Islamul denunta violenta si teroarea!

 searcher-star, on 6th February 2011, 19:44, said:

CA SA LE CUCEREASCA.

 Ben_Gal_1, on 22nd February 2011, 17:43, said:

Nu semana a cucerire, mai mult a invazie, ca cea a lacustelor. Daca vezi clientii ajutoarelor sociale din tarile europene, te vei convinge. Oamenii tarilor respective care traiesc si muncesc o viata acolo, poate ajung la un moment dat fara munca si primesc ajutor social, dar astia din orientrul mijlociu, in majoritate stau cu acel ajutor ani de zile. Am vazut recent o statistica din Suedia. Mai mult de jumate din cei pe ajutor social sunt din astia. In conditiile in care ei reprezinta cam 10% din populatie.

 Gunar, on 25th February 2011, 12:49, said:

E grozv liberalismul asta european. Taierea cracii sub picioare. 40 de milioane traiesc deja in Europa si numarul lor creste exponential.

 searcher-star, on 6th February 2011, 18:44, said:

Asta cred ca e mai greu de analizat. Am avut pe vapor, mai multi musulmani cateva voiaje. Toti ii urau din rarunchi pe americani, dar intrebati unde ar vrea sa emigreze, au raspuns fara ezitare SUA.  
Cred ca trebuie multe circuite shuntate ca sa gandesti asa.

Proaspetii eliberati egipteni ataca manastirile copte. Revolutionari si militari impreuna...
Oare de ce ma asteptam?...

 searcher-star, on 28th February 2011, 12:05, said:

Pai, la ce altceva sa te astepti....?  

jihadwatch
U.K.: "The technique of saying one thing designed to appeal to white liberals, while in fact doing the exact opposite, has been brought to a fine pitch by Islamists"
Problems generated by Islamic "hate speech" (to borrow a fashionable term) and those who act on it set up an interesting sort of game of "rock-paper-scissors" when it comes to liberal causes.
We have already seen that, in practice, Islam beats feminism (no pun intended) when the two come into conflict. Even the most basic women's rights are off the table when defending them runs the risk of offending delicate sensibilities, and it is taken for granted much more easily that women who are oppressed according to Western standards are actually "happy" as participants in their "cultural heritage."
Next up: homophobia! Who will win when that issue comes into conflict with the desire, at once sanctimonious and fear-driven, to accommodate and placate an increasingly strident, aggressive, and supremacist Muslim population in Britain? So far, the latter camp has the upper hand, as those hell-bent on "tolerance" at any cost accept the lies of groups like the East London Mosque with grateful relief.
"East London Mosque keeps on lying," by Andrew Gilliagan for the Telegraph, February 26 (thanks to Ken):
The East London Mosque, that legendary home of tolerance and moderation, has condemned a series of posters which have appeared in its local area, Tower Hamlets, containing a Koranic invocation and declaring the borough a “gay-free zone.” Dilowar Khan, the mosque’s director, was quoted in a council press release saying: “We stand together with our fellow citizens against all forms of hatred, including homophobia. We are committed to building strong and cohesive communities in Tower Hamlets, and our strength is that we will not let incidents of hate divide us.”
As so often, however, the East London Mosque speaks with forked tongue. Yesterday, it was due to demonstrate its deep commitment to “standing together against homophobia” by hosting a gala dinner with one Uthman Lateef, a homophobic preacher who has stated: “We don’t accept homosexuality… we hate it because Allah hates it.”
Mr Lateef is one of at least half a dozen homophobic preachers hosted or promoted by the East London Mosque, three of whom have been officially invited to deliver the Friday sermon. In 2007, as my Dispatches programme on the East London Mosque disclosed, a “Spot The Fag” contest was staged at the mosque. In recent years, there has been a sharp rise in homophobic hate crimes in Tower Hamlets – something which simply cannot be unconnected to the fact that hatred of gay people is allowed to be openly and regularly expressed inside one of the area’s most prominent institutions.
The technique of saying one thing designed to appeal to white liberals, while in fact doing the exact opposite, has been brought to a fine pitch by Islamists generally, and the East London Mosque in particular. The mosque’s idea of “standing against hatred” involves hosting literally dozens of hate, extremist and terrorist preachers on its premises – most famously, the al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. It now claims to have banished hate preachers from its building – but, as this blog has documented, continues to welcome them almost every month.
Why does the East London Mosque tell such obvious lies? Simply, because lies work. There is a part of liberal white society which would rather ignore or deny the problem of extremism, hatred and bigotry in some parts of some Muslim communities. The lies give them a form of permission to do so.
In that same council press release, the chairs of the Rainbow Hamlets LGBT Community Forum, a local gay group, condemned the anti-gay posters but added: “We also condemn those who use these incidents to create a moral panic and stoke up racist or Islamophobic sentiment. At present the people responsible cannot be accurately determined, but it is clear that whoever is responsible, they do not represent any of the local communities.”
It was an army of clones from a decades-old, top-secret DARPA project to replicate Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Oral Roberts (they got into the U.K. on student visas -- it's pretty easy!), goose-stepping through Tower Hamlets while menacingly humming that well known melody ("kill the wabbit") from the Ride of the Valkyries.
I mean... what else could it be?
This statement contains at least one palpable untruth, one questionable assumption, and one dubious elision. As any gay man in Tower Hamlets will tell you, and numerous victims of homophobic hate crime in the area have told me, “the people responsible” can be perfectly “accurately determined:” the hostility towards gay people in the borough comes largely from young Bangladeshis.
It seems rather unlikely that posters quoting the Koran were put up by evangelical Christians, yuppies, brogue-wearing trendies or members of the white working class, the other main parts of the Tower Hamlets community. And given the anti-gay activities allowed inside the area’s largest Muslim institution, and the expression of sentiments there almost exactly identical to those on the posters, it’s also hard to know how the LGBT Forum can be quite so confident that the posters are entirely unrepresentative of any of the local communities....
Read it all.

EU issues statement of "stuttering timidity" in denouncing Muslim persecution of Christians
In so doing, the EU joins the mainstream media and the White House of trying to portray both sides more equally as perpetrators and victims when they bother to denounce the Muslim persecution of non-Muslims in the name of establishing and maintaining the dominance of Islamic law.
The European Union could commit to a substantive defense of human rights here (even for less fashionable groups like Christians), but by issuing such a timid document, it only signals that its hands are tied in fear of enraging the Islamic supremacists within.
"Europe’s stuttering timidity in denouncing the persecution of Christians," by Bernardo Cevellera for Asia News, February 27:
Rome (AsiaNews) - After more than three weeks of debate, the EU has managed to produce a text that explicitly mentions Christians as victims of persecution and the object of violent attacks. An earlier text had been prepared in January, after the terrorist attack on the Church in Baghdad and the massacre at the Church in Alexandria, but was it rejected because of the lack of references to Christians, since the EU preferred to use generic term "religious minorities".
The new text approved yesterday explicitly mentions "Christians and their places of worship" victims of "acts of religious intolerance and discrimination," but now hastens to include among the victims of such acts "Muslim pilgrims and other religious communities" as well.
The Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, one of the promoters of the text, had condemned the draft as a sign of 'excessive secularism "present in the EU, but expressed satisfaction with the text adopted yesterday. Moreover, recalling that the European Constitution does not mention the Christian roots among the historic foundations of Europe, yesterday’s statement really is a gigantic departure.
Yet even this text does not satisfy in full. It seeks to balance the anti-Christian violence with those against other religious communities, in an "excess" of balance and equidistance, not taking into account that at least 70% of persecution in today’s world is carried out against Christians. Yet these impressive figures are the result of statistics (from the World Christian Encyclopedia to the Pew Research Centre) and not partisan reports, so much so that Pope Benedict XVI used the word "Christianophobia" for the first time in a papal speech....
Above all, the text approved by the EU does not go beyond some general exhortation on the defense of religious freedom as a universal human right that must be defended everywhere and for all. " [...]
Europe’s stuttering timidity on religious freedom is underscored by the continents approximation and inanity faced with the riots taking place in North Africa and the Middle East. As an epochal change unfolds before our very eyes - with non-violent demands for justice, equality and democracy - the EU is ineptly concealing its remorse, calling for a "transition" while it secretly sheds tears over all the fabulous economic contracts drawn up with fallen dictators, null and void or hanging in the balance.
It is said that the world and Europe have been taken by surprise by the riots in Tunisia, Egypt, etc. .. We think that this blindness is due to the fact that in all these years, the sole motivation for our Europe’s relationship with these countries was its own its narrow economic interests and thus "stability", not a shared communication of values, attentiveness to social questions, dialogue between cultures and religions. In practice, Europe’s identity was its wallet: and little more....

 Gunar, on 27th February 2011, 00:41, said:

Ei ar vrea America fara americani. Tot asa vor Israelul fara evrei. Vor si mura'n gura si posmagi muieti.

 Ben_Gal_1, on 5th March 2011, 07:22, said:

Adica un mod de viata tipic virusilor. Merg intr-un sistem pus la punct de altii, profita de acel sistem, il vad ca pe un loc de unde sa suga, sistemul se distruge, si apoi se muta intr-un alt sistem, pus la punct tot de altii....s.a.m.d.

 Gunar, on 6th March 2011, 02:31, said:

Exact si iti exemplific ceea ce ai spus cu un video....  Musulmani intr-un autobuz in Franta http://www.youtube.c...f/1/QzaVEwl_HQs

dupa ce ai-au primit pe refugiati  din tarile lor de rahat disperati venicind cu barcile pe mediterana, le-au dat ajutor social, ajutor de sanatate le intretin cele 4 femei (in cazul poligamilor) le cresc plozii pe banii guvernului si francezului de rand care munceste cinstit...iata ce respect le poarta musulmanii

 iceman007, on 11th March 2011, 07:19, said:

Ioropa este o entitate zarghita. Ori face razboi si Hitler o decimeaza, ori invita calai musulmani ca s-o ucida.

 Gunar, on 6th March 2011, 01:31, said:

Dupa parerea mea, metoda optimala consta in a transfera pe toti musulmanii in tarile islamice, trimitind acolo ajutoare economice si educatori cu experienta imuni la virusi periculosi.

Uite o diferenta intre Crestinism si Islamism: Iisus a fost bun, a ajutat oameni bolnavi, i-a invatat pe oameni sa isi iubeasca aproapele, in cele din urma S-a sacrificat pentru noi. Mohamed a luptat pentru a cuceri Mecca, s-a impus prin forta, prin constrangere, prin violenta si santaj.

 adrian93, on 15th March 2011, 16:38, said:

Iisus a deschis cutia Pandorei, a scos de aclo Tanachul si l-a dat la porci. Neamurile nu erau pregatite sufleteste si inteleectualiceste sa "mistuie" Tanachul. Ca urmare a iesit un crestinism scindat in zeci de secre si reprezentantii lor s-au omorit unii pe altii si inca se omoara. Si omoara si evrei.
Concluzia:
Mohamed a facut mult mai putin rau omenirii.

Radical Islam and the eroticisation of death
Why am I not surprised that the FBI says text messages sent between alleged terrorists plotting to blow up the New York City subways used the term “the wedding cake is ready” to signal that the operation was ready to go, and that Al Qaeda apparently often uses the term “wedding” to refer to pending attacks?

Think of a suicide bombing: there is the huge fireball explosion with shrapnel flying like confetti, and then the brilliant white light, and then the union of shaheeds (often inexperienced, sexually frustrated young men) with 72 beautiful virgins. It’s the best thing that’s ever going to happen to a lot of these guys. The wedding cake term is part of the overall eroticisation of death one sees so much in radical Islamism. Not having very much on earth to look forward to – no dancing, no drinking, women excised from public life, rich-take-all controlled economies – what else is there but heaven? http://blogs.telegra...th-in-new-york/

 Ben_Gal_1, on 24th March 2011, 13:02, said:

Eu zic ca trebuie vazute efectele pe termen lung:
Vestul a mers pe o cale mult mai evolutiva decat alte culturi. Nu doar c-a facut Revolutia Industriala dar in plus a avut o istorie mult mai blanda ca alte zone. China de pilda, singura civilizatie care se poate compara cu el, a avut niste recesiuni si represiuni oribile, a avut perioade de istorie traditionala, fara arme moderne dar  cand a reusit sa piarda mai multi oameni ca Europa in WW2.
Poti sa separi lucrurile astea de crestinism, desi mie mi se pare fortat, insa nu poti sa zici ca crestinismul a facut rau. Daca chiar facea asa rau, se vedea pe cultura si istoria continentului nostru. In cel mai rau caz n-a facut obstructie imbunatatirii societatii.

 adrian93, on 15th March 2011, 17:38, said:

Alo? Cu ce sa "sacrificat " Iisus  si pentru cine? Ca pe timpul Lui nu exista picior de crestin pe glob. Daca El a fost asa de bun si milos, daca era asa in stare sa Ajute omenirea pe care a iubit-o asa de mult, dece a lasat totul balta si a luat drumul in cer?
Crestinii sunt asi in ce se cheama la noi evreii "amestecatul oualor".In raspunsurile lor ei arunca o gramada de cuvinte care se aud foarte inteligente dar de fapt sunt goale de tot inteles.

 perpetumobile, on 6th April 2011, 16:15, said:

Ma rog, de fapt El a venit sa ne dea o incertitudine, o neliniste, o instabilitate, sa ne scoata din rutinele din vremea aia care nu faceau decat sa anchilozeze sufletele.
Desigur, oamenii au transformat in rutina si ce-a zis El, dar nelinistea si instabilitatea au ramas, ca dovada, evolutia lumii.

 searcher-star, on 5th April 2011, 14:23, said:

China - budismul
Este adevarat ca budismul nu este o religie monoteista, insa primul "decalog" e al lui Hamurabi. Drept e ca el era babilionean, insa invataturile lui au influientat si budismul si chiar si iudaismul.
In China a existat o comunitate iudaica prin sec. XII. Parte din evreii aceia au lasat urmasi evrei care mai traiesc si astazi in orasul Harbin. Liberalismul chinejilor le-au permis acelor evrei sa traiasca in religia lor. In China nu a fost Inchizitie si nici misionari nu au.
Generalizarile nu au valabilitate. Astfel, bulgarii crestini s-au opus terimiterii evreilor la moarte, desi Bulgaria, ca si Romania, erau aliatii lui Hitler. Tot asa danejii su suedejii au salvat pe evreii care traiau la ei.
Hitler a asmutit Germania impotriva evreilor folosind Noul Testament [invechit].

"efectele pe termen lung"
Islamul este pe cale de a cuceri Europa si Sharia va fi LEGEA de care crestinii vor trebui sa asculte. Deja legea Britaniei a fost "reparata" pentru a face fata tipetelor noilor veniti.