Why wasn't Islam a problem before 2001?

Why wasn't Islam a problem before 2001?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
youtube.com/watch?v=bG6omxJJrw4
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_invasion_of_Otranto
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Rome_airport_attacks_and_hijacking
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Rome_and_Vienna_airport_attacks
youtube.com/watch?v=Xb3O46ZEJmI
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

No fag marriage in the West. Now easy meat

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks

SAGE

Because Jews didn't decide to push hard for greater Israel until some guy wrote a thing about how they need to bomb the shit out of everything in the 90s

It was, but it was not OVER HERE...but its a diversion from all our master Mr Shekelstein who runs the world

it has always been a problem

>what is 1979

Sage
>sage

because the US had not terrorized muslims for several decades yet. the US needed a new enemy and instead of finding one, they created it: taliban, al-qaida and now ISIS.
ron paul told us this, even the CIA calls it blowback; an unforeseen and unwanted effect, result, or set of repercussions.

this is why a lot of people say "america deserves it" every time something shitty happens to you.

except it was

A british general quelled some by executing some terrorists with bullets coated in pigs blood.

>what are the crusades

Because you were still safely tucked into your dads testicles and therefore not paying attention to the news. Islamic war against the west has been a problem for centuries but until the fall of the ottoman empire they didnt have to use terrorists tactics as they were capable of open warfare against "infidels" around the world.

do you even history?

It's been a problem all its existence.

becasue muzzies stayed in their fucking shitholes (mainly)

Because we didn't have as many of them here at that time. We still had problems with those we had though (and they were still too many).

It's been a problem for 1400 years.

Islam has been a problem since before 1001

The muslims were not ready for the 2000 effect and all their computers turned to shit going back to a medieval-tier era.

because you are only 16 years old

Because the Jews hadn't done 9/11 and blamed it on cave dwellers in Afghanistan yet

it's never not been a problem. too bad a meteor couldn't have smacked into the semetic lands way back and prevented this hebery.

AHAHAHAHA
Are you kidding or don’t know jack shit about history. Here’s a few fun ones
Israeli olympians being slaughtered
Airplane hijackings, I believe one occurred during the carter era.
Plus many more

islam was a plague since it began.
SAGE!

Where i am from I*lam has always been a problem. Now it's a global problem because it has reached the west and their pussyass is screaming.

Btw what kind of OP doesn't reply to 25+ replies on his thread? Hmm

It was. We just handled you better in the Philippines than here.

it's been a problem since it expanded from the arabian peninsula. From the crusades to the barbary pirate raids, the ottomans. It stopped being a massive pain in the ass only during colonial times because it was kept in check. Now that those shitholes are free again, it's a problem again

Mia khalifa

Islam has been a plague on humanity

>debunked

It was not real problem before amerishats elected King Nigger.

Because they weren't in our fucking countries

>wasn't a problem before 2001

Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Assyrians, Bulgarians and Pontic Greeks massacred by the Ottomans or the Copts and Christian communities of the Levant, Irak or Maghreb who have been persecuted and hunted for thirteen centuries by muslim dogs, you piece of dog shit...

We love muslims, dont let anyone tell you differently. They're losers. Real Americans are the best around.

youtube.com/watch?v=bG6omxJJrw4

ASK THE SERBS YOU DIRTFUCKER. GO FUCK ALLAH IN THE ASS .

They hadn't purchased John McCain, George W, or Obama yet.

C U C K E D

>anti LGBT
«The Prophet cursed effeminate men (those men who are in the similitude (assume the manners of women) and those women who assume the manners of men» {72 :774}
«For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds» {7:80}
«Of all the creatures in the world, will ye approach males, and leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates? Nay, ye are a people transgressing» {26 :165-166}

>promotes fertility
«Marry the ones who is fertile and loving» {3 :227}
«Marry the one who is loving, means, the one who loves her husband; and the one who is fertile, is the one who bears a lot of children» - ‘Awn al Ma’bud {6/33}

>anti feminism
«Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls» {2:223}
«Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means» {4:34}
«No people shall ever prosper who appoint a woman as their ruler.» {4163}
«The woman is the caretaker of her husband’s household and she will be questioned as to her responsibility» (Al Bukhārī)

>crime
«The male thief, and the female thief, you shall mark, cut, or cut-off their hands as a recompense for what they earned, and to serve as a deterrent from God.» {5 :38-39}
«If you find that someone has had intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill the animal too.» {1455}
«If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did (sodomy) publicly, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done.» (38:4447)

it was, just not in America

Islam was a problem since 609AD

Hello colony :^)

it was.

Lybia is rightful italian clay and colony.

East Europe and Balkans protected Europe from mudslimes for a 1000 years, until liberals started bringing them to the west.

>shake down nineteen, seven, nine

checked

you are a Bulgarian larping as some ancient race, you have bigger problems than that

It always was, the child grooming shit in England for example was already happening in the 80s if not even earlier. And there have been muslim terrorist attacks in the West stretching back decades too. Its just intensified now, probably due to the sheer numbers of them in the West and the instability of the middle East.

wow based, I want to worship the false prophet now

>uffering is the central ideological component of the Victim Value Index. "He Who Suffers Most Wins." But suffering, as in the Douglass debate, is relative. Ego means that people feel their own pain first. And even when they feel someone else's pain more than that of their own group, this is a personal egotistical identification, a selective empathy that derives from their own background and psychological makeup.

>Historical suffering transmuted into guilt is the gold standard of liberalism, but suffering is relative. In our wonderful multi-everything society, there are so many groups with so many claims to pain. Everyone agrees that the Heteronormative Caucasian Patriarchy of Doom is to blame for all of it, but that still leaves the question of dividing up the spoils of the system and all the privileges to be gained from denouncing privilege. A caste system doesn't work without priority, and calculating the priority of privilege claims by the perpetually underprivileged is complicated.

>Without the Victim Value Index, understanding how these priorities work can be confusing, even for liberals. It's particularly confusing for conservatives and libertarians who don't understand the system and dismiss it as liberal insanity. It is insane, the way all cultural taboos are, but there is a method to the madness.

The first thing to understand is the dirty little secret of the Victim Value Index. While loud vocal assertions of suffering are very important, the substance of such suffering is unimportant when moving up the ladder of the Victim Value Index.

If historical justice for suffering were the barometer, American Indians would be at the head of the line. While conceptually they are, progressives respond to praises of America by bringing them up, in practice they are somewhere near the back end of the middle. The group currently at the head of the line, Muslims, have the least claim on historical justice, but are at the center of civil rights activism.

Please conquer them again

Actual suffering doesn't matter. Neither does historical justice. Both of those are easy to make up, and in a dogma-ridden environment no one will look past the politically correct line anyway.

The Victim Value Index is calculated based on one overriding factor: Disruptiveness. Those who are most disruptive go to the head of the line. This can be mistaken for a "Squeaky Wheel Gets the Grease" phenomenon, and occasionally in the micro it is, but in the macro it goes to the question of why progressives value minorities and for what purpose.

To be a progressive is to be committed to perpetual reform in the name of perpetual grievance for perpetual power. Grievance is to their government feudalism what the Divine Right of Kings was to feudal rulers. It justifies their right to agitate and undermine, to seize power by any means necessary and to implement their programs legally or extra-legally.

Reformers need their bleeding sores, their cries of outrage and their muck to rake. Those who give them that often go to the head of the line acting as their secular clergy, blessing their rule and anointing them as the protectors of their faith in hope and change. But that's just part of it.

Because our nations weren't filled with so many niggers and muslims. The real flood only started in the late 90's. And before this europe was still uncucked enough to bring swift destruction to barbarian nations that pissed us off. Now we just bend over and as for more foreign cock....

It's existance has always been a problem

Progressivism is a revolution in slow motion, and revolutions need revolutionaries. Disruption is more than just grievance, it's violence. Those who are willing to ruthlessly attack the status quo clearing the ground for revolution are the ones who go to the head of the line and the dais of honor on top. A little murder and mayhem, and progressives will trot out "moderate" versions of the murderers and mayhemists, usually linked to them, and offer to represent them and tamp down the violence in exchange for meeting their demands.

Anyone who is shocked that the left would make common cause with Islamists has forgotten the Black Panthers. From the left's point of view they are doing the same thing by bringing on board a group with some revolutionary energy and a willingness to overthrow the system. Associating with them gives the left some revolutionary cred and the supposed ability to turn the violence on and off.

If you think that's farfetched, what do you think happened in 2008 when a completely inept hack blew through Hillary Clinton and John McCain on a pledge to end the wars and repair our relations with the Muslim world? Why exactly do you think the Democrats chose a man with no experience except a few books about growing up in a Muslim country and Hussein as his middle name? Why was that man then awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for no discernible accomplishment?

September 11 and its aftermath is why Muslims have gone to the top of the Victim Value Index. The left may swear up and down that they are interested in Muslim civil rights, but if the Muslims were Sikhs, they would merit a place somewhere in the back. Before Muslims began prominently blowing things up in the United States, the left barely paid any attention to them. Once they did, they began outweighing every other group in the country because killing 3,000 people is the gold standard of revolutionary mayhem.

The Victim Value Index places the most disruptive groups at the front, the somewhat disruptive groups in the middle and the least disruptive groups at the back. The status of groups within the Index can change with their behavior. Muslims used to be shelved in the back with Asians, Indians and Jews. The War on Terror dramatically upgraded their status. The other groups are stuck there because they are relatively successful and aren't rioting or blowing things up.

Latinos are still somewhere in the middle. Native Americans are in the back along with most unclassified minorities. Homosexuals are somewhere near the front, but behind African-Americans. Their status tends to drift wildly depending on current events, but they cannot overtake African-Americans or fall behind Latinos. Not unless some drastic events take place that change their status. Women are, and have always been, in the back.

Witnessed. Even KEK give his blessing.

do people actually believe shit like this?
That's less battles than what 1 crusade had

The practical value of the Victim Value Index is that it mediates internal conflicts. For example, a bias attack by a member of a high-value group on a member of a low-value group is much less likely to be treated as a hate crime. However, an ordinary attack by a member of a low-value group on a member of a high-value group is more likely to be treated as a bias attack even when it isn't.

High VVI status carries with it the caste privilege of assumed persecution. A high-status VVI can blame a great many things on persecution. This is more difficult to do for a lower-status VVI. A claim of discrimination by a low-status VVI is more likely to be mocked than a similar claim by a high-status VVI, and is less likely to lead to politically correct reprisals. Jokes relying on bias and stereotypes can be made with greater freedom about low-status VVI's than about high-status VVI's.

White men have the lowest VVI status imaginable, and are fair game for racist jokes and bias attacks, but Asians, who have a fairly low VVI status, are also fair game. VVI status is group based but can be forfeited by an individual who engages in counterrevolutionary behavior, thereby forfeiting a status awarded to his group for its revolutionary disruptiveness. Any minority group member who aligns with conservatives is immediately assigned the same VVI status as a white male. A low-status VVI who offends a high-status VVI group may be treated the same way.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing

>fixes her tits
>quits porn

Speech codes are an easy way to determine VVI status. As a black man, Juan Williams was a high-status VVI, allowing him to make otherwise politically incorrect observations. He was only purged for offending Muslims, a group with a higher status VVI. But black sportscasters who make jokes about Asian men are rarely reprimanded because Asians have a lower VVI status. Jokes and politically incorrect remarks about lower-status VVI's such as Asians, Jews or women are permitted within liberal circles. Making those same remarks about middle-status VVI's is dangerous and generally frowned on. High-status VVI's are completely off limits to anyone who is not a member of that same group.

This is more than just a guide on how to safely be politically incorrect, it's a map of the caste system under which we live. The caste system determines what jobs we get, what things we can say and what is expected of us in everything from job performance to conspicuous displays of social justice. It is how we live now, and it is vitally important to understand that it really is this way in every place that falls under the shadow of government mandates and the progressive Kulturkampf against equality.

In the grip of the left, we have become a culture that rewards destruction and disruption, that feeds the worst behaviors and then blames their repetition on society's failings, rather than their own calculated tactical assault on the country. We can be a country where all Americans are equal or we can be a country where all Americans are equal... but some Americans are more equal than others in the name of remedying inequality.

But it wasnt muslims. Only the dumbest of the dumb dont get that yet. Ie. the voting population

Ever heard of Bosnia mujahideen, Kosovo KLA or Sandzak muzzies causing strife ? All these things occured in 1992-5 and 1999 timeframe. But the west was friends with the muzzzies in those conflicts (ring a bell) and only afterwards did they become an issue.

>Why wasn't Islam a problem before 2001?
KEK
Islam has always been a problem since the 7th century
After all Islam is nothing more than an offshoot of the Talmud

it was in this part of the world. using the term "islam" is misleading. you should change it to western backed radical islamism

So fake
ftfy

>implying it wasn't
It was, you retard, you just didn't notice it.

Although I'd admit that it wasn't as much as now.

>muh genocide

I can smell you from here agopyan. stop whining about things that never happened

Is this your analysis or are you
sourcing it from somewhere? It's obviously something that a lot of people inherently know, but yours is a nice concise explanation.

2001 wasnt even the first time the world trade center was bombed by muslims.

1 post by this ID

because it was containable... atleast that was the illusion our politicians held it up to us
because they where a minority
but it doesn't matter, the purge will come and we will clean you out again and again and again untill you are no more

Because actions for the beginning of Greater Israel were not begun yet.

Islam was always a problem lad, we must eradicate them from the planet

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_invasion_of_Otranto

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Rome_airport_attacks_and_hijacking

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985_Rome_and_Vienna_airport_attacks

The crusades were generally long sieges on specific cities, not random raids and skirmishes across the shoreline.

t. mainstream/memestream history

Vanity.

Selfie Culture.

The Islamic Empire was of no greater threat to the West than the West was to the rest of the world. Many would argue comparing the magnitude of Western imperialism to Islamic imperialism is not even a fair comparision since the West pretty much colonised most of the world at one point. This is just what empire did. In the post colonial world where nations gradually began to gain independence, things began to change. Especially after the 2 great world wars where Westerners slaughtered millions of their own because of land and nationalism. The Islamic world would have been able to develop on their own if left on its own devices as much of the post colonial world did. This obviously was not the case due to continued Western policy of imperialism and intervention in the Middle East as well as the creation of the Zionist entity. The terroristic threat has surfaced after 2001 should thus be seen as a blowback to Western actions.

It was a problem literally nonstop until the end of WW1. Islam completely genocided entire populations like that of Malta, attempted to do the same throughout Spain and into France, then eventually into Austria. Vlad the Impaler literally made a forest of asspained Muslims because they wouldn't stop invading and doing that to others.

Islam is the biggest problem that history has ever seen.

hahahaha nice point XD

>Islam and the West are equal
>Islam conquered Eastern Rome, the beacon of civilization, the City of the Worlds Desire
>Turned it into the equivalent of the dead baby and shit infested ganges
>The West conquered some dirt fields
>Turned it into the beacon of civilization

it was, moron

ha.
t. croat from herzeg-bosnia

Islam has always been a problem.
youtube.com/watch?v=Xb3O46ZEJmI

...

because your punk ass either A) wasn't around before 2001 or B) you didn't own a tv or read any history or C) you're a faggot, like most OPS nowadays.

Underrated toast

The Y2K bug sent them all crazy

because from 1994-1999 the jews were cultivating the collapse of the first boom of the commercialized web so they could swoop in and reign control. They were really busy in the 90s selling personal PCs via Dell to everyone they wanted to spy on or steal from.

Islam has been a problem for 16 centuries.

there is not a time period where islam wasn't a problem.
they were just less prevalent in the west for obvious reasons

>You can see her hair
Get the shovel and bring me some rocks.

Ask my ancestor if Islam was a problem before 2001.

Why wasn't Islam a problem before 2001?

TIME TO GET PAID, BLOW UP LIKE THE WORLD TRADE

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing

the soviet union collapsed in 1990 leaving the world polarized by one superpower who waged war against muslims for being the only ones not to comply to american imperialism
Muslims struck back with asymmetrical warfare
which is very justified
9/11 was a happy day, well done osama

Don't you have some more land to lose, ISIS?

Islam was a problem before 2001. You must be a child.

Because we crushed and dismantled the Caliphate in 1918, you fucking mong.
Have you really never heard of WORLD WAR 1?

i'm iraqi son
cutting time was over in 2014
been bulking ever since

islam has been a problem since mohammed was born