Whatever.

----Boycott Isreal, Oppose the anti-free speech and the anti-science and anti-civil liberties agenda of the Judeo-Christian-Muslim brainwashed hordes. 

I thought I quite reasonably refuted your argument.

___

Defend Christendom. Defend Jewry. Oppose socialism in Europe.

I really hate it when people start a rebuttal with insults and then fail to even refute my argument.  Damn those pesky muslims resisting european occupation!  Some things never change just the labels do. When afganis were resisting the USSR they were "freedom fighters" now these same people are "terrorists"

It is true that the Irak-Iran war in the 1980's killed about 1.5 million people.  They can be attributed to Saddam. It is also true that the estimates of higher (largely infant) deaths of the UN sanctions regime during the 1990's amounted to over half a million.  But the latter deaths can be attributed properly to the Iraki Baath leadership (or to the UN if you take the view that governments should be allowed to behave with impunity).  And, of course, there are numerous other deaths (as evidenced by mass graves in Irak) which one could (perhaps too easily) attribute to Saddam and his 'Tikriti' culture that sunni Irakis tended to embrace in the past.

By comparison, the removal of Saddam & Sons by the US has cost casualties on the order of around twenty five thousand (mainly Iraki soldiers).  Given the first paragraph, it is reasonable to assume that that removal should have saved untold numbers of victims in the future.

The people doing the regular and extensive killing in Irak today are NOT the US, but they are (sectarian) Irakis and other islamists from 'neigbouring states'.  In fact, the US is trying to stop this sectarian bloodletting.  Why, then would a rather-shallow-educated American in Amsterdam make such an absurd statement like "the US must have killed at least 1 million Irakis in the last 15 years"?  Why? Well the answer is obvious.  He buys into the perverse selfhatred of western naive-leftism (coupled with a strong dose of libertarianism, in his particular case).   On the level of geopolitics that means that the west, and especially the Great Satan, is always blamed for whatever bad conditions exist among other peoples, not those peoples themselves.  They are not held responsible for their own abominable behavior.  On the level of internal politics, particularly w.r.t. domestic crime, this means that the criminals themselves are not really held responsible for their own actions either, because...you know... "the system made them do it"!     

Obviously, societies whose education system keeps producing such self-hatred (and inability to make empirical observation), as manifested by Amsterdamsky,  cannot endure.   But, he is not a political refugee, he is simply another naive-leftie in a cultural sense.  America does not have political refugees (i.e. people whose safety could or would no longer be guaranteed because of their political speech).   By contrast, there is a growing stream of political refugees from Europe to America, by people who are fleeing political intimidation and whose lives are genuinely threatened in Europe: people like Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Oriana Fallaci, etc.....As a European, I can only regret this deeply, and I must make the comparison with the early smart refugees from Germany in the early thirties who saw the writing on the wall and fled to England and further away.  By the late 1930's for many others it was too late....

I am not a muslim apologist but again the body count is mostly dead muslims in my opinion.  The more I think about it the more examples I come up with.  The US must have killed at least 1 million Iraqis in the last 15 years compared with 3000 dead americans.  The Israeli Pali ratio is also very tilted towards dead Palis.  Most of the Middle East had been either British or French colonies and I am sure there were not very nice either especially the French.  I am still looking for totals put most accounts but dead Algerians at over 1 million. 

Compare this with maybe 20,000 european dead at the "Gates of Vienna".  Seriously, we have been kicking their butts and subjugating them for a long time and we should not be surprised that they don't like us very much. 

Again, however, the big mistake was even letting them into europe and the US and Australia.

Just Algeria:"The FLN estimated in 1962 that nearly eight years of revolution had cost 1.5 million dead from war-related causes. Some other Algerian sources later put the figure at approximately 1 million dead, while French officials estimated it at 350,000." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algerian_War_of_Independence#Death_toll

That is ONLY Algeria.  I can't find any figures on how many muslims the Brits killed in colonising nearly most of the middle east but I am sure it is not zero.  Add other French muslim colonies and I am sure you are many many multiples of dead that muslims have ever inflicted on the west.

This is only last century also not 1000 years ago.

I appreciate your acceptance of European military expansion and economic exploitation, however, I must agree with Fjordman's historical analysis.

Moreover, Israel has only existed for some half century, and has not had either the willingness, capacity or time to inflict casualties and fatalities on its own people and foreigners that the Persian, Ottoman, Mogul or successive Arab Islamic empires did.

"fucking them up for over 1000 years in a very one sided way"

The Battle of Lepanto was a lot less than 1000 years ago...likewise the Seige of Vienna. Or perhaps you meant that the West has been "fucking them over" by resisting invasion and enslavement.

I said the US and Israel but I could probably include the entire west.  We have been fucking them up for over 1000 years in a very one sided way.  Not too surprising they hate us really although for me the feeling is mutual.  The big mistake was allowing them over here.

@ Siegetower

That was not just (innocent) "ignorance" on Amsterdamsky's part, but rather incredible ignorance.  Yet, a fairly articulate modern westerner in 'Amsterdam' can make such statements today.  It shows how ideological media bias can 'dumb down' a whole society over time.  

But, then, anybody who can start an 'argument' with an opening sentence like "I hate all religions" is obviously misinformed on "religion" too.  That is like saying "I hate all politics" or...  So, we may be dealing with an "articulate" individual, but not a reasonable one.  Too much emotion, pre-judgement and one-sided 'parroting' (of the BBC, The Guardian, etc...?), I would say.   

"It would be interesting to see Muslims deal with the trail of blood they have left behind on several continents, from Thailand via India to Armenia, during more than 1300 years. To quote Paul Fregosi’s book Jihad in the West:"

I hate all religions especially Islam and I don't like to defend them but I am sure the body count racked up by Israel and their backers the US in the muslim world has far exceeded any non-muslims killed by muslims.

'nuff said. I am always amazed by how the newly converted to Islam take a more hardline approach than those born into the religion e.g. the Jewish convert to Islam who was interviewed by Dawkins.

The war is still a secret among the next targets. Why is that? How does an enemy that has been constantly on the attack someplace in the world pass itself off as the Religion of Peace.

It is the biggest charade in history and the most successful. Does the Koran outline the strategy to be used to successfully overrun the infidels?

Pierre Legrand

The Pink Flamingo Bar

The Muslim intelligentsia, of course, has refused to involve itself in any kind of self-criticism, at least since the Enlightenment.  And the results are plain to see:  crappy universities, even in Turkey, which was never colonized but, rather, colonized others; no scientific community to speak of outside of Muslim immigrants in the West; no contribution to medical science; no contribution to agricultural advancement.  Their self-defensive accounts of the jihad are just a recipe for further mediocrity.

And now we have the European intelligentsia not only letting the dishonest accounts of Muslim history go unchallenged, but also taking on the same tendencies:  criticizing only America (or Israel, when they can be bothered), puffing themselves up with false pride about meaningless gestures like the Kyoto Treaty, pretending their bungling of the Balkans crises never happened, blaming every problem in the Middle East on the Jews (as if hideous events in Europe did not precipitate the formation of Israel).

It's tiresome to live in America and have to listen to the American elites -- our journalists and academics and half our politicians -- blame America for everything, including the weather, while they marvel, in total ignorance, at the European paradise.  But I suppose it's preferable to have an elite that blames its own country than an elite that blames only outsiders.  The results, again, are plain to see:  the world's top universities, the most vital scientific community by far, an economy that can absorb ten million illiterate immigrants every decade, even a vibrant popular culture that fascinates people around the globe (though I can't always understand why).

I have no idea how cultures like those in the Muslim world can transform their elites from dishonest hacks into self-critical intellectuals.  Perhaps it's not something that can be engineered.  Perhaps America is just lucky.  The irony may in fact be that the American elites' inferiority complex toward all things European -- in my estimation, the most irritating thing about America -- is our saving grace.  If not for that, we too would probably be fooling ourselves as badly as the Muslims, while similarly trapped in a state of self-induced poverty and ignorance.