Muslim bigotry
I still have noticed some bigotry against Muslim women and girlsI post. Like of my galleries of Indonesian girls, what should the country of half Muslim and half Christians (largely a tho Catholic ). I always much more thumbs down and negative comments against the Muslim girls then vs the non-Muslim. However if I hide the fact that the girl is Muslim, by not showing pictures of her in hijab etc, than there are no negative reactions, compared two if it is apparent that she is a Muslim. Even if they are all Indonesian Asians, the Muslim hat get a lot worse reaction.
I find it sexy to see naked Muslim girls naked or wearing clothes which reveals their curves...to show the secrets they restthat hide under their innocent or conservative clothing.
I might post a whole gallery of non nude Muslim girls (Asian, Arab, Desi, Persian, etc) in which you can see the curves under the conservative dress.. because they can't hide them because either their breasts are too firm n big or ass too big and curvy to hide... no matter what they wear]
I find it sexy to see naked Muslim girls naked or wearing clothes which reveals their curves...to show the secrets they restthat hide under their innocent or conservative clothing.
I might post a whole gallery of non nude Muslim girls (Asian, Arab, Desi, Persian, etc) in which you can see the curves under the conservative dress.. because they can't hide them because either their breasts are too firm n big or ass too big and curvy to hide... no matter what they wear]
7 years ago
For instance, my stories are stalked by my one most 'fidele' hater.
Who looks like proud to thumb down anything by me within a dobe.
Always anonimously and one after the other, without even reading.
I think it might be jealousy, 'cos we both wrote with, block him, not me!?
Thanks for your trouble to wrte and post your observation!
the rip between shia and sunni was from the day muhhamad died and maybe in the time of secularisem and was less important to them who was shia and who was sunnu. that is true
i can totally blame the west that in time of relatively peace they went into again conquering wars if we think about "what disrupted somewhat 'world peace'" because they were on the offensive without specifc justfiyed reason but conquering but they are defenantliy are not the ones wh oinvented "supported your enemy of your enemy...." . no.
it is a method use from the beginning of human history it is something happened all the time and it is called "priority of allies"
if you are talking about history i can mention the islamic conquests since muhhamads time counquering arbia and after is death reaching all the way to viena which then caused the crusades that were initiatied to hold back the muslims attacks.
i can tell you about the people who initiated slavery of black before the west which were the black themselves and the muslim arab enslaving dozen of million blacks and sold them to the west.
so yes if the cause now in 2017 in the age of globalisem the purpose is "world peace" you can look retrospect and defenantliy blame the west for instigating offensive war (although i am not sure i would blame them for wht happened in afganistan because it was a war of America against Russia... it is different situation if America wouldn't act the way they acted it could have borught Russia an advantage but i agree that the west is bad in understanding muslim culture and understanding who erally is their allies there and who are the enemies) when it was uncalled for but again i can go with it through history so far... in 2017 it is kinda easy looking back with all the information in hand but it is kinda unfair...
and if we are looking on the situation now the west went steps backwords on agrresion while now it is the Islamic world who are agrresive towards the west when if peace is the porpuse is uncessacery.
the west is accepting people from the middle east to live amongst them. muslims are in ruling jobs in the west . it is no longer the agreesion of the 20th century and the mistaken war in Iraq .
and i personal although i know there are "some" corrupt people but claiming that the "whole leadership" is corrupted including the president and they listen to people who use monet to bribe them i don't see any evidence of such claim... sometimes it is just people making silliy choices like Obama supporting the overthrown of Mubarak while mubarack telling him "you don't understand our culture, there will be bad results for that" and Obama did not care and the muslim brotherhood came after Mubarak... like in Iraq ISIS came after sadam who knew how to really handle them
it was fringe in Afghanistan until the west spent a decade arming radicals to fight the Soviet invasion. Photos of Afghanistan in the 70s look way more progressive then say the 90s. It got caught in a proxy war between two superpowers. Syria is now caught in a proxy war and a civil war. Civil wars often become proxy wars..even Spain in the 30s turned into a proxy conflict with Italy and Germany diresctly supportin Franco and the USSR directly supporting the Republicans. With volunteers from other western nations fighting against Franco.
What is happening in Syria now, would not be taking place if not for what happened in Iraq. The west used its old divide and conquer technique. Which totally incited Sunni-Shia divides which were not bad in 2002. How the Brits ruled India for so long, had the Hindus and Muslims bitching at each other forever. The elites pay the game in the good old USA. Lisen to the song 'Only a Pawn in Their Game' by Bob Dylan..shows how the southern white politician used race to keep the poor white man distracted and is anger focused elsewhere than at the top
"A South politician preaches to the poor white man
“You got more than the blacks, don’t complain.
You’re better than them, you been born with white skin,” they explain.
And the Negro’s name
Is used it is plain
For the politician’s gain
As he rises to fame
And the poor white remains
On the caboose of the train
But it ain’t him to blame
He’s only a pawn in their game
The deputy sheriffs, the soldiers, the governors get paid
And the marshals and cops get the same
But the poor white man’s used in the hands of them all like a tool
He’s taught in his school
From the start by the rule
That the laws are with him
To protect his white skin
To keep up his hate
So he never thinks straight
’Bout the shape that he’s in
But it ain’t him to blame
He’s only a pawn in their game
From the poverty shacks, he looks from the cracks to the tracks
And the hoofbeats pound in his brain
And he’s taught how to walk in a pack
Shoot in the back
With his fist in a clinch
To hang and to lynch
To hide ’neath the hood
To kill with no pain
Like a dog on a chain
He ain’t got no name
But it ain’t him to blame
He’s only a pawn in their game."
obviously if the west wouldn't have invaded the muslim society could complete their secularisem movment like the west completed
specificly about mubarack you say it was a support but as far as I know it was just acceptance of the situation of a forien land. opposing mubarrack would have been intervention in their business and in mubarack's time eygpt was secular by spirit...
after mubarack which Obama opposed came naturaly the muslim brotherhood which wanted to change eygpt to a religious state..
sisi's rebellion only stopped it from happening
about countries invading countries until not long ago that was still the norm...
islam conqured from saudia up to viena and then was pushed to the general now day's borders..
it is only know that counqering sounds strange but islam and the west was never friendly....
and the muslim society are more trible not only because western actions although they influenced because western society with all of their inner wars managed to reach some critical stage in building individualizem that is more stible
the Islamic society was in the process not long ago but haven't reached the critical stage and yes - that because of the western invation that made them go back to traditional pride.
countries like Indonesia - which are somewhat secular - even them are influenced by the Islamic environment through media that you hear the ISIS is reaching there and religious people or laws or promoted
so concerning the issue I was saying that you see those comment from muslim on muslim girls undressing or getting sexual because of that reason (I wasn't even talking who is to blame or the reason that they are like that. just said that that's the reason for it).
off course there are many kinky muslim women who want to express themselves and experience things . epspecialy in the open internet era .
Iran was invaded during WWII by the west and Soviets. Then they had a few years of independent democracy, before an Anglo-American coup of a democratic president who who wanted to nationalize the nations oil. He was replaced by the brutal shah..the hatred of him led to the Islamic revolution in 1979. So, our actions in the Arab lands are not helping things. Other Muslim areas in Asia are not as bad now as I said..like Indonesia.whose chicks I love. About half are Muslim..both the Christian and Muslim. IIndo girls are great. Pretty teens with tight little bodies and sexy silky bushes
i have an Indo friend online who I buy Kratom from and she skpes with me, have seen her beautiful body. What curves..and what bush for a 20 year old! 7 years my younger. She is Muslim..wears a hijab in public. What is sexy about them.seeing what they hide under their secretive clothes..
muslim culture is more trible now then western one then i said that's why you see those differences you described
if it is not someone from their religion there is not responsibility because that's those people from different religion thing.
but if it it is their own they have responsibility to preserve proper sexuality and no to promote "looseness" so they vote thumbs down