“These people are speaking a strange language.
It is strange to me
And strange, I think, even to themselves.”
-Louis Simpson
I am a lover of words. I have a collection of dictionaries. I love the way words can articulate meaning in just a certain way. In my Penguin Dictionary I found the word pronoid, and the meaning of this word given in the 2004 edition (paperback) is: “showing undue optimism and happiness, and especially having a firm and often unjustified, belief that one is liked by other people.”
It is my opinion that a great percentage of the Muslim world, and especially those Muslims living in the Western hemisphere, and of those Muslims in the Western hemisphere, especially those who write apologia for the religion of Islam and bad Muslim behaviour, are living under this trance—this unjustified belief. Why else would the entire Muslim world refer to the non-Muslim as infidel? As though we have no choice but to admire the religion of Islam for the good virtues we are continually assured it possesses; as though the non-Muslim is incapable of virtue of any kind without the influence of Islam and the fright of its umma. As though such an appellation is not insulting.
The Muslim religious presume that the non-Muslim world acknowledges—and rejects—only their god, as though only their god exists. Therefore they perpetuate the supremacist Islamic sentiment that only their god, Allah, is worthy of fidelity and that the non-Muslim is incapable of such a feat. They believe that if all infidels were to submit to their god today, everything would be well in the world: Jews would be exterminated en masse, even those hiding behind stones, as foretold in their Quranic teachings, the State of Israel would cease to exist, and the so-called Palestinians would live happily ever after.
It was reported in Canada’s National Post yesterday that Hussein Hamdani, at one time “widely hailed as a hero on the front lines of Canada’s war against homegrown terrorism” is now “suspended from the Cross Cultural Roundtable on National Security, which he has sat on since 1995.” Hamandi has since posted a video in the Montreal Gazette where he tells of his hurt feelings and boasts of his efforts to rescue Muslim teenagers from the dark evils of “radicalization.” In this video he remarks that “Canadians aren’t stupid.” No, we’re not. A majority of us—an obfuscated majority, I might add—have been deeply confounded for a long time now as to why our politicians, but especially the selected members sitting at the Cross Cultural Roundtable, have failed to honestly critique the real source of all “homegrown terrorism.” We are always dealing with this problem second-hand.
Why do we go on pretending that this religion [Islam] is not strange and foreign to traditional Canadian (or American) values? I’m no Pierre Burton, but I cannot remember this country ever before accommodating (or accepting as unremarkable) the atrocious custom of honour killings, or a court of law releasing a convicted terrorist murderer (Omar Khadr) into the public domain, simply because we’ve become so forcefully acculturated with the norms of a religion whose political advocates insist we have nothing to worry about. Hussein Hamdani complains that his rejection is the result of political intrigue. Welcome to the West, Mr. Hamdani. This is that part of the world where political intrigue is experienced as being dealt an unfair shake—not where our political opponents are removed from the running by way of suicide bombs and assassination. Besides, you had to know that if you signed up for an anti-terrorism roundtable, it would be a Conservative government, not a Liberal government, would one day probably kick your ass out the door (no matter what “Islamicize” meant back in 1994). Unlike Justin Trudeau and the proverbial toad, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has not become so tender-hearted that he’s lost his intelligence.
In their very Clintonesque work The Age of Sacred Terror, Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon note that, “We are a long way from taking full measure of the new terrorists. Those who have committed the most atrocious violence—the jihadists, who are the most numerous—have done the most to explain themselves.” This was published a year after 9/11. The terrorists may have explained themselves well, but, since 9/11, we have heard very little from the moderate side of Islam to explain the violent side of Islam. Their best excuse is the “radicalization” theory, but that theory doesn’t go far enough to explain why the religion of Islam, even after being embedded in relatively peaceful Western societies, should have such a breach in its teachings that terrorism is still its most prolific attribute.
Benjamin and Simon point out that, “A surfeit of causes lies behind the challenge of bin Laden and his radical Islamists, including frustration with states that fail them politically and economically, a pessimism born of several centuries in which Muslim countries failed to achieve like Western ones…” When will the Muslim world give up blaming the West for Islam’s failure to bring those countries wherein it has gained preponderance out of the 7th century and into the modern age? One would think that these Islamist grudges must surely sound strange (and by now unfounded) in the ears of those Muslims who’ve experienced the abundance of peace and security of Western democracies. But, alas, many of them insist on speaking this strange language, this lexicon of hate and antisemitism, only because they erroneously believe their hatred does not sound strange in our ears—because they think we like them for it.
mortimer says
Justin Trudeau has identified himself with Muslims, the only Canadian politician to do so. A Liberal government will be disastrous for human rights and freedom of expression. I don’t trust the younger generation with power. They are unable to perceive the primacy of freedom of expression.
Most, but not all, Canadian Liberals are willfully blind to the jihad threat even though jihadists murdered Canadian soldiers in Canada on duty and one entered Parliament and close to killing politicians.
Justin Trudeau, his party and large numbers of Canadians are willfully, even obstinately blind to the jihad threat.
Bamaguje says
Hopefully, Justin Trudeau will end up like Ed Milliband who threatened to prosecute Islamophobes if elected, but was sent packing by Brits in the last UK election.
celtic warriarcanada says
I Agree Mortimer ! It boggles my mind when hear the obvious Propaganda spouted by the Liberal puppets at CBC . And what really burns me is that my hard earned tax money is used to support this garbage NEWSCAST ,If I can call it that .Then there is the uninformed young people, who think he (Justin Trudeau); is cool and will vote for him only because of HIS MARIJUANA PLATFORM ! WILLFULLY BLIND AND OBSTINATE describes very well the way many Canadians view the ISLAMIC Terrorist Threat . I really hope and Pray that Bamaguje is right ; or God help us Canadians !
Kepha says
We’ve got our own problems with this sort of monkey business down on the southern shores of the Great Lakes, too.
albert says
You only have to look at the intentions of Britains Labour party to see what will happen if Canadians elect Trudeau because their thinking is basically the same, they were going to criminalise criticism of Islam, we even had Green party politicians ( who were going to be coalition partners if Labour didn’t win outright ) who were comparing terrorists going to Syria ” its the same as British jews fighting for the IDF ” Also don’t forget that most of the Muslim rape gangs operated in Labour controlled authorities and the local authorities were complicit in the cover up of the muslim rape gangs abuse of under age girls. Basically vote for the Left means, give the muslims all they want, pay for anything they want, let them do whatever they want, which in Britain at least meant mass child rape and in some cases where the young girls went missing, possibly murder
Lioness says
Lucky for us in Canada, the left is divided into Liberal and NDP, so both are diluted. The Conservatives are one party and therefore stand a better chance. God help us all if idiot Trudeau is elected, he supports radical Islam and thinks that unemployment leads to terror. Funny, ’cause when I was unemployed a few years ago, I didn’t engage in terror for some reason.
kay says
Re:
“You only have to look at the intentions of Britains Labour party to see what will happen if Canadians elect Trudeau because their thinking is basically the same, they were going to criminalise criticism of Islam…”
TRUTH
Albert speaks the truth. He is quoting Ed Miliband who led Labour until a couple days ago. Labour got clobbered and he resigned. That is a great relief because Miliband is a collaborationist politician.
If this is also the case in Canada with an equivalent party then we are in deep deep trouble. Things are looking bad in Canada. The following shows why.
( I sent this item to Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. )
————–
New problem in Canada this month.
Heritage Canada shuts down free speech / drawing event.
See
http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/05/the-islamic-castle-on-parliament-hill/
And
https://youtu.be/HL7ixRrkobM
We cannot afford to lose free speech in Canada.
From (c) 2015 Gates of Vienna:
…aborted attempt to hold a free speech event on International Draw Mohammed Day (May 20) on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. It did not specifically involve Mohammed cartoons — it was officially known as “Draw Whatever You Want”, and referenced prosecutions for illustration depicting the Buddha wearing headphones, and the Pope’s statement about responding violently to anyone who insulted his mother.
Alexandra Belaire, who blogs at Xanthippa’s Chamberpot, was the organizer of the event. At the last minute — less than 24 hours before her event was scheduled to take place — Heritage Canada informed Ms. Belaire that the permit for the event had been denied, due to “security concerns”.
————-
Please share this out! Save Canada. If we cannot keep free speech in Canada we are in huge trouble and we suck.
I have been looking at the politics of Britain and posting on Islamism there and the politics of the “euroskeptics”.
Anyway, here I have provided good new content that I did not see from either RS or PG.
G. Gardiner. says
“When will the Muslim world give up blaming the West for Islam’s failure to bring those countries wherein it has gained preponderance out of the 7th century and into the modern age?”
Indeed. A very good question. I’m tempted to answer “never” but don’t wish to be TOO pessimistic.
So let’s look at the Muslim contribution to civilization these past few decades, shall we? Let’s start with Muslim Nobel Prizewinners.
How many were there? Ah yes, here we are:
“As of 2014, eleven Nobel Prize winners have been Muslims. More than half of the eleven Muslim Nobel laureates were awarded the prize in the 21st century. Seven of the eleven winners have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, including a controversial award to Yasser Arafat.”
Oh dear. Seven out of eleven were Peace Prizes. You’d almost be inclined to think that had that noble figure Bin Laden not died in the line of duty then he’d have been the eighth. Don’t scoff. We live in a crazy world.
And what about the Jews? Given that they comprise a mere .02% of the world’s population their Nobel laureates will be commensurate, yes?
Yes?
No, I’ll stop there. I’ve no wish to embarrass our wonderful Islamic friends and their superior, cutting-edge* culture.
*Sorry, couldn’t resist it 🙂
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi G. Gardiner.
Actually, it’s 0.2%, not 0.02%, but your point is well taken nevertheless.
(14,000,000 / 7,000,000,000 = 0.002)
Jews account for over 20% of all Nobel prizes, many of which were awarded to pioneers of human endeavors that have revolutionized our understanding of the universe, Albert Einstein for example.
So, Jews are 100 times more productive per capita in Nobel prizes than the population as a whole.
(0.20 / 0.002 = 100). That says a lot about their culture of family, education, and successful contribution to the advance of humanity.
BTW, I think the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are equally false, and each are utterly deplorable…but in terms of Nobel prize productivity as a cultural indicator…facts are facts.
Linde Barrera says
To Stardust Psyche- I am interested in why you think Christianity is deplorable. But I would answer you to the best of my ability without wanting to debate. You wouldn’t be the first person to drop that line without substantiating your abhorence! Of course everyone can and should have opinions. I am a Christian lady, and would never convert. I always question what my faith preaches if I don’t understand something.
Stardusty Psyche says
Sister Linde,
Indeed, it is all too easy to toss out an unsupported offhand remark, fair enough.
You seem like a very kind and thoughtful person… I sense by the tone of your writing. So please allow me to be perfectly clear with you as I am with Muslims when I proceed to criticize doctrine…I am not attacking you as an individual. Your lived experience as a Christian is almost certainly a very positive and loving aspect of your life. To be precise I said the doctrines are deplorable.
Christian doctrine includes torturous human sacrifice to facilitate scapegoating. I find that quite repugnant.
Further, I am destined for eternal torture by your loving Jesus./Yahweh/Spirit trinity. Please do excuse me for finding hideous torture without respite for all eternity to be deplorable 🙂
I also find the incoherence of a supposed sacrifice by an immortal being simply by shedding some transitory vessel to be rationally objectionable. Further, the very notion that scapegoating is somehow praiseworthy is, in my view, corrosive to our social psyche.
Nor do I abide by the extreme pacifism Jesus directed for us in this life, to give a thief double, to expose for further attack, and to serve your slave master well as opposed to escaping your slave master. No, these are not healthy tenets in my view.
Thank you for taking the time to comment on my words.
Linde Barrera says
To Stardusty Psyche- Thank you for your thoughtful comment to me of May 29. I am not a student of philosophy nor theology, and I don’t know what I dont know. So my response to you will be limited to 2 topics. The first is the scapegoat aspect of Christianity. Many thousands of years ago, mankind had the practice of human and animal sacrifice to get a good harvest, get rainfall, get sunshine, settle a score, etc. The revealed word of God (higher power than humankind) made it clear that God was to be the sacrifice to atone for humankind’s errors and atrocities (sins). So God (higher power) created a new standard for which people would have to reckon. And as St Paul states: “Our fight is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities of darkness”. The 2nd topic is the idea of being condemned to hell for not believing in God (higher power). In the 10 Commandments, it unequivocally states, “I am the Lord your God, a jealous God, you shall have no other Gods before me.” So it would appear that God desires a relationship with us. If one does not want a relationship with the higher power (God) then it would seem that God will make an accommodation to that person and assign a place to that person where he/she will not see the light of God or feel the love of God again. I think this is not a punishment but a merciful act. To put it more personally, if you really loved another fellow human to the ends of the Earth, and tried to make that person happy, healthy, safe, but that person continually rejected you and your intentions, would you really want to spend eternity being rejected by that person? This is how I believe God feels with respect to His creatures. And if you say “There is no God”, did any human create the world? Did you create yourself? I hope I gave you a few nuggets to mentally “chew on”. Be well and take care.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Linde Barrera,
Yes, the Jesus story is progression from “the practice of human and animal sacrifice to get a good harvest, get rainfall, get sunshine, settle a score, etc. ” to a single human sacrifice to atone for sins generally.
Hence, my characterization of the Easter story as just another primitive scapegoating practice that makes no rational sense and humanity would be better off without.
Wrongdoing simply cannot be transferred. Killing a human being doesn’t help anything, nor does torturing him. These are all just disjointed and incoherent notions.
Nor was the death of Jesus any kind of sacrifice. The trinity is said to have existed forever, is immortal, omnipotent, and omniscient. So, for a brief moment (relative to eternity) god put on human clothes, walked around the surface of our planet, then took off the clothes. No sacrifice to god whatsoever.
Sorry Linde, I really do not take some kind of perverse pleasure in raining on your parade, and I imagine Easter is a time of warm spiritual emotions for you, and represents hope and good will for you. So, fine, if that is what you think and feel then you have every right to do so and I wish you all the best.
“I am the Lord your God, a jealous God, you shall have no other Gods before me.”
God is jealous? Isn’t that rather petty for such a grand being?
“…God feels with respect to His creatures. And if you say “There is no God”
So, I hurt god’s feelings and therefore he is going to torture me hideously for millions and billions and trillions of years for all eternity? Well, at least that is consistent with his jealous nature, consistently monstrous.
These are the kinds of beliefs one would expect from a small nomadic tribe in 1400 BC. With all our modern knowledge and technology it is hard to imagine the harsh life of continual warfare, a life lived in total ignorance of what the lights in the sky are, why people get sick, or what causes rain.
I realize it is not often easy for theists to hear their cherished doctrines called “primitive, barbaric, horrendous, hideous, superstitious, ignorant, violent, disgusting, petty etc.”
I can see how that would feel like a personal attack, so I really do try to separate my characterizations of doctrine from my assessment of individuals.
Unfortunately, most of the people in the world are convinced one or the other such doctrine is actually true, and since these doctrines often contain incitements to violence, religious doctrine has been the proximal cause for so very much of the war and suffering there is in this world today.
Linde Barrera says
To Stardusty Psyche- Your last post had several valid comments, yet I am not looking to get in the last word here. I just wanted to advance 2 ideas. I, as a human being having a natural, finite mind, cannot understand or think as God or a higher power would, since that Being’s “mind” is infinite and supernatural. If humans had believed and acted on the revealed word of God, as given by the prophets, they would have fared much better in life, as history would indicate. The Jews, back in Biblucal times, were the first group in the middle east to give women the right to own property, when their desert neighbors had no such rules. But I’m not a cultural anthropologist. I’m just trying to get across the concept that believing in God or a higher power is supposed to serve a practical purpose: to cause humans to be kinder, wiser, healthier and have some connection to the ethereal world with regard to seeing visions, speaking in tongues (a language that the devil doesn’t understand) and identifying gifts (abilities, talents) to use which will benefit the whole community of believers, as well as unbelievers, because the believers will speak the Gospel to enable the Holy Spirit to convert the hearts of unbelievers to Jesus Christ. And Jesus never told anyone to kill or rape or take slaves. So that is my message, that believing in God is supposed to make people civilized and free. But humans always mess up, don’t they, don’t we? Take care, be well and keep me up to date.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
I think the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are equally false, and each are utterly deplorable
Ah, there’s the old equivalency card again… that’s the trump card, if you will, in the Moslems blossoming world takeover program.
The Jews and Christians have the Ten Commandments and living in peace as their central doctrines. The Moslems have world takeover and subjugation as their central doctrines.
That’s not equivalent. As you say, facts are facts.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Alarmed Pig Farmer,
Witty handle 🙂
Yes, theists often commit the fallacy of false equivalence, but I did not claim Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all the same, or that they are all equally violent (Muhammad is diametrically opposed to Jesus on the subject of violence), or that they are all equally harmful as practiced today. I only asserted they are equally false.
I think there is no god, therefore any assertion of any god is, in my view, equally false.
What do you feel is so wonderful about the 10 commandments? Half are rather petty, and the other half are so obvious as to be nearly universal and available from a multitude of sources entirely independent of a single tiny ancient tribe.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi AJ Liberphile,
Thanks for the link but the first 4 commandments are rather useless and the last 6 are rather obvious and nearly universal globally.
The idea that our morality is based on the 10 commandments has it exactly backwards.
The 10 commandments are based on our per-existing innate morality, our inherent sense of ought.
Besides, there aren’t just 10 commandments, there are over 600, and a lot of them are primitive and dangerous nonsense.
Kay says
Re:
“BTW, I think the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are equally false…”
You have the freedom to think and say that.
But you have not presented a case.
I do not stand for either Judaism or Christianity, but these three Abrahamic religions are not equally “false”.
Judaism for example has a kind of continuity.
Islam does not. There is no direct connection from Mohammed the desert pirate to the Christian and the Jews. Also, he spoke and worked against them.
This is important. Mohammed the desert pirate does NOT carry on an Abrahamic tradition, whereas Jesus WAS a Jew. Big difference.
Thus, whatever the merits of Christianity or Judaism, Islam is false because Islam starts with NO connection to the Abrahamic tradition.
Mohammed the desert pirate was no rabbi. He never studied with a Christian teacher.
Mohammed’s “teachings” are often the opposite of what Jesus taught.
So it makes no sense to say that Mohammed the desert pirate “continues” the tradition of Jesus. He simply does not.
Therefore the social disconnection and theological contradiction of Mohammed the desert pirate means that he has no philosophical ground to stand on.
There is no concrete reason to respect Mohamed the desert pirate as following in the tradition of Jesus. His claim to do so makes no sense.
That is the philosophical and theological and sociological approach.
Someone needs to tell Dr. Reza Aslan that there is no real basis for Islam.
I will tell tens of thousands. Then Dr. Aslan the world class apologist for Islam will be in big big trouble. I’m gonna nail him again and again in the press.
Oh., and a corollary here is that you lose, S.P. You’re just shooting blanks. You are not trained in debate, critical thinking or theology. Obviously.
Thanks for playing!
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Kay,
I think there is no god therefore I think all assertions of god are equally false.
The foundation of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is god’s existence. If there is no god then all theistic religions are just stories. The stories vary a great deal, but absent god, they all fall to mere fiction.
It is true I did not present a case at my first message. I tend to be rather long winded, so I am trying to adjust for that rather boring character flaw 🙂
I can counter all the usual assertions…argument from first cause, argument from beauty, argument from morality, argument from literary uniqueness, argument from personal revelation, argument from design…
Any particular place you would prefer for me to begin?
kay says
Re:
“Hi Kay,
I think there is no god therefore I think all assertions of god are equally false.
The foundation of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is god’s existence… they all fall to mere fiction.
It is true I did not present a case…
I can counter all the usual assertions…
Any particular place you would prefer for me to begin?”
KT responds:
1) I am a theologian. I know that much of what we call “theology” is just made up nonsense and irrational and delusional. Major instances : Nation of Islam, Latter Day Saints, Scientology, Sun Myung Moon, “Sufism”, all that laughable nonsense.
Any Christian or Mormon who is dumb enough to think Mormons are Christian is not worth the breath it takes to argue. Like the Mormon and the Christian with whom I worked at Amazon, sharing a room. They thought they were using the same playbook!
2) I am familiar with the Euthyphro dialogue of Socrates and the contradiction inherent in an “all wise, all loving, all powerful creator god.”
3) One major problem for Islam is that it makes no sense to despise and/ or kill monotheists of The Book. That should be a sin. But much of Islamic society and mosque teaching is pure hatred of Jews and Christians, their fellow monotheists. It would make more sense if they just went after pagans ( indigenous shamans, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, etc. ) and muggle materialists.
Islam goes after Abrahamic brothers and sisters with the “claimed same basic cultural DNA”. Mohammed the Desert Pirate condemned Jews and Christians and told the early Muslims to reject them. This is equivalent to rejecting the Old Testament and the New Testament. But Mohammed did NOT say why the Old and New Testament were fundamentally flawed, and he was NOT trained in those traditions, and he claimed to be the prophet of that same tradition. That so does not work.
So his problem is that he is rejecting people who follow the ( purported ) guidance of the Abrahamic creator god, which god he claims to accept. To claim inheritance of that tradition and reject those who uphold it professionally is a complete self-contradiction. It is just dumb.
4) What I understand of the Old Testament is that the meaning of “Thou Shalt Not Kill” is formally interpreted as “Thou Shalt Not Murder”. That is the “same principle” as the Buddhist teaching to not initiate violence ( altho Buddhists are technically atheists who go with Karma and not a creator god ). It is situation ethics or scalable response, not a hard and fast rule “Don’t Kill”, which of course just doesn’t work in practice.
Sharia as a legal / ethical system just does not follow from Judaism or from Christianity. Sharia Law is drastically different. Sharia is a form of imperialism and fascism and dictatorship which subjugates the Jews and Christians, enslaves war hostages and kills the pagans. That does not in any way combine with Christianity. How is Sharia a continuation of Christianity?
5) Note that the foundation is more than one piece. Islam claims to be (a) the CONTINUATION of the Abrahamic prophetic tradition AND (b) the FINAL outcome of that tradition. If Mohammed is merely the messenger of the one true god, then that god has the agency to change his mind and come out with more stuff and more revelations, like say Joseph Smith and all the Mormon LDS “revelations”.
Mohammed the desert pirate does NOT have the right to say his client is done forever telling us stuff. After all, Mohammed is just one in a series of prophets, and only a spokesperson, NOT the manager of the creator god, not standing over him. If there can be a third prophet, say, there can also be a fourth and so on.
6) My basic point is very simple: Mohammed has very little connection with the Abrahamic tradition. He’s not trained in it, he wasn’t a rabbi or a Christian teacher, he’s only one of the sandpeople, and he even said he was nobody special – the divine revelation just came to him. But in that case the bar is extremely low. The revelation could come to anyone without preparation and without the means to determine whether the tradition is valid.
7) What is ridiculous about Islam, apart from the fact that it is clearly anti-Abrahamic, is that there is nothing to back Mohammed’s tall tales. In short, Mohammed the desert pirate is just printing paper money. Nothing backs up his paper money that we know of.
8) From a psychological standpoint, I think Mohammed is unstable and lacking basic reasoning powers and basic social skills. I think he’s got really bad behavioral disorders, is vindictive and murderous, and mainly inhabits the range from sociopathy to psychopathy. I see him as a dangerous madman, pure and simple. And that’s a really bad way to start a major religion.
Look, much of religion is dangerous or nonsensical. But religion doesn’t have to be psychopathic. Mohammed and his crew were psychopaths. Mohammed was just a fascist. So it is decidedly NOT a matter of “another mere fiction”. They problem is that this guy Mohammed has NO credentials and he’s a proven psychopath.
9) And THAT is why these traditions are NOT equivalent in value or truth. What I am saying on the existential level is that one could be a good Jew and be a good person, or be a good Christian and be a good person. However it seems really clear that the only way to be a good Muslim is to adhere to Sharia law fascism and be a truly bad human being.
10) And of course the Dalai Lama is flat wrong in his book “Toward a True Kinship of Faiths”. The basic rejoinder to that book is the title “God Is Not One”, and also the analysis of Dr. Sam Harris the neuroscientist / public intellectual.
I’m certain I have covered the basic ground here. I do not see why it takes people so long to define the basic questions or understand the essential divergence of each faith and belief from all others.
11) I was NOT arguing for religion. I am arguing for philosophy. Religion is the death of philosophy and philosophy is the death of religion. My intention is to use philosophy to kill off psychopathic religion. They teach philosophy to kids in the French high schools.
12) Why can’t we do philosophy more generally? It is like an immunization against religious insanity. And that’s a good thing. In summary, I see philosophy as the basic cure for the disease of irrational anti-social faith. With some help from SWAT teams and planes delivering 500 pound bombs ( not so good for the kids ). I do not uphold “peace” or conventional faith like the Desert Religions.
I uphold civilization and justice and philosophy, and especially the law or axiom of Karma. That is my religion, or more exactly, my dharma. Dharma means discipline and humility and fairness and respect. Islam means hatred and cruelty and violence. Make sense?
. . .
“Jedi do not fight for peace. That’s only a slogan, and is as misleading as slogans always are. Jedi fight for civilization, because only civilization creates peace. We fight for justice because justice is the fundamental bedrock of civilization: an unjust civilization is built upon sand. It does not long survive a storm.” – Mace Windu
tilda says
Question (big question): Is Islam an Abrahamic religion?
Islam certainly tries to claim Abraham, but I no longer refer to it as Abrahamic.
For more on this point see (and the origin of the idea of Islam as being an “Abrahamic religion”) see:
On youtube: “The Abrahamic Fallacy: Why Abrahm is not a point of unity for Islam, Judaism and Christianity”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK696Fl7Zkw
Also, see (Dr) Mark Durie’s book: “Which God? : Jesus, Holy Spirit, God in Christianity and Islam”
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Kay the theologian,
Ok, that was an interesting survey of religions from your viewpoint.
Muslims would counter that the very fact Muhammad was illiterate is what evidences the divine origin of his recitation. They will also tell you that all the patriarchs and prophets were actually practicing Islam but the books got corrupted in copying so Gabriel got Muhammad to set the record straight.
I don’t see anywhere that you established I was somehow “shooting blanks”
abad says
Wrong, Stardusty.
Christians want to convert you.
Muslims want to kill you.
There is nothing “equally deplorable” about Christianity and Islam.
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi abad,
I did not precisely say “equally deplorable”.
I made two separate assertions:
“equally false”
“utterly deplorable”
Yes, I think they are all “equally false”.
Indeed, I do consider them all “utterly deplorable”. Perhaps I should have said “highly deplorable” or “very deplorable”. Thank you for pointing out what might have been the use of an excessive word, “utterly”, on my part.
You and I agree that they are not “equally deplorable”. I suspect you do not consider Christianity to be deplorable at all.
The simple fact is that the texts of Jesus get you radical pacifism, and the texts of Muhammad get you radical violent conquest followed by radical fascistic, homicidal, misogynistic rule. (I have truncated the list of accurate pejoratives for Islamic textual doctrine for the sake of brevity!)
Stardusty Psycyhe says
Hi Philip Jihadski,
The texts of Jesus, like the texts of Moses, Muhammad, and all the rest are those attributed to them in various books.
Opinions vary greatly as to the historicity, much less the divine nature of all these figures, and the accuracy of the words attributed to them.
But, in general, you can find the “texts of Jesus” by reading quotes of his words in the Christian bible, and the “texts of Muhammad” are found in the Qur’an and Sunnah.
If you read the words attributed to Jesus you will find he is quoted as saying a camel may pass through the eye of a needle more easily than a rich man can go to heaven, sell your possessions, give to the poor, give no thought for the morrow, if a thief steals from you then give him a second time the same amount he stole, if attacked turn the other cheek to expose yourself passively for further attack, if taxed by a tyrant then pay the tax, if enslaved then serve your slave master well…
That’s about the most radically pacifistic message there is. So you may now consider yourself to be enlightened, perhaps even a Buddha 🙂
Muslims are, of course, quite content with the fact Muhammad was illiterate, and point to that fact as a further indication of the divinity of his recitation.
“Qur’an” means “recitation”. There is no Islamic assertion that Muhammad himself wrote the Arabic script of the Qur’an, only that he recited it and others wrote it down as a recording of repeated recitations.
I am ever so glad to have assisted in your enlightenment 🙂
Wellington says
You suffer, Stardusty Psyche, from a rather bad case of tu quoque reasoning. For Christ’s sake, wake up will ya’?
BTW, I am not religious whatsoever but your silly equivalency thinking leaves me no alternative but to deem you a mediocre intellect until proven otherwise. Prove otherwise if you’re able, which I rather doubt you are.
Holy Hell, will Jihad Watch never be rid of second-rate, non-religious intellects who persist in making their dreadful, petty moral points about how all religions are equally worthy of being excoriated, all the while only one religion remains a menace to liberty and equality under the law? Guess not.
It seems the “tu quoque crowd,” though innocuous, are not helpful in the least (this always slips over their limited heads) and are also unwittingly determined to remain in permanent stupid mode. I really am getting tired of those who have made a religion out of not having one. They err in full ironic fashion more than the vast majority of them will ever realize. How tedious they are.
Stardusty Psyche says
Brother Wellington,
Ok…
Well, I don’t see that I accused anybody of having a false logical point because they did not themselves behave according to their own logical assertion.
I simply said I think the three religions are equally false. I will expand that for you, at the risk of pouring gasoline on the flames…I think all theistic religions are equally false.
The central point of any assertion of theism is just that, the theistic entity, god. I think there is no god, so it kinda stops right there for me in terms of truth claims a theistic religion cares to make.
All religions are not equally harmful. Islam is demonstrably far and away the most harmful religion at this point in history.
The rest of your post is a reiteration of the false attribution of the tu quoque fallacy in combination with a variety of ad hominems so I will not bother to respond individually to them.
Wellington says
How smart is it, Stardusty Psyche, to rattle on about how Judaism, Christianity and Islam are equally false when Christians and Jews are part of the coalition opposing what Islam intends for us all? Even assuming that these three religions are equally false, so what? Only the followers of one of these wants to control the world and kill those who oppose this design.
You know, a smart person knows when to shut up. You are not smart and that’s why you keep blabbing away. And, oh yes, this is an ad hominem because sometimes ad hominems are deserved. You are deserving here most certainly. And while you’re at it, learn, will you, what the tu quoque fallacy really means. To date you don’t know, but then there’s a lot you don’t know, especially in the wisdom department.
kay says
Re Wellington:
“How smart is it, Stardusty Psyche, to rattle on about how Judaism, Christianity and Islam are equally false when Christians and Jews are part of the coalition opposing what Islam intends for us all? Even assuming that these three religions are equally false, so what? Only the followers of one of these wants [sic] to control the world and kill those who oppose this design. ”
In a word, yes. Well said! This is the functional response. Thank you. Now let’s investigate. . .
From a scientific standpoint the Revealed Truths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, and for that matter The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints ( i.e. the Mormons ) are untestable hypotheses. As statements, their revelations “are not even wrong”. Meaning : if they were testable, and proved false, that would be a step forward in human knowledge. But they are not testable and therefore “not even wrong”.
Why is that important? These revelations are NOT testable BUT ALSO FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE. So we CANNOT and MUST NOT base the social system on these “private revelations” because there can never be any agreement. Not now, not ever, never. Instead we work from a secular public discourse and society.
(
The French have a word for that: Laïcité.
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laicite
Proponents maintain that laïcité is thus distinct from anti-clericalism, which actively opposes the influence of religion and the clergy. Laïcité relies on the division between private life, where adherents believe religion belongs, and the public sphere, in which each individual, adherents believe, should appear as a simple citizen equal to all other citizens, devoid of ethnic, religious or other particularities. According to this concept, the government must refrain from taking positions on religious doctrine and only consider religious subjects for their practical consequences on inhabitants’ lives.
)
So-called “theology” is not Real theology but mere religious dispute, just the stupid round-and-round of “I’m right and you’re wrong. My revelation is better than yours, so everybody needs to go with the revelation I like ( or we like ).” That is merely childish, and obviously can never work in the public sphere. Because it’s all just Us and Them, and solves nothing.
It therefore follows we MUST to put away simplistic Us Vs Them theology. Even tho we ALSO MUST apply tons of theological and philosophical and social criticism. Which is what I try to do. ( There is a real alternative, which I will introduce in this post. Please bear with me. )
In particular, there are many hundreds of millions of people who cannot and indeed must not accept the claimed-and-untestable revelation of Islam, as Sharia Islamic Law is the death of civilization and the extermination of lots of nonconforming people, e.g. all the Hindus and all the Buddhists and all the scientific materialists. And genocide over many centuries.
So we need a Big Tent Approach. The psychopathic bad guys rely on the big tent approach. The good guys MUST do the same, globally. Remember, we can only win if we all work together everywhere.
( There are books for this. “Getting To Yes”, “Getting Past No”, “Getting Together”. )
So, hammering on Christianity is no good. Hammering on atheism is no good. The people we need are people like Pamela Geller ( Jewish chick ), Robert Spencer ( Christian I think ), and Dr. Sam Harris ( PhD neuroscientist atheist ). People from any and all different backgrounds who directly and effectively and responsibly address the Big Problem. That is The Program. Nothing else works.
Yes, there is a social “coalition” that is forming. And yes, numerous Jews and Christians are part of that developing coalition. But it must NOT be put forward as religious war, not put forward as “Judaism and Christianity against Islam”. Nor as “Atheism against Islam”. That plays perfectly into the hands of the bad guys. Their indoctrination / counter is “defense of Islam against the evil Jews and Christians and immoral western decadence.”
A reactive approach to Islam fails for several key reasons. One is that it is seen as “discrimination.” It can be labelled “Islamophobia” and “reactionary”, and that will sometimes be true. This is the main attack used in Europe by the collaborationist Left, the “Antifa” and the universities. We must win Europe and win the universities, and here is how:
There is a very simple, direct and functional counter to the charge of Islamophobia, one that I use. It’s called “human rights”. John Locke, John Rawls theory of justice and all that.
I publically claim opposition to Nazism, to Marxism-Leninism, and to Islam / Sharia. On the basis of international human rights. e.g. the United Nations treaties.
Thus I “claim the moral high ground” and CANNOT be targeted as a right-wing reactionary.
“The cause of freedom is not the cause of a race or sect, a party or a class. It is the cause of humankind, the very birthright of humanity.”
— Anna Julia Stewart
Anyone can take this same approach, even a highschooler. It is invincible and effective…when used! The issues are clear and the theory is complete and the problem scoping is done.
This counter breaks the narrative of the collaborationist Left and the Antifa.
On this basis one can go on the attack against any brutal totalitarian dogma, including especially the fascist dogma known as Islam / Sharia.
If one has the basic background and basic critical thinking skills, John Locke etc.
In summary:
– Religion per se is not the issue here. Fascism, religious fascism, is The Issue.
– Know your enemy, including the Left and Antifa. Know who you can rely upon as allies, of whatever background.
– Study and apply critical thinking skills and debate skills.
– Take a functional approach and strategize for the overall mission, global defeat of Islam / Sharia as the global threat to freedom and civilization.
– Co-operation ( Getting To Yes ) and team-building.
– International human rights ( UN Declaration of Human Rights ), meaning freedom of speech, thought and assembly.
– Laïcité Is The Program. Sharia is The Mortal Enemy of Laïcité and human rights.
– Work online to build political community and condemn the bad guys.
– Break the narrative of the Antifa / collaborationist Left.
– Leverage all effective resources, e.g. Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, Dr. Sam Harris etc., anywhere and everywhere.
Remember, the task is to save civilization from the religious fascists, the bloodthirsty psychopaths, the orc armies of Mordor. No pressure! I do my part.
Liberté. Egalité. Fraternité. Laïcité. Solidarité.
D’accord?
“The future has several names. For the weak it is the impossible. For the fainthearted it is the unknown. For the thoughtful and valiant it is the ideal.”
— Victor Hugo
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi, Wellington and Kay,
“You know, a smart person knows when to shut up”
By this reasoning we should not expose the truth that Islamic doctrine calls for killing everybody else to establish a global caliphate. Exposing this truth is likely to backfire by generating more true believer jihadis. I think the recruitment issue is one reason Obama publicly spouts the “nothing to do with Islam” lie.
Yet, we continue to speak truth, even if it might turn out to be tactically “not smart”.
In truth, I think there is no god and therefor all theistic religions are equally false. I have no intention of shutting up about that whether you consider the possible alienation of Christian allies to be “not smart” or not.
As for your false attribution of the tu quoque fallacy to me, again, you simply have not produced a quote of my words that indicates I argued against an individual’s logical position based on that individual’s failure to behave consistently with his own logical position.
That’s what it means, Wellington, I will save you the trouble of looking it up, ’cause I am just that nice a guy!
Tu quoque (/tuːˈkwoʊkwiː/;[1] Latin for “you, too” or “you, also”) or the appeal to hypocrisy is an informal logical fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent’s position by asserting the opponent’s failure to act consistently in accordance with that position.
Wellington says
How the hell, Stardusty Psyche, you can conclude that my asserting that a smart person knows when to shut up with the imperative, per your reasoning, to refrain from exposing what Islam intends for us all lest more recruitment of jihadis occurs, is a risible and convoluted “reasoning” that make me wonder if you’re not a plant here at JW. Really, the more you write the more I think you are a dimwit, whatever your motives. I also note your sly endorsement of Obama and I want you to know that I know this.
My previous communication to you SPECIFICALLY addressed the dearth of wisdom in insulting portions of a coalition arraigned against a common enemy. Really, I don’t give a damn what you think about Judaism and Christianity, nor should anyone else here at JW who has their “”eye on the ball”——keep this private because it is irrelevant. Got that? No, of course you won’t because you function is tedium mode consistently.
Your continued excoriation by way of lumping Judaism and Christianity with Islam as all equally false religions, even though you admit that Islam is a great danger in sundry ways that Judaism and Christianity are not, falls woefully short of an optimal strategy in confronting the spiritual fascism which is Islam. You know this or should know it.
Why combine proselytizing with strategy for the here and now? And yet this is exactly what you have done. Put a lid on your own private reflections about religion in general. To the extent you don’t, you reveal yourself as, at best stupid, and at worst someone who has an agenda which does not aid the anti-jihad cause (which would actually be a different but more furtive kind of stupidity).
As for the “tu quoque” matter, spare me the Wikipedia explanation of it. Anyone who on the surface says they are opposing Islam’s nefarious designs but who also at the same time excoriates Judaism and Christianity is, ipso facto, the very kind of hypocrite the tu quoque fallacy goes to the root of. Wise up. So far you have showed no promise of this.
Stardusty Psyche says
Wellington,
“Anyone who on the surface says they are opposing Islam’s nefarious designs but who also at the same time excoriates Judaism and Christianity is, ipso facto, the very kind of hypocrite the tu quoque fallacy goes to the root of. ”
Non-sequitur. Attempting to explain your erroneous attribution of tu quoque by watering it down to some kind of generalized inferred and erroneously attributed hypocrisy is just a case of you digging a deeper hole for yourself.
I can be against Islamic doctrine, against, Christian doctrine, against the doctrine of Judaism, plus differentiate the specific ramifications, differences, and similarities between them all at the same time.
I also walk and chew bubblegum at the same time quite proficiently.
Stardusty Psyche says
PJ
““StarBoy” is a poster at HotAir who goes by the nic, “right2bright””
Huh?
Did an angel tell you that or something? No, I never heard of HotAir or right2bright…
Wellington says
“I can be against Islamic doctrine, against, {sic} Christian doctrine, against the doctrine of Judaism, plus differentiate the specific ramifications, differences, and similarities between them all at the same time.”
Yeah, you can, but what’s the point in doing so, Star Boy, at Jihad Watch where a very broad coalition composed of religious and non-religious people are unified in opposing the spiritual fascism which is Islam? Take your petty, tedious and irrelevant preaching some place else (and how ironic that someone against religion in general is a preacher as you are, proving that some, like you, make a religion out of not having one).
JW has no use for you. Who of sense would ever have use for someone insulting certain members of a coalition which is fighting a common enemy all the while claiming to be himself fighting that common enemy? I mean how stupid can you get? Christ, you’re so full of yourself (full of something else too) you probably won’t get even this.
kay says
I have GREAT stuff from Australia. From Q Society.
PLEASE PLEASE propagate it! ! ! See below.
Re Wellington:
“Who of sense would ever have use for someone insulting certain members of a coalition which is fighting a common enemy?”
Yes.
We work to build a BROAD coalition for every good person everywhere. That is the whole point.
Obviously.
The bad guys have a friggin’ HUGE coalition. Tens of millions of other bad guys.
Our coalition is in bootstrap mode.
And we have lots of Politically Correct enemies. Like on CNN and the media generally. And the collaborationist Left.
And Islamic State scored THOUSANDS of armed Humvees in Iraq in one day!
Enough for many battalions of bad guys. This is a disaster.
I just spent many hours doing outreach. To Australia and on youtube. But all my work online is like a drop in the bucket. There are so many collaborationists and apologists.
This is an incredibly hard fight.
But winning Australia feels good. That’s a whole continent. That’s a start.
Here’s the good stuff from Australia.
(1)
Clare Lopez with Q Society in Sydney, Australia 5 September 2014
Q Society of Australia Inc
23,821
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVD-aOvo-iU
Published on Sep 16, 2014
Clare Lopez at the Q Society event in Sydney on the evening of 5 September 2014. Her topic is “Jihad Resurgent: Islamic Challenge, Western Response”.
She flew into WA from Washington DC, first spoke in Perth on 31 August; on to Melbourne 2 September, then Sydney and finally Brisbane on 7 September. The tour was organised by Q Society of Australia.
About Clare
Clare M. Lopez is the Vice President for Research and Analysis at the Center for Security Policy and a Senior Fellow at The Clarion Project, the London Center for Policy Research, and the Canadian Meighen Institute.
Also Vice President of the Intelligence Summit, she formerly was a career operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency, a professor at the Centre for Counterintelligence and Security Studies, Executive Director of the Iran Policy Committee from 2005-2006, and has served for a variety of defense firms.
She is deputy director of the U.S. Counterterrorism Advisory Team for the Military Department of the South Carolina National Guard and serves as a member of the Boards of Advisors/Directors for the Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia, the Clarion Project, the United West, and the Voice of the Copts. She has been a Visiting Researcher and guest lecturer on counterterrorism, national defense, and international relations at Georgetown University. Ms. Lopez is a regular contributor to print and broadcast media on subjects related to Iran and the Middle East. She is the author of an acclaimed paper for the Center, The Rise of the Iran Lobby and co-author/editor of the Center’s Team B II study, “Shariah: The Threat to America”.
Ms. Lopez received a B.A. in Communications and French from Notre Dame College of Ohio and an M.A. in International Relations from the Maxwell School of Syracuse University. She completed Marine Corps Officer Candidate School (OCS) in Quantico, Virginia before declining a military commission to join the CIA.
——————-
More good stuff from Oz
(2)
Islam, Jihad, and Australia thread topic posted Thu, September 18, 2014 – 11:53 PM
extensive thread with rich resources on main tribe for Australia
http://aussie.tribe.net/thread/6fb1dec6-89aa-4f59-9fda-f27f99c4c336
I now reach ( up to ) one thousand people and several cities for Australia.
The good guys have major traction there.
Please Propagate The Good Stuff!
Linde Barrera says
To Kay- As per your June 1st 6:06 am comment about Australia and jihad, great work! And God bless Senator Jacqui Lambi for her bravery in wanting to put the death penalty on the table for her country, and standing against those ISIS cowards.
kay says
Re Linde:
“To Kay- As per your June 1st 6:06 am comment about Australia and jihad, great work! And God bless Senator Jacqui Lambi for her bravery in wanting to put the death penalty on the table for her country, and standing against those ISIS cowards.”
Hi Linde! You are most welcome!
I like being incredibly useful and building bridges and helping save civilization. Yeah, Jacquie Lambi is more than doing her job. She’s a brave girl on the front line. She deserves international recognition for being so. I’m gonna make sure she gets the recognition too.
It’s not just “an Aussie issue”. The s.o.b.s tried to get the Canadian Parliament too very recently!
And I think that the other flight ( brought down ) on 9/11 was probably going to be aimed at the main office building for the US House of Representatives. Hey, they could have tried to wipe out a lot of national government types in D.C with that other plane.
That would be just as high priority as nailing a chunk of the Pentagon. They weren’t aiming for Chicago on 9/11, they were going East in Pennsylvania, almost back to the East Coast. And the bad guys know how to aim huge airplanes at high speeds like they’re target hunting.
That’s when we all should have figured out we have a real problem on our hands. Bad guys have proven they want to decapitate governments in Ottawa and D.C. And that means we really really ARE at war, and have been for over twelve years.
Going after legislators will definitely become a big part of the hot war on western civilization. It is NOT an idle threat but a strategy. The stupid thing is that many Aussies want to PROTECT the Muslims there and they counter-demonstrate against the good guys who want to defend Aussie lives and freedoms and equality under the law. ( Same thing goes on in Germany. The ANTIFA hammer on the PEGIDA and outnumber the PEGIDA. And the ANTIFA are really mean. )
So I did my part. I gave the Aussies a bunch of posts and now they’ve been put on notice: “Aussies! You’re At War! And it’s a global war and here is how it works.” Q Society is great, obviously. And so is the American ex-CIA woman who spoke in several Aussie cities. All I did was find her great video and amplify it before all the Aussies with stuff that happened on their turf. Big loop-around. After the Sydney shooting, so wake up mates!
And I’m very very proud to have done the work to get that message thru. Aside from Q Society and Reclaim Australia, people there just weren’t minding the store! And they’d even had Geert Wilders over there to explain it to them. He flew halfway around the world, bless him.
This is how the job gets done: we communicate. Together we are all in the global Situation Room and we have to monitor events and put together the threat assessment and protect each other collectively. Jihad Watch is of course great for that, as are some other sites. I make really good use of these communication resources. And this is not a drill. This is global conflict, global asymmetrical warfare.
I have built many bridges to the public for Jihad Watch, for Pamela Geller, and for Religion of Peace. I could stop now and claim I made a real contribution to counter-jihad. But the s.o.b.s nailed Charlie Hebdo and Paris and that makes me their enemy For Life. Bad guys killing frogs ( grenouilles, French ) really pisses me off. I am not Christian and I will NEVER forgive them for Paris. And enslaving the Nigerian Christian girls totally pisses me off too.
I’m not just ranting. I have a big communication strategy that handles three continents ( Australia, North America, Europe ). It’s already in place and it’s really working. I just need people to read my stuff and thank me on the many threads I do for the outreach ( or at least be bad guys and hate me a lot so I get traction online ).
Anybody who wants to push the good guy story and / or break the bad guy story has an open field on http://www.tribe.net. I’ve got Texas and New York City and London and some other places covered. I have another huge strategic field of battle. It’s called youtube. Done some serious fighting and outreach work there recently. So can anyone else.
Dr. Bill Warner is now well-defended on youtube and well-publicized and I will support other key youtube videos. STRATEGIC outreach is the key, as is defending good guys and infrastructure. This is all guerrilla warfare. And the workload is infinite. Strategy and outreach and hammering the bad guy narratives are the highest priorities. And we have to defend freedom of speech on every streetcorner.
The collaborationists are literally EVERYWHERE. We used to have the Berkeley Free Speech Movement in like 1968. Now we have at U Cal Berkeley an academic program in “Islamophobia”. Maybe the bad guys should take their war to Berkeley and make things really clear to the clueless Chomsky type academia crowd.
“I hate this war,” said Ilsa in Casablanca. January was horrible. I swore a lot. And they’ve tried for Lars Vilks and Pamela Geller in recent weeks. It’s Us or Them. There is no middle ground. This is Total War. Even in Australia and Texas and Boston and Canada for Chrissakes.
“The lamps are going out all over Europe.”
Mark Steyn’s Australian Freedom of Speech Tour 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrNcIaWrnq0
Insult those that behead others.
Mike From Nebraska
Freedom of Speech
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Wellington
“but what’s the point in doing so”
Truth.
Accurate, unbiased analysis of complicated issues.
“unified in opposing the spiritual fascism which is Islam”
Ok, good, fundamentalist Islam is fascistic, yes, I agree.
“how ironic that someone against religion in general is a preacher”
So, when I post opinions that is preaching? Well, I suppose in some sense any expression of opinion is. How is that somehow limited to expressions of religious opinions?
“Who of sense would ever have use for someone insulting certain members of a coalition which is fighting a common enemy”
If disagreement is inherently insulting to you, well, good luck with that. I can disagree with people on certain issues and work with them on others. If you can’t be that flexible, well, then you have some maturing to do.
You are right that I don’t see much sense in what you are saying.
No Fear says
While not a Christian, I ask myself “Who would I rather have, as a role model, Jesus or Mohammed?”
a) someone who raises people from the dead and heals the sick, who puts the needs of others above his own, the “perfect man”……Jesus
b) a thief, murderer , pimp, pedophile, encourager of rape, torturer and killer of Jews, the most vile man …..Mohammed
If it about choosing a role model then it is no contest for me.
Sure, the dying god/scapegoat paradigm is pretty horrid.
But don’t we all kill off our own desires so as to give life to another, our child?
Jesus represents life itself to me, if nothing else. His story reminds me of the Buddha.
And all that coming from me, an Atheist…..(and yes I know about Mohammed being a gnostic myth etc etc but I am taking the fundamentalist view)
miriamrove says
“When will the Muslim world give up blaming the West for Islam’s failure to bring those countries wherein it has gained preponderance out of the 7th century and into the modern age?”
Never would they give that up. That is their only hope. Muslims blame all their short coming, their misery, their lack of education, lack of Economic opportunity, and every other ills they have on the West and the Jews. Trust me when I tell you this. I was born and raised a Muslim. m
Larry A. Singleton says
The answer is, depressingly and unfortunately, “never”. We can’t even get a handle on the radical preachers in the majority of mosques in America preaching “apes and pigs” and Jews as the ultimate enemy. I’ve posted this many times but I wish people would copy it and pass it around like a religious tract. This “4th Conference” below coupled with “Jihad in the Qur’an and Sunnah” by ‘Abdullâh bin Muhammad bin Humaid (that I found almost as an Introduction in a Summarized Bukhari I’d ordered) should be required reading for those wanting to understand this issue. I tell people to start their education with a great “Primer”; The Haj by Leon Uris. And Because They hate by Brigitte Gabriel. The Israeli Solution by Glick and The Case for Israel by Dershowitz are good too.
The 4th Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research: Arab Theologians on Jews and Israel. Sept. 1968 Translated by D.F. Green/David G. Littman (Support Secure Freedom)Front to back; 95 pages of outrageous lies, inversion and vile Jew-Hatred. I’ve read this whole thing. I invite you to find any comparison with Jewish, Christian or Buddhist “Conferences”. See the Declaration of War titled “Resolutions and Recommendations” on page 73.
http://supportsecurefreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/Arab-Theologians-on-Jews-and-Israel-4th_Ed_082011.pdf
and
Center for Security Policy
Arab Theologians on Jews and Israel
Books | August 30, 2011 | Understanding the Shariah Threat Doctrine
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2011/08/30/arab-theologians-on-jews-and-israel/
Read Andrew Bostom’s The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism and read from page 51 on the above topic to page 53 the 2003 Putrajaya Islamic Summit and a little beyond to a speech by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi on the same page. The whole chapter is one horrific example after another of Islamic mass murder and pogroms but go ahead and start with this:
Supplemental Article “The First and Last Enemy: Jew Hatred in Islam.” by Bostom
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=28549
And this:
Dr. Wafa Sultan exposes Islamic values with Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/dr-wafa-sultan-exposes-islamic-values-sheikh-omar-bakri-muhammad
This less than 8-minute video segment, if viewed objectively and dispassionately, could do more to educate the American public on the theory animating the practice of “Islamic international relations,” without any further explanation required. Andrew G. Bostom-The Legacy of Jihad and The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism.
Islamists Project Islam’s Worst Traits onto Christians by Raymond Ibrahim
http://www.meforum.org/2915/islamists-project-islam-worst-traits-onto
Muslims Project Islam’s Worst Traits onto Israel and the Jews by Raymond Ibrahim
raymondibrahim-com/8348/muslims-project-islam-worst-traits-onto-israel
kay says
Hi Larry.
You have made a substantial contribution here.
I will strongly affirm three of these people you recommend as being Absolutely Essential. They are Andrew Bostom MD, Brigitte Gabriel and Dr. Wafa Sultan.
Here are resources for all three.
The Legacy of Jihad Paperback – March 1, 2008
by Andrew G. Bostom M.D. (Editor), Ibn Warraq (Foreword)
http://www.amazon.com/Legacy-Jihad-Andrew-Bostom-M-D/dp/1591026024/
Sharia Versus Freedom: The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism Hardcover – September 18, 2012
http://www.amazon.com/Sharia-Versus-Freedom-Islamic-Totalitarianism/dp/1616146664/
Brigitte Gabriel gives FANTASTIC answer to Muslim woman claiming all Muslims are portrayed badly »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Gabriel
Because They Hate: A Survivor of Islamic Terror Warns America Paperback – January 8, 2008
by Brigitte Gabriel (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Because-They-Hate-Survivor-Islamic/dp/0312358385/
They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It Paperback – January 5, 2010
by Brigitte Gabriel (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/They-Must-Be-Stopped-Radical/dp/0312571283/
Dr Wafa Sultan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wafa_Sultan
On January 10, 2011, Sultan, opposing Ibrahim Ramey, appeared on the Russian television news show CrossTalk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awmz_7HSeDw&list=PLcxzpHL-KWmzoz4BVJWyq9WbD4XSF4PhU
Ex-muslim Wafa Sultan Debates Sheikh Omar Bakri
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQwn4-jXNLs&list=PLcxzpHL-KWmzoz4BVJWyq9WbD4XSF4PhU&index=13
A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Islam Paperback – April 26, 2011
by Wafa Sultan (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/God-Who-Hates-Courageous-Inflamed/dp/0312538367/
quotha raven says
To G. Gardiner – ““As of 2014, eleven Nobel Prize winners have been Muslims. More than half of the eleven Muslim Nobel laureates were awarded the prize in the 21st century. Seven of the eleven winners have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, including a controversial award to Yasser Arafat.”
Is BHO amongst the seven Nobel Peace Prize winners you count here? When, within only a very few months of taking office, the narcissistic, pro-Islam community organizer U S President was awarded the NPP (as though Yassir Arafat’s award weren’t just about enough) I came to see the whole peace prize as absolute rubbish.
As I recall, what BHO had done to win this “honor” was to have gone to Egypt and read off his famous teleprompter an apologetic speech for the history and values of the West and, specifically, the USA, and on another occasion bowed deeply and reverently to the Saudi king.
A pox on all their houses. Cheers! Quotha R
Shmooviyet says
@Quotha R:
Well, the anti-America, islamic world-posterior-kissing activities you specified surely didn’t hurt BHO’s chances at the prize. And they certainly made him all the more popular with the UN ( dba the OIC ). The ‘honor’ came breathtakingly quick, too.
Cheers to you!
quotha raven says
Shmoovi – What is OIC? I don’t know what that is. Yes, it certainly did happen to BHO in no time at all! I believe he had been in office less than a year. I remember my being pretty…puzzled…at the time. Well, flabbergasted and disillusioned might be a more accurate and less diplomatic way to describe my reaction. Cheers! Quotha
Angemon says
quotha raven posted:
“Shmoovi – What is OIC? I don’t know what that is.”
http://www.oic-oci.org/oicv2/page/?p_id=52&p_ref=26&lan=en
“About OIC
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) (formerly Organization of the Islamic Conference) is the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations which has membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The Organization is the collective voice of the Muslim world and ensuring to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world”
56 sovereign states + “palestine”.
quotha raven says
Angemon – Thank you! Or, after having scanned the site you provided, perhaps I should I say “YIKES!” See, that’s why I read JW every day and have done for years and years: one learns so much from the discussions in and contributors to comments. You, Angemon, are one of my long time favorites. Thanks again. I will peruse this OIC site with full attention.Cheers! Quotha
Angemon says
Thank you for the kind words, QR. I linked to the site merely to give a source for the “ensuring to safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world” bit – I don’t expect anyone here to spend any amount of time there, especially when they openly state what they’re defending: the interests of the “muslim world”.
quotha raven says
Angemon – Keep your friends close and your enemies closer! I like to see original source material from many sides, so I’ll peruse the site with great interest. I am interested even in reading the trolls (and peppery responses to), whom I’ve become pretty good at spotting here on JW. Oh, yeah! JW proffers some amusing, learned, mighty and even daunting intellects, generously spiced with humor, passion and rage. Lots of articulate writers here. I love it! Cheers! qr
Angemon says
True that 🙂
Stay safe and keep fighting the good fight.
Edward says
“As of 2014, eleven Nobel Prize winners have been Muslims. More than half of the eleven Muslim Nobel laureates were awarded the prize in the 21st century. Seven of the eleven winners have been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, including a controversial award to Yasser Arafat.”
Ah! Perhaps, the noble Nobel Prize entity has been deceptively been charmed or spooked* by the Muslims too. Politician’s and Cleric’s from around the world have fallen to their wishes…err demands. The avant- garde theorists, that they are, have mastered the techniques that have opened many paths to endeavors that they pursue that eventually will be advantageous to their sect propagation.
They could be a great sociality, but sadly Islam has perverted religion that even has the Vatican duped.
Islam has invoked the name of Jesus Christ and His mother’s The Virgin Mary as a deceptive hedge….they are not possessing Divinity as Muslim’s convictions is concerned!
It’s up to the God of the 10 Commandments to judge when their convoluted way of life is going to end.
As for being spooked……could it because of this!
http://blackmagicworld.com/black-magic-in-muslim-countries.html
Angemon says
It would be an interesting study: in the last couple decades, how many “moderate”, exemplary muslims worldwide were judged and convicted for supporting terrorism?
KrazyKafir says
“But, alas, many of them insist on speaking this strange language, this lexicon of hate and antisemitism, only because they erroneously believe their hatred does not sound strange in our ears—because they think we like them for it”
Well, it doesn’t, in the leftist realm.
Alarmed Pig Farmer says
Benjamin and Simon point out that, “A surfeit of causes lies behind the challenge of bin Laden and his radical Islamists, including frustration with states that fail them politically and economically…
When the subject of Islam comes up among our news entertainers, they must before saying anything else establish two things:
1) the vast majority of Moslems are regular people just like you and me, and
2) The situation is very bad over in the Middle East, and now here, because the situation they’re in is so complex.
Neither is true. All Moslems are questionable people because they abide a belief system dedicated to the rise of subjugation and the total end of freedom, and that’s with them on top and us threatened under the penalty of death. And the situation in the Middle East, and now in Moslem communities in the West, is simple, not complex: they are against us, and promise to fight us until we are subdued, because they want to. This overriding desire has nothing to do with exigent their circumstances.
Bad assumptions by necessity yields bad dialog. For example, when discussing the stunning rise of the New Caliphate, the news entertainers always talk about the Internet and the masterful use of its social media by ISIS. That implies the conclusion that the reason 40,000 young Moslems went to the Levant and Somalia is because the “radical extremists” could make easy contact with them.
No mention is ever made of why things resonate so upon making contact, which is the central issue.
Cartimandua says
I suppose this would be an inconvenient time to mention IQs among Muslim intermarriage since the 7th century and why UK schools are having a terrible problem with some schools only having first cousins who don’t speak English, as well as having to cope with 130 different languages. I thought not.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
A few random thoughts…
Thank you, Michael Devolin, for your vocabulary-expanding introduction to the word “pronoid”, meaning “showing undue optimism and happiness, and especially having a firm and often unjustified, belief that one is liked by other people.”
Who does this description remind you of? Yes,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DIETlxquzY
It’s not very Canadian of you to misspell the name of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Berton
At least I trust you won’t misspell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Sinclair
I have never before heard of this peculiarly named organization know as the “Cross Cultural Roundtable”. I would have expected the word “cross-cultural”, but that’s not the word its founders chose: instead, this roundtable celebrates the culture of the Cross. And “roundtable” gives a subliminal image of knights gathered together, preparing to go off on a Crusade to the Holy Land of ISIS. I’ve heard of stealth jihad, but this is an example of stealth counter-jihad.
st. patrick says
5 o’clock world for us..Not so much for them..
reyol says
Thank you, Robert for our vocabulary word of the day. I will now attempt to use it in a sentence:
The volunteers at the Lutheran Social Services, being excessively pronoid, lobbied the State Department for more Somalis.
Mike says
Michael, your command of words in this piece is impressive; your use of punctuation could be better. (Or is the semicolon pretentious?)
(This is just a light-hearted jab – no offense intended.)
terry says
Winning a debate does not mean The Truth necessarily wins.
Guy Macher says
Justin’s daddy declared all cultures equal in 1971.
kay says
Rollup:
(1)
Re Tilda
Question (big question): Is Islam an Abrahamic religion?
Islam certainly tries to claim Abraham, but I no longer refer to it as Abrahamic.
kay responds
We HAVE to refer to Islam as Abrahamic. Because it inherits the tradition of the Old and New Testaments. We do NOT have to agree that Mohammed is an authentic prophet or interpreter of the Abrahamic tradition. I do not see Mohammed as in any way related to the teaching of Jesus the Nazarene. The label Abrahamic does not guarantee authentic Abrahamic lineage. But yes, Islam is agreed to be Abrahamic.
And no one has to respect that in theological terms. I am a theologian and I think the claim is rubbish. ( See more on this below. ) Theologians in general and academics generally don’t get to say that the claim is rubbish. It’s a direct request for assassination.
(2)
Stardusty Psyche says
Hi Kay the theologian,
Ok, that was an interesting survey of religions from your viewpoint.
Muslims would counter that the very fact Muhammad was illiterate is what evidences the divine origin of his recitation.
kay responds:
So what? That evidences nothing. That is the opposite of a religious or spiritual credential. Even if Mohammed got some things right, how did he know he got the whole story correctly? There is no corroboration and no evidence of anything. There is no reason to believe Mohammed is a prophet, period. That’s the point. And if f he has hundreds of millions of believers it’s because his team slaughtered tens of millions in many lands and took over many places.
Simple arguments of Divine Authority and Popular Opinion count for nothing. Muslims use these two literally all the time but the real answer in law and critical theology is SO WHAT?
No one has to agree. Here is why:
Jesus the Nazarene says and does very differently compared to Mohammed. And he is a recognized prophet and he has hundreds of millions of followers. There is no priority of Mohammed over Jesus the Nazarene.
A Christian by definition is Abrahamic and someone who does not accept the claim of Mohammed. There are no Christian Muslims and there are no Muslim Christians.
Mohammed countermands the teachings and principles of Jesus the Nazarene.
Islam is culturally Abrahamic, of course, but it is clearly not following the themes and teachings of Jesus but rejecting those teachings either in theory or practice or both. Usually both, in a big way.
So Islam is and is not Abrahamic.
Sort of like an American citizen who rejects US law and supports Sharia instead. It’s basically a betrayal. Especially when they kill and abduct and enslave Christians in Nigeria, Iraq, and so forth UNDER SHARIA LAW, under Islam. That is a complete contradiction. So you can’t say Islamists are really “People of the Book”. They are the opponents of the People of the Book. That’s the argument to use. Very simple.
( See more below. )
(3)
OIC
Read this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_of_Islamic_Cooperation
—————
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC; Arabic: منظمة التعاون الإسلامي; French: Organisation de la coopération islamique, OCI)[a 1] is an international organisation founded in 1969 consisting of 57 member states. The organisation states that it is “the collective voice of the Muslim world” and works to “safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony”.[1]
The OIC has permanent delegations to the United Nations and the European Union.
Human rights
OIC created the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam.[2] While proponents claim it is not an alternative to the UDHR, but rather complementary to it, Article 24 states that “[a]ll the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah” and Article 25 follows with “[t]he Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.” Attempts to have it adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council have met increasing criticism, because of its contradiction of the UDHR, including from liberal Muslim groups.[13] Critics of the CDHR state bluntly that it is “manipulation and hypocrisy,” “designed to dilute, if not altogether eliminate, civil and political rights protected by international law” and attempts to “circumvent these principles [of freedom and equality].”[14][15][16]
—————–
See also the Cairo Declaration on Wikipedia.
Basically, the OIC and the Cairo Declaration are principal enemies of human rights worldwide. They are meant to provide a cover for Islamic Sharia Law. OIC and Cairo are about subordinating human rights to Sharia pure and simple.
That means no human rights whatsoever, including no right to leave Islam. Not even if a young person was born into a Muslim family. That is denial of all basic human rights. Therefore OIC is a primary enemy of civilization.
The only real charter for human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The OIC alternative is NOT parallel to the UDHR. The OIC seeks to subvert and destroy UDHR by offering a supposedly compatible alternative that in fact destroys the UDHR.
This is the real stuff:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/UDHRIndex.aspx
Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the core of modern civilization. The Cairo Declaration is the opposite.
The Cairo Declaration and the OIC are fascist and by default support all Islamic terrorism because they refuse to agree even the simplest definition of terrorism. To the OIC, Islamic terrorism is not terrorism because it is classical Sharia and everything Sharia is good in their policy by definition. That is the point. They are running cover for Sharia and global jihad. That is the whole purpose. They wanna rule the world.
Which makes OIC the greatest conspiracy on the planet.
People need to know this.
Now we are at square one. Thank goodness.
kay says
Re Stardusty :
Hi, Wellington and Kay,
“You know, a smart person knows when to shut up”
Basic ( and useful response ) :
Sometimes people “have to shut up”, e.g. to save their lives. That is the crux of the problem.
It’s been a problem under various regimes, e.g. medieval Roman Catholic, Nazi, Marxist, or Islamist.
See:
Islam’s Fatal Flaw
Muslims are captive of a system they do not control – behind a “Crescent Curtain” of fear. Here is how it works.
http://islamsfatalflaw.blogspot.com/2009/01/why-islam-is-different.html
This is the answer:
Pamela Geller : “Truth Is The New Hate Speech : Welcome To The War” – Freedom of Speech vs. Islam
http://newyork.tribe.net/listing/Pamela-Geller-Truth-Is-The-New-Hate-Speech-Welcome-To-The-War-Freedom-of-Speech-vs-Islam/new-york-ny/93c29103-cb2f-42c1-a874-a46afd6eae45
“Yes, it is fear and silence and the spiritual isolation they cause that must be fought today. And it is sociability and the universal inter-communication of men that must be defended. Slavery, injustice, and lies destroy this intercourse and forbid this sociability; and so we must reject them. But these evils are today the very stuff of history, so that many consider them necessary evils. It is true that we cannot ‘escape history,’ since we are in it up to our necks. But one may propose to fight within history to preserve from history that part of man which is not its proper province.”
— Albert Camus
“For my part, I am fairly sure that I have made the choice. And, having chosen, I think that I must speak out, that I must state that I will never again be one of those, whoever they be, who compromise with murder, and that I must take the consequences of such a decision. The thing is done, and that is as far as I can go at present…”
— Albert Camus
Albert Camus – Nobel Laureate, Resistance Fighter and Humanitarian
http://people.tribe.net/aa35e5c2-3d1f-4b92-b135-bdc41d795776/photos/a937e09d-4e10-4b35-b3c2-e82bc6326c98
Here, join the Politics tribe and talk all you want Stardusty. Go for it.
http://uspolitics.tribe.net/
There are also atheist and secular humanist tribes you may consider.
Tribe is extraordinarily useful for political work. See real live counter-jihad at:
Reclaim Australia NGO and Reclaim Australia Rallies
http://uspolitics.tribe.net/thread/908598f6-6bb1-4707-82b1-e9c5dce3001e
…and also at seven Australia tribes, European tribes, Texas and NYC tribes etc.
Kay responds directly:
I never told anyone to “shut up” Stardusty. I simply responded to you, not the same thing. I am a guest here and my work is to build communication and defend basic human freedom.
I support freedom of speech for Nazis, Marxist-Leninists, and Islamists, and I like to quote them and broadcast their deeds.
E.G.
“But those who study Islamic holy war will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless.”
— Ayatollah Khomeini ( founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran )
Pamela Geller likes to quote Islamists and make municipal transit advertisements from their statements. Smart girl.
The Cairo Declaration and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation work to destroy freedom of speech etc. That is civilizational jihad.
It would be wholly inconsistent to oppose them but then try to shut down others.
There are repeated attempts on college campuses to shut down counter-jihad freedom of speech and even simple movies like the Kyle Cooper bio “American Sniper” ( as provoking “enmity towards Islamic students” ).
This is terrifying. It creates a lose lose scenario for the good guys:
Bad guys (a) appeal to collegiality while also (b) slaughtering with impunity while claiming defense.
The Boston bombing was motivated by “defense of Muslim brothers”.
Destruction of Christian churches in Nigeria was indignant “retaliation” for Charlie Hebdo in Paris, even tho the Nigerian Christians had no part.
Thus, the “defensive strategy” of Islam is to destroy anyone anywhere for any perceived insult to their culture.
We are all to varying degrees captive or vulnerable to this fascist paradigm.
Freedom of speech and other basic human rights comprise the basic theory, practice and goal of the many generations struggle against totalitarian oppression ( medieval Roman Catholicism etc. ).
The old Roman Empire was far better, in that it allowed freedom of speech and local religious customs and also preserved the tradition of Athens.
Destruction of free speech and imposition / maintenance of Sharia is absolutely central to civilizational jihad EVERYWHERE, including campuses, in Garland Texas, Paris, Denmark, Sweden, Bangladesh etc.
The goal of civilization is to defend basic human rights FOR ALL and the impartial rule of law.
This is what keeps us together and effective against all totalitarian threats.
“But one may propose to fight within history to preserve from history that part of man which is not its proper province.”
“And henceforth, the only honorable course will be to stake everything on a formidable gamble: that words are more powerful than munitions.”
–Albert Camus
I work to raise awareness and promote discussion and provide resources to build functional co-operative culture.
And fight the totalitarian paradigm. Like Albert Camus.
If people condemn or ridicule me, I can fight back…unless prevented from entering or staying in the ring, and Troll moderators are my nemesis.
The priorities are clear : chief among them being to support free speech anywhere and everywhere.
That is what I do. You can also: I have provided the means.
<>
Liberté. Egalité. Fraternité. Laïcité. Authenticité. Solidarité.
Lars Vilks Attack – the Entire Event
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbpyk1uHNWY
Lars Vilks & Pamela Geller:Stop Islamization of Nations’ International Freedom Congress
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOLyohv6r0U
Patrick Doyle – THOR (2011) – Soundtrack Suite