758925
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
- Messages
- 29
Based last page
@derpdederp Except he literally used the words "racially homogeneous".
So either you can't read, or rapeman is bringing up race where it doesn't matter.
Or maybe it's both!
Also, LOL with this "i am le enlightened racist who speaks the truth the media won't tell you" bullshit.
He says "terrorist attacks don't happen in the largest city on Earth, which is racially homogenous!", except he forgets to mention that the 3 largest cities by population are in China.
You know. China. As in, the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China. Which is installing security cameras on every street corner and harvesting organs of its citizens.
Including millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
The CCP isn't even religiously motivated - it's extensively anti-religion.
And if he meant largest city just by size, as in Tokyo - there was literally a terrorist attack in Tokyo this January. They weren't Muslim, either!
There aren't too many other terrorist attacks there, sure. But Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is. Religiously or racially.
For instance, there's a large divide between its Buddhist and Shintoist populations.
On that note, in Myanmar, Buddhists are committing genocide against the Rohingya Muslim population there, again blaming an entire group for the actions of a small percent of them.
That's what it always boils down to. Acting as though "there are individual good muslims, but the majority are evil terrorists!" is just blindly judging a group based on news clips. It's the opposite - the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception. You just don't read that in the news because "local muslim doesn't stab anyone today" isn't exciting news.
Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either. If you're just trying to live on your desert farm with your family but one day you find a foreign government blew up your house, blew up your family, and continues to blow up anyone else they deem as a threat, anyone would say "yeah, they're pretty justified in trying to stop that government". In fact, I just described Star Wars.
Two more things:
The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
And the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are from rightwing white christians, the media just doesn't call them terrorist attacks.
So either you can't read, or rapeman is bringing up race where it doesn't matter.
Or maybe it's both!
Also, LOL with this "i am le enlightened racist who speaks the truth the media won't tell you" bullshit.
He says "terrorist attacks don't happen in the largest city on Earth, which is racially homogenous!", except he forgets to mention that the 3 largest cities by population are in China.
You know. China. As in, the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China. Which is installing security cameras on every street corner and harvesting organs of its citizens.
Including millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
The CCP isn't even religiously motivated - it's extensively anti-religion.
And if he meant largest city just by size, as in Tokyo - there was literally a terrorist attack in Tokyo this January. They weren't Muslim, either!
There aren't too many other terrorist attacks there, sure. But Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is. Religiously or racially.
For instance, there's a large divide between its Buddhist and Shintoist populations.
On that note, in Myanmar, Buddhists are committing genocide against the Rohingya Muslim population there, again blaming an entire group for the actions of a small percent of them.
That's what it always boils down to. Acting as though "there are individual good muslims, but the majority are evil terrorists!" is just blindly judging a group based on news clips. It's the opposite - the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception. You just don't read that in the news because "local muslim doesn't stab anyone today" isn't exciting news.
Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either. If you're just trying to live on your desert farm with your family but one day you find a foreign government blew up your house, blew up your family, and continues to blow up anyone else they deem as a threat, anyone would say "yeah, they're pretty justified in trying to stop that government". In fact, I just described Star Wars.
Two more things:
The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
And the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are from rightwing white christians, the media just doesn't call them terrorist attacks.
@imahuman
>Or maybe it's both!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P06brsyz7xI
>3 largest cities by population are in China
>not counting by metro area
ISHIGGITY: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population
>the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China
>millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
Yeah while morally questionable you have to hand it to them, seems to have stopped the terrorism in the region.
>Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is.
There's about half a million non-Yamato in the Tokyo Metropolis subdivision of the city, out of 14 million or so total, or about 3.5% (and that's still much higher than the rest of the country average/outlying areas). Much less pozzed than Londinistan.
>there was literally a terrorist attack in Tokyo this January. They weren't Muslim, either!
Aum's gonna Aum, but a) no one died, and b) despite being much more massive than any western European cities, you'll be hard pressed to find any incident of note happening more than once every few years. And when it does it's usually just some genuine crazy like the Kyoanus arsonist, not someone in a truck of peace aiming for genuine max casualties.
>But Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is. Religiously or racially.
>For instance, there's a large divide between its Buddhist and Shintoist populations.
Okay now this is where the true ass-talk starts. If you knew anything about religion in Japan, you'd know that while there are Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples on every corner, very few Japanese would actually identify as being religious, (while nevertheless visiting both Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples throughout the year). Religion in Japan isn't like religion in the west/middle-shieast where it's a core part of the personality of those who practice. There are customary 'religious' practices in the culture (hatsumode/shinto weddings/buddhist funerals/praying for luck/buying some omamori/having a butsudan in your house/Shinto matsuri/etc) that most everyone will participate in, but ask them in a survey and they won't call themselves Shinto or Buddhist most of the time. Yet if you look at their actions an outsider may consider them to be both (and hell, until the Meiji era, Shintoism/Buddhism was rather mixed before the government forced them to re-split and defined many sites as either a Shinto shrine, or Buddhist temple, see Shinbutsu-Shuugou/神仏習合).
It's a strange mix, but that mix itself is the 'dominant religion' (if you could call it that) of a population that largely considers itself irreligious.
>blaming an entire group for the actions of a small percent of them
>the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception
A small percent might carry out attacks, but those views don't develop when only a small minority of the religion holds them: https://i.imgur.com/MjcBRJs.jpg
>Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either.
Ah so that's why they kill hundreds in poor non-Muslim countries like Sri Lanka too, that massive Sri Lankan war machine waging terror over there.
>The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
Who cares what each book says or what happened centuries ago, what matters is whether those who read it today take the violent parts literally and put them into action or not, which only the readers of one of those books seem to do.
But if you want to wind back the clock let's not forget how the hordes made it to the gates of Vienna before being fought back over bloody centuries to their shithole countries. If anyone should have a grudge it's Europe in the first place.
>And the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are from rightwing white christians, the media just doesn't call them terrorist attacks.
Because inceldom isn't a religion, the word 'terrorism' has a meaning, being political/religious motivation to intimidate a population generally, not 'going out in a blaze of glory because you're waifu isn't real'. Same way the Kyoanus arson wasn't 'terrorism', but one fatty hikineet's delusion and personal vendetta against them.
>Or maybe it's both!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P06brsyz7xI
>3 largest cities by population are in China
>not counting by metro area
ISHIGGITY: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population
>the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China
>millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
Yeah while morally questionable you have to hand it to them, seems to have stopped the terrorism in the region.
>Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is.
There's about half a million non-Yamato in the Tokyo Metropolis subdivision of the city, out of 14 million or so total, or about 3.5% (and that's still much higher than the rest of the country average/outlying areas). Much less pozzed than Londinistan.
>there was literally a terrorist attack in Tokyo this January. They weren't Muslim, either!
Aum's gonna Aum, but a) no one died, and b) despite being much more massive than any western European cities, you'll be hard pressed to find any incident of note happening more than once every few years. And when it does it's usually just some genuine crazy like the Kyoanus arsonist, not someone in a truck of peace aiming for genuine max casualties.
>But Tokyo also isn't as racially homogeneous as he says it is. Religiously or racially.
>For instance, there's a large divide between its Buddhist and Shintoist populations.
Okay now this is where the true ass-talk starts. If you knew anything about religion in Japan, you'd know that while there are Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples on every corner, very few Japanese would actually identify as being religious, (while nevertheless visiting both Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples throughout the year). Religion in Japan isn't like religion in the west/middle-shieast where it's a core part of the personality of those who practice. There are customary 'religious' practices in the culture (hatsumode/shinto weddings/buddhist funerals/praying for luck/buying some omamori/having a butsudan in your house/Shinto matsuri/etc) that most everyone will participate in, but ask them in a survey and they won't call themselves Shinto or Buddhist most of the time. Yet if you look at their actions an outsider may consider them to be both (and hell, until the Meiji era, Shintoism/Buddhism was rather mixed before the government forced them to re-split and defined many sites as either a Shinto shrine, or Buddhist temple, see Shinbutsu-Shuugou/神仏習合).
It's a strange mix, but that mix itself is the 'dominant religion' (if you could call it that) of a population that largely considers itself irreligious.
>blaming an entire group for the actions of a small percent of them
>the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception
A small percent might carry out attacks, but those views don't develop when only a small minority of the religion holds them: https://i.imgur.com/MjcBRJs.jpg
>Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either.
Ah so that's why they kill hundreds in poor non-Muslim countries like Sri Lanka too, that massive Sri Lankan war machine waging terror over there.
>The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
Who cares what each book says or what happened centuries ago, what matters is whether those who read it today take the violent parts literally and put them into action or not, which only the readers of one of those books seem to do.
But if you want to wind back the clock let's not forget how the hordes made it to the gates of Vienna before being fought back over bloody centuries to their shithole countries. If anyone should have a grudge it's Europe in the first place.
>And the majority of terrorist attacks in the USA are from rightwing white christians, the media just doesn't call them terrorist attacks.
Because inceldom isn't a religion, the word 'terrorism' has a meaning, being political/religious motivation to intimidate a population generally, not 'going out in a blaze of glory because you're waifu isn't real'. Same way the Kyoanus arson wasn't 'terrorism', but one fatty hikineet's delusion and personal vendetta against them.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
- Messages
- 970
LoL
I thought the queen knows her fraud from the start and she had a plan. But, she looks still as naive as ever.
@bimikushi
Well..... Rapeman is those anti-Arab / anti-Muslim person from the beginning. Even got warning from Mangadex admin for his credit page. I don't mind seeing someone using bad joke / dark joke for once in a while. But constantly using it means that they have harmful intention.
I thought the queen knows her fraud from the start and she had a plan. But, she looks still as naive as ever.
@bimikushi
Well..... Rapeman is those anti-Arab / anti-Muslim person from the beginning. Even got warning from Mangadex admin for his credit page. I don't mind seeing someone using bad joke / dark joke for once in a while. But constantly using it means that they have harmful intention.
Double-page supporter
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2018
- Messages
- 309
When I get an update, I wonder why I keep this shit mango in follow.
And then I read the credit page.
And then I read the credit page.
Power Uploader
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,272
@imahuman
>The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
Whataboutism. But OK, lets play that game. why do people like you feel comfortable criticizing Christians but find criticizing Muslims or anyone else is Racist or evil or wrong? That's just hypocrisy. I dislike all religions spun out of Judaism for various reasons, but to say the Bible is just as violent as the Quran, oh please. Most of the violence in the bible is from the Old Testament, which most Christians don't follow, and similarly exists in the Quran. However the Quran has extra violence added on where Mohommad the warlord decides violence is the best way to get what he wants. And he's not necessarily wrong. But to say they're the same is true naivety.
> Except he literally used the words "racially homogeneous".
>So either you can't read, or rapeman is bringing up race where it doesn't matter.
>Or maybe it's both!
Yeah and he's wrong there. While Racial homogenaity can certainly be beneficial to the stability of society, there are many societies that are racially homogenous that are shitholes. So there's clearly other factors at work.
>the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China
>millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
Fascist Communists. Commie Nazis.
We live in a world where people pretend, perhaps thanks to the benefits of western civilization, that humanity isn't cruel. That we don't fight over resources or land or religion or just because. Conflict between the Chinese and the Uyghurs goes back centuries. The reality is that there are only two possible outcomes for the scenario. The Uyghurs either succeed in gaining autonomy and establish a muslim state, or the Chinese succeed in their attempts to re-educate them away from Islamic teachings. Well that's not quite true, because the third option is a stalemate, but that's not really an option, because it's only a temporary solution and ultimately both sides want their way. And you know what, despite the criticism, Chinas actions will probably work out for them in the long run. Being weak ultimately means destruction. I expect India to follow suit with Kashmir. These societies have had to put up with the antics of crazed religious extremists for a long time, and ultimately, conflict was inevitable.
>You know. China. As in, the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China. Which is installing security cameras on every street corner and harvesting organs of its citizens.
Yeah pretty despicable, but don't for a minute think it can't or doesn't happen here. It's just that they don't get caught. I mean Planned Parenthood was caught selling baby body parts for instance. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...it-in-court-to-harvesting-aborted-fetal-parts. Still, China at least officially, doesn't seem to like religion. Atheism seems to go hand in hand with Communism. So at least they're consistent. Falun Gong and Islam and perhaps even Christianity are all the same to China I suppose.
>That's what it always boils down to. Acting as though "there are individual good muslims, but the majority are evil terrorists!" is just blindly judging a group based on news clips. It's the opposite - the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception. You just don't read that in the news because "local muslim doesn't stab anyone today" isn't exciting news.
Well it doesn't even matter if the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists. They don't have to be terrorists. They simply have to have a culture that has beliefs that don't mesh with that of society. Even if they themselves aren't all terrorists, so long as they silently support the actions of terrorists, so long as they don't denounce it or work towards reforming their religion, either out of complacency or fear, then they are ultimately incapable of assimilating into society. And it's not just terrorism. It's beliefs. It's the whole package. What do they think about, lets say gay rights? Homosexuality? What do they think about other religions? What do they think about their daughters chosing to date outside of their culture or religion? What do they think about apostates? What do they think about the dress of western women? Swimsuits? Modern fashion? We know what they think, And it's these beliefs that any other group would be criticized for, but you seem to want to give them a pass. Because racism or something.
>Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either.
Well, I'm not a fan of the Bush/Clinton crime families attempts at carving up middle east for their own profit, but to blame it on western countries is just incorrect. Most people in western countries don't give a shit about the middle east and would prefer to have nothing to do with it.
Islam tried to conquer Europe on multiple occasions, my ancestors fought to repel them. So yeah, for me, who is aware of history and all the Islamic agression towards Europeans, of the acts of slavery and forced conversions under penalty of death, repeatedly throughout history, of the slavery that goes on even today in Islamic countries, of the beheadings and stonings and acid attacks in the name of their religion, I'm pretty unsympathetic when things happen back to them, because I see it as karma. As the inevitable repercussions for their actions. Eventually a bully will meet with a bigger bully who just doesn't give a shit and will beat the shit out of them. That's China in this scenario.
But for you, it's just going to somehow just boil down to Racism bad, Muslims good. No deep thinking, no critical understanding of society or history or even human nature. Just a belief that somehow if you sweep problems under the rug, they'll go away and eventually everything will magically work out. Stick your fingers in your ears and go LA LA LA. I suppose I'll never understand such simplistic thinking.
>The Bible is just as violent as the Quran, and was used to justify black slavery, Native American genocide, the Inquisition, etc. It's just not used to justify those on nearly the same scale anymore because we're over a century and a half since those.
Whataboutism. But OK, lets play that game. why do people like you feel comfortable criticizing Christians but find criticizing Muslims or anyone else is Racist or evil or wrong? That's just hypocrisy. I dislike all religions spun out of Judaism for various reasons, but to say the Bible is just as violent as the Quran, oh please. Most of the violence in the bible is from the Old Testament, which most Christians don't follow, and similarly exists in the Quran. However the Quran has extra violence added on where Mohommad the warlord decides violence is the best way to get what he wants. And he's not necessarily wrong. But to say they're the same is true naivety.
> Except he literally used the words "racially homogeneous".
>So either you can't read, or rapeman is bringing up race where it doesn't matter.
>Or maybe it's both!
Yeah and he's wrong there. While Racial homogenaity can certainly be beneficial to the stability of society, there are many societies that are racially homogenous that are shitholes. So there's clearly other factors at work.
>the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China
>millions of Uyghur Muslims, who are being put in concentration camps for the actions of a small handful.
Fascist Communists. Commie Nazis.
We live in a world where people pretend, perhaps thanks to the benefits of western civilization, that humanity isn't cruel. That we don't fight over resources or land or religion or just because. Conflict between the Chinese and the Uyghurs goes back centuries. The reality is that there are only two possible outcomes for the scenario. The Uyghurs either succeed in gaining autonomy and establish a muslim state, or the Chinese succeed in their attempts to re-educate them away from Islamic teachings. Well that's not quite true, because the third option is a stalemate, but that's not really an option, because it's only a temporary solution and ultimately both sides want their way. And you know what, despite the criticism, Chinas actions will probably work out for them in the long run. Being weak ultimately means destruction. I expect India to follow suit with Kashmir. These societies have had to put up with the antics of crazed religious extremists for a long time, and ultimately, conflict was inevitable.
>You know. China. As in, the fascist dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party, China. Which is installing security cameras on every street corner and harvesting organs of its citizens.
Yeah pretty despicable, but don't for a minute think it can't or doesn't happen here. It's just that they don't get caught. I mean Planned Parenthood was caught selling baby body parts for instance. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...it-in-court-to-harvesting-aborted-fetal-parts. Still, China at least officially, doesn't seem to like religion. Atheism seems to go hand in hand with Communism. So at least they're consistent. Falun Gong and Islam and perhaps even Christianity are all the same to China I suppose.
>That's what it always boils down to. Acting as though "there are individual good muslims, but the majority are evil terrorists!" is just blindly judging a group based on news clips. It's the opposite - the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists, the terrorists are the exception. You just don't read that in the news because "local muslim doesn't stab anyone today" isn't exciting news.
Well it doesn't even matter if the vast majority of muslims aren't terrorists. They don't have to be terrorists. They simply have to have a culture that has beliefs that don't mesh with that of society. Even if they themselves aren't all terrorists, so long as they silently support the actions of terrorists, so long as they don't denounce it or work towards reforming their religion, either out of complacency or fear, then they are ultimately incapable of assimilating into society. And it's not just terrorism. It's beliefs. It's the whole package. What do they think about, lets say gay rights? Homosexuality? What do they think about other religions? What do they think about their daughters chosing to date outside of their culture or religion? What do they think about apostates? What do they think about the dress of western women? Swimsuits? Modern fashion? We know what they think, And it's these beliefs that any other group would be criticized for, but you seem to want to give them a pass. Because racism or something.
>Western countries repeatedly performing coups and random drone strikes in the Middle East, constantly upending everyone's lives there, sure isn't winning any allies either.
Well, I'm not a fan of the Bush/Clinton crime families attempts at carving up middle east for their own profit, but to blame it on western countries is just incorrect. Most people in western countries don't give a shit about the middle east and would prefer to have nothing to do with it.
Islam tried to conquer Europe on multiple occasions, my ancestors fought to repel them. So yeah, for me, who is aware of history and all the Islamic agression towards Europeans, of the acts of slavery and forced conversions under penalty of death, repeatedly throughout history, of the slavery that goes on even today in Islamic countries, of the beheadings and stonings and acid attacks in the name of their religion, I'm pretty unsympathetic when things happen back to them, because I see it as karma. As the inevitable repercussions for their actions. Eventually a bully will meet with a bigger bully who just doesn't give a shit and will beat the shit out of them. That's China in this scenario.
But for you, it's just going to somehow just boil down to Racism bad, Muslims good. No deep thinking, no critical understanding of society or history or even human nature. Just a belief that somehow if you sweep problems under the rug, they'll go away and eventually everything will magically work out. Stick your fingers in your ears and go LA LA LA. I suppose I'll never understand such simplistic thinking.
Similar threads
