Malaysian Muslim man marries 11-year-old Thai girl

Discussion in 'Asia' started by MGB ROADSTER, Jul 2, 2018.

  1. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    41,272
    Likes Received:
    13,733
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Child marriage in Malaysia is largely driven by tradition and culture. It is accepted as a traditional practice by many sections of society.

    In 2014, the National Fatwa Council published a fatwa declaring that child marriage was not obligatory and that it was not a “healthy” practice, a declaration that has slowly started to change attitudes.

    Child marriage is still thought to be more common among rural and indigenous communities.

    https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/child-marriage/malaysia/
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2018
  2. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    @notme Yes, african slaves. But it wasn't the only arabic slave trade. The total number of people enslaved by muslims is much higher because it considered not only african.

    I didn't knew for the batavian one.
     
  3. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The source says what the source says... and it says 5 million. And you were just rewriting history for the sake of your argument with nothing to back it up. So it is 5 million taken form Africa for the Muslims vs 12 million for the Christians/Jews, also taken from Africa.
    You still are pulling numbers out of thin air, with "casually" forgetting the Christian/Jewish west enslaved people ALL over the world for centuries, when they violently oppressed about the entire world. Something the Muslims did not do. Says enough who is far more violent.

    You simply again tried to rewrite history. Here have an other one:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_India
    During colonial time many Indians were taken into different parts of the world as slave by British Raj
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
  4. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Something the muslims did not". Oh yes, beyond invaded north africa, spain, eastern europe, asia, without considering they went in Island plundering it.But muslims didn't had any expansionist views. You're miserable attempts to whitewash the imperialistic policies muslims had for centuries is truly pathetic. Both europeans and muslims were expansionnists, one was more powerfull and successfull. That's the history of Europe and western world, to have reached unimaginable technologic might for their time, and have used all that power for great things like horrible things. Muslims had agressive expansionnist policies for centuries, no doubt they would have submitted the world if they could.

    You simply again tried to rewrite history.[/quote]

    Not really, that's what you're doing, I only have done a mistake, I aknowledge, it happens to everybody.


    Yes, the articles you quote show that muslims had a lot of slaves in India too for centuries, it says too that the british abolished slavery in India in 1863. The muslims for centuries kept slaves in India, after a few decades, the british abolished slavery.

    Okay, I already have shown you that there were other slave trades than the african one and so it's totally dishonned to take only in consideration slaves only in Africa. Who cares that the slaves are african, asian or european ? What matters is the total slave trade.
    You're focusing only on african slave trade because it fit you're interest and so you can hide that muslims abducted millions of people for their pleasure. Commiting slavery on any human being is morally reprehensible by standart nowodays moral standarts, no matter their colour of skin or origin.

    I already exposed why it's morally doubtfull to whitewash crimes commited by muslims by pointing the one commited by the christian.
    I already exposed that the christian west wasn't more "jewish" than the islamic word during the period of times we are considering, but I don' think that's something rationnal, you have an irrationnal obsession of jews.
    I already exposed why the total numbers of victims can be explaind just by the fact that euros were more mighty.
    And I have already shown that the islamic slave trade last on a much longer time, and, considering laws of countries, the last countries to abolish slavery were all muslims.

    So yes, muslims commited slave trades on huge scale (millions of victims) and the fact that euros did too doesn't make it better. But you will keep to try to make diversion by speaking of european slavery.
     
  5. Canell

    Canell Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,760
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  6. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Christians invaded all of Europe, North to South America, Africa, Asia and Australia. Making THEM far worse.

    The Christians/Jews violently oppressed on a FAR bigger scale than Muslims.
    That has been the point all along. Making THEM far worse.

    Where you previously claimed that there was no slavery under Christian/Jewish rule in Asia. You made an entire fake point with that, with your made up numbers.

    I don't give a rats butt about your made up explanation. The point is that Christian/Jewish west was more violent, still is more violent, and oppressed and enslaved far more people than Muslims do. And that tips the scale to the advantage of the Muslims, ... while you're still keen on ripping on them by never minding all the atrocities the Jews and Christians have committed and still are committing.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
  7. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Or mightier. There is no nice invasions. Invasions by Gengis Khan were wrong, the one by Muhammed and his califs were wrong, the one commited by

    I already pointed it the fact that the particular association of christian and jews make sense only from the fifties. The islamic world war for most of the history of this world more jewish than the european world. It's not negative or positive.

    Not really.

    And there you are, trying to whitewash all the crimes commited by muslims, like if all those genocides commited by muslims never happened, like if all those people wasn't enslaved by muslims. For most of those crimes, however, the author died, and there is no reasons for nowodays muslims or descendant of christian nations to bear the culprit of that. We're responsible of our own act. Nobody put in prison someone because his grand father was a murderer.


    And I aknowledged that I made a mistake. It happens to everyone.

    And still, it doesn't excuse all the crimes and horrors commited by muslims. You pretend that's on far bigger scales, but in both case we're speaking of dozens of millions of people enslave and hundred of dozens of people killed.

    And from a practical point of view, it doesn't change a simple fact, european countries without muslims have almost no terrorist attacks.

    I agree that the interventionnist trend of the west, especially the west, tend to be problematic but apart not voting for people who are against that, I can't do a lot.
     
  8. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Point remains, that the Christian/Jewish world have been oppressing far more people in far more places, than Muslims. That includes their enslaving.

    I'm going to label this nonsense as a personal attack. You can't prove I wrote this.

    Doesn't really compare well when the Christian/Jewish west recently blew up 2 entire Muslim countries.
    And they also support the terror in Palestina, Syria, Yemen and Egypt.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
  9. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    About enslaving, it lasted much less time too. Furthermore, the atlantic slave trade is the only slave trade where we got very precise numbers. Considering we don't have precise numbers, we can rely on estimations. Muslims probably enslaved more people, because their slave trade lasted twice to three much more times. The atlantic slave trade who was the main european slave trade made 12 millions victims. We can know precisely the number of victims because we have a lot of accounting book of those times. The arabic slave trade alone did around 14 to 17 millions people.
    And none make the other less horrible. But both responsible for those slave trades are dead long ago.

    The christian world probably oppressed more people. It saved a lot of people, thanks to vaccine, advance medicine and surgery, and a lot of NGO, like action against hunger or the red cross.

    I don't think that any civilization ever had a technological like the western world had and it's not to deny the important role of the chinese or the civilizations of the fertile crescent.

    But that's what you're doing from the beginning, the only reason you point some crimes commited by the west.

    But it's not a matter of compare, it's a simple fact. Nobody will says "okay, I will let a muslim butcher my children because of far away semitic on semitic conflict or because a former foreigner president by tricking his own people into war". And it doesn't change that poland who was involved in the Iraqi war didn't had any terrorist attack when sweden and germany had, both country not involved in any war. It's secret ? The "no muslims" immigration policy. Spain got an attack recently, despite not being involved in any war since they left Iraq in 2006 when it was totally sure that Bush lied.

    Most of the people don't care of that semitic on semitic conflcit, so keep whining about Israelian conflict. Almost the whole world have diplomatic relationships with Israel, western countries and eastern countries, except a bunch of muslim countries.

    I guess you're refering to Iraq and Lybia.
    The civil war in Lybia started before the west intervened, and muslims were already slaughtering each other between loyalists and rebels. So muslims blew up their own country in Lybia. Some countries intervened so it would stop the war, partly western countries, but too, two big muslim players : Turkey and Qatar, the war ended but it's now mostly chaos. I'm against that kind of intervention. Yes Ghadaffi slaughtered his own people ? And ? Anyway, muslims were responsible in the first place for their own civil war.
    About Iraq, I already said what I thought about this, and I already mentionned that a lot of death were caused by the eternal shia/sunni muslims, war who started just after the death of Muhammed. So Bush isn't really responsible of that war, and from my point of view, he still deserve to end in a prison cell for creating false proves to begin a war, causing dozen of thousand of american death, and removing the only man who was cruel enough to prevent shia and sunni muslims to kill each other. Because that's the only thing who can prevent shia and sunni muslims to kill each other, a merciless cruel dictator like Saddam Hussein or Bachar El Assad.
    Let's not your contradictory point of views : you both blame the west for having diplomatic relationships with Hussein and for being in war against Hussein. You can't blame the west for both not being in war with Hussein and being in war with him.
    From my point of view, that was none of our business.

    It's funny how you're always pointing out the role of western countries in those war, even when highly indirect, when totally ignoring the direct role of some muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, highly involved in the yemeni war. But no, even if the yemeni war is a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and one of those eternal shia/sunni world, it's the whole western world who is responsible. You would give the impression that from your point of view, a farmer in the middle of hungary is more responsible of the yemeni war than for instance, the learders of Saudi Arabia or Iran who give weapons to the Huthi rebellion.

    Anyway my point is rather clear : muslims can't coexist with other civilizations. It doesn't work in Europe, it didn't worked in Lebanon, Myanmar, it doesn't work in Nigeria, it doesn't work in Mali.
     
  10. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We already discussed that your 14 to 17 million are numbers you made up out of thin air. And so it's 5 million vs 12 million. You also are making up that Muslim slave trade lasted longer. That Christian emperor Constantine had slaves in his entire realm centuries from England to Egypt before Islam even started. So we got the Christian/Jewish western world enslaving for longer, and on a bigger part of the planet. Period.

    Pfff. Western industry about medicine is all about squeezing out money from the people in need. That's why them ex-colonial countries trash them patents and make their own.

    My comment stands that you're just ranting personal attacks by lack of a source.

    Yes it is. You mention muslim terrorist attacks in Europe. And I raise you 2 muslim nations bombed into the stoneage by the Jewish/Christian west. You got nothing to top this.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2018
  11. Charleyman1

    Charleyman1 Newly Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2018
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Gender:
    Male

    Help me understand why this is my problem!
     
  12. Plus Ultra

    Plus Ultra Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2017
    Messages:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Indeed, Mohamed (their Christ) had a 9 year-old wife, this is their example.
     
  13. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No. Because Slavery started to disappear during european middle age :
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_abolition_of_slavery_and_serfdom

    It's 5 millions only between 1500 and 1900 for the african slave trade alone. It doesn't concern all the other slave trades, like the barbary coasst one or the eastern european one.

     
  14. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    @notme

    Yes, because before western world ,everything was free and everyone were happy and hugging each other. I don't deny that corporations act like mafias, but it don't change the point, vaccines were invented by westerners. Furthermore some westerners like Alexander Flemming made penicillin free, for the good of all manking. Westerners were the first to perform blood transfusions, nodoways anasthesias, or discovered the existence of bacterias and viruses, saving a lot of people. If the life expancy in a lot of places in the world, it's because of modern western science.

    Not really, that's what you're doing from the beginning. Everytime a muslim crime is mentionned, you try to make a diversion, speaking of a western crime and rant how about the west is the bigger evil, all of that to excuse muslim crimes. It's not a personnal attack, I'm not insulting you, I describe what you do.

    My point wasn't to top that. I just state fact, I'm not in your "let's excuse an evil by another" delirium. Now I mention terrorism, you try to make diversion by speaking of the war in Iraq and in Lybia. Furthermore, in both case, you're clearly ignoring the role of muslims in it, the fact that one of those country was already destroyed by a long civil war, and the second the role of the shia/sunni war, which explain too a lot of the destruction Syria and Iraq knew. But it doesn't change a fact, I speak of terrorism, and you can't help to make diversion by speaking of another topic.
     
  15. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_medieval_Europe#Slavery_in_Christian_Iberia
    Between 1489 and 1497 almost 2,100 black slaves were shipped from Portugal to Valencia.[96][97] By the end of the 15th century, Spain held the largest population of black Africans in Europe, with a small, but growing community of black ex-slaves.[98] In the mid 16th century Spain imported up to 2,000 black African slaves annually through Portugal, and by 1565 most of Seville's 6,327 slaves (out of a total population of 85,538) were black Africans.

    And I've been telling you this for quiet some time, and this compares to 12 million the Christians do.
    That 12 million does not include who the Christians/Jews enslaves ALL OVER THE FREAKING GLOBE.
    You know,.. where you made up that such a thing did not happen in Asia.

    The French alone massacred 300.000 people when Algeria fought to end that oppression. You can say to Jean-Marie le Pen, the previous leader of the French extremist right party, to his face that he tortured people in French Algerian death camps,... and he will lose the law suit if he tried to make you take it back. And he did try that a lot of times. The gimp is still alive... didn't went to jail over that or nothing. Nobody did. That's the legacy of the Christian/Jewish west. And such things don't weight up to penicillin.
    You're not even quoting me. So you're just ranting up personal attacks.
    It's the same topic of death, massacres and destruction. And you're not able to come remotely close to what the Christians/Jews have done when pointing at Muslims.
     
  16. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Centuries of islamic influence let a legacy. Furthermore, it's after middle age. It doesn't change that a lot of places of Europe started to regulate slavery and even forbidd slavery on their territories. The renaissance on that point of view is a backward movement, but the forbiddence of slavery in middle age will be the base of the great abolisment of 1850.

    It doesn't change that muslim practiced mass slavery. The atlantic slave trade doesn't erase all the horrors of the arabic slave trades.

    The Islamic empire had a huge islamic population. Like the 5 millions people you quote doesn't include the people muslims enslaved in the rest of the world.

    I didn't made up things, I made a mistake that I aknowledged. At the opposite of you, I don't pretend to be always true, I'm human, not really humble, but I don't pretend to be an all knowing god, so I don't have problems admitting I was wrong.

    And again and again, you're making diversion. I'm speaking of the medical progress made by the west and, suddently you change the topic and start to rant about Algeria. I never pretended that nothing bad happened in Algeria. Furthermore, the barbary coast, which Algeria was part of, attacked European coasts and boats for centuries. The colonization of subsaharian africa and indochina was totally free, but north africa absolutely deserved it. And colonization is not different of what Genghis Khan made or the muslims empire. What are you pretending ? That people died only when westerners were conquering ? Everywhere in the world, people tried to make empire, and it always cost life of people. But it's only bad when european do that. Nobody whine about Gengis Khan conquest. Why ?
    Furthermore slavery was abolished in Algeria by french.

    [uqote]You can say to Jean-Marie le Pen, the previous leader of the French extremist right party, to his face that he tortured people in French Algerian death camps,...[/quote]

    Jean Marie Le Pen was one of the few people who took care of burrying along their muslim ceremonies instead of throwing them up in the sea.
    I'm not a big fan of Le Pen. Despite being very smart, he acted as the usefull idiot of the left. His ridiculous behaviour create harm to the defense of the fatherland. A lot of people weren't judged for their acts during war, that's the case in every country and it's not specific to the west. That's case of pakistani generals who commited genocide in bangladesh. Le Pen despite being a fool is a more complex man he seems.

    I don't pretend to weight up things. I pretend that the west did very positive things, and did very negative things. And that's the legacy of the west, big slave trades, a general abolishment of slavery, huge technical and scientific improvement, terrible wars (most of the victims were europeans). Effectively, that's a part of the legacy of the christian west, but that's legacy is not composed only of that, like all the slaves taken by muslims is part of their legacy. You're creating a false dilemma.

    Even if you're trying to weight up, it's quite hard. In any case, we're missing a lot of datas. It's more easier to count death than life saved. It's easy to count a death, a life saved, it's harder. How many people were saved by modern western medicine , it's impossible to know ?
    However, the 20th century was dominated by western technology, and it's under western technology that the world population went up from around 1 billion in 1900 to 6 billion in 2000. So I could claim that 5 billion people were alive in 2000 thanks to the west. For sure, the west didn't killed 5 billion. It's mostly an instance, but that's wrong logic, I will let that to you.

    I'm not quoting you, so it's a personnal attack. It would be a personnal attack if I claimed, for instance, that you were an idiot. I don't claim that, it's just an instance. But I'm not doing that. I claim that you try to make diversion. You did again by claiming the algerian war when I was mentionning

    Everytime I mention a muslim crime, you try to compare to a western crime. I speak of the slaughters muslims commited in india ? You start to mention the slaughter commited by conquistadors in americas. I speak of slavery commited by muslims ? You start to speak of the atlantic slave trade, and so on.
    Everytime I mention a muslim crime, you mention a western crime claim "that doesn't compare". What's your intention to do that ? Claim that the muslim crimes were okay, because the european one were on a slighty bigger scale (in both cases we speak of millions of victims, the scale is still millions, and I think it's a deeply fallacious argument to think that a genocide is okay because another is bigger).
    And often, when we're talking about muslim crimes, you try to put the responsibility on western world. For instance, Saddam Hussein, commited slaughters on the kurds with his muslims army using gas. Who is guilty ? A) Saddam Hussein who ordered the slaughters B) His army who obeyed him C) The western world because they had some diplomatic relationships at this time.
    Other instance, The sunni muslim country Saudi Arabia, you consider as the most faithfull muslim country (which must explain why they abolished slavery so late in history) is bombing civilian in Yemen to fight the shia Huthi rebellion supported by shia Iran? A) The Saaudi Arabia who is bombing the civilian ? B) Iran who supported the houthi rebellion ? C) The west.

    It's still diversion. I'm not pretending that westerner history isn't full of blood, but everytime I mention crimes commited by muslims, you try to make diversion. You're always trying to change the topic by speaking of other crimes. It's always how you act. The topic isn't death massacre and destruction otherwise we would speak more of Gengis Khan or what the aztecs did.

    The original topic was about a malaysan muslim who married a 11 year old thai. Then you started to make diversion by speaking of child marriage in USA, slaughters commited by christian and so on. The topic was a malaysian muslim who married 11 year old thai. And then you did your diversion things.

    Anyway, those crimes belong to the past. Nobody will sacrifice his children because grand-daddy was mean to some muslims. We don't send children of murderers in prison for the crime for their father, and if I have no problems aknowledging the crimes commited by my country in the past, I won't put the guilt of that on my shoulders or on my children.

    It doesn't change a very practical issue, the best way to avoid terrorism is simply to avoid having muslims.
     
  17. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You wrote "No. Because Slavery started to disappear during european middle age"
    And I proved you wrong. I also proved you wrong about slavery in Asia.
    It's still is 12 million done by Christians and Jews vs 5 million by Arabs.

    Nope. The Muslims did not enslave in North to South America or in Australia.
    The Christians violently oppressed most of the world, and they had slavery all over the world.

    It wasn't free. It was paid by the blood of all the millions of indigenous people who got massacred for that to happen.
    Africans deserved to be violently oppressed for centuries because of a what their ancestors did? That sounds like a person who holds a grudge against all the Jews alive today, because some Jews asked Jesus to be killed at one point in history. Tell me,.. do you think you may be convicted over some wrong your grandfather did? Or are you "too white" for that?

    The point is that Europeans did that on a massive scale, far greater than Muslims.
    Hence they are worse than Muslims.

    The guy tortured people in death camps! And here you are sweet talking it all.

    They started WWII, WWI, Korea, Vietnam... we can count them. Doesn't compare well with a 9-11.

    Indeed. And it makes western Christians/Jews look far and far nastier than Muslims.

    Indeed. You claim ridiculous things I supposedly said, without quoting and sourcing me.
    To than make a personal judgement on that. That makes it a personal attack.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  18. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's why slavery was abolished in France and Sweden, and after the conquest of England by William the Conqueror there were no slaves in England. I sourced my claims.

    For the african slave trade between 1500 and 1900, considering that arabs started this slave trade as soon than the 8th century.

    Because they never reached those continents and that christian were much better navigators. Furthermore, they still enslaved in a lot of other places. That's really a dishonnest argument. What's the next step of that kind of absurd logic ? "Nazis didn't commit genocide on sikhs", ", WW2 Japanese didn't slaughtered any inuits", "Aztecs didn't sacrificed any congolese".

    Free in the sense "european had no dispute with those people", every conquest provoke death, the one of muslims, of asian or every nation. In the 19th century, european had a lot of legitimate reasons to want to break islamic countries who were dangers for centuries to europe.

    Nobody is guilty for the deed of their grandfather, but still, a lot of north african are acting as if north africa wasn't agressing europe for centuries.

    Far greater no, we stay on a scale of millions. We would speak on one side of thousands of people and another millions, yes, but no. Muslims invaded millions of people, that's what is called a "massive scale".

    Or far more skilled.

    No, I just mentionned facts who show that he is a more complex man than he seems.

    WW2 was started by japanese too, and they invaded Manchuria and Korea before WW2 started. Turks were heavily involved in WW1 too.
    For Korea and Vietnam, western countries were involved, but eastern one too like China. Those wars started as civil wars, but every side were supported by outer power, not only western one, eastern power like China were involved too.
    Furthermore, you want to compare, but that's not my point of view. I never claimed that islamic terrorism is the most horrible things who happened. I said that it's for me a deep concern. Muslims represent a threat to the inner peace of a lot of countries, including muslim one but that's their own problems. Despite the vietnamese war and the important vietnamese diaspora, nobody heard of vietnamese commiting terrorism attack.

    Yes, finally, you admit your goals. Whitewash muslim crimes. Did the people enslaved by muslims, and castrated to serve as an eunuch suffered less because some other were bought to work in americas plentations ? No.
    Furthermore, that doesn't prove that the western world were far more agressive than the muslims. Islamic countries have shown to had very often expansionnist and slavery views. The western world had however far better technology, and from the early 19th century to the late seventies, they western world completely dominated the world from a technological point of view.
    There is no proves that islamic countries were less agressive in their intentions, they ended to be much less powerfull.
    Westerners had positive sides too. The abolishment of slavery was one, the life saved by western medicine too, and there is a lot of caricative associations too. For sure, if I want to look at positive things made by the west, I would rarely look at the government.
    I don't try to "weigh" things. If a surgeon who saved 100 lifes started to kill 10 people, the tribunal won't say "that's okay, you have a total sum of 90 life saved". You can't weight things this way. Western technologies saved much more lives than the islamic one for sure.
    There is a lot of western innovations who help people, for instance, guide dogs, rescue dogs who help saving people during earthquake. Nobody know who domesticated dogs, but training dogs this way was invented by the west.

    "And it makes western Christians/Jews look far and far nastier than Muslims.", nice sentence, it says a lot about you, your intentions, and your way of thinking. It remind me those kids who steal things, and try to justify themselves by pretending that someone else stole more, or everyone else did.


    You just proved it yourself. "It makes western Christians/jews LOOK far and far nastier". I juste quoted you, your all aim is to whitewash muslims crimes by using western crimes to make them "look" (I used your own terms) nastier.
    Furthermore, the fact that I don't quote you doesn't mean that I'm wrong.
     
  19. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    31,548
    Likes Received:
    3,603
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You wrote "No. Because Slavery started to disappear during european middle age"
    And it did not disappear in Spain, now did it? Is Spain suddenly not part of Europe, because it pleases your agenda?


    Christians started at 3rd century. And the Arabs starting point was a couple of towns, while Christians had an empire stretching from the UK to Egypt in the 3rd century.

    It's not dishonest to keep on saying that Christians/Jews enslaved a far larger part of the world, than Muslims ever did. They also started centuries earlier with this. The west simply was far more violent and oppressive. That is the entire point.

    The west had basically violently oppressing about the entire globe in the 19th century.
    It's absurd to claim they had to massacre people in Africa because those people "supposedly" were a threat.
    The only threat the west had was less income from the lands the colonial powers were violently oppressing.

    They aint guilty.... "but". You made an argument that they were guilty of deed that happened centuries ago in order to justify the slaughter of 100.000's of people who did not want to be oppressed anymore. And with that "but" you sure show you're not backing down from this.

    Christians oppressed billions, on a scale Muslims never did.
    The end.

    Hitler painted and was kind to his dogs as well. That makes it equally "complex" which is just your way of sweettalking that it was simply a person who was profoundly evil.

    You're not convincing me even slightly that the roll of the Christian/Jewish west wasn't over the top present in all them wars.

    It is mine. And it shows that the Christian/Jewish west was far more violent than Muslims.

    You're just making the same personal attack because you're losing the debate.

    It's factual correct. Christian/Jewish west enslaved far longer, on an exceptionally larger part of the world compared to the world. And in utterly massive wars, they are over the top present slaughtering around.
     
  20. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,809
    Likes Received:
    2,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually that's not correct.

    Muslims are estimated to have murdered 270 million, though some rate it higher.
    No other group comes close.
     
  21. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    71,378
    Likes Received:
    56,794
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Really? Where are your facts?
     
  22. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I never pretended that spain isn't part of Europe. France, England and Sweden are in Europe even if they don't belong today to Europe from a cultural point of view today. I showed that there were already abolishment of slavery who will be challenged by the reanissance. Some european countries abolished slavery many centuries before the first muslims countries started. Furthermore, most enlightment philosophers who fought slavery with their words grew up in socieites were slavery didn't exissted.

    Extremly dishonnest point of view, I would just notice that the first disciples of Jesus were peacefully spreading christianity through the roman empire when muslim one were killing each other.

    One of the most dishonnest point of view I ever red. Islam appeared 6 centuries after christianity. If we compare timelines, christianity became violent after three centuries of peacefull time, Islam was violent from the very start.

    [quot€]The west had basically violently oppressing about the entire globe in the 19th century.
    It's absurd to claim they had to massacre people in Africa because those people "supposedly" were a threat.
    The only threat the west had was less income from the lands the colonial powers were violently oppressing.[/quote]

    I don't say that for subsaharian africa, but for northern africa it was the case.

    Centuries ago ? The barbary slave trade was still alive in the beginning of the 19th century.
    [
    Again, one of the most dishonnest thing I ever red. Muslims were powerfull when the world population was under one billion. Furthermore, it's false. The british colonial empire in the 40's was around 400 000 inhabitants, the french one around 100 000 one. So no, christians never oppressed billions of people in the same time.
    And how the world population reached a population over one billion ? Thanks western science.

    Hitler did other things too, nazis were among the first to have laws for protecting animals and fight smoking. Hitler was vegetarian. Anyway, we're not speaking of a specific individual, but a whole civilization. You can hate as much you want western civilization, you're still using photography, internet, cars, vaccines and a lot of things enabled by western science.

    Probably because you don't care of the millions of chinese people killed by the japanese.

    Yes, in english it's called a tautological reasonning or a circular reasonning.

    Not really, you admitted it, you make that to make the muslims crimes looks less nasty. I quoted you, you should be happy. Furthermore, I just describing a process you use. For instance, you're making an affirmation. Is the previous sentence a personnal attack on you ? No.

    Christian west is 6 centuries older than the islamic world.
    Christian west were still the first to abolish massively the world.
    You don't define utterly massive wars, and so again, it's a biased reasonning. What does tamerlan or Ummeyad wars not massive ? They occured on dozen of thousands of kilometers and involved millions of people.
    The fact it concerned a larger part of the world doesn't show that muslims were more benevolent, just less powerfull.

    Considering your way of reasonning, the aztecs who sacrificed thousand of people and enslaved too thousand of people were much more benevolent than muslims, because 1) their death toll is largely inferior to the muslim one, 2) They did it on a far less large part of the world.

    So, that's probably the conclusion of this debate. That the mass sacrificing aztecs were pretty cool guys in fact.
     
  23. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    71,378
    Likes Received:
    56,794
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Ahhhh sorry but you are dead wrong about Muslims not reaching Australia. There was a well established trade between Northern Australia and Malaysia, which is and was Muslim

    https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27260027

    Europeans came and slavery did not end in Australia until the 1967 referendum

    Google " stolen wages"
     
  24. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    6,022
    Likes Received:
    3,004
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Okay, I didn't knew. Than,s it's interesting.

    The 1967 seems to have given citizenship to the aboriginal. As far as I know, slavery was theorically illegal, because it was made so in the british empire around 1830. Even if, there is a step between the laws and the reality. For instance, slavery is still a thing in Mauritania, despite being outlawed in 1975.

    What I googled it show it was illegal even if it doesn't change the sad reality of what aboroginal lived.
     
  25. yasureoktoo

    yasureoktoo Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2018
    Messages:
    9,809
    Likes Received:
    2,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That depends, are you going to waste my time saying each link I give you is islamophobic, because I really don't want to keep posting over and over.

    Or if you like you can google "Muslims killed 270 million", and you can chose from a dozen or so until you find one you like.

    Keep in mind these are estimates, and many go much further,

    Here is a great video for some insite.
    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...266161EA0C5458868E1A266161EA0C54588&FORM=VIRE

    Muslims started raiding western, and eastern countries, before they were actually muslims, For general reference these start in the 7th century, however the first reference to muslims in history, is 150 years later. Prior to this they are referred to as "The Godless Pagans"

    Keep in mind the Arab slave trade goes on long before this, but we have little records because everyone was illiterate and nothing survived in writing.

    I want to point out, if I am discussing with a person who, as Islam claims, insists Islam and muslims were around since Adam and Eve, then obviously the numbers would be a lot higher.
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2018

Share This Page