When they did much worse?
>muslims attack and invade christian, buddhist, zoroastrian and hindu lands
>it's considered bad to fight back
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests_on_the_Indian_subcontinent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Talas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_conquest_of_Hispania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Russo-Turkish_wars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Transoxiana
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Persia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquests
>>287737
Muzzies are pretty hate able is how much they play the victim 2bh
>>287737
>muh religious genocide isnt as bad as your religious genocide
Fuck off, retard.
>>287737
Muslims don't cry about the Crusades. If they're complaining about Westerners fucking up the Middle East, they're talking about Western intervention in their lands post-WW1 and WW2.
Only SJW on the internet trying to prove "C-Christians are just as bad as ISIS!" bring up the Crusades.
>>287758
>muh atheist genocide doesn't count
fuck off, retard
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_Reason
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_the_Supreme_Being
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Militant_Atheists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cristero_War
Any communist government ever
>>287801
Based
>>287801
What the fuck does any of this have to do with the topic at hand?
Why do you always resort to whataboutism to excuse your sect? Whats wrong with you?
>>287762
>Only SJW on the internet trying to prove "C-Christians are just as bad as ISIS!" bring up the Crusades.
And, you know, the president of the United States.
>>287762
>Muslims don't cry about the Crusades
Are you an idiot? ISIS literally refers to all the Western powers (and their people) as Crusaders consistently throughout their publications.
>>287862
The president of the USA literally refers to the same thing the same way.
>>287877
Al Baracki is a cunt though
>>287808
>says all religious genocide is the same
>gets mad and back pedals when atheist genocide is brought up
lol
>>287936
>lol u mad :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Communist/muslim/pagan/whatever genocide doesnt excuse christian genocide.
Stop trying to justify one wrong by bringing up others.
>>287942
>muh Tu quoque
>muh Non-sequitur Fallacies
>Communist/muslim/pagan/whatever genocide doesnt excuse christian genocide.
Stop trying to justify one wrong by bringing up others.
Never said it did but you seem to think so
>>287954
Original post:
>Why are muslims mad at christians killing them, when they killed christians too?
Excusing one wrong with another.
My first post:
>muh religious genocide isnt as bad as your religious genocide
Telling you that you cant excuse one evil with another.
Your reply:
>muh atheist genocide doesn't count
Excusing one evil with another another evil.
Basically I told you that you are stupid, but you are too stupid to grasp your own stupidity.
>>287801
I dont see any "atheist genocide" in any of your links,one is even a violent religious rebellion...
>>287971
Ignore him. He's just a christfag with a massive confirmation bias. You can't expect him to be objective
>>287966
first post
>Why are muslims mad at christians, buddhist, zoroastrian and hindus, when they killed them too
I'm not christian but you single them out.
also how is self defense against muslim aggression excusing one wrong?
your first post:
>muh religious genocide isnt as bad as your religious genocide
Telling me that single death is a tragedy million a statistic
my reply:
>muh atheist genocide doesn't count
calling out your "all religious genocide is the same" which you claimed
Basically you are stupid, and mad I called you out on your bullshit
>>288000
>I'm not christian
Is plausible deniability in the Bible as well?
>>288000
>I'm not christian but you single them out.
The OP and this thread is titled "Why do muslims cry about the Crusades?".
Christianity is implied heavily by this.
>Telling me that single death is a tragedy million a statistic
No, you fucking imbecile, telling you that one evil cant be excused by bringing up another.
Just like you do later when you bring in atheism.
I dont give a fuck about any of it, you are excusing one genocide with another. This is morally bankrupt.
>>287737
Burmese Buddhists are massive assholes actually.
The Rohingya *literally* did nothing wrong and the Burmese Junta is just using Buddhist Clergy for ethnic cleansing, along with the Karen and other Burmese Minorities
Burmese are shitlords m8. Neighboring ASEAN cunts don't like them.
>>288015
I'm from South Asia I don't care about the bible and christians are a minority here
>thinking all religious must be christian
>thinking all religious believe in a god
>>288018
How is the Cristero war "an atheist genocide" looks like Christians chimping out by a separation of church and state policy
>>288018
Which was part of communism. Communism and atheism are not one and the same thing. Just because the communists called themselves the representatives of the whole of atheism, that doesn't make it so. For instance, Ayn Rand was also an atheist, yet I don't think she would have agree with these people
See how massivelh you reky on confirmation, and how you ignore everything to the contrary? You've just proven your own massive confirmation bias yourself
Why do Europeans cry about immigrants when they literally colonized the entire planet?
Why do Africans cry about slavery when they enslaved other Africans?
Why do Chinese cry about Western imperialism when they conquered Tibet and Xinjiang?
Why do Indians cry about Muslim persecution when they persecuted Buddhists?
>>288038
Not to mention there was never a communist state with a population of atheists comparable to western Europe's
I predict someone will say China and ignore that Chinese folk religions are counted as non religions by western census
>>288019
>The OP and this thread is titled "Why do muslims cry about the Crusades?".
Christianity is implied heavily by this.
that's because most westerners don't care about history outside of their little circle so i used the crusades as an attention getter
>telling you that one evil cant be excused by bringing up another.
Again how is it "excusing an evil" when it was in self defense? sounds to me like you are defending islam
>This is morally bankrupt.
What do you base your morals on?
>>288053
>What do you base your morals on?
Not murdering vast amounts of people based on religion.
Not saying its okay to murder vast amounts of people, because others do it too.
>I only committed genocide in self defence!!
Genocide yourself, fag. And learn to fucking quote.
>>288038
>Communism and atheism are not one and the same thing
communism wanted to destroy religion and spread atheism
>The Soviet Union used the term gosateizm, a syllabic abbreviation of "state" (gosudarstvo) and "atheism" (ateizm), to refer to a policy of expropriation of religious property, publication of information against religion and the official promotion of anti-religious materials in the education system. Governments that have implemented official policies of anti-clericalism oppose religious institutional power and influence in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.
the communists aimed to break the power of all religious institutions and eventually replace religious belief with atheism. "Science" was counterposed to "religious superstition" in the media and in academic writing.
Thus the USSR became the first state to have, as an ideological objective, the elimination of religion and its replacement with universal atheism
Article 37 of the Albanian Constitution of 1976 stipulated, "The state recognizes no religion, and supports atheistic propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialistic world outlook in people.", and the penal code of 1977 imposed prison sentences of three to ten years for "religious propaganda and the production, distribution, or storage of religious literature. Individuals caught with Bibles, Qurans, icons, or other religious objects faced long prison sentences. Religious weddings were prohibited.
>>288077
>>What do you base your morals on?
>Not murdering vast amounts of people based on religion.
exempting atheism again I see
>>I only committed genocide in self defence!!
So it's considered genocide to kill invaders?
Traditionally, Muslims didn’t care about the Crusades. Compared to the Mongols or the fighting between Muslims, the Crusades were a mosquito bite.
They only started to care about the Crusades in the late 19th century, when Europeans became super powerful and showed an interest in it.
Saladin was almost obscure for Muslims and his popularity only increased because of a visit by the German Emperor.
>>288081
As the literary monthly Nendori reported the event, the youth had thus "created the first atheist nation in the world."
State atheism has been defined by David Kowalewski as the official "promotion of atheism" by a government, typically by active suppression of religious freedom and practice. It is a misnomer referring to a government's anti-clericalism, which opposes religious institutional power and influence, real or alleged, in all aspects of public and political life, including the involvement of religion in the everyday life of the citizen.
State atheism was first practised during a brief period in Revolutionary France and repeated only in Revolutionary Mexico and some communist states. The Soviet Union had a long history of state atheism, in which social success largely required individuals to profess atheism, stay away from churches and even vandalize them; this attitude was especially militant during the middle Stalinist era from 1929-1939. The Soviet Union attempted to suppress religion over wide areas of its influence, including places like central Asia, and the Socialist People's Republic of Albania under Enver Hoxha went so far as to officially ban all religious practices.
>>288085
>exempting atheism again I see
Whataboutism again, I see. Stop trying to excuse one evil with another.
>>288118
>Whataboutism again
Avoiding the question and using Tu quoque
You still have not denounced islam
>>288118
>repelling invaders is evil
Are you an idiot?
>>288129
>Tu quoque
How is that Tu quoque at all? I am not saying that you are wrong, because you are immoral.
I am saying that you are wrong, because you make no point whatsoever.
You are excusing one evil by bringing up another.
>>288129
>You still have not denounced islam
How is denouncing islam a requirement in order to argue?
How can I be an atheist and a muslim at the same time, since you accuse me of both?
Again, what the fuck is wrong with you?
>>288133
Your appeal to hypocrisy
It's bad to fight back but don't mention atheist endeavours. Again how is it evil to repel invaders?
>How is denouncing islam a requirement in order to argue?
So the kitman comes out
you had no problem attacking christians
but refuse to comment on muslims
very interesting
>>288146
>So the kitman comes out
>you had no problem attacking christians
>but refuse to comment on muslims
>very interesting
You are delusional. I am a humanist. I despise all genocide. I condemn all of them.
Yet here I am, in a thread where you are trying to excuse christian genocide.
So I attack that, because its that which you are defending.
Brainwashed fuck.
>>288149
>how dare you call me out on my bullshit
>uses Tawriya
Seems I struck a nerve there muslim
>I despise all genocide
yet you downplay islamic aggression into foreign lands
Then accuse the defenders of those lands as being the genocidal ones
You have no argument and resort to name calling. Nice appeal to ridicule muslim dog
>>288149
And to follow up on my post you again have no problem attacking christians.
>Why should I denounce islam you are trying to excuse christian genocide
thank you for proving me right
>>288162
>people who dont agree with me are muslim secret agents
Alright, love. Thats enough for me. Have a nice day and God save your rotten soul.
>>288047
>Why do Indians cry about Muslim persecution when they persecuted Buddhists?
They did?
Everywhere i read it said it was muslims
>>288020
>be rohingya
>try to do your prayers every day because you want to go to musilm heaven
>don't know shit about radical islam because you don't even know how to read and no one even bother to tell you
>everyone arround you hates you for some reason
>burmese won't let you get food because muh ethical purity
>thai will help you pass the border and then shoot you for the lulz after taking the 5 bucks you saved during your whole life
>malay seamen will do the same and put you in lifeboats with holes in the hull halfway through
>what do?
>die
>>287737
>Why do Muslims cry about the Crusades?
Because it serves their ideology.
From "Inventing the Crusades". An article by Thomas Madden; one of the foremost scholars on the crusades:
Riley-Smith describes the profound effect that Sir Walter Scott’s novel The Talisman had on European and therefore Middle Eastern opinion of the Crusades. Crusaders such as Richard the Lionhearted were portrayed as boorish, brutal, and childish, while Muslims, particularly Saladin, were tolerant and enlightened gentlemen of the nineteenth century. With the collapse of Ottoman power and the rise of Arab nationalism at the end of the nineteenth century, Muslims bound together these two strands of Crusade narrative and created a new memory in which the Crusades were only the first part of Europe’s assault on Islam—an assault that continued through the modern imperialism of European powers. Europeans reintroduced Saladin, who had been nearly forgotten in the Middle East, and Arab nationalists then cleansed him of his Kurdish ethnicity to create a new anti-Western hero. We saw the result during the run-up to the Iraq War, when Saddam Hussein portrayed himself as a new Saladin who would expel the new Crusaders.
Arab nationalists made good use of the new story of the Crusades during their struggles for independence. Their enemies, the Islamists, then took over the same tool. Osama bin Laden is only the most recent Islamist to adopt this useful myth to characterize the actions of the West as a continual Crusade against Islam.
>>288361
That is the Crusades’ only connection with modern Islamist terrorism. And yet, so ingrained is this notion that the Crusades began the modern European assault on Islam that many moderate Muslims still believe it. Riley-Smith recounts : “I recently refused to take part in a television series, produced by an intelligent and well-educated Egyptian woman, for whom a continuing Western crusade was an article of faith. Having less to do with historical reality than with reactions to imperialism, the nationalist and Islamist interpretations of crusade history help many people, moderates as well as extremists, to place the exploitation they believe they have suffered in a historical context and to satisfy their feelings of both superiority and humiliation.”
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/06/inventing-the-crusades
>>287758
They are just defending themselves. Any century now, the Muslims will manage a successful coup or work as a fifth column. Survival of the Buddhist culture requires they be removed.
Burma is not conducting an offensive operation here.
>>287758
The crusades weren't religious genocide dumbfuck. It was Muslim caliphates fighting western kings/princes/lords in response to the holy Land becoming unsafe to travel to
>>288748
Most of the OP links and title arent about Burma.
>>288099
Get the fuck off this board, you are too reasonable
>>288047
>Why do Indians cry about Muslim persecution when they persecuted Buddhists?
If by persecuted you mean being btfo by literary and philosophical debates, then yes they were persecuted.
Also, I didn't know that Bakhtiyar Khilji was a Hindu.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalanda
