That is why it has been said: Ulaika kaal anam; They are like animals. Animals are penile, their lives revolve around the penis and abdomen. In the eyes of materialism, man is an advanced animal. To them, the difference between dogs and humans is not qualitative, but stratified. That is why the humanity, morality, law, freedom, speech of materialistic people all aim at enjoyment ... the greatest happiness in the greatest suffering. The pinnacle of success is the pinnacle of enjoyment.
When the maximization of consumption supports the ethics, that is their sense of principle. There is no norm that my personality will follow this line. Tasteful people will be able to capture this shallow third-class personality, who can be called a 'fan of hard, a fan of soft' personality. Today again Shirley Hebdo has printed a cartoon on the cover. Erdogan called their president crazy, so they printed cartoons of Erdogan wearing underwear, a wine-distributor taking off the skirt of a woman and loosening her buttocks: This is the Prophet. Anyone who has a very low level of interest will understand that humor is said, and intellectual critics say, or personal attack is said, it does not fall at any level in anything. Does civilization, benevolence, advanced values, etc., which they claim, fall into anything?
When the minority speaks to the majority, when the powerless speak to the powerful about their rights, to protest against oppression, it is called freedom of speech. Day after day when the majority and the powerful tease the minority and the powerless, such inferiority complex hurts the feeling; And suppresses the voice of the minority, imposes punishment; It is not called freedom of speech, but fascism. However, they fired a cartoonist for drawing "things that go against the Jews." Today, those who mocked the Prophet in favor of drawing cartoons were the ones who expelled Maqbool Fida for doing art of Hindu deities. Why can a Sikh in the secular Indian Army wear a beard, but a Muslim cannot? Why in a 'secular' country pure salam, Islamic dress code is identified as 'extremism'. George W. Bush has said that the Geneva Conventions will not apply to Afghan and Iraqi prisoners held by US forces. Do you think these dichotomies are the normal course of history? ‘Innocent’, ‘isolated from each other’, why governments are not abiding by the standards they are demanding. Why they have no standard, no criteria.
In the case of Muslims only, the reason for this dichotomy is 2, our mistake is 1, and the solution is one. The 1st reason is that the standard which is claimed to be in beautiful words, is contrary to its inner philosophy. They do not follow the word, they follow the philosophy behind it. Listening to 'Liberty-Equality-Fraternity' fills the chest, but it is not for everyone. The African or Indian who hears this and turns a blind eye in obsession is a stupid idiot and a slave to the pore. Democracy does not mean the rule of the majority, but the rule of the western capitalists. So there is no need for that in Africa, there is no need in Saudi-Qatar, because they are in the service of the Western capitalists. Freedom means the freedom of consumption in the West, anyone can take away the freedom in need of Western consumption, so 4 crore modern slaves are under the supply chain. They are right in their line, we are rather deceived by words.
Or the second reason, the Clash of Civilizations. The conflict between the civilization of consumption and the balance of consumption. What is the proof of the rise of extreme right-wing Hinduism-Zionism in the country, the proliferation of knee-jerk Muslims, the westwardness of materialistic Muslims? In each of these blows to the West, you will see two types of Muslims in each dichotomy. It takes a group of faith, the reaction. Another group does not get current, does not need to go. Blame it on the Muslims. The 'tent of faith' and the 'tent of disbelief' mentioned in the hadith are becoming different in this way. Was this injustice, this rule-breaking-game, this test of emotion inevitable?
Our mistake, we believed their words.
There is only one solution, which is applicable to people with 'hard fan, soft yam' personality.
This is a nice article. , the Clash of Civilizations. The conflict between the civilization of consumption and the balance of consumption. What is the proof of the rise of extreme right-wing Hinduism-Zionism in the country, the proliferation of knee-jerk Muslims, the westwardness of materialistic Muslims? In each of these blows to the West, you will see two types of Muslims in each dichotomy. It takes a group of faith, the reaction. Another group does not get current, does not need to go. Blame it on the Muslims. The 'tent of faith' and the 'tent of disbelief' mentioned in the hadith are becoming different in this way. Was this injustice, this rule-breaking-game, this test of emotion inevitable?
Our mistake, we believed their words.