Taliban savages: If 14-year-old peace activist whom we shot survives, we will shoot her again, for she is "secular-minded lady"

"one word comes to mind whenever i hear or read about the taliban,and that word is EXCREMENT."

You can replace the word "taliban" by "jihadis" or "salafists" or "mohammedans" or "true muslims", and you will come to the same conclusion... EXCREMENT.

A true follower of Muhammad has to be an excrement because Muhammad himself was their excrement-in-chief.

http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2010/12/perfect-man-of-islam.html

At the core of Islam is, simply, the lust for raw Power and the adoration of raw Power, Power or Violence deployed without *any* moral restraint or rational discrimination.

'Power' is *the* defining characteristic of Islam's god.

Or so at least one 19th century scholar, a Mr Palgrave, concluded; and I think he was right.

Here is Mr Palgrave, as quoted by James Freeman Clarke in section 6 of chapter 11 'Mohammed and Islam', of Clarke's book 'Ten Great Religions':

'Mr. Palgrave, who has given the latest and best account of the condition of Central and Southern Arabia, under the great Wahhabee revival, sums up all Mohammedan theology as teaching a Divine unity of pure will.

'God is the only force in the universe. Man is wholly passive and impotent.

'He [Palgrave] calls the system, "A pantheism of force."

'God has no rule but arbitrary will.

'He is a tremendous unsympathizing autocrat, but is yet jealous of his creatures, lest they should attribute to themselves something which belongs to him.

'He delights in making all creatures feel that they are his slaves.

'This, Mr. Palgrave asserts, is the main idea of Mohammedanism, and of the Koran, and this was what lay in the mind of Mohammed.

{In other words, this is saying that 'allah' is a Sadist - using that term in the precise technical sense deployed by psychologists, that is, as one driven by an abnormal desire to dominate and domineer over others. And if people worship a god who is a sadist, if that is their fundamental paradigm or diagram of 'The Way Things Are', how will that affect the way they behave, the way they treat each other, the way they treat strangers, or animals, or the earth itself? - dda}.

"Of this," says he, "we have many authentic samples: the Saheeh, the Commentaries of Beydāwee, the Mishkat-el-Mesabeeh, and fifty similar works, afford ample testimony on this point.

'But for the benefit of my readers in general, all of whom may not have drunk equally deep at the fountain-heads of Islamitic dogma, I will subjoin a specimen, known perhaps to many Orientalists, yet too characteristic to be here omitted, a repetition of which I have endured times out of number from admiring and approving Wahhabees in Nejed.

'"Accordingly, when God—so runs the tradition,—I had better said the blasphemy—resolved to create the human race, he took into his hands a mass of earth, the same whence all mankind were to be formed, and in which they after a manner pre-existed; and, having then divided the clod into two equal portions,

he threw the one half into hell, saying, 'These to eternal fire, and I care not';

and projected the other half into heaven, adding, 'And these to paradise, and I care not.'.

And the result of worshipping such a 'god' - a god without pity, a god who is seen as being allpowerful and at the same time as fundamentally amoral and wholly arbitrary?

well, we see it in the murderous sadism of so many Mohammedan mobsters (especially those who manage to claw their way to the top of assorted Mohammedan heaps, be it a village, a tribe, a 'nation' or an 'empire') and their accompanying gang molls.

"In those cases you described the word "savage" was misused..."

See how deep the PC MC rot runs?

The word 'savages' does not appear in the ad! The word is 'savage', in the singular. That means it could be taken as a noun OR an adjective.

So, do not support the savage, can mean 'do not support that which is savage' - and violent jihad, the central plank of Islam - is certainly savage.

Incidentally, your efforts would be better used if you spent more time learning how the false concept of Palestine as a pre-existing state is a club that has been fashioned to beat the Israelis with. And beating people with a club is savage; that's 'savage' as an adjective!

You'll have to decide whose side you're on, Rich.
No man can serve two masters.(Matthew 6:24)

Knowing something about both the indigenous cultures of Mesoamerica and the Northeast, I can't but concur with your reminder of how America's Indigenous peoples were indeed savage. Further, it is indeed true that smallpox was introduced unintentionally to the Americas (as syphillis, apparently, was unintentionally spread from the Indigenes to the Spanish--hence "Spanish pox" in 16th century Europe).

However, it is indeed documented that Lord Geoffrey Amherst had smallpox-infected blankets sent to the Indians when he was fighting them.

However, the point is well taken that the West has little to apologize for when history shows that the world in general is a pretty brutal place.

Sunday services were held at Auschwitz for the savages that were torturing and killing...

I hope you meant "..for the victims of savages"

"But the Nazi and Europeans were less savage than worshipers of Allah."

Well, a savage is a savage is a savage...

But, naturally, their background may differ

The Nazi's descent to savagery was through betrayal of the Christian Civilization.

Whereas it is the adherence to the moral principles established by muhammad that keeps the "worshipers of Allah's" in the state of permanent savagery.

Otherwise chowching, I suspect Buraq is right referring to you as clown

It is rare to find the person that would not enjoy savagery if given the situation or opportunity. But most people are kind when they are well fed or after a long hard day of cruelity. I agree that Muslims are savages and should be savaged.

So, do not support the savage, can mean 'do not support that which is savage' ...

Did you clerk for Johnnie Cochran...?

You wrote: 'It is rare to find the person that would not enjoy savagery if given the situation or opportunity.'

Speak for yourself, or your violently inclined jihadists!

Most people abhor savagery.

"However, it is indeed documented that Lord Geoffrey Amherst had smallpox-infected blankets sent to the Indians when he was fighting them."

I'd like to see that documentation.

@chowching,

Every decent human being must condemn in strongest possible language these Talibans or whoever that may be, attacking this totally innocent little 14 years old girl and seriously injured her is beyond being sad.

Thee Talibans are more than savages, I have no problem of calling them with that name. That is why I m calling U.S. not to leave Afghanistan. Because, these fanatics wil take over Afghanistan and all the good work that the U.S. did over there will be gone.

That is why I am calling another group of terrorist in occupied Palestine known as Kazari Zionist settlers should move to Afghanistan and fight these Talibans fanatic instead of beating up Palestinian kids on their way going to schools. I think that will be a good and fair match between, "Fanatic VS. Fanatics" Baptist John Hagee of TX can be the referee. Singing " old time Grit and Gravy hours " and Pamla Goller can be the cheer leader.

I hear such abhorrent and awful crime also took place did happened over at the refugee camps call Shatila and Sabra in in Lebanon in the past as well as more recently in Gaza by the terrorist Zionist.

Remember a little boy name DURA? I guess was shot by the terrorist Zionist while hiding on a road side along with his father?

f...off!!!
m

The Amherst story about infected blankets, Kepha, is a myth. Michael Medved, among others, have written about this falsehood.

If the glove fits, wear it! In this case, it doesn't.

Here's one link:

http://www.nativeweb.org/pages/legal/amherst/34_41_114_fn.jpeg

It reproduces a microfilm record of a letter from Lord Jeffrey Amherst to Col. Henry Bouquet from 1763.

This being said, I hope that both you and LemonLime understand that by hunting down this reference, I by no means believe that my country (the USA) is somehow a uniquely iniquitous nation. I dismiss the whole crew of such supposed "historians and philosophers". While I say a sincere "Amen" to Amos' "For three transgressions of...and for four...", I'm very much aware that if God were to enter into judgment with the nations at this time, none would stand; and therefore we must all accept this time of grace to repent and believe that the Kingdom has come in Jesus Christ (even if we're Muslim or Marxist). And, if I ever seem hard on my own country, I beg you'uns to keep in mind it's only because I believe that God has been especially gracious on my country (even if the grace we and other nations have received is out of God's pure favor).

It never ceases to amaze me how people like Zinn, whose belief in the goddesses Historical Necessity and Material Nature (who seems to be as fickle and capricious as the entertainer Madonna herself) seems to have no transcendent and absolute standard of right, can nonetheless launch lachrymose Jeremiads on behalf of all the supposed victims of Anglo-American perfidy as if America is somehow governed by an earthly ruler who is the heir of Moses and King David himself. I have always been somewhat impressed by Dostoevsky's position that if there is no [Christian] God, then all things are lawful. Were I a dialectical materialist and Scientific Socialist of Zinn's stripe, I probably would see Amherst's use of smallpox-infected blanket as an admirable application of scientific progress to do away with a people living in the super idiocy of pre-agricultural life (Marx himself praised the French invasion of Algeria, after all, no matter what his later disciples try to live it down). Perhaps something along the line of Budenny's massacre of the Kazakhs, or Mao's ferocity to the Hui and Uyghur, or the Vietnamese Communist and Pathet Lao treatment of the Hmong. And, I suppose, that for all my being a bit of a Jew myself, were I a "historical materialist" of Zinn's stamp, I could probably find ways to justify the Soviet sponsorship of the reprinting of the _Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion_. You know, a handy way to curse those Bronze Age savages who inexplicably prolong their existence into these enlightened times (and here, I put myself in the shoes of an imaginary, re-made, Marxist Uncle Kepha).

Further, I hold no candle for the "noble savage" mythology of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who had nothing to go on but a few accounts by a handful of explorers and Conquistadors, whose skills with the languages of the "savage" lands they visited were negligible--and, perhaps, his own contacts with the wild, whooping, Calvinist Francophone Swiss peasantry in the suburbs of his natal Geneva (the selfsame tribe that produced Col. Henry Bouquet, who sold his services to His Britannic Majesty).

As one of my heroes once said to the portraitist, "Paint me warts and all". These are the words of someone who has learned a powerful confidence in a powerfully mercifully God. My country indeed has its warts, as has every land I have lived in and enjoyed, those I have visited and detested, and those of which I have only read. As something of a historian, I believe we should always be aware of those warts, and not let the cry of "racist" avert our gaze from the slave-trading of the West Africans or cannibalism of the Iroquois and Azteca (the reason that I somehow introduce myself as a professional swindler of the young is because the curriculum I'm supposed to follow does so avert its gaze).

So, I've let out more of my reasons for apostasy from the political Left.

Peace, guys.

I have no idea if you can write few words beside that 4 letter word or your family name.

lol

From the site Kepha linked to, a site dedicated to the cause of the "Native Americans", they reproduce quotes from British officers concerning the Red Savages:

The letters are filled with comments that indicate a genocidal intent, with phrases such as:

"...that Vermine ... have forfeited all claim to the rights of humanity" (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [149k]
"I would rather chuse the liberty to kill any Savage...." (Bouquet to Amherst, 25 June) [121k]
"...Measures to be taken as would Bring about the Total Extirpation of those Indian Nations" (Amherst to Sir William Johnson, Superintendent of the Northern Indian Department, 9 July) [229k]
"...their Total Extirpation is scarce sufficient Attonement...." (Amherst to George Croghan, Deputy Agent for Indian Affairs, 7 August) [145k]
"...put a most Effectual Stop to their very Being" (Amherst to Johnson, 27 August [292k]; emphasis in original)."

It is reflexively assumed by modern guilt-ridden pedagogically deformed PC MC Westerners that such comments must be "racist" and "genocidal"; and they never bother to even suppose for a minute that the Indians behaved in such a ferociously savage manner over a long enough period of time to warrant such comments as indicative of a realization of what the Europeans were up against and what they needed to do to defend themselves. It's just automatically assumed our forebears were wrong -- and as a logical, evil. That assumption by itself is, or should be, remarkable and telling of just how far we've declined intellectually and philosophically and culturally -- and, as I noted earlier, is symptomatic of precisely why we remain myopic and impotent in the face of the new, and far worse, savages of our day: the Muslims.

"Incidentally, your efforts would be better used if you spent more time learning how the false concept of Palestine as a pre-existing state is a club that has been fashioned to beat the Israelis with."

Dont tell me where my efforts would be better used you f@#ckin A%&hole. I dont take kindly to people telling me what to do.

I serve no bloody master, so kindly f off and keep your advice to yourself.

"Incidentally, your efforts would be better used if you spent more time learning how the false concept of Palestine as a pre-existing state is a club that has been fashioned to beat the Israelis with."

Dont tell me where my efforts would be better used you f@#ckin A%&hole. I dont take kindly to people telling me what to do.

I serve no bloody master, so kindly f off and keep your advice to yourself.

Please note that my point was that the infected blankets incident happened--not that there was no war going on. And, even if a site is dedicated to "the native American cause", it can still put the truth out.

That history also underscores one of Samuel Huntington's points, that inter-civilizational warfare can be intensely nasty (which we see in the Islamic jihad as well).

From what I have been able to gather, Kepha, Amherst's suggestion was not carried out. There is some evidence that a local commander at Fort Pitt acted on his own authority and passed out infected blankets to some Indians but even this has not been ascertained. Even if so, it's an isolated incident and there's no evidence that the deed, if done, had any effect. One thing is for certain and that is that all claims that Americans ever did this once America was born are completely bogus.

There can be no doubt that Americans at times treated Americans Indians horribly, but American Indians treated each other horribly as well as white settlers on many occasions. I agree with Oliver Cromwell, a man whom I admire very much, though I wouldn't venture to praise him in Ireland, that "the warts and all" approach is the best and most honest way to deal with an assessment of both an individual and a nation. Islam, of course, fails miserably here and is a master of deflecting blame everywhere but to itself.

OK. Points well-taken. LemonLime's, too. As for Islam's miserable failure to accept any blame for its moral failures, that's one reason why I, for one, find Islam terribly wanting.

@ Lemon Lime ""2. The word savages also have been used as a derogatory term to describe, American Indians..."

The American Indians were savages."

1. You didnt take my entire quote:

"2. The word savages also have been used as a derogatory term to describe, American Indians, African Americans, Africans, Indians, indigenous peoples all over the world."

There was an Indian from India if you recollect who also objected to the use of the word savage/ savages.

"The American Indians were savages."

Oh really? All of them? How do you define savages? Someone who's opinion differs from yours? Not Christian? Illiterate? Table manners? Appreciation of Classical Music? Art? Vegetarian? Hitler? Gassing and mass murder of humans? What about Col. John Chivington and his Colorado militia who cut the breasts off living Cheyenne women after raping them and murdering their children?

"There can be no doubt that Americans at times treated Americans Indians horribly, but American Indians treated each other horribly as well as white settlers on many occasions."

This makes it sound rather equivalent (reminiscent of those frequent MSM descriptions of the "Palestinian situation" where both sides are in a "cycle of violence" and mutually responsible).

It would be apt to recall the quote from Forsmark, citing Medved, which I provided above:

Medved makes an argument I had not heard before: Nearly every infamous atrocity by whites followed a much-publicized massacre by Indians. He also observes that only one side in the conflict -- the whites -- ever punished those who committed murderous acts.

I.e., it was the fault of the Injuns. I'd wager to say the Europeans tried to establish peaceful relations far more often, but the savages just didn't want that, and perpetrated horrific massacres with all sorts of gruesome mutilations of living bodies and corpses.

It might be added too that various American Indian tribes routinely practiced slavery against other tribes, as well as wife-beating and child abuse.

Indeed, one can say the American Indians (and their southern brothers the Aztecs and Mayans) were a lot like Muslims but simply lacked the blueprint for expansionist supremacism, along with that sense of overarching identity, which Muslims possess (even if the fanaticism encoded in that blueprint tends -- thank Allah! -- to manifest itself all too often in centrifugally internecine violence undermining the Pan-Islamic vision they profess).

Dumbledore's Army wrote, quoting James Freeman Clarke:

'Mr. Palgrave, who has given the latest and best account of the condition of Central and Southern Arabia, under the great Wahhabee revival, sums up all Mohammedan theology as teaching a Divine unity of pure will.

'God is the only force in the universe. Man is wholly passive and impotent.

'He [Palgrave] calls the system, "A pantheism of force."

'God has no rule but arbitrary will...
...................

Telling, DDA. And we can well see from this why Hitler admired Islam—although he was predisposed to disdain anything not of Teutonic origin.

How could any Fascist help but admire such savagery?

...why Hitler admired Islam—although he was predisposed to disdain anything not of Teutonic origin.

How could any Fascist help but admire such savagery?

It wasn't only the savagery of Muslims which Hitler admired -- he also admired their fanatically totalitarian sense of organization for military purposes as well as, closely related, their globally expansionist ambition.

Hitler's Nazis had many social programs calculated to instill mass organization for purposes of transforming Germany into a militaristic society -- often focusing on the German Youth. One of those movements was the "Spade Movement".

Andrew Bostom dug up a fascinating cultural exchange between Hitler in the 1920s and a Muslim propagandist visiting from India:

...a Muslim scholar and demagogue by the name of al-Mashriqi (born in 1888), who met Hitler in 1926 (at a time when Hitler’s political career was on an upward course and when he had already become leader of the National Socialist party in Germany). This Muslim, al-Mashriqi, founded the Khaksar Movement, an Indian Muslim separatist movement. In one of his writings, he expressed designs that go far beyond a mere regional concern in northern India:

“...we [Muslims] have again to dominate the whole world. We have to become its conqueror and its rulers.”

And in a pamphlet titled Islam ki Askari Zindagi he stated:

“The Koran has proclaimed in unequivocal words to the world that the Prophet was sent with the true religion and definite instruction that he should make all other religions subservient to this religion [Islam]...”

Al-Mashriqi also wrote a book called Tazkira which, as Bostom describes it, “produced a quintessential message of Islam enshrining the ideals of militaristic nation-building”...

What is startlingly noteworthy about this is revealed in al-Mashriqi’s own account of his meeting with Hitler in 1926:

“I was astounded when he [Hitler] told me that he knew about my Tazkirah. The news flabbergasted me. . . I found him very congenial and piercing. He discussed Islamic Jihad with me in details. In 1930 I sent him my Isharat concerning the Khaksar movement with a picture of a spade-bearer Khaksar at the end of that book. In 1933 he started his Spade Movement. ”

I.e., already in 1926, Hitler knew enough about Jihad "in details" to impress a Muslim activist!

LemonLime wrote:

It wasn't only the savagery of Muslims which Hitler admired -- he also admired their fanatically totalitarian sense of organization for military purposes as well as, closely related, their globally expansionist ambition...
.......................

Absolutely,. LemonLime—I hadn't intended to imply this was the case. There is also Hitler's infamous quote as to his having preferred that the German people would have had a legacy of Islam rather than "flabby" Christianity.

More:

Andrew Bostom dug up a fascinating cultural exchange between Hitler in the 1920s and a Muslim propagandist visiting from India...
.......................

Thanks for that reference, LemonLime. I hadn't heard of al-Mashriqi—but his exchange with Herr Hitler does not surprise me, on either side.

The Muslim apologist "chowching" wrote:

It is rare to find the person that would not enjoy savagery if given the situation or opportunity. But most people are kind when they are well fed or after a long hard day of cruelity. (sic)
.........................

Speak for yourself, creep. I grew up around cruelty and criminality, and rejected it outright.

Also, see what "chowching" is here implying—that the only reason civilized Westerners are not cruel is because they are generally 'well fed'.

Of course, he has things exactly backward here—we are as a rule well fed because we are rational and *don't* practice gratuitous cruelty.

The Muslim world is poverty-stricken because its members labor under a creed which is both irrational and cruel. Such a creed does not allow for the development of peaceful, decent societies.

More crap:

I agree that Muslims are savages and should be savaged.
.........................

Then he attempts to turn this around, and that we are the ones who advocate the savaging of Muslims.

This is an utter lie.

Instead, it is devout Muslims who are practicing savagery—such as shooting this little 14-year-old girl, and proudly boasting that they would do it again.

"danny" wrote, replying to that other Muslim apologist, "chowching":

@chowching,

Every decent human being must condemn in strongest possible language these Talibans or whoever that may be...
.............................

"Whoever they may be"—they are devout Muslims, acting as devout Muslims by trying to eliminate anyone who stands against Jihad terror. This is on the model of the "Prophet" of Islam.

More:

That is why I am calling another group of terrorist in occupied Palestine known as Kazari Zionist settlers should move to Afghanistan and fight these Talibans fanatic instead of beating up Palestinian kids on their way going to schools. I think that will be a good and fair match between, "Fanatic VS. Fanatics" Baptist John Hagee of TX can be the referee. Singing " old time Grit and Gravy hours " and Pamla Goller can be the cheer leader.
.............................

Witless moral equivalence, comparing the civilized Israelis to rabid Muslims who were stoning women in the streets until the West intervened.

But then, why would we expect anything else from "danny"?

More:

Remember a little boy name DURA? I guess was shot by the terrorist Zionist while hiding on a road side along with his father?
.............................

Perhaps you should attempt to stay current with your calumny and bullsh*t. This bit of "Pallywood" has been thoroughly debunked by the French press some years ago:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/french-media-watchdog-acquitted-of-libel-for-calling-the-muhammad-al-dura-tapes-pure-fiction.html

Meanwhile, pious Muslims *really do* target children, and are proud of it—the children of the Fogel family in Israel; a school full of children in Beslan, Russia taken hostage, tortured, and murdered; and children like this Afghan girl who just wants to be able to get an education without the threat of having her school blown up.

LemonLime wrote:
>And in a pamphlet titled Islam ki Askari Zindagi he stated

The pamphlet's name, Islam ki Askari Zindagi, means "Islam's Military Life".

Considering that Islam is Arabic for 'submission', that's a rather grim title.

"Islam's Military Life" would be a redundancy, I think.