Monday, 21 December 2015
If these twits bothered to take 5 minutes out of the day and research this they would find out, that isn't necessarily true.
Firstly, it was over 500 years ago and there are no documented accounts of the interactions, only modern day anthropologists INTERPRETATIONS of findings.
Monash University anthropologist, John Bradley (who I believe to be not only a muslim apologist, but an Aboriginal apologist also), comes to the conclusion that the contact between the two groups was a success: "They traded together. It was fair - there was no racial judgement, no race policy." Even into the early 21st century, the shared history between the two peoples is still celebrated by Aboriginal communities in northern Australia as a period of mutual trust and respect.
But others who have studied this period have come to a different conclusion regarding the relationship between the aboriginal people and the visiting trepangers. Anthropologist Ian McIntosh has said that the initial effects of contact with the Macassan fishermen resulted in "turmoil" with the extent of Islamic influence being noteworthy. In another paper McIntosh concludes, "strife, poverty and domination is a previously unrecorded legacy of contact between Aborigines and Indonesians." A report prepared by the History Department of the Australian National University says that the Macassans appear to have been welcomed initially, however relations deteriorated when, "aborigines began to feel they were being exploited leading to violence on both sides.
In 1916, two bronze cannons were found on a small island in Napier Broome Bay, on the northern coast of Western Australia. Scientists at the Western Australian Museum in Fremantle have made a detailed analysis and have determined that these weapons are swivel guns and almost certainly of late 18th century Makassan, rather than European, origin. Flinders account confirms that the Makassans he met were personally armed and their perahus carried small cannons.
In conclusion, one man ignores the evidence of the distrust and violence between the two groups (which makes him a shitty scientist, picking and choosing the bits that align with his bigotted views) and all our lovely lefties take only his account to paint the picture that Aboriginals prospered with the muslims while the Brits did horrible things (and they did).
But, let's not rewrite history to coordinate with our own views, let's actually look at ALL the facts. The evidence tells a different story than the apologists want you to know, you only need to look.
Monday, 7 December 2015
So.... the UK bleeding hearts have come up with yet another hashtag to fight terrorism with their naive assumptions that islamic terror has nothing to do with #islam.
The latest one is #youaintnomuslimbruv come up with when footage of a bystander called out "you aint no muslim bruv" to Muhaydin Mire while he went on a terrorist rampage through a London tube train station. The person who turned this into yet another hashtag fest clearly doesn't understand islamic scripture or history and instead listens to the bullshit rhetoric our appeasing leaders and media are spewing trying to keep calm in the community. These hashtags are designed to support the moderate muslims in the community, though by default they forget the victims. The #bleedinghearts have fallen all over each other to convince themselves that islam is peace when they clearly have NO IDEA whether it is or isn't.
Firstly, Muhaydin Mire attempted to behead a 56 year old man, which fits in perfectly with islamic doctrine and what we see happening in the world not only today, but throughout history also. Instructions regarding decapitation can be found in both the Quran, the Hadith as well as the Siras. The Quran itself mentions decapitation twice, including a verse concerning fighting unbelievers, in which it implores Muslims to "strike off their heads until you have crushed them completely; then bind the prisoners tightly." Much of the justification for beheading however, comes from the Siras and Hadiths rather than the Quran itself. The Siras, the number of traditional biographies of Muhammad, speak of decapitation on numerous occasions, several of which portray beheadings ordered directly by Muhammad himself.
He called out "this is for Syria". Islamic doctrine allows war in self-defence (Qur'an 22:39), to defend Islam (rather than to spread it), to protect those who have been removed from their homes by force because they are Muslims (Qur'an 22:40), and to protect the innocent who are being oppressed (Qur'an 4:75). This man clearly thinks he was defending Syrians who have been removed from their homes due to the war on ISIS. Muslims worldwide believe the war on terror is actually a war on muslims. Do some research on why they turn to islamism and jihadism, it becomes clear very quickly.
Birth place - Somalia. 99.8% islamic country.
Muslim? Damn good chance of it.
Please stop making up bullshit hashtags and CONFRONT THE DAMN PROBLEM!