees or otherwise) based on their religion, it would be much more appropriate to screen for signs that a person may attempt to perpetrate or incite violence.
Ladies and gentleman, Australia is facing a crisis.
Australia is not facing a crisis. Rather, the Australian government is facing a particularly tough issue of generalization and misrepresentation within Australian borders. I hope that Australia will not succumb to the fear and hatred of Muslim people so often preached by those able to benefit from it. All the best, Endless
On 11/30/15, Endless <3ndless@riseup.net> wrote:
From an aspiring Australian senate candidate who I and many others admire, Bernard Gaynor. Hopefully he is observant enough to not get imprisoned on trumped up charges like Pauline Hanson did some years back due to a united effort (it turned out) between our two major ("left" and "right") political parties.
Good luck Bernard, Zenaan
Hello Zenaan,
I'm afraid that Islam, and Islamic ideology, although undoubtedly founded in the midst of violence and chaos and closely linked to quite violent and bloody wars throughout much of history, is not a violent religion. Texts in the Qur'an, as in the bible, promote and glorify the violence of it's followers when perceived in the context of historic events. Such is the nature of holy texts, advocating the victory of their followers in battle over the followers of other religions pertaining to foreign cultures.
To say that Islam is a violent religion by referencing battles that occurred hundreds of years ago completely negliges the positions members of other religions and faiths, such as Christians, took throughout the course of history. Christian movements such as the crusades and the idea of spreading religion through missionaries to be a noble act caused damage in the same way that Islamic movements did by conquering swathes of land in order to spread their ideology and economic power. Such a comparison clearly reflects the nature of religions based on interpretative scripture without so much as delving into the violence caused as a result of more modern colonialism, closely linked with Christian ideology and capitalism.
I agree that religion nearly always degenerates into control of its "followers" in more or less degraded and degrading ways. The Tibetans on the whole are (from what I've read) much better off under the system imposed by the Chinese than they were under the system imposed by Lamas, "Lamaism" ultimately under the Dalai Lama. To excessively generalise, and to stick to "at this point in history, as in, 2015 AD", could you agree that the current manifestation of "Islamists" (i.e. those extreme individuals professing faith in Islam), is in fact problematic for the "reasonably comfortable" Christian/ democratic "west"? Recently Russia has implemented some significant changes in Crimea, replacing the Turkish Imam with a new Russian Imam, building a new large mosque, and I think also some other legislative measures. Russia seems to approach "Islamism", by 'implementing' it's version of Islam and importing a "truly moderate" Imam. My question might be getting lost. Perhaps, do you consider it sensible to distinguish between moderates and extremists of any religion? If so, given the current extreme level of emigration from Syria, Libya and other Muslim areas of our little planet, is there some wisdom in attempting to distinguish between true moderates and extremists or even "likely to be extremists"? I problem I see is that in our 'modern' 'democratic' striving for 'secularism', we in the so called west have given up on morals and ethics ('goodness as each individual conceives goodness') for an extreme relativism, where no one really takes any stand for anything, and it appears to me that "evil" paths of action are pursued by western powers (companies, individuals, nations) in the pursuit of power, oil, control.
An even more modern example of tragedy motivated by religious interpretation is that of Australia's "stolen generations", where, by means of the Christian religion, Australian society itself separated up to 30% of indigenous children from their families.
And the settlers in Tasmania systematically slaughtered the aborigines of Tasmania (an island state of Australia). Heinous crimes. Genocide of the first order. Yes, humans can be a problem. In fact, humans usually are the primary problem.
Evidently, no religion is immune to acts of violence perpetrated in the name of religion or "protection of religion", taking as an example the persistent Israeli-Palestinian conflict, where Judaism and the fear of Jewish people being oppressed is used as an excuse for the colonization of Palestinian territory.
To blindly accuse "Islam" as the root of all violence perpetrated by those proclaiming to be of Islamic faith is a broad and particularly callous generalization, especially when addressing the issue of immigration.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Muhammad/myths-mu-home.htm http://thestoryofmohammed.blogspot.com.au To handle the genuine problem of violent immigrants and the difficulty in properly assessing individuals for the violent potential, perhaps a contractual bind - you want to be here, you sign and agree to: - not engage in criminal acts as defined by our statutory criminal code - if you engage in any criminal act according to our statutory criminal code, you will be immediately deported to the country you were allegedly fleeing The "Christian" ethic of "turn the other cheek" can be, and I say is, abused. Abused by our politicians, abused by our schooling institutions turning us into compliant citizens. And abused by those who immigrate to Australia with intent to implement "emigration jihad" which by my readings, is a religious duty, at least for some Muslims (or is that Islamists? - too many terms sorry).
Regardless of one's religion, if a person is conditioned to react with violence, violence will ensue.
I agree. This is a straightforward and logical position. And it's the violent acts that need to be handled, and ideally minimise the entry of violent people into our country. Can we identify violent people amongst those who are attempting to immigrate? Some people say we shouldn't distinguish between "good" and "bad" inclined people - they are just poor refugees fleeing war and who have suffered (which may be true) and we ought to suffer them regardless - I disagree with unlimited tolerance and acceptance of all beliefs, all positions - violent positions and violent beliefs are not only held, but preached, believed and acted upon. A policy to deter violence by immigrants: If they commit any violent crime, immediate deportation ought be mandatory.
Preventing any group of people based on their faith from immigrating to a country is simply discrimination issuing from a stereotype propagated by members of a society acting out of fear. Instead of screening immigrants (refugees or otherwise) based on their religion, it would be much more appropriate to screen for signs that a person may attempt to perpetrate or incite violence.
And an indicator may, for a not so random example, Sudanese Muslims. But all you can do is assess areas and people for indicators - I think a deterrent as suggested above is what's needed. And I think that without such deterrents, and an excess of immigrants who commit crimes, the problems may lead to vigilante reprisal groups - which may well have its own problems (people taking the law into their own hands, without evidence, trials, witnesses - nothing - is this where we want to head?).
Ladies and gentleman, Australia is facing a crisis.
Australia is not facing a crisis. Rather, the Australian government is facing a particularly tough issue of generalization and misrepresentation within Australian borders. I hope that Australia will not succumb to the fear and hatred of Muslim people so often preached by those able to benefit from it.
I can only agree - it is abhorrent actions which ought be handled. Political correctness however casts a great dampener on much "political" debate in Australia, but that's another problem... Zenaan
Zenaan Harkness wrote:
The "Christian" ethic of "turn the other cheek" can be, and I say is, abused.
Is the 'christian ethic of turn the other cheek' even present in the oldest version of the new testament. Or is it just as badly butchered as every other so-called 'holy book'? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus#Unique_and_other_textual_vari...
On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 09:21:31 -0800 Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Zenaan Harkness wrote:
The "Christian" ethic of "turn the other cheek" can be, and I say is, abused.
Is the 'christian ethic of turn the other cheek' even present in the oldest version of the new testament.
Has any single christian ever 'turned the other cheek'? Actually, a quick look at the real world shows that jew-christianity is the biggest criminal enterprise on the planet. Or is it just as badly butchered
as every other so-called 'holy book'?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus#Unique_and_other_textual_vari...
On 11/30/15, Rayzer <Rayzer@riseup.net> wrote:
Zenaan Harkness wrote:
The "Christian" ethic of "turn the other cheek" can be, and I say is, abused.
Is the 'christian ethic of turn the other cheek' even present in the oldest version of the new testament. Or is it just as badly butchered as every other so-called 'holy book'?
Butchered. How do people live, what do they believe. Do the majority have a right to self determination, or should the politicians get the say? For example direct democracy? Or will that just produce the tyranny of the majority or the tyranny of the stupid? With "democracy" and its reduction to two party system (the Liberal/Labour of Australia, or Democratic/Republican of America) things are so corrupt, so despotic, that something has to change. We have the people we have. And however we might "improve" things, we have to start with who we are.
Funny, that. Sounds eerily similar to what US Republicans (and many Democrats) would say. I didn't know you're a fan, Zenaan! -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
Dnia poniedziałek, 30 listopada 2015 21:56:06 rysiek pisze:
Funny, that.
Sounds eerily similar to what US Republicans (and many Democrats) would say. I didn't know you're a fan, Zenaan!
Come to think about it, it's interesting how not long after Russia goes to "war against ISIS", you seem to develop a strong islamophobia. :) -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147
On 12/1/15, rysiek <rysiek@hackerspace.pl> wrote:
Dnia poniedziałek, 30 listopada 2015 21:56:06 rysiek pisze:
Funny, that.
Sounds eerily similar to what US Republicans (and many Democrats) would say. I didn't know you're a fan, Zenaan!
Come to think about it, it's interesting how not long after Russia goes to "war against ISIS", you seem to develop a strong islamophobia. :)
It's a random violence phobia, and my government having no strategy to handle immigrants who might, or at least those who subsequently do some random violent act. Random violence done by those born here is another matter again. I don't know that it's relevant, but my position goes way back - and if it were truly relevant I could demonstrate that - but is it? What is relevant or useful? Perhaps my ability to communicate my position is (hopefully) improving over time. Zenaan
Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On 12/1/15, rysiek <rysiek@hackerspace.pl> wrote:
Dnia poniedziałek, 30 listopada 2015 21:56:06 rysiek pisze:
Funny, that.
Sounds eerily similar to what US Republicans (and many Democrats) would say. I didn't know you're a fan, Zenaan! Come to think about it, it's interesting how not long after Russia goes to "war against ISIS", you seem to develop a strong islamophobia. :) It's a random violence phobia, and my government having no strategy to handle immigrants who might, or at least those who subsequently do some random violent act. Random violence done by those born here is another matter again.
I don't know that it's relevant, but my position goes way back - and if it were truly relevant I could demonstrate that - but is it? What is relevant or useful? Perhaps my ability to communicate my position is (hopefully) improving over time.
Zenaan
My position is "My country excludes economic immigrants and brings in the thugs... ARVN soldiers, Iraqi "interpreters", Chechens who fought our proxy war against Russia... Libyan military officials who defected from Gadaffi and lived in Vienna Va, right down the road from Langley, until they ended up commanding LIFG thugs who later became the seed formation for ISIS and al-Nusra... and my country DESERVES every bit of mayhem that policy causes. So armor up dude... and get hyper-vigilant. RR
Since this is ostensibly about the history of Islam it's worth noting I had to factcheck a NewsWeek article today because it was BLATANTLY wrong. It tweeted like this... https://twitter.com/AuntieImperial/status/671434898402582536 The Kingdom of #SaudiArabia, "where “punishment by the sword” has been practiced for centuries" has existed for one single century @NewsWeek Got that @Newsweek? #SaudiArabIa is a barely century old British construct (1932) & the 'house of Saud' has Turkish, not Arabic, bloodlines But we REALLY can't expect a globally read MSM NEWS outlet like @Newsweek to fact check their shit before publishing http://www.newsweek.com/2014/10/24/when-it-comes-beheadings-isis-has-nothing...
participants (5)
-
Endless
-
juan
-
Rayzer
-
rysiek
-
Zenaan Harkness