Multiple fatalities in shooting at Christchurch mosques

A culture that 100% follows sharia, is Islamic.. Just like how if an empire follows Shariah 100%, it is an Islamic Empire.

That is not to say that Islam is a culture, it is not.

so: culture =/= Islam.

Please correct me if I said anything wrong

format_quote Originally Posted by Bhai

White nationalists (the far right) are our enemies. It's us (and all other non-whites) they don't want in 'their' countries.

So what? What is wrong with some whites wanting their own countries as long as they leave other people alone? That is much less harmful than liberalism and judaism which promotes corruption and undermines good governments all over the world.

Yes, uptil before this attack, their attacks have been on government targets (except 1997 attack on Brixton blacks and a gay pub and brick lane Asians), however it was only a matter of time before we were targeted as in their view, it achieves one of their goals in making us want to leave these countries and not want to come here.

Here you are equating white terrorists with white nationanism, which no different from equating Muslim terrorists with Islam.

Far right groups like BNP, Britain first and edl have all marched against Muslims and are constantly hstemongering/inciting violence against us, so it beats me how someone can be so deluded to say that we are not their enemy.

In the grand scheme of things, the jews are their main enemy and we are the pawns, but enemies too nonetheless!

Who would you say are the most moderate white nationalists?, UKIP?, Well they've just recruited the vicious racist yob tommy robinson as their political advisor!

"Moderate" is the wrong word. In an insane world, anyone who is sane will be considered an extremist. That applies equally to Islam and to white nationalism. Here are 2 sane white nationalists:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3ozrpk_eyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SHYAOD78kw

Anyone who supports genocide and mass murder of muslims in anyway don't have any right to free speech. More like abuse of speech.

It is simple, those kind of attacks need action against by execution of those who do it, and those who celebrae/encourage it.

White nationalists are racists, that is what they are.

I dont care if europe is overrun by arabs or africans, colour doesn't matter.

Only a man depraved of any humanity would kill ppl while defenceless and innocent

Everyone should have a right to free speech, even Muhammad in Mecca.

I am trying to organize a discussion between an intelligent Muslim and a white nationalist for YouTube. If I can do this, I will post it here.

54258075_2808691242689781_4742083725204914176_n.jpg

Presenting to you Daily Mail readers.

- - - Updated - - -

format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt

So what? What is wrong with some whites wanting their own countries as long as they leave other people alone?

That would be a valid point if you were a hermit Japanese sitting tightly in his island without a care for the world.

But the West models itself as a beacon of human rights, and when any country does not meet those "human rights" requirements that country gets bombed, hundreds of thousands killed, or just fund an army coup against the government like in Egypt, Algeria, Chile, etc. And all of this using human rights casus belli.

And it's not just government, whenever any society rejects your "enlightened" (read: degenerate, animalistic, hedonistic, filth-ridden) culture to protect their own culture, your people denounces that said people by calling them backward, barbarian, third world sand n******. Your NGOs and government works overtime to promote radical feminism, homosexuality, etc to destroy our traditions, religion and family. Europeans aim to convert the world into your "superior" culture, and it's convert or die. And yet on top of that, it's the muslims who are supposedly the intolerant ones.

So yeah you people should definitely have people from other races, risk of looking more barbaric, intolerant than us muzzlums, don't want that do we?

- - - Updated - - -

format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3ozrpk_eyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SHYAOD78kw

The idea of no censorship is hilarious. There is a limit and censorship to everything. French for example had practiced a massive censorship campaign against Protestantism and killed many protestants. This was to protect Catholicism. Censorship to keep the status quo, it is practiced by those who are in power, and free speech is called for by those who are out of power.

There is no right/left difference. The right-wing governments in poland, hungary and russia practice anti-liberal, anti-left censorship with m,uch more brutal methodology. So yeah, no need to play victim here.

Besides the very idea of forcing assimilation of non-whites into white culture is also censorship. It is censoring other cultures in favour of European culture because of the fear that those cultures may overpower European culture.

format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt

So what? What is wrong with some whites wanting their own countries as long as they leave other people alone? That is much less harmful than liberalism and judaism which promotes corruption and undermines good governments all over the world.


Here you are equating white terrorists with white nationanism, which no different from equating Muslim terrorists with Islam.


"Moderate" is the wrong word. In an insane world, anyone who is sane will be considered an extremist. That applies equally to Islam and to white nationalism. Here are 2 sane white nationalists:

I gave a reply but it's still in moderation so I'll give you a basic summary here;

White nationalism is racism and racism cannot be peaceful as it's an oppressive hate towards your fellow man just because he's a different colour. It also seeks to uproot millions of non-white people from their countries and expel them to somewhere else which is oppressive too.

How can there not be anything wrong with that?

Due to the belligerent hateful nature of racism, white nationalists are called the 'far right', 'far' stands for being too much on the right, I.e. too extreme, this is why the far right are equated to nazism and fascism:

Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of extreme nationalism,[1][2] nativist ideologies, and authoritarian tendencies.[3]

The term is often used to describe Nazism,[4] neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature ultranationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, anti-communist, or reactionary views.[5] These can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group,[6][7] nation, state[8] or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.[9]

Ref: Look up 'far right politics' on Wikipedia

Also far right groups have secret neo Nazi affiliations and this is well known to the authorities, this is why if a far right activist gets too popular for the government's liking, they will take him/her down; check out how France's le penn faces 5 years in jail for posting isis images and how tommy robinson is facing further prosection over contempt of court laws, both minor breaches which they could overlook if they wanted to.

format_quote Originally Posted by Bhai

I gave a reply but it's still in moderation so I'll give you a basic summary here;

White nationalism is racism and racism cannot be peaceful as it's an oppressive hate towards your fellow man just because he's a different colour. It also seeks to uproot millions of non-white people from their countries and expel them to somewhere else which is oppressive too.

How can there not be anything wrong with that?

Due to the belligerent hateful nature of racism, white nationists are called the 'far right', 'far' stands for being too much on the right, I.e. too extreme, this is why the far right are equated to nazism and fascism:

Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of extreme nationalism,[1][2] nativist ideologies, and authoritarian tendencies.[3]

The term is often used to describe Nazism,[4] neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature ultranationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, racist, anti-communist, or reactionary views.[5] These can lead to oppression and violence against groups of people based on their supposed inferiority, or their perceived threat to the native ethnic group,[6][7] nation, state[8] or ultraconservative traditional social institutions.[9]

Ref: Look up 'far right politics' on Wikipedia

Also far right groups have secret neo Nazi affiliations and this is well known to the authorities, this is why if a far right activist gets too popular for the government's liking, they will take him/her down; check out how France's le penn faces 5 years in jail for posting isis images and how tommy robinson is facing further prosection over contempt of court laws, both minor breaches which they could overlook if they wanted to.

I personally reject racism but I don't see it as a big problem. Racism doesn't imply hatred of anyone, it just means that people want to live with their own race. Just because I only allow my family to live in my house doesn't mean that I hate everyone who isn't a member of my family.

Here in America white nationalists just want to split up the country and have some portion of it as a white nation. I have nothing against this. Europe is more problematic because it is more densely populated. I don't know the situation there well enough to say what should happen.

Muhammad supported the idea of being loyal to one's extended family, and racism could be considered an extension of this idea. As I mentioned, there are Arab Muslim tribes that don't intermarry and have their own area, and are therefore racist in the same way that white nationalists are. And Islam has no problem with this.

Anything that differs significantly from the mainstream is considered extremist or far-whatever. I am sure that the Quraysh considered Muhammad to be an extremist and tried to suppress his free speech in Mecca for this reason, just as mainstream culture today does with views it doesn't like.

White nationalists today are not Nazis. This is just a slur used against them.

format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt

I personally reject racism but I don't see it as a big problem. Racism doesn't imply hatred of anyone, it just means that people want to live with their own race. Just because I only allow my family to live in my house doesn't mean that I hate everyone who isn't a member of my family.

Here in America white nationalists just want to split up the country and have some portion of it as a white nation. I have nothing against this. Europe is more problematic because it is more densely populated. I don't know the situation there well enough to say what should happen.

Muhammad supported the idea of being loyal to one's extended family, and racism could be considered an extension of this idea. As I mentioned, there are Arab Muslim tribes that don't intermarry and have their own area, and are therefore racist in the same way that white nationalists are. And Islam has no problem with this.

Anything that differs significantly from the mainstream is considered extremist or far-whatever. I am sure that the Quraysh considered Muhammad to be an extremist and tried to suppress his free speech in Mecca for this reason, just as mainstream culture today does with views it doesn't like.

White nationalists today are not Nazis. This is just a slur used against them.

Islam does not confirm a separatist sort of nationalism. This is against the very message of Quran. Allah created different nations so that we can meet each other. The only natural barrier is language. You can interact with people who speak a common language only. Apart from that, giving importance to race based differences is totally un-Islamic. Family ties has nothing to do with it. Allah commends in Quran to us to get united not divided. We have a nation of Muslims called ummah.

- - - Updated - - -

format_quote Originally Posted by Silas

I think we need to understand where some of this White Nationalist ideology comes from and why people are embracing it

As a white guy in the west, I am reminded almost daily that I am inherently some kind of vicious, genocidal racist and misogynist, simply because of the color of my skin. Furthermore, I am told that what I have earned is a result of "privilege", and that this privilege is a consequence of oppressing minorities.

In other words, if you demonize people long enough, they are going to start pushing back. They are going to get frustrated, especially when many of them have bent over backwards trying to appease, or help in some way, minority groups, Muslims, or the less fortunate. It is never enough: Sweden welcomes thousands of refugees and economic migrants into their country, and yet we have Islamic terrorist attacks in that country, and a rape epidemic that isn't a result of the native population's behavior. We have migrants accepting generous welfare from western nations and then turning around and calling the people who gave them the money "kafirs" or "infidels".

Now this situation is particular to Europe for the most part: Muslim immigrants get along pretty well in the US with the native population.

But when westerners turn on their televisions and see terrorist atrocities happening on an almost weekly basis around the world, it makes an impression.

Fact: Muslims are far safer in western countries than in Middle-Eastern

Fact: you are far more likely to get killed by a fellow Muslim than some lone-wolf, crazy white guy.

People in the west start embracing White Nationalism out of frustration, and in some cases rage. It is less about racism, and more about a reactionary impulse.

For people who think white guys are in power in the US, I would look a little further to see who owns virtually all the major banks and financial institutions, the Hollywood studios, 50% of the professional sports teams, and most of the Silicon Valley firms. Who owns Google and Facebook? It isn't white guys--it's Jews, and some of them foreign born. 40% of the Fortune 400, the richest people in the whole world, are Jewish, even though they are a tiny minority. Trump is controlled by Kushner and his Jewish handlers. AIPAC pretty much determines who becomes president.

Here in Illinois, our governor is a Jewish billionaire (Pritzker), and the Mayor of Chicago is also Jewish (Emmanuel). The average household income for a Jewish family in the US is double that of whites (whites come in behind Asians and Indians as well).

So when White Nationalist complain about Jewish influence and power, can we really tell them that they are wrong? George Soros almost single-handedly wrecked the British economy when he shorted the Pound. These are dangerous people with large amounts of political, social, and financial power.

Jews tell whites that we must allow refugees into our countries and allow Muslims and others to live within our borders, but Israel either expels people with brown skin from the country (which they did recently to Africans), or they put Palestinians and other Muslims into camps or ghettos.

I don't know of a single white person who wants the US to be involved in the Middle-East on any kind of military level. Many whites are actually somewhat sympathetic to the Palestinian cause.

"Racism" is a leftist slogan used by Jews and others to silence criticism.

Would it be racist for an Arab living in Damascus to object to a plan that involved settling 50,000 white Christians in the city? Would it be racist for a Muslim living in Cairo to become concerned if a militant Christian was elected mayor of the city? Would it be racist for Muslims to worry about the sudden appearance of Christian churches in which sermons were given denouncing the people of other faiths as sub-human infidels, and urging violence against them?

There could be a racist element to it, but these are legitimate fears and concerns.

When you tell white people that they are not allowed to have their own countries, and cannot speak in their self-interest, you invite problems.

Nationalism is on rise all over the World because of the decline of religion. As nations lose their connection with their religion they seek some other ties to connect eachother and nationalism is the easiest one. You can put in it or remove whatever you want and you basically dont have to do anything. Being of that specific nation is enough. It can give a very prideful feeling to have such a mentality when you make yourself believe in it. Islam does not promote or confirm this kind of mentality. Islam only teaches to unite as far as we can despite of natural borders as geography, language..etc. Pride is a very basic sin in Islam.

format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian

Islam does not confirm a separatist sort of nationalism. This is against the very message of Quran. Allah created different nations so that we can meet each other. The only natural barrier is language. You can interact with people who speak a common language only. Apart from that, giving importance to race based differences is totally un-Islamic. Family ties has nothing to do with it. Allah commends in Quran to us to get united not divided. We have a nation of Muslims called ummah.

The Quran says nothing about nationalism. The ummah is supposed to be united in religion, which doesn't prevent it from being divided in other ways like into nations. Do you think Saudi Arabia should have an open border policy with other Muslim nations? Then it would overwhelmed with people from countries like Pakistan and its native culture would be lost. Countries have a right to protect their native culture with limited immigration. And since culture is not religion, this doesn't conflict with being part of the ummah.

format_quote Originally Posted by fschmidt

The Quran says nothing about nationalism. The ummah is supposed to be united in religion, which doesn't prevent it from being divided in other ways like into nations. Do you think Saudi Arabia should have an open border policy with other Muslim nations? Then it would overwhelmed with people from countries like Pakistan and its native culture would be lost. Countries have a right to protect their native culture with limited immigration. And since culture is not religion, this doesn't conflict with being part of the ummah.

In an ideal implementation of Islam there wouldnt be political borders between Muslim folks. There would be one Islamic state ruling all Muslims. There woudnt be so much economic differences between the different parts of the state so there wouldnt be need for mass immigration. If you look at all Muslim folks of the World you can observe the main Islamic culture. Our differences are only in details. If we have attached to Islam more, those differences would be even lesser. The religion of Islam is a social engineer. It shapes the individuals and nations in a very spacific form and the common Islamic culture is born out of this. Your "whitest" American becomes like an Arab after converting to Islam and being a Muslim for long years.

Salaam

Had to share this, normal service is resumed.

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet