Crime 150+ dead after Terrorist attacks in Paris

FBS · Dec 2, 2015

kyrani99 said:
IMO
The Christians are not killing in the name of Christ but in the name of money and exploitation of natural resources and the policy of "divide and rule". The Muslims are killing in the name of defending their territories from Western aggression, but also in disputes with each other over territory.

I don't think we can say that Jesus was a pacifist because there is a lot of contradiction in the scriptures. For instance when Jesus went into the temple and saw the corruption he did not say "I forgive you" but instead whipped them. Plus we have nothing written by Jesus himself, nor even from his apostles. All of the gospels are "the gospel according to......"

I also strongly believe that Paul/Saul portrayed Jesus in the manner that suited the Romans. He was a Jew but also a Roman citizen and very likely a Roman agent. There are political reasons for many of the words put into Jesus's mouth, especially those of pacifism. Love thy enemies and forgive thy enemies. I doubt very much that Jesus ever uttered these words.

There was a lot of interest in Judaism by the Greeks. There was Hellenic Judaism and Gnosticism. So there was a lot of sympathy for the Jews by the Greeks of the times. And don't forget the Eastern Roman Empire was essentially Greek city states with a few extras such as Palestine. Meanwhile the Jews were in revolt. If the Romans had tried to crush them before they had a chance to brainwash their Greek subjects they may have lost the Eastern Roman Empire. So I believe what they did was use Paul/Saul to re-invent Jesus and portray him in a manner that would dis-empower the Greeks and then attack Palestine and crush the Jews, which is exactly what they did. And this "pacifism" has dis-empowered millions ever since with dire consequences.

The Muslims on the other hand, may have corrupted the Koran to some extent, in adding in tribal laws and customs, but from my own understanding and experience at least, I see that the theology is sound. And there is ample indication that while Mohammed supports defending one's self and property/ territory, he also uphold ideals that speak loudly for peace and co-operation between people with differences in culture and religion.

According to Feisal Abdul Rauf, "the Quran expressly and unambiguously prohibits the use of coercion in faith because coercion would violate a fundamental human right—the right to a free conscience. A different belief system is not deemed a legitimate cause for violence or war under Islamic law. The Quran is categorical on this: "There shall be no compulsion in religion" (2:256); "Say to the disbelievers [that is, atheists, or polytheists, namely those who reject God] "To you, your beliefs, to me, mine"

We are prompted to see whole groups when in fact the enemy is not "the Christians" or"the Muslims" or any particular nation. The enemy is hidden and interwoven throughout every society on earth. Whether you like to believe it or not, there are evil people (what psychiatrists call functional psychopaths or successful psychopaths), who are networked. There is no one big network and there are not signed up memberships or leaders etc. There are small networks that have become inter-connected simply because evil people, like all other people move from one place to another. The difference however is that while humane people form circles of friends for the joy of friendship, evil people make new "like-minded friends" because they need others to play the power games they play and to ensure what they call "the quintessential".. the ability to hurt others and get pleasure from seeing their suffering. These are the real enemy and they are in every culture.

I agree with every word kyrani99. I may disagree in many other of your posts but with this one, you've nailed it.

LeBrok · Dec 2, 2015

kyrani99 said:
IMO
The Christians are not killing in the name of Christ but in the name of money and exploitation of natural resources and the policy of "divide and rule". The Muslims are killing in the name of defending their territories from Western aggression, but also in disputes with each other over territory.

I don't think we can say that Jesus was a pacifist because there is a lot of contradiction in the scriptures. For instance when Jesus went into the temple and saw the corruption he did not say "I forgive you" but instead whipped them. Plus we have nothing written by Jesus himself, nor even from his apostles. All of the gospels are "the gospel according to......"

I also strongly believe that Paul/Saul portrayed Jesus in the manner that suited the Romans. He was a Jew but also a Roman citizen and very likely a Roman agent. There are political reasons for many of the words put into Jesus's mouth, especially those of pacifism. Love thy enemies and forgive thy enemies. I doubt very much that Jesus ever uttered these words.

Wait a minute, you are not being objective and consequential at all. Both of these examples come form the same source, and yet you believe only one is true?!!!

We are prompted to see whole groups when in fact the enemy is not "the Christians" or"the Muslims" or any particular nation. The enemy is hidden and interwoven throughout every society on earth. Whether you like to believe it or not, there are evil people (what psychiatrists call functional psychopaths or successful psychopaths), who are networked. There is no one big network and there are not signed up memberships or leaders etc. There are small networks that have become inter-connected simply because evil people, like all other people move from one place to another. The difference however is that while humane people form circles of friends for the joy of friendship, evil people make new "like-minded friends" because they need others to play the power games they play and to ensure what they call "the quintessential".. the ability to hurt others and get pleasure from seeing their suffering. These are the real enemy and they are in every culture.

I pretty much agree with this. The "Evil" is in us, and religion is used to legitimize bad actions. To have god(s) backing you, gives an ultimate authority, even if you do "evil".

matbir · Dec 2, 2015

kyrani99 said:
The scholars have every right to make the connection between the inquisitions and witch hunts etc., as well as wars and ill-treatment of natives by colonizers for deaths due to plagues.

Do not bull s**** us. The basic knowledge is that witch hunt occurred in countries under influence of reformation. Catholic countries ware much more conservative in that matter so inquisition killed much less people then angry crowds in heretic countries. Example in Southern catholic Europe (Portugal, Spain and Italy) there was only 10 000 trials and less then 1000 convicted in 300 years (1450-1750) while in Holy Roman Empire there was about 50 000 trials and 25 000 to 30 000 convicted.
In whole Catholic Europe there was about 20 000 trials and up to 4 000 convicts for 300 years in protestant Europe 60 000 trials and up to 34 000 convicts. So the reality of inquisition was 80% of suspects ware found not guilty - that means scared people throw accusations but only few of accused was found to be violating the law. But in protestant countries there was no authority to hold back that madness.
BTW Inquisition was convicting only people who did not want to admit publicly that what they sad and done before was heresy.
I recommend book: “Witchcraft and magic in Europe” volume 4 William Monter - author among others. Data I mentioned are from that William's estimations.

kyrani99 said:
There is such a thing as the "germ theory", which says that microorganisms cause infectuous diseases. Indeed we can find evidence in that microorganisms are present and if we give appropriate medication, eg antibiotics, which kill bacteria, we can treat the disease.. in many cases. And associated with this theory is the notion that people have developed immunity over generations so the argument goes that the American natives died because of the introduction of European bugs brought across by the colonialists. This is rubbish. EVERY infant has NO adaptive immunity only inate immunity, which does not discriminate for a particular microbe. So the truth is that there is no bugs that we have become immune to over the generations.

I have read that church scriptures from 16th century from Peru shows that Amerindians had lots of children but majority of them was dead until the age of 5. Ask someone who deals with this problem instead of telling that whole story is rubbish.

Aaron1981 · Dec 2, 2015

matbir said:
Do not bull s**** us. The basic knowledge is that witch hunt occurred in countries under influence of reformation. Catholic countries ware much more conservative in that matter so inquisition killed much less people then angry crowds in heretic countries. Example in Southern catholic Europe (Portugal, Spain and Italy) there was only 10 000 trials and less then 1000 convicted in 300 years (1450-1750) while in Holy Roman Empire there was about 50 000 trials and 25 000 to 30 000 convicted.
In whole Catholic Europe there was about 20 000 trials and up to 4 000 convicts for 300 years in protestant Europe 60 000 trials and up to 34 000 convicts. So the reality of inquisition was 80% of suspects ware found not guilty - that means scared people throw accusations but only few of accused was found to be violating the law. But in protestant countries there was no authority to hold back that madness.
BTW Inquisition was convicting only people who did not want to admit publicly that what they sad and done before was heresy.
I recommend book: “Witchcraft and magic in Europe” volume 4 William Monter - author among others. Data I mentioned are from that William's estimations.

I have read that church scriptures from 16th century from Peru shows that Amerindians had lots of children but majority of them was dead until the age of 5. Ask someone who deals with this problem instead of telling that whole story is rubbish.

Of course...says the good Polish Catholic. Not biased at all are we? Since the Reformation happened quite late in history, and Roman Catholicism has, simply for sake of argument, quite a number more centuries under its belt than any Reformed church, your argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Angela · Dec 2, 2015

Aaron1981 said:
Of course...says the good Polish Catholic. Not biased at all are we? Since the Reformation happened quite late in history, and Roman Catholicism has, simply for sake of argument, quite a number more centuries under its belt than any Reformed church, your argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

How is that relevant when the prior poster is comparing Catholic versus Protestant Europe for the same 300 year period?

matbir · Dec 3, 2015

Aaron1981 said:
Of course...says the good Polish Catholic. Not biased at all are we? Since the Reformation happened quite late in history, and Roman Catholicism has, simply for sake of argument, quite a number more centuries under its belt than any Reformed church, your argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

O, I see, you seem to have special abilities to predict somebody’s' faith.

For the rest I see Angela have stolen my point

To do good comparison of regimes or institutions you need to check time and standards. I bet you that in Muslim countries and even more in far eastern ones cruelty was even bigger then in Europe.

Ike · Dec 3, 2015

Arban Hoti said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perse...5.A1_and_the_wider_Toplica_and_Morava_regions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacres_of_Albanians_in_the_Balkan_Wars
http://espressostalinist.com/genocide/albanian-genocide/
http://www.albanianhistory.net/texts20_1/AH1913_1.html
We have carried out the attempted premeditated murder of an entire nation. We were caught in that criminal act and have been obstructed. Now we have to suffer the punishment.... In the Balkan Wars, Serbia not only doubled its territory, but also its external enemies.
— Dimitrije Tucović

You can say whatever you like on this Nazi forum. But the truth is out there in the fields. I know it, you know it, and I hope other people here will never know it first hand.

LeBrok · Dec 3, 2015

matbir said:
I bet you that in Muslim countries and even more in far eastern ones cruelty was even bigger then in Europe.

What do you base your assumption on?
I'm sure Europeans know how to stick a guy on a sharpened post, how to blow a guy tide to a canon or ripped apart with horses, how to remove fingernails, how to burn a guy or a girl slowly, or six million of them, etc. I'm sure you would love to forget how crafty Europeans are with torture and industrious with mass killing.

matbir · Dec 3, 2015

LeBrok said:
What do you base your assumption on?
I'm sure Europeans know how to stick a guy on a sharpened post, how to blow a guy tide to a canon or ripped apart with horses, how to remove fingernails, how to burn a guy or a girl slowly, or six million of them, etc. I'm sure you would love to forget how crafty Europeans are with torture and industrious with mass killing.

Mass extermination never happened in Europe before the rise of Marxist revolution in Russia (Bolsheviks) and Germany (National Socialists). While in China mass extermination happened in 1755-1758 when 80 % out of 600 000 Oirats ware killed or died. Today after 250 years so more or less 10 generations all Oirat tribes consists of around 600 000 people 1/3 of them - Kalmyks lives in European Russia.
If you are shocked by number of killed during which hunt, you would be even more by learning about Muslim conquest and rule in India; same time period, number of victims about 10 000 times higher. Do not ask me check for your self, it was hundreds of millions people. Mass castration of Hindus was very common practice.

That is one of many reasons why in 18th and 19th century literature Asians are described mostly as savages, habits of Asians were far too cruel for Europeans to admire their culture.
When Europeans turned their backs on Christianity they started same practices as Asians, we know from Germany and Russia. Nazis even found inspiration in Islamic ideology.
Himmler: Islam is a practical and sympathetic religion for soldiers"; "Islam is very similar to our world view"

Hitler referring to Poles and Armenian Genocide: "Our strength is our quickness and our brutality. Genghis Khan had millions of women and children hunted down and killed, deliberately and with a gay heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. What the weak Western European civilization alleges about me, does not matter. I have given the order–and will have everyone shot who utters but one word of criticism–that the aim of {translator: this} war does not consist in reaching certain {translator: geographical} lines, but in the enemies’ physical elimination. Thus, for the time being only in the east, I put ready my Death’s Head units, with the order to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of the Polish race or language. Only thus will we gain the living space that we need. Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

LeBrok there is no assumption, just facts.

BTW during WW II Japanese weren’t much less skilled in death industry then Germans or Communists. Numbers speak for themselves.

bicicleur 2 · Dec 3, 2015

matbir said:
Mass extermination never happened in Europe before the rise of Marxist revolution in Russia (Bolsheviks) and Germany (National Socialists). While in China mass extermination happened in 1755-1758 when 80 % out of 600 000 Oirats ware killed or died. Today after 250 years so more or less 10 generations all Oirat tribes consists of around 600 000 people 1/3 of them - Kalmyks lives in European Russia.
If you are shocked by number of killed during which hunt, you would be even more by learning about Muslim conquest and rule in India; same time period, number of victims about 10 000 times higher. Do not ask me check for your self, it was hundreds of millions people. Mass castration of Hindus was very common practice.

That is one of many reasons why in 18th and 19th century literature Asians are described mostly as savages, habits of Asians were far too cruel for Europeans to admire their culture.
When Europeans turned their backs on Christianity they started same practices as Asians, we know from Germany and Russia. Nazis even found inspiration in Islamic ideology.
Himmler: Islam is a practical and sympathetic religion for soldiers"; "Islam is very similar to our world view"

Hitler referring to Poles and Armenian Genocide: "Our strength is our quickness and our brutality. Genghis Khan had millions of women and children hunted down and killed, deliberately and with a gay heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. What the weak Western European civilization alleges about me, does not matter. I have given the order–and will have everyone shot who utters but one word of criticism–that the aim of {translator: this} war does not consist in reaching certain {translator: geographical} lines, but in the enemies’ physical elimination. Thus, for the time being only in the east, I put ready my Death’s Head units, with the order to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of the Polish race or language. Only thus will we gain the living space that we need. Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

LeBrok there is no assumption, just facts.

BTW during WW II Japanese weren’t much less skilled in death industry then Germans or Communists. Numbers speak for themselves.

allways big outrage when there is something happening in the west, but in the mean time we let ISIS and Boko Haram have their way

in 2014 more than 32000 people were killed by terrorists, Boko Haram is number one, ISIS is second
this year it will be more
all this outrage for 130 killed in Paris, while every average day that many are killed

and don't tell me Islam has nothing to do with it

LeBrok · Dec 3, 2015

matbir said:
Mass extermination never happened in Europe before the rise of Marxist revolution in Russia (Bolsheviks) and Germany (National Socialists).

They were Europeans, right?

Hitler referring to Poles and Armenian Genocide: "Our strength is our quickness and our brutality.

Hitler was European, right?

Genghis Khan had millions of women and children hunted down and killed

Click to expand...

, Give me a source of this claim.

LeBrok there is no assumption, just facts.

BTW during WW II Japanese weren’t much less skilled in death industry then Germans or Communists. Numbers speak for themselves.

Stop helping me.

You missed my point totally. There is no way to figure out who of all the human races and ethnicities is more cruel than others. All are capable of the same crimes and bestiaries.

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

Tomenable said:
In Europe plague has existed constantly for hundreds of years, and - when it comes to smallpox - adults were immune to smallpox because most of them had survived it as children (those who had not survived, never became adults - because they died).

In the Americas smallpox was new - it means, that neither children nor adults were immune to it. When smallpox (and then other exclusively Eurasian diseases) hit Native Americans, entire population got infected, because nobody was immune.

When entire population is infected, there is noone left to take care of those who are sick. There is simply noone left to provide food and medical care. This means that mortality had to be much higher, even if their immune systems were not so weak..

There is no case to be made about a disease being "new and thus having no immunity". Whether child or adult, IN EVERY case a person who is confronted by a new organism will build immunity. There is no such thing as any inherited immunity. When we encounter a new organism our immune system recognizes it and builds a defense, i.e., antibodies are made from characteristic bits of the offending microorganism and are displayed on the surface of infected cells and immune cells to alert other immune cells that these are pathogens and need to be destroyed. Thus the immune system sets about to kill the invaders. Sure if you have had the disease as a child you have already got that immunity but you can still get the immunity as an adult.

Tomenable said:
Starvation also causes decline of immunity, and when everybody was infected, there was noone left who could provide food.

Many parts of the Americas were hit by the plague before first Europeans showed up - so there was no fear of Europeans..

Starvation over time will cause a person fear for survival and thus declined immunity.
There is probably very few cases if any where all of the population is sick. It is possible to have microorganism that are pathogenic in a person's system that do not lead to disease. This is being labelled as "latent infection".

There may have been plagues in the Americas before Europeans but you will find that they would have been associated either with natural disaster, eg fires or famines etc., or by warring tribes.

Tomenable said:
==================================

EDIT:

I agree with you, that "the plague" is some catastrophic event when an extraordinarily high % of the population is sick.

But we must remember, that in Europe smallpox was constantly killing people. When there was "a plague", it was simply killing extraordinarily large numbers of people over very short periods of time. But smallpox was one of the main killers in Europe ALL THE TIME, also when there was no plague. Check my thread about death causes of people in Warsaw as late as the 1800s:

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ians-amp-Jews-of-Warsaw-in-years-ca-1800-1805

As you can see Smallpox and Tuberculosis were among the main causes of death in Warsaw as late as years 1800 - 1805.

So it was not the case, that there was one "Black Death" in the 1300s, and later Europeans were disease-free.

Infectious diseases were killing Europeans all the time, but they were doing it slowly most of the time.

Rapid increases in mortality caused by infectious diseases is what we call "plagues". As for the Americas - they were disease-free until the 1500s. They did not have smallpox. Their first encounter was in the 1500s. So here is the main difference - for Europeans, children killed by smallpox was everyday reality, while for Native Americans it was something new. And in Europe adults were immune to smallpox, so the main victims were always children, while in the Americas nobody was immune when Columbus landed..

I will answer you also in the thread above.
I did not say that later Europeans are disease-free. I was only talking about the Black Death because it was a particularly bad plague.
Certainly the plague was a catastrophic event but this is not what I meant. I meant that where you find plague you find that there is some catastrophic event or events happening that stress masses of people at the same time.

There is a difference between an individual's life and the community's life.
We see disease all the time but in small amounts because it affects individuals and their lives vary so while most people may feel safe and secure and thus have a good immune response some people may be suffering abuses and hence suffer with a reduced immune response.

Tomenable said:

EDIT 2:

Click to expand...

Tomenable said:
I can't agree that lower immunity must always be caused by "fear" or some other "trauma".

What about mutating bacteria and viruses? A new mutated version of a bug, can be the reason of lower immunity for it. Adults have immunity for old versions of a bug, but once a bug mutated and became a new version, there was - initially - no immunity for that new version. And mortality rates were then rapidly increasing also among adults, causing what we call "a plague".

Viruses and bacteria can mutate till the cows come home but they won't affect the immune response of a healthy unstressed individual. Mutating microorganisms are a headache only for the pharmaceutical companies who are keen to make money selling vaccines and if the microorganisms mutate then they have to go back to the laboratory and start again.

Also an individual who is stressed can respond to the stress in a way that helps maintain their normal immune response. I can vouch for this personally. I have upset toxic people, who have been aggressively seeking to destroy me for 15 years now and I can still maintain my health. This is the secret that big pharma wants hidden.

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

Catholic extermination camps!

Tomenable said:
The Nazis disliked the Catholic Church, most of their supporters were Lutherans.

Share of Nazi votes was inversely proportional to share of Catholics in the population:

And here an even better map, showing the same correlation between Protestant population and support for Nazis:

LINK

And by the way - camps were neither "Protestant" (though supported by Protestants), nor "Catholic" - but GERMAN.

And "German" is not a religion.

Well what about these?
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v09/v09p101_Lang.html

https://promoteliberty.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/catholic-extermination-camps/

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/20/jasenovac-the-cruelest-death-camp-of-all-times-26/

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

Tomenable said:
"The death toll from 14 centuries of the Muslim slave trade in Africa is estimated at over 112 million":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31E1gHowYcA#t=513

Add to this the death toll from 14 centuries of the Muslim slave trade in Europe, which was also many millions.

Yes this is true but you have to see the responsibility of the Christians in the matter too. There is no trade where there is no market!

Edit.
The problem is we see only the group at large, so we talk about Christians and Muslims or we talk about the Germans, the Russian, the Greeks, the British etc., etc.,

Who is the enemy?
The problem is that humanity is made up of two completely different types of human beings. The majority is the humane and yes some of them might at times be swayed by common reasoning but while they may be persuaded into wars, they do not commit atrocities.

Then you have the inhumane, who may be as much as 20% of the world's population, 1/5th of approx. 7.2 billion. That is about 1.4 billion! They will offend because they hate justice and because they get pleasure out of the harm they do AND they exist in EVERY country. It is useless to talk about "us and them" if we are identifying whole nations or whole religious groups. Every nation and every religious group is a mixture and the badies hide behind a good public image in many cases. Some make themselves obvious but most don't.

bicicleur 2 · Dec 3, 2015

LeBrok said:
They were Europeans, right?

Hitler was European, right?

, Give me a source of this claim.
[/I] Stop helping me.

You missed my point totally. There is no way to figure out who of all the human races and ethnicities is more cruel than others. All are capable of the same crimes and bestiaries.

you didn't like what matbir told, did you?

did you know about the Muslim conquest of India?

I'm surprised you even didn't know about Dzjenghis Khan
he still is a hero in Mongolia, he has a big statute over there

try this for a starter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_under_the_Mongol_Empire
and don't miss the positive footnote in the end :
[h=2]Environmental impact[edit][/h]According to a study by the Carnegie Institution for Science's Department of Global Energy, the destruction under Genghis Khan may have scrubbed as much as 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere by allowing forests to regrow on previously populated and cultivated land.^[22]^[23]

you should be aware of human nature

people visit Auschwitz yet they fail to understand what Muslim fundamentalism stands for

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

Tomenable said:
There is a thing called "incubation period", which is time between the actual infection, and first symptoms of a disease:

https://www.google.pl/search?client...F-8&oe=UTF-8#q=incubation+period+for+smallpox

Then of course between first symptoms and death (or getting healthy again) there was also a long time.

They could get on board without knowing they were sick, develop first symptoms half-way, and still get to the New World.

There is a thing call the germ theory, which states that some diseases (i.e., infecteous diseases) are caused by microorganisms. This was of course the famous Dr Louis Pasteur.
Then along came the German doc Dr Robert Koch who said “if that was true then it would have to mean that….” and he put forth his four postulates.

The pathogenic microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.
The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.

And here there is trouble.
Koch discovered asymptomatic carriers of cholera and later, of typhoid fever. Oooops! Asymptomatic carriers have the microorganism but have no symptoms! Bit embarrassing.. so they call it “subclinical infection” because they are married to the idea that the microorganism causes the disease or at least an infection.

People who have the microorganism but have no symptoms, i.e.., are not harmed by the microorganism are now known to be a common feature of many infectious diseases, especially viruses such as polio, herpes simplex, HIV, and hepatitis C.

However while all doctors and scientists studying the microbes agree that the poliovirus causes paralysis in just a few of the infected subjects, by continuing to talk about infected subjects and insisting that the poliovirus is the cause of the disease, they serve big pharma and the successful sales of the polio vaccine as a preventative of the disease. It is doubtful that the polio vaccine was responsible for the downward trends of polio nor the other vaccines of the many other diseases, for which there are vaccines because the downward trend was already in place for decades before the vaccines and the vaccines did not change the shape of the downward trend. Here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MuHra7ZcAa8
It is a long video (1.5hrs) but the trends are discuss in the first 20mins or so.

In the third postulate the wording is "should", not "must", because Koch and others showed clear evidence, we might even say proof, that at least with regard to tuberculosis and cholera, only some organisms, which are exposed to the supposed “infectious agent”, the microorganism, will become sick. And IMO they are devious in the way they explain this phenomenon. They say that “non-infection may be due to such factors as general health and proper immune functioning; acquired immunity from previous exposure or vaccination; or genetic immunity, as with the resistance to malaria conferred by possessing at least one sickle cell allele”. This of course preserves the germ theory and thus the reason to vaccinate.

The truth is that the microorganism IS NOT the causative agent of the disease. A person can be in good health and still get sick. The real reason is that if the person is being terrorized or feel they are in mortal danger for some reason over a prolonged period of time then they will have a depressed immunity for the well-known reason that fear declines immunity, when the danger is perceived to be external because the body seeks to manage its resources efficiently so as to give the musculature (which is needed in fight or flight) the best supply of its resources, ie sugars and oxygen to create the energy demands that may be needed. AND furthermore danger is only the preparation of the body or mobilization of the body for fight or flight. This means that fear will continue to dominate as long as the danger persists or the individual perceives it as current. It is in this atmosphere, when immunity is declined and not operative, at least not in sufficient levels, that the microorganisms may gain an advantage.

As for Columbus he stopped in Haiti on his first trip for a month and on his second trip too at another location for a long time. If he had anyone on board that was sick he would have known and left them behind. After all it makes no sense to travel with a sick person on such a voyage.

The Spanish and others that went to the Americas were brutally cruel to the natives and that is what caused them the problem. After all there may have been smallpox bugs in the Americas since the year dot! But that fact doesn't help sell vaccines. So the story is told that the bugs cause the disease.. the germ theory.

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

Not all the same.

LeBrok said:
There is no way to figure out who of all the human races and ethnicities is more cruel than others. All are capable of the same crimes and bestiaries.

I agree with you that it is often very hard to figure out who is cruel but I strongly disagree that we can talk about which races or ethnicities are more cruel than others. There are good and evil, humane and inhumane IN EVERY RACE. Not everyone is capable of the same crimes and bestiaries. I have seen time after time in families where either one or both parents are evil. They NEVER try to make a good /humane child evil because it never works. They aggressively train their evil/inhumane children in the ways of being evil and they persecute and torment their good/humane children.

Evil /inhumane people want to hide inside the group so they use phrases to try and convince others that are not evil and who are naive about evil. Saying such as "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" as if it applies to everyone is a way of putting everyone in the same group. It is false. There are plenty of examples where national /tribal leaders were benevolent and though held absolute power yet were never corrupted. The two that come to mind and which are highly relevant to this threat are Jesus and Mohamed. Both were benevolent and were prepared to fight and die along side their followers, who were also subjects in the case of Mohamed, to protect the whole from an enemy.

kyrani99 · Dec 3, 2015

matbir said:
Do not bull s**** us. The basic knowledge is that witch hunt occurred in countries under influence of reformation. Catholic countries ware much more conservative in that matter so inquisition killed much less people then angry crowds in heretic countries. Example in Southern catholic Europe (Portugal, Spain and Italy) there was only 10 000 trials and less then 1000 convicted in 300 years (1450-1750) while in Holy Roman Empire there was about 50 000 trials and 25 000 to 30 000 convicted.
In whole Catholic Europe there was about 20 000 trials and up to 4 000 convicts for 300 years in protestant Europe 60 000 trials and up to 34 000 convicts. So the reality of inquisition was 80% of suspects ware found not guilty - that means scared people throw accusations but only few of accused was found to be violating the law. But in protestant countries there was no authority to hold back that madness.
BTW Inquisition was convicting only people who did not want to admit publicly that what they sad and done before was heresy.
I recommend book: “Witchcraft and magic in Europe” volume 4 William Monter - author among others. Data I mentioned are from that William's estimations.

The connection I am pointing to is terror and plague, not how many died in witch hunts and inquisitions. The witch hunts and the inquisitions were times of terror for many people. The point is terrorized people are most likely to get sick and die and NOT those infected by a microorganism. There are plenty of cases, in fact it is quite common for people to have contacted a microorganism said to be the agent of disease and never get sick.

matbir said:
I have read that church scriptures from 16th century from Peru shows that Amerindians had lots of children but majority of them was dead until the age of 5. Ask someone who deals with this problem instead of telling that whole story is rubbish.

I don't know what you are taking about here. I was talking about immunity. EVERY child acquires adaptive immunity, which is the immunity the body uses to fight infections.

Angela · Dec 3, 2015

matbir said:
Mass extermination never happened in Europe before the rise of Marxist revolution in Russia (Bolsheviks) and Germany (National Socialists). While in China mass extermination happened in 1755-1758 when 80 % out of 600 000 Oirats ware killed or died. Today after 250 years so more or less 10 generations all Oirat tribes consists of around 600 000 people 1/3 of them - Kalmyks lives in European Russia.
If you are shocked by number of killed during which hunt, you would be even more by learning about Muslim conquest and rule in India; same time period, number of victims about 10 000 times higher. Do not ask me check for your self, it was hundreds of millions people. Mass castration of Hindus was very common practice.

That is one of many reasons why in 18th and 19th century literature Asians are described mostly as savages, habits of Asians were far too cruel for Europeans to admire their culture.
When Europeans turned their backs on Christianity they started same practices as Asians, we know from Germany and Russia. Nazis even found inspiration in Islamic ideology.
Himmler: Islam is a practical and sympathetic religion for soldiers"; "Islam is very similar to our world view"

Hitler referring to Poles and Armenian Genocide: "Our strength is our quickness and our brutality. Genghis Khan had millions of women and children hunted down and killed, deliberately and with a gay heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. What the weak Western European civilization alleges about me, does not matter. I have given the order–and will have everyone shot who utters but one word of criticism–that the aim of {translator: this} war does not consist in reaching certain {translator: geographical} lines, but in the enemies’ physical elimination. Thus, for the time being only in the east, I put ready my Death’s Head units, with the order to kill without pity or mercy all men, women, and children of the Polish race or language. Only thus will we gain the living space that we need. Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?"

LeBrok there is no assumption, just facts.

BTW during WW II Japanese weren’t much less skilled in death industry then Germans or Communists. Numbers speak for themselves.

Have you forgotten the extermination that went on during the crusade against the Cathars?
http://www.cathar.info/cathar_wars.htm
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Albigensian_Crusade

As many as one million people may have been killed.

How about the extermination of the Jews in France and Germany during the Middle Ages? Spearing babies, herding people into a synagogue and then setting it alight doesn't constitute cruel behavior to you?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Medieval_anti-Jewish_pogroms

They were so severe that the entire Jewish population was reduced to a couple of hundred people.

How about the atrocities committed by the Crusaders not only in the Near East but on Orthodox Christian Constantinople?
http://www.historyguide.org/ancient/lecture25b.html

First Crusade: "Meanwhile, the main body of the army was besieging the great city of Antioch which was finally conquered after seven months. Antioch became the second crusader state under Bohemond. The other crusaders then took Jerusalem by assault in July 1099, followed by the wholesale slaughter of Muslims and Jews, men, women, and children, an event recorded by FULCHER OF CHARTRES. "

The Third Crusade also involved a lot of barbaric slaughter, and ironically, a lot of the Christians, who wore Middle Eastern garb, were among the Muslims and Jews who were killed.

Fourth Crusade: "In March 1204 the crusaders and Venetians agreed to seize the city a second time and to elect a Latin emperor. This siege ended in a second capture and a three-day sack of Constantinople."

Ironically, the biggest gains were made by the Emperor Frederick II without a single battle. " Emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) personally led the Sixth Crusade (1228-1229). No fighting was involved. Speaking Arabic and long familiar with the Muslims from his experience in Sicily, Frederick secured more for the Christians by negotiation than any crusader had secured by force since the First Crusade. In 1229 he signed a treaty with Saladin's nephew that restored Jerusalem to the Latin world. Bethlehem and Nazareth were also handed over and a ten year truce was signed."

Heck, if some people are correct, the "Indo-European" or Eastern Europeans, take your pick, exterminated most of the MN men living in central, northern and southern Europe.

I think you're starting the reckoning far too late in European history.

LeBrok · Dec 4, 2015

bicicleur said:
you didn't like what matbir told, did you?

did you know about the Muslim conquest of India?

I don't like his lack of objectivity. He believes in millions of children killed by Genghis Khan but he never mentiones millions killed by Europeans. Could you give me a reason for it, bicicleur?

I'm surprised you even didn't know about Dzjenghis Khan
he still is a hero in Mongolia, he has a big statute over there

try this for a starter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_under_the_Mongol_Empire
and don't miss the positive footnote in the end :
Environmental impact[edit]

According to a study by the Carnegie Institution for Science's Department of Global Energy, the destruction under Genghis Khan may have scrubbed as much as 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere by allowing forests to regrow on previously populated and cultivated land.^[22]^[23]

Did you really read my quote? Give me the figure of millions children and women murdered by Genghis Khan from a serous paper, or keep quiet.

people visit Auschwitz yet they fail to understand what Muslim fundamentalism stands for

What is a reason you wort it?!!! People can't visit Auschwitz because they don't understand Muslims? Precious.

Crime 150+ dead after Terrorist attacks in Paris

Regular Member

Elite member

Banned

Junior Member

Elite member

Banned

Regular Member

Elite member

Banned

Regular Member

Elite member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Elite member

Elite member