Islamophiles / Regressive Left - Liberal non-Muslims who are desperate to protect the Religion of Peace

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
BlueSpark said:
They literally would, that isn't even a joke. Most likely they'd blame their respective governments' foreign policies for causing poor Muslims to become radicalized.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Unfortunately it's not even a joke. "White oppression" or some other leftist cognitive dissonance would be used to absolve them for sure.
 
The absolute worst part of the whole leftists riding Muslim cock thing is the fact that they're ignoring all of the terrible problems muslims are causing in Europe, at the moment. Rape is increasing, crime is increasing, Islamist enclaves are growing, and the mainstream press is trying to downplay it because they don't want to admit there are some serious problems with Islam. Seriously. It's just the fucking muslims. You don't see the sikhs causing trouble. Or middle eastern people of basically any other religion, or no religion at all.
 
BlueSpark said:
They literally would, that isn't even a joke. Most likely they'd blame their respective governments' foreign policies for causing poor Muslims to become radicalized.
Click to expand...

It isn't anything new, since every terrorist attack that hits Israel is blamed on the Jews Zionists for mistreating those poor Palestinians (obviously, they had no choice but to kill Israels). Anything bad Hamas does or believes is also the fault of the Jews Zionists.

As Muslims have expanded to Europe in large numbers, these people have logically blamed Europeans for anything bad Muslims does.
 
Save the Loli said:
It isn't anything new, since every terrorist attack that hits Israel is blamed on the Jews Zionists for mistreating those poor Palestinians (obviously, they had no choice but to kill Israels). Anything bad Hamas does or believes is also the fault of the Jews Zionists.

As Muslims have expanded to Europe in large numbers, these people have logically blamed Europeans for anything bad Muslims does.
Click to expand...
I love the word "zionists" because it's exactly the same kind of thinly veiled racist euphamism these people always accuse anyone who says "islamist" of using. They have to be careful to not admit too obviously that they just hate jews because even they realize doing so would discredit their claim that they're the ones "opposing" nazis.
 
Alec Benson Leary said:
I love the word "zionists" because it's exactly the same kind of thinly veiled racist euphamism these people always accuse anyone who says "islamist" of using. They have to be careful to not admit too obviously that they just hate jews because even they realize doing so would discredit their claim that they're the ones "opposing" nazis.
Click to expand...

They don't really oppose Nazis, though. They oppose "Nazis," which is just anyone they don't like, and really means "anyone who isn't one of us." Much like any other kind of supremacist.
 
AnOminous said:
They don't really oppose Nazis, though. They oppose "Nazis," which is just anyone they don't like, and really means "anyone who isn't one of us." Much like any other kind of supremacist.
Click to expand...

"...the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else ... Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathisers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come." - George Orwell
 
@Artie whitefox

So how do you feel about Muslims again? Specifically, people who worship them like the people beimg talked about in this thread?
 
Chris did nothing wrong said:
"...the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else ... Except for the relatively small number of Fascist sympathisers, almost any English person would accept ‘bully’ as a synonym for ‘Fascist’. That is about as near to a definition as this much-abused word has come." - George Orwell
Click to expand...
"Fascism" has been run into the ground so hard it is now simply analogous to "asshole"

Watch how people use it. Especially in leftist plagued sites.

AnOminous said:
They don't really oppose Nazis, though. They oppose "Nazis," which is just anyone they don't like, and really means "anyone who isn't one of us." Much like any other kind of supremacist.
Click to expand...
This shit right here.

Being progressive requires an absolute lack of self awareness.

fireatdawn said:
The absolute worst part of the whole leftists riding Muslim cock thing is the fact that they're ignoring all of the terrible problems muslims are causing in Europe, at the moment. Rape is increasing, crime is increasing, Islamist enclaves are growing, and the mainstream press is trying to downplay it because they don't want to admit there are some serious problems with Islam. Seriously. It's just the fucking muslims. You don't see the sikhs causing trouble. Or middle eastern people of basically any other religion, or no religion at all.
Click to expand...

"Being White is inherently worse than anything Muslims could do. Even if destroying the world. It would be justified"
 
Last edited:
Recently, I found a tumblr thread where SJWs were reblogging a post that contained pictures of women in niqabs that was saying how just because a Muslim woman was wearing a niqab does not mean that she was oppressed. Funny enough, the person who originally posted this was confirmed to be an ISIS supporter and a follower of Wahhabism/Salafist Islam.

There were quite a few radical feminists that I followed that called out the SJWs/regressive leftists for reblogging the post in agreement with the ISIS supporter OP.

I archived the post just for the Farms!
https://archive.fo/scbB1
 
DirkBloodStormKing said:
Recently, I found a tumblr thread where SJWs were reblogging a post that contained pictures of women in niqabs that was saying how just because a Muslim woman was wearing a niqab does not mean that she was oppressed. Funny enough, the person who originally posted this was confirmed to be an ISIS supporter and a follower of Wahhabism/Salafist Islam.

There were quite a few radical feminists that I followed that called out the SJWs/regressive leftists for reblogging the post in agreement with the ISIS supporter OP.

I archived the post just for the Farms!
https://archive.fo/scbB1
Click to expand...

"It's the womans choice to wear the niqab, she doesn't have to do it" is the most common thing I hear. Then when told of honor killings, they hand wave it away with "oh there are some problem with islamic families that haven't intergrated, but thats mostly due to intolerance and xenophobia" it always comes back to the Western populace to blame, every single time.

It's like talking to a tape recorder. They repeat exactly what they've read, all the time, almost word for word.
 
CowReserach Inc. said:
"It's the womans choice to wear the niqab, she doesn't have to do it" is the most common thing I hear. Then when told of honor killings, they hand wave it away with "oh there are some problem with islamic families that haven't intergrated, but thats mostly due to intolerance and xenophobia" it always comes back to the Western populace to blame, every single time.

It's like talking to a tape recorder. They repeat exactly what they've read, all the time, almost word for word.
Click to expand...
To be fair though it does happen. At least where I live, women have freedom in what they wear.

Now this "honor killing" bullshit is something I only hear from random families in places like Pakistan.
Not saying it doesn't happen but it's not a common Arab thing. In fact it's more to do with tribalism that's prevalent in poorer nations.
 
Last edited:
Lol, they wanna make those places seem women-friendly...By only focusing on the queens and princesses. Yes of course the rulers will obviously have more privileges and rights than the ordinary woman. It's like making a documentary of how good British women have it by only focusing on royalty and Emma Watson.
 
Last edited:
When veiling started as a custom in Islam, it was a bit weird how it happened. Initially, the only women who were supposed to be veiled under Islamic law were wives of the Prophet -- the idea being that since he was God's representative on Earth, mere mortals shouldn't even be able to look upon his wives.

There was a pretty good reason, at the time, that they didn't want Muslim women generally to be veiled. Zoroastrians, who were known around the Arabian peninsula at the time, tended to put headcoverings on their women, and for purposes of differentiation the fledgling Islamic movement involved women not covering their heads (wouldn't want to look like a dirty Zoroastrian!).

Veiling as a custom came about because of attitudes growing more conservative later on, but it certainly wasn't part of the original religion. Early Islamic art shows unveiled women as a matter of course, even during medieval times when dominant European cultures generally made non-prostitutes veil.

Art also gives the lie to the idea that the "pictures of Mohammed are forbidden" issue is in any way about Islam: for hundreds of years, Muslims (very devoted ones) made beautiful art involving figural images that included images of Mohammed. Conservative clerics fatwa'd that shit and destroyed a tradition of incredible art, choosing not only to ban images of Mohammed but all figural images.

For the record, I'm not saying "Islam's actually great if you subtract the shitty parts." I'm saying that it's ironic that progressive liberals have taken some of the most conservative lurches of Islam to heart as being critical to the religion as a whole. Promoting veiling and banning images of Mohammed are the hills a lot of progressives are happy to die on, and it's usually because they're so uneducated about Islam that they think things have always been that way -- and they don't stop to think about the fact that the only people who really benefit from these conservative laws are the odious people in charge.

If they were teleported to Europe in 1500 AD, these people would talk about how truly, Christians need witch-burning and the buying of indulgences as part of their religious heritage and culture, and anyone opposing these practices just didn't really understand them.
 
Abortions4All said:
If they were teleported to Europe in 1500 AD, these people would talk about how truly, Christians need witch-burning and the buying of indulgences as part of their religious heritage and culture, and anyone opposing these practices just didn't really understand them.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. It was FUCKING WHITE MALES doing all of that. It's a moot point though since any danger haired troon that got teleported into the 1500s would be one of the ones being burned as a witch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom