Here in a nutshell is the encounter between Postmodern Man and the Man given to ancient and ineluctable realities of human nature. One wants to talk it all out, the other wants to kill. That’s all there is to it. One thinks we ought to be able to rise above all that, and the other doesn’t want to.
The Christian leaders of the West are so fanatically committed to “dialogue” with Muslim leaders that they ruthlessly ostracize and silence anyone who dares speak about the reasons why Canon Andrew White’s people are being persecuted. White’s own experience with his dinner invitation, however, shows how futile and self-defeating that “dialogue” really is: it hasn’t saved a single Christian from persecution, or changed a single Muslim’s mind about the necessity to persecute Christians. White himself has no illusions: “You can’t negotiate with them. I have never said that about another group of people. These are really so different, so extreme, so radical, so evil.” But if he repeats that in the comfortable and complacent rectories of the West, he is liable to be charged with “Islamophobia.”
“Canon Andrew White: ‘Vicar of Baghdad’ on leading a church in Iraq and being in the crosshairs of Isis,” by Cole Moreton, Independent, November 1, 2015 (thanks to Lookmann):
They were coming for him and his people. Friends were being killed or fleeing for their lives. So Andrew White did what he always does when faced with an enemy. “I invited the leaders of Isis [Islamic State] for dinner. I am a great believer in that. I have asked some of the worst people ever to eat with me.”
This extraordinarily self-confident priest is best known as the vicar of Baghdad, leader of a church in the chaos outside the protected Green Zone. He made his offer last year as the terrorist forces threatened to take the city. Did he get a reply?
“Isis said, ‘You can invite us to dinner, but we’ll chop your head off.’ So I didn’t invite them again!”
And he roars with laughter, despite believing that Islamic State has put a huge price on his head, apparently willing to pay $157m (£100m) to anyone who can kill this harmless-looking eccentric. Canon White was a doctor before he became a priest and could be one still, in his colourful bow-tie and double-breasted blazer with a pocket square spilling silk. But appearances are deceptive.
For the last two decades, he has worked as a mediator in some of the deadliest disputes on Earth, in Israel and Palestine, Iraq and Nigeria. He has sat down to eat with terrorists, extremists, warlords and the sons of Saddam Hussein, with presidents and prime ministers.
White has been shot at and kidnapped, and was once held captive in a room littered with other people’s severed fingers and toes, until he talked his way out of it. He is an Anglican priest but was raised a Pentecostal and has that church’s gift of the gab, even though multiple sclerosis (MS) makes him drawl like a posh barfly. “When I went on Radio 4 talking about Baghdad there were complaints because they thought I was drunk. I wasn’t!”
MS also affects his vision and his balance, but he claims to have come up with his own way of keeping the symptoms down, by injecting his own stem cells. A big man with a boyish enthusiasm, he declares himself afraid of nothing, not even the direct threat to his life.
“They’ve not sent an email telling me it’s off,” says White, 50, chuckling and looking at his travelling companion Terry, a former policeman. How does it feel to have that price on his head? “It feels good.” Terry raises his eyebrows and mutters, “While the head’s attached.”
It’s knockabout stuff, but let’s put this in context. White reopened St George’s church after the invasion of Iraq even though civil war raged and the diplomats and ex-pats who had once made up the congregation no longer dared to go there.
Iraqis came instead, and the congregation reached a peak of 6,500. They built a school, a clinic and food bank. White pledged to stay even as the sound of bombs grew louder. “We had Isis on the doorstep of Baghdad last year. I said to my people, ‘I will not leave you; don’t leave me.’ But many did leave me and they went to Nineveh and Mosul. Isis were there too. There was total mayhem.”
More than 1,200 men, women and children who worshipped with him have been killed in recent years, he says. Four boys he knew were beheaded because they refused to swear allegiance to Islam. The church caretaker was forced to watch as his five-year-old boy was cut in half.
There used to be 1.5 million Christians in Iraq but now there are only 260,000, he says. Some are calling it genocide. Surely he no longer believes that negotiations with Isis could work? White stares at me from behind owlish spectacles. “Can I be honest? You are absolutely right. You can’t negotiate with them. I have never said that about another group of people. These are really so different, so extreme, so radical, so evil.”
So what is to be done? “We must try and continue to keep the door open. We have to show that there is a willingness to engage. There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.”
But surely there is only one logical conclusion to be drawn? He sighs, and answers slowly. “You are asking me how we can deal radically with Isis. The only answer is to radically destroy them. I don’t think we can do it by dropping bombs. We have got to bring about real change. It is a terrible thing to say as a priest.
“You’re probably thinking, ‘So you’re telling me there should be war?’ Yes!” …

Fr. Basil says
The Bible says we wrestle NOT against flesh and blood. The war with ISIS and mahometanism generally is a spiritual fight.
Christianblood says
The Holy Bible also says that: “…There is a time to plant and a time to uproot, a time to tear down and a time to build, a time to weep and a time to laugh, a time to mourn and a time to dance, a time to tear and a time to mend, a time for WAR and a time for peace, a time to love and a time to HATE, a time to heal and a time to KILL…” (Eccl 3).
wildjew says
No offense intended. I’m pretty sure my Bible says we wrestle against flesh and blood here on the earth. There is evil in the world; evil men whom we must fight (kill even) while we are here.
Christianblood says
Exactly! That what the scriptures that I quoted above says and you are right.
Jay Boo says
Christianblood
You put WAR, HATE, and KILL in all caps.
Whatever a person dwells upon is what controls them.
eduardo odraude says
Both sides in this comments thread are right. The State and Christian missionaries have two very different functions. The State when practicable should use physical force if necessary to defend people against aggression. By contrast, Christian missionaries are engaged solely in a spiritual war to persuade people to accept the gospel and Jesus Christ. To some extent there will naturally at times be some tension between the two roles, but Christians do not deny there is a place for the use of force.
Force is forbidden to Christians as a means to spread Christianity. It is not forbidden for Christians seeking to defend people against rapacious tyranny (like that of ISIS).
Christianblood says
In the Eastern Orthodox Christian world we deeply believe you have the option to KILL the evil people (muslims) who are attacking you but in the Western world they believe they should keep turning them to the other cheek..
Christianblood says
Jay Boo posted:
“…You put WAR, HATE, and KILL in all caps.
Whatever a person dwells upon is what controls them…”
I had to ‘Jay Boo’ because it is about time to WAR, HATE and Kill. What else will you DO Jay Boo??? The same political-correctness that I am sensing in this forum is the political-correctness that is ruling in America and in the Western world and untill we decide to fight BACK as indeis in alll its manifestations
Christianblood says
may apologies for my accidental bad words above. To finish my thoughts please read the next sentence:
until we decide to fight BACK as infidels with all possible means we CANNOT win THIS WAR and we will be defeated.
voegelinian says
Now I see Christianblood is one of those “Pass Go, Skip Deportation, Go Straight to War” — so either he is delimiting the problem to ISIS and other manifestations of the Tiny Minority of Extremists, or he is saying we must fight and kill over one billion people in 80 countries. If the latter, he also is a “Sky is Falling” Counter-Jihadist who believes we don’t have several decades to turn the Ship of State around from its Titanic course.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“Now I see Christianblood is one of those “Pass Go, Skip Deportation, Go Straight to War””
And you only saw that after endorsing him? Heck, that’s your whole problem with someone who clearly hates the West more than he hates muslims? That he’s not going to support your seditious nonsense?
خَليفة says
You make a valid point.
But, when you can no longer reason with someone who has stated they want to kill you, what do you do? Let them kill you or defend yourself?
The problem with Islam and “devoute” followers is you simply cannot reason with them – Islamic ideology is clear, you are not to question or criticize Islam. So if you ask how is it that Muhammed says the world is flat (like a rolled out pizza dough), and science has proven Earth is a spheroid, or you ask how is it that according to Muhammed, Alexander the Great went to the place on earth where the sun sets and the sun went into a puddle of water (on earth), or that Muhammed also said the sun orbits around the earth and the moon makes its own light – how do they respond? With dialog or “I keeeel you”?
According to Muhammed women make sperm in their ribs, the gender of a child is based on whether the father or mother has an orgasim first during copulation. Islamic texts also state it is easier to masturbate with a watermelon than your own hand. Islam also teaches you can have sex with animals, male or female, young or old, annus or vagina, alive or dead – the only thing is you need to wash yourself before you pray. WTF? Muhammed had sex with his dead aunt – he said it was to ease her passage into Janna – in 2012 Egypt passed a “farewell sex” law that allowed sex with dead wife up to 6 hours after death ( I believe this was later repealed, but under the sharia it would still be allowed ). Most Muslims probably don’t know this and if they did they would leave – but Muslims are taught to have faith in the imam – and not ask questions.
How do you reason with such twisted, perverted, brainwashed people?
eduardo odraude says
Christian missionaries have sometimes converted people one would think it impossible to convert.
About Christianity, the gospels provide two guidelines that I believe resolve the debate in this comments thread. 1. Christ forbade Christianity to be spread by force. 2. Governments however could use force to defend people against aggressors and tyranny. Thus Christians are not against all use of force.
Kepha says
Eduardo, I think you make very good points. It humbles and amazes me that the Gospel has now made inroads into the ethnic Turkish and Kurdish communities of SE Anatolia and in Kabylia–carried thither, apparently, by returning Gastarbeiter.
These are good times to consider both ROmans 12 and 13. Yes, we Christians are to build a peaceable community; but we must also respect that the state bears the sword to punish evildoers. I fear that the current crisis in the post-modern West is the state using its powers to encourage and protect evildoers while punishing that which is good.
خَليفة says
Kepha,
And don’t forget
Isaiah 5:20 ” Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! “
Kepha says
@Poster-with the-Arabic-Name (which I can’t even decode sorry :().
Isaiah 5:0 is very appropriate to the state of the post-Modern West. I am just superstitious enough to believe that a lot of the calling evil good that is being done by the MSM, governments, academia, and cultural figures in the West is one reason why the Islamic resurgence had gotten as far as it has.
But I would also remind any Jihadi ready to crow over this comment that there is also Isaiah 10, about the Assyrian monarch.
Mazo says
There is a significant population of hardcore Turkish and Kurdish Communist Marxists in Turkey. I do not see anything amazing or stange about foreign beliefs making a few converts.
kay says
Re: “There is a significant population of hardcore Turkish and Kurdish Communist Marxists in Turkey. I do not see anything amazing or stange about foreign beliefs making a few converts.”
________________________________________________
There are socialists, Communists, and Muslims among the Kurds.
But Christianity is NATIVE to Iraq and Turkey, NOT “foreign”. That is utter nonsense.
There are substantial reports that Kurds in Iraq have welcomed Yazidis and also Christians. There are claims ( via Walid Shoebat ) that Kurds kill Christians.
It is most unlikely that Communists are converted to Christianity. Usually Marxist-Leninists strongly oppose Christians. For example, in Spain. hundreds of Roman Catholic priests were slaughtered by the Marxists. I just read a very detailed account on the Spanish Revolution which details this.
Christianity is NOT foreign to Turkey. That is a STUPID statement contrary to history.
Islamic slaughter and oppression reduced a formerly large Christian population to almost nothing in Turkey. This occurred over many centuries. It was a gradual squeeze. Like this:
Liberty and Islam Cannot Coexist – STOP ISLAM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZp5mqVsjXA
The Ottoman Turk slaughter of the Armenians is well known and now well-documented in recent books. Between 800,000 and 1,1 million lives were lost in a few years during the early Twentieth Century. This was RECENT Sunni Islamist genocide against native Christian populations.
Similarly, Christianity is NOT foreign to Egypt. Same goes.
Clearly, Mazo is quite unfamiliar with the history of the Middle East.
The cure for that is here:
Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret, by Dr Bill Warner
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y
This is one of the most important video teachings on world history ever made. Also one of he most important videos on Islam. I have promoted it many times.
Sorry Mazo, you really have no idea of what you are talking about here. This is about Islam, Communism, Christianity and the Middle East. These are clearly not your strengths. You blunder here. Gotcha!
Mazo says
@Retarded moron
99% of Christian proselytizing in the Middle East is done by Protestants, who follow a foreign religion which is totally alien to the region.
The local Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Rite Catholics do not bother proselytizing or converting.
And these is no such thing as a “native Christian Turk” or “native Christian Kurd” who follow indigenous religions like Oriental Orthodoxy. There are Turkish speaking citizens of ethnic Greek origin who practice Orthodoxy, or Turkish/Kurdish apostates who converted to weird cults like Protestantism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Mormonism.
Its clear you don’t know jack about what I am talking about. I repeatedly made my point here before that Protestantism is foreign to the Middle East.
My point is that people in the region are open to different kinds of foreign ideologies and that converting a few people to your Protestant cult is not an accomplishment.
Many Kurds and Turks are even willing to die for Marxism. They used and still use suicide bombers.
Now go take a stick and sit on it. Use butthurt salve to easy the pain.
kay says
Re: “99% of Christian proselytizing in the Middle East is done by Protestants, who follow a foreign religion which is totally alien to the region.”
____________________________________
Protestants are Christian.
So was Paul of Tarsus. He was a Jew and a Roman citizen.
Ever hear of him?
Christianity, Protestantism, the Roman Catholic Church, and Orthodox Christianity derive from Paul of Tarsus, who actually visited and taught in Turkey, on the Mediterranean Coast.
Christianity is native to the Middle East. Even a fourteen year old should be able to understand that. I was in church choir as a young child and I knew the Rabbi Jesus hung out in places like Jerusalem. We had to carry palm fronds on Palm Sunday.
Similarly, Buddhism is native to India and Nepal and South Asia. The Islamofascists killed ten million or so Buddhists and Buddhism was extinguished in what we now call India. But Buddhism is still historically native to India and South Asia.
The BIZARRE nonsensical idea that (a) Protestant Christianity is either not Christianity or that (b) Christianity is not native to the Middle East is laughable and marks the claimant as a complete fool.
I typically find that carpet pilots are basically unable to argue. They often get things backward or upside down. This is simply one more such example.
The Koran is stupid. The Koran claims to continue and finalize the Abrahamic teaching, including that of the Rabbi Jesus, but of course does not.
Whatever the final status of the Rabbi Jesus, he was hung up on a cross. It is completely ridiculous for this sociopath/ psychopath Mohammed to claim that someone was “substituted” for Rabbi Jesus on the Cross.
These Muslims make no sense whatsoever. They reject the New Testament, rather than develop the theme of the New Testament. The Koran is a falsification of the Abrahamic tradition.
And you don’t have to be a theologian ( like me ) to work out that basic point. It’s just common sense.
Mohammed gave no EVIDENCE nor REASONING that Jesus did other than get himself crucified.
Therefore the unsubstantiated feeble CLAIM of Mohammed in the Koran is something that all reasonable people reject. Intelligent and reasonable people reject the Koran.
And arguing with a Muslim is like arguing with a small child, a small, ignorant, irrational combative child. As in this case. When Muslims try to “present an argument”, as here, they just embarrass themselves.
It’s just a lot of work.
I see no one here bothered to answer this fool.
In the future, please do defend the New Testament, you who are Christian. I have much else to do.
Jeremiah says
Deception is an artform in Islam. It is like Ju Jitsu to Japan. The best practitioner is Barack Hussein Obama. Whatever religion he claims to be, he was trained a muslim. He is an expert in taqiyya, holy deception. Watch his formula for deception when he is interviewed because all muslim academics use this formula. Regardless of the question, they change the question. Then they look for an irrelevant answer that cannot be immediately checked. Then they look for an insult that seems connected to the irrelevant answer. Then they do a dance around the microphone to emphasize that your question has now been totally discredited. By this time you are so distracted by the dishonesty and so challenged by the new topics that have suddenly been thrown into the arena that you are tempted to go off your topic. Whether you go on with your argument is not relevant because Obama has just created his own thread that he now takes to well practiced lines of deception. So it was better not to have started the argument in the first place. Rather than arguing just ask Obama what he is doing about the Christians in Syria and keep drawing him back to examples of abuse that everybody knows about. Keep it narrow.
kay says
That is not the discussion. The discussion is not about Barack Obama.
The discussion is where I destroy Mazo regarding indigenous Christianity in the Turkey and the Middle East.
Can we have some Christians deal with this guy? You shouldn’t need a Buddhist teacher to do this kinda stuff. I’m more than over-extended.
I’m hammering on Islamic State tight now in support of the Yazidis.
My Yazidi/ Islamic State just articles just reached about 160,000 people in Public Health and Politics groups. And elsewhere. I have a whole social media war to fight.
Please mind the shop.Thanks!
___________________________
Vian Dakhil was hopeful when Obama helped rescue thousands of Yazidis from ISIL a year ago. Her people now feel abandoned.
__Educational purposes asserted. No infringement intended. __
By Eliza Collins
10/07/15 (c) 2015 Politico.com
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/vian-dakhil-yazidi-iraq-barack-obama-help-abandoned-214513
In 2014, Vian Dakhil’s stirring plea for international intervention helped inspire President Barack Obama to order airstrikes and launch a humanitarian effort to rescue thousands of Yazidi Iraqis who were trapped on a mountainside under assault by Islamic State.
A year later, Dakhil, one of two Yazidi members of the Iraqi parliament, says her people have been abandoned by Washington and the international community.
In an emotional, at times tearful, on-stage interview at POLITICO’s “Women Rule” event Wednesday morning in Washington, Dakhil described a full-blown humanitarian crisis — 420,000 Yazidis living in refugee camps in tents with mud floors, women and girls continuing to be kidnapped, 2,200 girls in captivity as sexual slaves, and survivors returning from the horror of ISIL captivity with no resources for psychological support. Thousands of orphans have no homes.
Dakhil, who is credited with saving many Yazidi women and girls from ISIL captivity, said she was not contacted by U.S. officials after the initial announcement. A letter to Michelle Obama received no response, she said.
“We have 3,000 girls who are kidnapped in ISIS and we have 1,000 children between 3 to 10 years who are separated from their families and kept in the special school,” she said. “We don’t know what happened to those children, sometimes we see photos about those children, the girls with the black scarf with the hijab, and the boys with the scarf [gestures to head], they learn how to fight.”
“I tell all the people we need help, please. I can’t do everything alone. We need someone to help us,” Dakhil said as she began to cry.
After the event Wednesday, Dakhil and her sister, Deelan Dakhil, a medical doctor who treats refugees and survivors of ISIL captivity, went to Capitol Hill to meet with lawmakers. They are also setting up a U.S.-based charitable foundation to raise money for Yazidi refugees.
Mazo says
Protestanism was invented by John Calvin and Martin Luther and bears no chain of authority, real or imagined, for its teachings back to Jesus and his apostles.
Unless Calvin claimed to be a prophet then his teachings are worthless since they have no real or imagined divine sanction. This is why people in the west become non religious.
kay says
Re Mazo: “Protestanism was invented by John Calvin and Martin Luther and bears no chain of authority, real or imagined, for its teachings back to Jesus and his apostles.”
____________________________________
No, you got it wrong. Martin Luther was a trained Christian theologian. Mohammed the Desert Pirate was NOT. You got it backwards.
It is Mohammed the Desert Pirate who COMPLETELY LACKS a chain of authority.
Mohammed the Desert Pirate had no connection to Jewish or Christian traditions. That is the whole point.
He was never qualified to discuss the Jewish or Christian traditions.
And the more you fight the more you lose, loser.
Your humiliation is permanent and global. Grin grin.
Mazo says
@dumbass
Muhammad is the last Prophet and Messenger of God to Muslims, and he is someone who claimed prophecy to non-Muslims.
The Pope is the successor to St Peter upon whom Christ said he would build his Church according to Catholics. Spiritual succession leading back directly to Jesus.
Martin Luther nor John Calvin claimed prophecy. They were not prophets. They were men who invented their own religions which have zero legitimacy in terms of connection to Jesus.
FYI Vian Dakhil and the Yazidis demanded that Protestant missionaries fuck off.
Even the Mormon Joseph Smith founded a more real religion than them since he claimed prophecy and that he got his religion and book from God.
You’re are charlatan and a retarded.
voegelinian says
It’s both a spiritual fight and a physical fight — unless you don’t believe in preventing women and children from being raped, tortured, and massacred in the name of a supremacist ideology with plans to destroy our society and conquer us…
kay says
That is a given.
And Vladimir Putin of Russia is now getting the job done.
He is protecting the lives of two million Orthodox Christians and others.
With force of arms.
Pacifism is of no use when dealing with sociopathic and psychopathic carpet pilots.
Basically in some major scenarios it comes down to kill or be killed.
This is acceptable in terms of situation ethics.
All Buddhists are situation ethics people and I am too. Since seventh grade.
Fighting and killing is sometimes necessary to protect the lives of children.
Any twelve year old can see that. So does the Dalai Lama.
Not hard to understand.
Islamofascists reject all the principles of the Amended Geneva Convention on Warfare.
Save ALL the children. As much as possible. Let the bloodbath begin. Smash these criminally insane jihadis. Do it for the kids and for civilization.
No bad karma.
DeMolay says
Wow. Total respect to this guy!
voegelinian says
Interesting how this article on Canon White — preceded by a lengthy editorial remark by Robert Spencer finding fault with Canon White — seems to have elicited numerous nonce-commenters whose nicknames I’ve never seen before, evidently lurkers who’ve been reading Jihad Watch for a while but never found anything worth their time to comment on — until now, in order to register their wholehearted admiration for this flamboyantly starry-eyed priest whose Christian Wilsonian stars in his eyes apparently prevent him from seeing that Sunni Muslim leaders are every bit as evil as ISIS is.
Moses says
NEVER negotiate with terrorists at all times
Karen says
The good priest is in favor of destroying ISIS? Good! A priest should be in favor of destroying evil. Very unusual to see such clarity.
Unfortunately, ISIS isn’t evil enough for Mr. Truedeau to fight, even after they cut a 5 year old in half. (Ho hum, they must have had a good reason.) And Mr. Obama plays expensive, incremental games and accomplishes nothing. What a legacy he’ll have, along with GWB.
Jay Boo says
Image Control
President Obama does not wish to give the impression of being at war with Muslims — any Muslims especially those who target Christians with genocide because that would risk him being called a Crusader against Islam.
.
Instead, he postures that he is (aiding) the good “true Muslims” in battle against extremists who are supposedly misinterpreting Islam.
Putin has recently exposed Obama’s game plan and now Obama is scrambling to double down to cover up his neglect.
Karen says
Perfect summary!
celticwarriorcanada says
Unlike islam, Faith in the Judeao Christian Tradition is compatible with and includes commonsense and reason ! Though I admire this Church Leaders Courage and his desire to put into practice some basic Biblical Principles , the Wisdom of God is needed to help one decide Whether they are Really Exercising Faith Or whether they are SIMPLY PRESUMING ON GOD’S GRACE . Sometimes God calls us to Radical ACTS OF LOVE AND MERCY SO Who Am I To JUDGE GOD’S SERVANT! On the other hand Jesus warned his disciples NOT TO CAST THEIR PEARLS BEFORE THE SWINE !
Jaladhi says
Vrery true response by ISIS but the dub Vicar and our leaders will never believe Muslims when they even warm them of their intent to behead you!! How dumb, stupid, moron one can be??
Benedict says
What is it with these Christian clergy.They are going over on the hospitality bit. Around the world Christians are being persecuted and they act all foolish. They need to wake up.
Jay Boo says
All the same I applaud this man’s bravery while other clergy in much safer environments in the West offer politically correct platitudes and suggest this has nothing to do with “their religion”
His options are limited.
celticwarriorcanada says
I agree Benedict ! So much of mainstream Christianity Especially at home here in the west , has become so diluted with Pietism and Cultural Marxism ! The Late Great Christian Philosopher Francis Schaffer deals with this in great depth in many of his books . His book, A Christian Manifesto , has alot of good advice for Christians facing todays challenges . Perhaps You’ve already read it ! I recommend it for all Christian who are frustrated with the Therapeutic Pietism which has come to dominate so much of Christianity today !
Kepha says
Greetings Celtic–from ethnically mixed.
As another who respects the memory of Francis Schaeffer, I’m not so sure that I would mention Pietism and cultural Marxism in the same breath. While there is a strain in Pietism that thinks it can be holier than God himself, I admit to a profound respect for its stress on working out the implications of salvation in one’s personal life. This must not be neglected even when proclaiming the social and political implications of the Gospel.
As for cultural Marxism, it’s an infamy and one of the monsters in the land that needs a good, round pebble smacking it at high velocity right between the eyes. My unhappy tendency towards Schadenfreude snickers at the cultural Marxist casual blasphemers starting to mind their p’s and q’s before Islam, which they know in their hearts of hearts to be an utterly despicable religion. However, I realize that the more important task is reminding the world that the Left’s moral equivalence games are in fact morally irresponsible and intellectually lazy.
eduardo odraude says
The missionary for Christianity is only foolish to the extent that he claims force is never justified. But few Christian missionaries claim that. They claim rather that force is never justified to convert people to Christ. They usually accept that governments can and should use force where practicable to defend people from aggressive tyranny, regardless of what religion or non-religion perpetrates it. There is often some tension between the two very different approaches (physical war and spiritual war), but few Christians deny that each has some legitimate place depending on the circumstances.
el cid says
“For the last two decades, he has worked as a mediator in some of the deadliest disputes on Earth, in Israel and Palestine, Iraq and Nigeria. ”
Hah. As usual, Israel and Palestine is there. In comparison to many other conflicts, it is NOTHING.
Relentless propaganda.
cs says
I have seen a doc in vice with this guy, at least he is brave, and he takes a lot of risks, he was almost killed by a bomb. He is not sitting in an armchair talking about what he doesn’t know, he acts. But anyway he is deluded.
Jay Boo says
You are correct that “He is not sitting in an armchair talking about what he doesn’t know, he acts.”
But he is not deluded.
He said, ““You can’t negotiate with them. I have never said that about another group of people. These are really so different, so extreme, so radical, so evil.”
By offering dialog and dinner to which ISIS rudely declined he can then make the case that they are “so different, so extreme, so radical, so evil” as opposed to his somewhat more moderate Muslim neighbors. It is a simultaneous appeal to Muslim vanity although It is no guarantee that some of his Muslim neighbors won’t turn on him his options are very limited.
cs says
You are right.
Peter Hyatt says
I know that calling for Islam to go through reformation sounds appealing, but if it experiences a reformation, the results will be unbearable, as it turns back to “pure” Islam as taught by the Koran.
http://analysistomorrow.blogspot.com/2015/11/reformation-of-islam-brings-death.html
spot on says
My hat is off to this very courageous guy. However, ISIS consists of highly programmed and motivated cold blooded killers. They are like predictable Islamic killer robots but they can be stopped only by killing them. Kindness will not work. Islamic killer robots are programmed to see kindness as weakness. Only their death and not ours will bring peace. I applaud this pastor for trying in his own way to sooth the robotic like evil beast in them.
voegelinian says
“My hat is off to this very courageous guy.”
There are behaviors that may resemble courage, but are actually folly (it is a staple of seasoned military servicemen as well as policemen that rational fear is a part of true courage, and they appropriately look askance at the type of man who seems almost pathologically fearless in battle). Canon White’s folly is the same mainstream PC MC folly that is endangering all our lives and has already gotten millions unnecessarily killed (not to mention all the mayhem, destructions of infrastructure, disease, and dislocations that have ensued). Someone famous I believe once said, The road to Jihad is paved with good intentions….
Jay Boo says
I knew it would not be long until voeggy chimed in to remind us that the glass is half empty.
This man does not have the luxury of criticizing Islam as the root of the problem while sitting back in a Lazy-Boy brand recliner while sipping cappuccinos,
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“Canon White’s folly”
Gonna have to stop you right there, voeg. I know you enjoy being in the warmth of your basement, sipping a cup of coffee along with a bottle of laxatives so you can easily s*** on the people you, the self-proclaimed ideological leader of JW and the CJ movement, deem “unworthy”. But this man does not have that luxury. Unlike you, he faces death on a regular basis, and he acts accordingly and with the best interests of his community in mind. And yet, you, on your ideological purge, are willing to throw him under the bus, probably because he’s not clamoring for “total deportation” of ALL muslims in Iraq. This is a man that has a large bounty on his head because of his “folly”, but still that’s not enough for you, is it? You would have the people in the West that should be supporting him hating on him for no other reason that he doesn’t abide by your rules – have you no shame whatsoever? No boundaries, no limits?
Godless says
Typical of Angemon to zoom in so he can defend a Christian leader who said “We must try and continue to keep the door open. We have to show that there is a willingness to engage. There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.”
A member of the counter-Jihad going to Jihad Watch comments section in order to defend a person who says there are “good Sunni leaders” and advocating a dialogue with Muslims. This is disturbing and surreal yet typical for the counter-Jihad.
Angemon said “Unlike you, he faces death on a regular basis, and he acts accordingly and with the best interests of his community in mind.”
So Angemon thinks attempting to have a dialogue with Muslims is in the best interest of White’s community. This contradicts Spencer saying “White’s own experience with his dinner invitation, however, shows how futile and self-defeating that “dialogue” really is: it hasn’t saved a single Christian from persecution, or changed a single Muslim’s mind about the necessity to persecute Christians.”
Yet Angemon routinely bitches about how Voeg has criticized Spencer in the past. I don’t understand Angemon. It is ok to disagree with Spencer but we should never talk about it? WTF?
Angemon says
voeg’s mouthpiece posted, using a clearly voegelinian-esque speech:
“Typical of Angemon to zoom in so he can defend a Christian leader who said “We must try and continue to keep the door open. We have to show that there is a willingness to engage. There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.””
Give me, oh, I don’t know, 5 links of where I did such a thing. You said it’s typical, so that should pose no problem for you, right? If, however, you’re lying and trying to defame me…
And apparently, even though several other posters made remarks similar to mine, both voeg and his mouthpiece Godless focus on mine and claim I’m the one who “zoomed in”. Projection, thy name is voegelinian and Godless!
“A member of the counter-Jihad going to Jihad Watch comments section in order to defend a person who says there are “good Sunni leaders” and advocating a dialogue with Muslims. This is disturbing and surreal yet typical for the counter-Jihad.”
And you say that having read my comments and the article – Mr. White said the following:
Of course, that just goes to prove that honest discourse is alien to you. And, of course, you give no alternative as for what Mr. White, the leader of a Christian community that’s a minority in a muslim-majority land, should do – you simply try to tar the whole CJ movement, from which you’re apparently excluding yourself from, with a broad brush. But I guess that’s not a problem for someone who thinks that the majority of the CJ movement are “fucktards” with a “strange brain impediment”…
“So Angemon thinks attempting to have a dialogue with Muslims is in the best interest of White’s community.”
Do you offer any alternative for a community that’s a minority in a muslim majority land other than trying to find a muslim leader with a pragmatic view that lets them live in peace? Of course not – you’re simply interested in throwing mud in my general direction and hoping anything sticks, undoubtedly as it was ordered by voeg.
“This contradicts Spencer saying “White’s own experience with his dinner invitation, however, shows how futile and self-defeating that “dialogue” really is: it hasn’t saved a single Christian from persecution, or changed a single Muslim’s mind about the necessity to persecute Christians.””
The irony here is that voegelinian, who spent the last decade or so trying to discredit Robert Spencer, is now reduced to have his mouthpiece use Robert Spencer’s words as a shield.
“Yet Angemon routinely bitches about how Voeg has criticized Spencer in the past.”
Tsk, tsk – that remark was tailor made to make me look bad. It, however, has no connection with reality. Voeg has not “criticized” Mr. Spencer. He has ascribed him all manners of outrageous words that prompted reactions such as:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/07/jihadi-john-flees-the-islamic-state#comment-1274017
I wouldn’t call lying about other people “criticism”, I’d call it “lying about other people”. Then again, I like to use correct and accurate language to describe things as they are.
“I don’t understand Angemon.”
Well, there’s only so much I can go back in the evolutionary tree, so it’s up to you to step your game – I shouldn’t have to devolve to match the intellectual prowess Ior lack thereof) of what amounts to a parrot.
“It is ok to disagree with Spencer but we should never talk about it? WTF?”
Disagreeing with Mr. Spencer is one thing, ascribing him all manner of outrageous claims like voeg likes to do to deride and discredit him is another.
Jay Boo says
Godless
Allow me to interrupt your BS
All your points are meaningless slight of hand drivel because you are a PHONY.
Godless says
“All your points are meaningless slight of hand drivel because you are a PHONY.”
You are just asserting that without explaining any errors with my points.
Your ad hominem attack on me is a logical error in your reasoning. Try again.
Angemon says
voeg’s mouthpiece posted:
“You are just asserting that without explaining any errors with my points.”
Lol! This is like having Captain Hook complaining about other people being pirates with a hook for a hand!
Jay Boo says
Just checking Godless
Other than that moniker, you sound — exactly like voeg
Godless says
Oh Angemon thought the same thing before but when he realized I am a friend of Voeg’s he denied that he ever accused me of being his sock puppet.
How bizarre that the counter-Jihad comments section on Jihad Watch is so full of denial that my lack of softness makes people think I must be Voeg. It is a depressing disgrace. I hope and suspect that other people agree with us and just lack the courage to say so because of this silly high school social pecking order, although that would be a shame too.
I am failing to see how that matters at all though Jay Boo. Even if I was a phony a person’s identity and character are irrelevant. You aren’t addressing the argument. A Muslim could point out the same things I did to the counter-Jihad. The Muslim wouldn’t be wrong merely because he is a Muslim.
Like I said, your ad hominem attack is a logical error in your reasoning. So tell me where and why I am wrong. You won’t accept the full reality of the problem of Islam because you don’t have the stomach for the ramifications of it.
*Anticipating Angemon’s reply*
Angemon says
voeg’s mouthpiece posted:
“Oh Angemon thought the same thing before but when he realized I am a friend of Voeg’s he denied that he ever accused me of being his sock puppet.”
This is, of course, a lie – I stated several times that I couldn’t tell whether Godless was voeg under another username or simply a brainless moron taking cues from voeg. I also stated it made no difference – in the end, it’s just a user parroting voeg’s propaganda to the point they’re indistinguishable.
What happened was that I pointed out so overwhelmingly the similarities between Godless and voeg that they had no choice but to spill the beans: voeg recruited Godless on PalTalk to come to JW and harass me.
“How bizarre that the counter-Jihad comments section on Jihad Watch is so full of denial that my lack of softness makes people think I must be Voeg. ”
No, people associate you with voeg because, like I said, you parrot his speech to a point you become indistinguishable from him. I.e., to the point where it doesn’t matter if you’re another person or reading from cards written by voeg.
“It is a depressing disgrace.”
No, voeg’s behaviour is a disgrace – he harassed people via email to get them to shout-down his critics here. And when that failed, he went on PalTalk to get someone gullible enough to do just that. Voeg stated that most people here are “fucktards”, you never disagreed with him on that – if you don’t like it, no one is forcing either of you to stay.
“I hope and suspect that other people agree with us and just lack the courage to say so because of this silly high school social pecking order, although that would be a shame too.”
The so-called “silly high school social pecking order” originated with voeg. He’s the one trying to shame anyone bearing a different opinion.
“I am failing to see how that matters at all though Jay Boo. ”
Apparently it matters enough for you to lie about it.
“Even if I was a phony a person’s identity and character are irrelevant. You aren’t addressing the argument.”
The irony here is that you’ve been gunning for my character ever since you came here. Can you say “dual standards”?
“You won’t accept the full reality of the problem of Islam because you don’t have the stomach for the ramifications of it. ”
Translation: if you don’t wholeheartedly agree with voeg’s seditious “total deportation” nonsense, you don’t get “accept the full reality of the problem of Islam“. Of course, you fail to realize that that logic is self-defeating. Because you’re not a very bright person.
spot on says
Vorgelinian, While it may seem to be folly, I expect to see some PC MC from a “Man of God”, especially these days. However when I see it from anyone else, I consider it folly. Canon White to me seems to be a courageous man of the cloth. He is willing to sacrifice his life in the name of his faith, which is the world where he lives. His realm is not of this world.
Journalists and most of us do not run a church and we DO live in this world and hopefully have respect or faith for the next. I do expect all others to be more practical like the rest of us. ISIS fighters are robotic killers and need to be killed. I say “robotic” because they do not have any tiny trace of a human heart or spirit. They are driven only by a lust for sex and power. They are barbarian savages of the worst kind and must be annihilated.
Godless says
“While it may seem to be folly, I expect to see some PC MC from a “Man of God”, especially these days. However when I see it from anyone else, I consider it folly.”
So Canon White should be excused from being criticized for his PC MC bullshit because he is a “Man Of God”?
“Canon White to me seems to be a courageous man of the cloth. He is willing to sacrifice his life in the name of his faith, which is the world where he lives.”
Interesting he is “courageous” enough to die but too cowardly to fully condemn Islam for fear of being viewed as a bigot.
May his god grant him the courage to accept reality.
gravenimage says
I have to agree with Voegelinian here. This is folly on Canon White’s part, and though I’m sure he does not intend it, such folly does *not* serve his threatened parishioners.
This is what Robert Spencer says, as well. This, from his comments on the story, above:
“The Christian leaders of the West are so fanatically committed to ‘dialogue’ with Muslim leaders that they ruthlessly ostracize and silence anyone who dares speak about the reasons why Canon Andrew White’s people are being persecuted. White’s own experience with his dinner invitation, however, shows how futile and self-defeating that ‘dialogue’ really is: it hasn’t saved a single Christian from persecution, or changed a single Muslim’s mind about the necessity to persecute Christians.”
I know one might also suggest that such an approach is particularly Christian on Canon White’s part–but surely his main focus should be on the protection, as much as is possible, of the threatened members of his vulnerable flock?
voegelinian says
“This is folly on Canon White’s part, and though I’m sure he does not intend it…”
Most if not all starry-eyed Wilsonian dreamers (whether they be secularists or of the modern Christian variety like Canon White) don’t intend the disastrous harm their good intentions are paving the way for.
“I know one might also suggest that such an approach is particularly Christian on Canon White’s part–but surely his main focus should be on the protection, as much as is possible, of the threatened members of his vulnerable flock?”
The only possible logical (but not necessarily moral – or Christian, for that matter) justification Canon White’s modern Christian-Wilsonian recklessness — which puts the Gospel According to Andrew (White) above the physical and emotional well-being of his flock — would be some otherworldly eschatological ethos which would be the mirror image of the Taliban’s recent argument that the Muslim schoolchildren they killed are all now “in Paradise”, so it’s all good, Jihad-wise.
spot on says
There are many bonifide “men of God” who believe that their lives are very literally in the hands of God at all times. They believe that God will protect them. They believe that good will always win over evil without question. I don’t know about Canon White but he may be of that frame of mind. This is why I raise the exception in his case and I gave him the benefit of the doubt. We need more sincere pastors who are real men of faith. We need them now more than ever before due to the favoritism of Islam by Western Governments. Devoted Christians are the most likely to fight hard against the Muslims. Secularists do not understand the Muslim enemy.
kay says
Re: “Secularists do not understand the Muslim enemy.”
__________________________________________
Fat chance fella. Fat chance. Actually, the secularists REALLY understand The Enemy. I use both Christian and New Atheist sources. And very effectively.
Ever hear of Douglas Murray? Caroline Fourest? Richard Dawkins? Sam Harris?
These are major players. They are some of the top people in counter-jihad. I rely heavily on their work. I promote their work and find their work indispensable. They are all 100% hard core secularists, and so am I.
If you want to condemn these people, please find someone half as good. That won’t be Pope Francis.
Actually, it is only the secularists who really understand what is important and necessary. Thomas Jefferson was a secularist. The United States is a secular republic by its very foundation.
Secularism does NOT mean anti-religion. It does NOT mean anti-clerical.
Secularism DOES mean anti-theocracy.
And that’s the only way you get an anti-Sharia position. Nothing else works.
Having studied the Dalai Lama writings and his book “Beyond Belief”, I am very clear on the fact that he emphasizes the importance of a universal secular ethic. And altho Thomas Jefferson was anti-clerical, he would have really connected with the Dalai Lama. Guaranteed.
If you want to go up against any of the people I just mentioned, then have at it. I will fight tooth and nail for secularism and for free speech. It may seem self-contradictory for me to be both a cleric/ theologian and also anti-clerical, but I’m only HALF anti-clerical. I just oppose a few groups, like the Vatican, and Sharia law types..
I studied Dr Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and even the original Martin Luther.
Listen very carefully. I can shred the Islamic Scholar Dr. Tariq Ramadan. I figured out the overall approach all out by myself.
And I know how to testify it. Rock and roll is my religion, and Jess Greenberg is an angel I just found today. After hanging out some more with the frog Caroline Fourest.
We’re on a mission from God.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4YrCFz0Kfc
Highway to hell – AC/DC (cover) Jess Greenberg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2RZXeQc5HU
Over the Rainbow – Eva Cassidy (cover) Jess Greenberg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE8Fe5czRE0
Stairway To Heaven – Led Zeppelin (cover) Jess Greenberg
Jay Boo says
Extrapolation to a leap.
I do not see that Robert Spencer is throwing Canon White under the bus as some commenters here are smugly gleefully doing.
Canon White and “The Christian leaders of the West” are not one being.
voegelinian says
Surely he no longer believes that negotiations with Isis could work? “…You are absolutely right. You can’t negotiate with them. I have never said that about another group of people. These are really so different, so extreme, so radical, so evil.”
So what is to be done? “We must try and continue to keep the door open. We have to show that there is a willingness to engage. There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.”
There we go, at last. The bolded portion is the PC MC spasm that’s behind all this buffoon’s unbelievably reckless Christian Wilsonianism. It is the same spasm we find in myriad varieties, but all the same at bottom, in all Westerners — PC MCs and Counter-Jihad Softies — who can’t fully assimilate the indigestible horror of the Islam all Muslims support (except for the ones we can’t adequately distinguish and so shouldn’t base Muslim Roulette policy banking on their viable existence).
Jay Boo says
“There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.”
—————————————————————————————
If that sentence offends you voegelinian, then go to Bagdad and tell all the Sunni leaders that they are just like ISIS and make sure your life insurance and will are up to date.
Sometimes your lack of empathy borders on being sociopathic egotism.
gravenimage says
Jay Boo wrote:
“There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.”
—————————————————————————————
If that sentence offends you voegelinian, then go to Bagdad and tell all the Sunni leaders that they are just like ISIS and make sure your life insurance and will are up to date.
………………………….
Jay Boo-with respect–if “good” Sunni leaders would, as you imply, violently turn on anyone who questioned their lack of violence, then perhaps this proves the point that their “goodness” does not run very deep, and cannot be relied upon.
Indeed, it is important to note that Christians were being attacked, kidnapped, driven out, and their churches bombed well *before* ISIS ever appeared on the scene.
voegelinian says
JayBoo isn’t necessarily disputing the eminently reasonable assumption we in the Counter-Jihad would make that Sunni leaders are in fact as evil as ISIS (isn’t the Counter-Jihad the only place on Allah’s green Earth, after all, that is bold enough to say that “ISIS is Islam”….?); what he’s doing is pestering me with a peripheral point – namely, that since Canon White has chosen to risk his neck shepherding his flock smack dab in the raging maelstrom of the Jaws of an Islamic hellhole, he should be excused for telling an interviewer a lie about Sunni Muslim leaders. Apparently, JayBoo doesn’t think such a statement as Canon White made could be sincere, but must be Canon White saying what he has to say, given his daily precarious situation. However, this seems rather paradoxical – for if we are to praise Canon White’s singular courage, why are we now turning around and excusing him for cowering behind such a monstrous lie for fear of his life? (For one thing, that doesn’t jibe with Canon White’s record of years of eccentric, reckless behavior where he’s risked his life countless times among criminals, madmen and terrorists – so why should he be afraid of Sunni leaders in his neck of the woods now?
At any rate, JayBoo’s little spasm there of pestering me (analogous to a snotty kid in the back row shooting a spit wad at the back of some other kid’s head a few seats in front of him) is a species of specious logical fallacy; for whether I would be willing or unwilling to risk my neck in Baghdad by publicizing the notion that Sunni Muslim leaders there (and elsewhere) are as evil as ISIS is not relevant or pertinent to whether what I said is true or not – that such a statement is a disastrous lie that perpetuates the Wilsonian insanity about a facile, spuriously fictitious distinction “moderate Muslims” and “extremist Muslims” that is increasingly endangering the entire West.
voegelinian says
“…for whether I would be willing or unwilling to risk my neck in Baghdad by publicizing the notion that Sunni Muslim leaders there (and elsewhere) are as evil as ISIS is not relevant or pertinent to whether what I said is true or not …”
And as the great William F. Buckley (PBUH) used to say: If I, like Canon White, had said that “Sunni Muslim leaders are not evil like ISIS”, I would be just as disastrously wrong as Canon White is. (Another way of demonstrating that JayBoo’s jab is a fallacy — a species of ad hominem, I believe, though I suspect there’s some more specific term for it.)
Jay Boo says
gravenimage
You missed my point which was not about that sentence but about voeg’s deliberately overlooking the context of his situation and dismissing this person as not meeting his official rubber stamp of anti-jihad. I find it a bit hypocritical of voeg to play the victim of ad hominem when that is precisely what he is doing to Mr White.
Jay Boo says
also gravenimage,
if you read what I actually wrote you will see that I don’t believe that Sunni leaders are to be trusted despite what voeg may wish to — (imply)
Godless says
“Jay Boo-with respect–if “good” Sunni leaders would, as you imply, violently turn on anyone who questioned their lack of violence, then perhaps this proves the point that their “goodness” does not run very deep, and cannot be relied upon.”
GravenImage you couldn’t have said this better.
Jay Boo is now denying that attacking Voeg for saying what he did about Sunni leaders meant that he disagreed. It doesn’t matter thought because Jay Boo’s defense of White really stems from his impulse to indirectly defend the Ummah.
Also if White really fully grasped the problem and was just saying what he did out of fear in order to appease Sunni leaders then it doesn’t make sense the invited ISIS to dinner in the first place.
voegelinian says
Canon White was a doctor before he became a priest and could be one still, in his colourful bow-tie and double-breasted blazer with a pocket square spilling silk…
For the last two decades, he has worked as a mediator in some of the deadliest disputes on Earth, in Israel and Palestine, Iraq and Nigeria. He has sat down to eat with terrorists, extremists, warlords…
…
“We must try and continue to keep the door open. We have to show that there is a willingness to engage. There are good Sunni leaders; they are not all evil like Isis.” — Canon White
Canon White is also a distinguished senior member of that international group of starry-eyed neo-Wilsonian do-gooders (many of whom have indeed been abducted by ISIS and tortured and/or beheaded) — Dhimmis Without Borders.
Angemon says
S***ting on those better than him – how typical of voegelinian. And, of course, to fit his narrative, he purposely left out the last part of the article:
voegelinian says
Is gravenmiage noticing how Angemon is pestering me on this thread? This is nothing new. It’s been going on for two fucking years now. Has she noticed the countless other times he has pestered me on countless other threads over the years — far more times than I have made little jabs at him by name in comments I’ve written? If so, why does she only chide me for my jabs but never Angemon? What’s up with that?
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“Is gravenmiage noticing how Angemon is pestering me on this thread?”
Right, the problem is not that you’re, as usual, s****ting on those better than you, the problem is that me (and a few other users) called you out on that. What you want is the same as muslims: you want to be awarded a special status that exempts you from criticism.
“This is nothing new. It’s been going on for two fucking years now.”
You’ve been saying that for what, 10, 11 months now? Where are the posts dating back to 2013? I’ve asked this back in January/February, and still haven’t heard from you on that one.
“Has she noticed the countless other times he has pestered me on countless other threads over the years —”
Where “pester” is your doublespeak for “criticism” or “questions”. In any case, you’ve asked this before. What was her answer then, and why do you feel you’re entitled to a different one now?
“far more times than I have made little jabs at him by name in comments I’ve written?”
Where “little jabs” is your doublespeak for “attempted character assassination”. You go out of your way to lie about, and misrepresent me to the point of slander. Because, apparently, I’m important enough for you to try to discredit.
“If so, why does she only chide me for my jabs but never Angemon? What’s up with that?”
Said the career criminal to the judge “why don’t you ever take my word over the word of law-abiding citizens and members of the police force? Why? WHY?!?!?!”. Your question can’t be answered because it relies on a false premise. Well, more than one, but the most obvious is that your whole narrative relies on a false equivalence between what you say to me and what I say to you. If I ever start going out of my way to gratuitously insult you out of nowhere with the outrageous, unsubstantiated crap you fling on my general direction on a regular basis, I expect GI to tell me what she tells you – that your insults are gratuitous, uncalled for and don’t help your case in any way or fashion. But I don’t do that, do I? No, I inquire you about what you say, and you simply can’t have that, can you? You recently stated that most people here are “fucktards”. Do you stand by that?
cremaster says
Didn’t you read the article? He is suffering from MS, which will also certainly kill him so he’s a man with little or nothing to lose.
He probably does have an irrational, do-gooderish side to him, it’s true, but when it matters he can face the enemy down, albeit with words only. How many of us would have the courage to do that, dying or not? We are living in a terminally ill political system and we have yet to behave so courageously…but we will have to in the near future.
voegelinian says
As I indicated above, Canon White’s lese-majesté is his conviction that Sunnis leaders are somehow not evil as ISIS is. His other flamboyantly eccentric behavior is less important. On a related note, I find it amusing that I’m being pecked at by the Softies for basically saying (and extrapolating from) what Spencer says in his editorial analysis up top.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“On a related note, I find it amusing that I’m being pecked at by the Softies for basically saying (and extrapolating from) what Spencer says in his editorial analysis up top.”
AH, always trying to ride Mr. Spencer’s tailcoat, eh, voeg? In any case, no, you’re saying the opposite of what Mr. Spencer says.
What Mr. Spencer wrote:
Here’s one of the things you wrote about Mr. White:
Now, I don’t see Mr. Spencer calling Mr. White a “buffoon”. Do you, voeg?
Angemon says
He seems to be a very eloquent and persuasive speaker, I’ll give him that.
It is. It is also the only alternative.
Mirren10 says
“You are asking me how we can deal radically with Isis. The only answer is to radically destroy them. I don’t think we can do it by dropping bombs. We have got to bring about real change.”
The only answer is to destroy them but he doesn’t think that can be done by dropping bombs.
So what’s his answer ? He doesn’t appear to have one.
Angemon says
My guess is something along the lines of “boots on the ground”. His final remark is ““You’re probably thinking, ‘So you’re telling me there should be war?’ Yes!”“. My understanding of that is that he’s acknowledging that the US/EU bombing runs aren’t working and something more must be . Something, I’d risk saying, along the lines of what Saint Augustine and Thomas Aquinas called “just war”.
j_not_a says
“You are asking me how we can deal radically with Isis. The only answer is to radically destroy them. I don’t think we can do it by dropping bombs. We have got to bring about real change. It is a terrible thing to say as a priest.
Radically destroy them how then? He doesn’t propose a solution as to how to bring about his “real change” after calling them radical, evil, impossible to dialogue with. Why does he bother to “keep trying” then? You know, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over…. yada yada
I think he has a “messiah complex” and is also addicted to the rush from all the danger and intrigue. And he is most definitely gay as the day is long – one look at his picture is all I needed.
dumbledoresarmy says
If you want to assert that he is gay, you had better face the fact that he is *married* with two children, and most definitely *not* divorced, though due to the danger of his current activities, his family are based in England.
From his wiki entry, which you could have found out, if you had bothered to look:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_White_(priest)
“…He was ordained in 1990,[5] and became a curate at St Mark’s, Battersea Rise in the Diocese of Southwark. During his time at Southwark White had his first appearance on TV when was interviewed on the street by a member of the That’s Life! team.
“He first saw his wife from the pulpit when she was in the congregation, and when six weeks later he asked her to marry him, she initially said “maybe”. He later became a vicar of the Church of the Ascension, Balham Hill in the same diocese…”.
“At the age of 33 years, Andrew was examined for poor vision and balance problems about six weeks after he became a canon at Coventry Cathedral.
“He was hospitalised, and a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis was given to him on the same day his second son was born. Being in the same hospital as his wife, he was able to attend the birth.
“His wife and two sons live in the southeast of England.
Canon Andrew has five adopted Iraqi children.” END QUOTE
Rather than reading his dress and demeanour as indicating homosexuality, why not read them as denoting “here is an eccentric English person”.
gravenimage says
Yes–as I’ve noted above, I’ve never seen anything that would indicate that Canon White is gay.
Given how free spoken he is in general, I very much doubt he would stay “in the closet” if he *were* homosexual.
voegelinian says
Well, he could lie about his closet homosexuality just as he has lied about Sunni Muslim leaders not being as evil as ISIS. (Or he actually sincerely believes the latter — which would be arguably worse than lying about it…)
Kepha says
DDA–Thanks for the info. While I respect what Canon White is doing, indeed, I respect the man himself, I confess that I haven’t really followed him online or anything like that.
And I appreciated the quip about Mr. White being “another eccentric English person”.
gravenimage says
Christian leader invites Islamic State leaders to dinner, they respond, “We’ll chop your head off”
……………..,.,.,……….
This pretty much sums up the situation…
Kepha says
Christi.an leader who was crucified for our sins and his bride say “Come!” (see the Book of Revelation–Betcha you thought Fundie old Uncle Kepha would call it “Revyoolashuns”).
ebola says
26 Oct 2015
Volunteer to be injected with Live Ebola Virus
Hammersmith Medical Research placed a newspaper ad seeking people to take part in Ebola Virus Vaccine clinical trials
This research lab is demanding volunteers to be injected with Ebola in a bid to find a cure for Ebola.
Hammersmith Medical Research is holding clinical trials to try and discover a vaccine to prevent more people dying from Ebola in West Africa.
United States Hospitals are also injecting people with live Ebola Virus as well.
40 United States hospitals are seeking thousands of Ebola Vaccine Virus participants to enroll in clinical trial testing for the Ebola virus vaccine.
The Ebola vaccine clinical trial, which is free, and open to American adults age 18 to 65 who have not previously had Ebola or been in contact with someone who contracted Ebola.
The FDA hopes to fast track the Ebola Virus Vaccine. Dr. Guerrero says he thinks the Ebola Vaccine could be available within the year.
Anyone between the ages of 18 and 65 who have never had Ebola and have had no contact with someone diagnosed with the virus can participate.
Dr. Guerrero, “As with any vaccine, you may have some reaction to vaccines. It’s not unusual that you may have sort of a fever.”
Click here to read the full story about U.S. Hospitals injecting people with Ebola Virus.
http://www.ebolaoutbreakmap.com/listings/volunteers-needed-to-be-injected-with-live-ebola-virus/
dumbledoresarmy says
Whatever else people want to say about this bloke, he *has* successfully deprogrammed Muslims.
I was reading a different article about him that drew attention to the way the Islamic apostasy law works out.
He described (without naming names) fourteen people, raised Muslim, who had come to his church secretly – like Nicodemus – for instruction in the Christian faith.
After a longish period of catechesis (and I *bet* he is perfectly well aware of the possibility that they were conning him), they insisted that he must baptise them.
He warned them of the seriousness of the step they were taking, there in Iraq. They were adamant; they wished to be baptised.
He managed to persuade them not to make a big song and dance about it; so, they were baptised, all fourteen of them, in relative secrecy, by night in the church.
Six months later eleven of them were *dead*; killed by family members or by other Muslims. Those eleven were the ones who had, after their baptism, been somewhat incautiously public about their change of faith. The three who, at the time he gave that particular interview, still remained alive were the ones who had been much more careful about who got to know about their change of faith.
So whatever else one wants to say about him: eleven of those fourteen conversions were absolutely genuine, because if they had *not* been genuine, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for those new converts to repudiate a faith they had only faked an interest in, and by that repudiation, to save their skins. They did not renounce Christ; they died as martyrs and confessors of the church in Iraq, and whatever else anybody wants to say about Canon Andrew White, the fact must be faced, that thanks to him, eleven human souls were freed from the deadly slavery of Islam, and died as free human beings. Eleven – and perhaps counting the other three more careful people, still alive, fourteen – fewer potential jihadi killer zombies.
From both a spiritual and a purely practical political viewpoint that has to be counted as a ‘win’, however small.
voegelinian says
“Whatever else people want to say about this bloke, he *has* successfully deprogrammed Muslims.”
There are two ways of looking at this evangelical project (which is a factor in the Counter-Jihad, I’ve noticed, among its modern evangelical wing, though I don’t think it dominates the movement – such as it is (as Diana West once wryly remarked); for one gets a strong impression of such when familiarizing oneself more deeply in the otherwise fine work of, for example, David Wood or Sam Shamoun):
1) in terms of a microcosm – this individual Muslim here before me, the evangelist
2) in terms of the macrocosm – the context of the overarching problem involving roiling, pullulating masses of Muslims boiling over in a global revival of Islamic Jihad with all its attendant disasters in the making and ongoing threats, atrocities and horrors of which only the Counter-Jihad (or parts of it, at any rate) has a clear grasp – masses of Muslims on the move in complex, chaotic ways involving every nation of the West, international networking and jet-setting transit, seemingly uncontrollable mass migrations, geopolitical turbulence caused by various colossal spasms in the wake of the “Arab Spring” – and, last but not least, the ongoing disastrously gullible naivete of the mainstream West about the metastasizing dangers all this portends, a West which needs to be woken up, with the only human agencies willing & capable of waking them up being the small but growing nucleus of the Counter-Jihad.
In the terms of 1, the microcosm, the evangelist can feel he or she is doing good, saving a soul. In the terms of 2, the macrocosm, this evangelical impulse, if translated into a project begins to acquire the dimensions of a policy recommendation in line with a conviction that reinforces the dominant PC MC meme out there, that we cannot treat “all Muslims with a broad brush” but rather we must assume that an indeterminable number of Muslims (how many? enough to make a difference for our disposition then policies?) are decent moms and pops whose decent humanity ought to put brakes on our reasonable alarm and desire to take measures – on the macrocosmic scale – to protect our societies from the also indeterminable number of Muslims fanatically and assiduously intent on destroying us.
More analysis on this:
Micro/Macro
http://hesperado.blogspot.com/2015/06/micromacro.html
Kepha says
@Dumbledore’s and Voegelinian–
Good for Canon White. He has friends awaiting him in Paradise and methinks he has truly counted the cost of what he is doing.
Voegelinian–You say Evangelization of Muslims reinforces the PeeCeeEmCee meme? I say it does nothing of the sort. It is a clear confession that what Jesus Christ has to offer and any culture founded on it is far, far superior to Islam. Such evangelization only (a) presupposes that Muslims are fellow human beings, and hence bearers of the divine image, (b) that Islam is a false religion which is very bad for human beings and other living things, and (c) God is calling his elect from among Muslims just as he is calling them from other groups of people.
Eleven of those ex-Muslims have been killed? The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church. By killing those people–and other Christians–ISIS could well be signing the death warrant for Islam itself.
I, for one, have made it perfectly clear that if it really gets down to God’s fearful temporal judgment of both Islam and the post-Christian West, I will take up a gun for the West (and probably die doing so, for I am old and slow). But if God is not entering into such a judgment with his human creatures, I will support with my prayers at least any effort to let Muslims see that the true submission to God is through Jesus Christ as he is offered in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments (NOT the Qur’an).
The PeeCeeEmCee paradigm is a form of radical relativism. It was born among people who actually believe Nietzche’s madman who declared God dead (and that includes far too many ostensibly “Christian” clergy), and hence are in the dark about where any moral or spiritual compass may be found. The PeeCeeEmCee position also denies that there is such a thing as truth; which is a position that is anathema to the historical Christian faith. And before anyone raises the question “what is truth?” be forewarned that the man who asked that question would not acknowledge that he had The Truth standing literally under his nose (John 18:33-19:22).
The current furor islamicus is a turning point for the Western world. It is a crisis in the strict sense of the word–a judgment against us. I am not saying that it is the final judgment, for that is not for me to say. It may just be that the crushing of the Islamic serpent’s head will be accomplished by a church that grows up in the Far East or Africa rather than the North Atlantic World (although this is something about which I can only speculate). But I sincerely believe that this moment in Western history is not only offering opportunity for Muslims to find the truth, but also for Westerners to return to their Redeemer before it is too late.
voegelinian says
It does if it is promoted as a project. I don’t mind evangelicals trying to save Muslims, but it begins to interfere with our society’s safety when they do so in grandiose terms, which may or may not also include the disastrous opinion that the main or only way to solve the problem of Muslims is through their mass apostasy consequent upon mass evangelization. Every Christian pursuing this should endorse a public statement, something along the lines of:
“Yes, I believe in trying to save Muslims for Christ, and I am trying to pursue that in my own humble way; but no, I do not believe this is relevant to the material protection of our societies and the men, women and children materially threatened by Muslims. I hope and pray that my evangelism will not interfere with measures not found in the New Testament — measures which need to be pursued by our secular authorities in material terms (which we hope and trust will be informed by moral values grounded in the spiritual truths derived from our Graeco-Roman Judaeo-Christian history) in order to protect our societies adequately.”
Would Christian evangelists sign on to that sentiment…? If not, why not…?
Mirren10 says
I like that statement.
Mo says
@ Dumbledoresarmy
“From both a spiritual and a purely practical political viewpoint that has to be counted as a ‘win’, however small.”
Thank you for this account. And I wholeheartedly agree!
Jeremiah says
Just round up the weapons, ammunition and korans from the mosques. Sell the mosques for redevelopment ans send the money to Christian charities. People do not need to die . . . unless they happen to be in the mosque.
j_not_a says
I guess dda has never heard of married guys on the down low. I live in San Francisco North (Toronto) and this city is teeming with them. The downtown area banking towers and other office towers are filled with straight married men with children who meet other married straight men with children in the washrooms to hookup during coffee break time or lunch. It is a hell of a lot more common than you think. This guy just looks more gay than the usual married guy on the dl. (or he really is just gay and his wife and children are his “beard” so to speak) Wake up and get a clue.
I am done.
Mirren10 says
Even if he is gay, which seems unlikely to me, so what ?
He may be slightly deluded, but he is extremely brave, and in a dangerous position.
voegelinian says
Let him be extremely brave for himself — and not drag other innocent people into his reckless bravery and its disastrous assumptions about “dialogue”. I’m astounded that someone as otherwise lucidly anti-Muslim & anti-Islam as Mirren is can suddenly turn around and relax her grip on the problem so remarkably.
Mirren10 says
‘I’m astounded that someone as otherwise lucidly anti-Muslim & anti-Islam as Mirren is can suddenly turn around and relax her grip on the problem so remarkably.”
I said he was brave, I didn’t say he wasn’t deluded. I can admire courage even if I think it’s wrongheaded, which I do.
citycat says
I heard the postmodern age was over and we were in the age of enlightenment.
Oh well, i guess it’s delayed, still, it’s summat to look forward to,
now, where’s my teletimescope, ah, here it is, let’s see, gosh, can’t see a thing,
something’s blocking the view,
looks like a mountain on fire,
i’ll zoom in, yep, a mountain of books, can’t tell what books, they’re obscured by flames.
Oh well, i’ll have to wait and see.
Oh wait, a burning page has come adrift, it’s burning fast, still a few words left,
“….. for good men to do …..”
Oh! The paper has stopped burning and it’s gone with the wind, up and away.
janemore says
Low IQ. Why do some people never learn? Fodder to the muslims.
richard courtemanche says
If one really understands Islam, it cannot be negotiated with; it has to be exterminated. And right now, our naive and coward western “leaders” are shamelessly aloof.
Crixus says
Andrew Wright has more courage in the speck of dust under his little finger nail than his boss, the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Pope, Every western leader (except possibly Orban) and an awful lot of journalists, apologists and useful idiots.
The man is a saint – simple as that.
gravenimage says
We had Isis on the doorstep of Baghdad last year. I said to my people, “I will not leave you; don’t leave me.” But many did leave me and they went to Nineveh and Mosul…
……………………………………
I’m afraid *this* is what struck m most–that Canon White is chastising Christians who want to leave and save the lives of themselves and their children–even though his own family is safely back in England (well, *fairly* safely, given Muslim inroads there, as well).
There is a place to stand your ground, and then a place–as in much of Europe during the Holocaust if you were Jewish–where *getting out* should be the goal.
I don’t believe there is any kind of future for the remnant of Christians remaining in Iraq–they should get out if they can.
What we should be doing is *helping them to get out* and welcoming them to the West, not sending them ‘holy fools’ who appear to believe that martyrdom is their only honorable option.
Mirren10 says
Excellent points, all, graven. I agree with you.
Mark A says
I hate to say I agree with the last line in the article about war being the only solution. But I don’t see any other way.
I just don’t see any viable alternative to fighting the likes of ISIS.
Richie says
are leftists really this ignorant? They need to read the parable of the frog and the scorpion. Muslims will kill or threaten to kill because it is in their nature
RT says
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places……Ephesians 6:12…..NASB
What Islam admits to in it’s OWN TEXTS is nothing less than astonishing.
MUHAMMAD AND THE DEMONS
http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/demons.htm
“His [Muhammad’s friend’s] father said to me, “I am afraid that this child has had a stroke, so take him back to his family before the result appears. ….. She [Muhammad’s mother] asked me what happened and gave me no peace until I told her. When she asked if I feared a demon had possessed him, I replied that I did.” [2]
Note that Muhammad’s wet-nurse believed he had been possessed by a demon. One would expect some degree of attachment between the two, since she nursed him, so it is extraordinary that she would return him in those circumstances: something very troubling actually occurred.”
steve says
You are correct i believe that we are fighting against evil not of this material world but unfortunately it is embodied in some people men and women we must fight.
Kepha says
I strongly suspect that when Canon White sought to speak with the ISIS leaders, he fully understood the potential outcome of such a meeting–and hence was no fool. And I don’t see him as a hypocrite for sending his wife and children to safety in Britain. Martyrdom is something to which others drag us; it is not something to which we subject others.
After all, Jesus Christ put himself in harm’s way, all the way to the cross and truly tasting death, for the sinners such as us.
Daesh has put itself in the far more dangerous position: will the blood of the martyrs be the seeds of a revived church (as I and many others, including Mr. White, I suppose, pray) that will supplant Islam in its core lands, or will it be something that calls forth a very terrible vengeance from the true God, who is not mocked? (Rev. 6:9-11)
Kepha says
@Voegelinian (6:50 PM)
You wrote we should sign on to:
““Yes, I believe in trying to save Muslims for Christ, and I am trying to pursue that in my own humble way; but no, I do not believe this is relevant to the material protection of our societies and the men, women and children materially threatened by Muslims. I hope and pray that my evangelism will not interfere with measures not found in the New Testament — measures which need to be pursued by our secular authorities in material terms (which we hope and trust will be informed by moral values grounded in the spiritual truths derived from our Graeco-Roman Judaeo-Christian history) in order to protect our societies adequately.”
No can do.
For one thing, the evangelization of Muslims (and others) is very relevant to the material safety of women and children materially threatened by Islamic aggression.
Many here have noted that the North Atlantic world’s unique balance of freedom and order with the security of the person is not the ordinary lot of humanity. Much of what we have been enjoying for a while is largely due to extensive Christian influence in our wider culture. Your own mentor Erich Voelgelin would probably agree. The wider and deeper the influence of God’s Word and Spirit in a given society, that society will be both more free and more secure–not only for women and children, but for men as well. At this point, when our MSM and [mis-]education have effectively emasculated the West, the best we probably have is to defuse the furor islamicus at its source–as people like Canon White are beginning to do.
Also, please do not take me for a large-P Pacifist. I am neither Quaker nor Mennonite, but a very traditional Reformed Christian who believes there are times when the state is justified in making war and in executing dangerous criminals. I also think there are several other people posting here who are profoundly in sympathy with what Canon White is doing who would agree with me on this point.
As for “measures not found in the New Testament”–I’m not sure I know what you mean. The New Testament certainly agrees with paying taxes to support the functions of the state, sees a legitimate place for soldiers, and notes the state’s right to punish evil. I most certainly include the extension of Islam by force among the evils which the state must resist and punish (and lament that Western governments have now become supine before Islamic threats). Further, for people in my tradition of theology, it is impossible to abstract the New Testament from the Old. We have the Judges and David as positive examples of civil rulers who justly used the power of the sword to protect their people. In David, we have one unjustly attacked by his superior (Saul) who went so far as to lead a successful rebellion.
I am writing from a theological tradition which recognizes that at times rebellion against evil government is justified. The idea of political compact is not from the enlightenment, but largely from Reformed theologians and statesmen who lived generations before John Locke (himself the son of a Puritan home), including Francois Hotman, Theodore Beza, Johannes Althusius, John Knox, Christopher Goodman, John Ponet, Philippus Marnix van Sint Aldegonde, Philippe DuPlessis-Mornay, Hubert Languet, George Buchanan, and Samuel Rutherford. If I appeal to the New Testament, do not think it is to counsel always turning the other cheek (which I believe applies far more to acts of private vengeance than to actions of the state).
However, my tradition also affirms that peace is better than war, life and salvation better than death and damnation, and repentance better than destruction.
Do you honestly believe for a minute that a West led by the current crop of leaders (who both decry “Islamophobia” and list Evangelicals as dangerous “extremists” in training manuals given to the troops) is capable of meeting a purposeful Islamicist onslaught? I, for one, can easily see our current American and Western European leaders leading us into quagmires in which our young men (because that’s who’ll do the fighting) and national wealth are squandered to obtain a deleterious “negotiated settlement” in which our wealth, safety, and liberty are further eroded. It is far more important to our leadership that the West’s traditional moral underpinning be undermined, perversion advanced, and concessions be made to an increasingly demanding Islam. Daily, we look more and more like the kind of society against which God’s covenantal curses were initially spoken (and I mean Canaanites and the apostate Israelites against whom the prophets wrote). This is why I indeed pray that God would not enter into judgment with us, his creatures and servants.
It is a far better sign of the times that more Muslims than ever before are becoming open to the Gospel of Christ–even to the point of shedding their blood for it when the “clear-eyed, intellectually courageous, no-illusions” man of the so-called “enlightenment” won’t stand up for the liberty he claims to protect.
Our re-armament must not simply be the protection of the 2d Amendment. It must also involve a spiritual awakening.
voegelinian says
“The wider and deeper the influence of God’s Word and Spirit in a given society, that society will be both more free and more secure…”
Sure, I agree; but as a perennial truth in the tension between time and the timeless (i.e., History, speaking of Eric Voegelin), not as a specific measure against this particular threat we all face. However broad and complex this threat looms, we should not elevate it to an existential threat whereby we paint it in the lurid hues of some kind of cosmic apocalyptic battle. Rather, we need to focus on the pragmatic exigencies it continues to unleash, and have more faith that our West still possesses, even if temporarily latent because obscured by bouts of fashionable secularism, the noetic/pneumatic substance of its former greatness. For one thing, Muslims have been attacking the West for 1400 years (a millennial jihad which abated, in fact, as the West’s Christendom began its long process of modern decomposition), and in none of those prior centuries did the world end, even during eras that were arguably blacker than our own time.
For another, projects of mass evangelism tend to sorely underestimate the unique fanaticism of Muslims. Unless you can construct and deploy some kind of Global Exorcism of approximately one billion demon-possessed people, evangelism will not put a dent in the problem (except in the overeager imaginations of those who have cut the cord to History, adrift in space to the Second Coming).
Kepha says
I am focusing on pragmatic exigencies: the ongoing suicide of Western civilization and Islamic resurgence. This is why I have scant sympathy for the “Bring it on” mentality when it comes to intercivilizational shooting war. Frankly, those people who bothered to witness to Muslims–whether originally Christian (such as Canon White) or ex-Muslim themselves–have done a lot more for the safety of the Western world than is realized. For the first time in a millennium, we are seeing real cracks appearing in the once-strong edifice of Islamic resistance to the Gospel. This is a very significant dent in the problem.
Nor do those of us who advocate evangelism (including of the secularist Westerner) cut any tether to history. On the contrary, the Bible we read is history and theology is in large part an exercise of memory. The Messiah came in the fulness of time (Gal. 4:3), in the days following a string of world-empires from Babylon to Rome (see Daniel 2). As for the 2d advent of Christ, we certainly believe it will come, but when is up to God himself. In the meantime, we do engage with the world in which we live, even if it pointedly ignores us.
Sure, Islam fosters a uniquely warlike temperament. Hence it is dangerous. But Muslims as people exhibit a range of attitudes and behaviors. Here’s a vulnerability which should be exploited. Maybe they are “demon-possessed”, but some of those “demons” are more easily exorcised than others; while some still may be the kind that possess those reprobated in the most secret counsels of the Father, Word, and Holy Spirit. But we have our orders to make disciples, and that includes in the Islamic world.
Hence, I and others here do not see Canon White as a fool–unless, perhaps, the kind off fool for the Messiah that Paul admitted himself to be (in his pointed Jewish sense of irony) in the Corinthian letters.
voegelinian says
“For the first time in a millennium, we are seeing real cracks appearing in the once-strong edifice of Islamic resistance to the Gospel. This is a very significant dent in the problem.”
You’re focusing your attention on the glory of the building cracking and falling, and not on the children in harm’s way who will be crushed by that falling building.
And my metaphor doesn’t do full justice to the shit-hitting-the-fan train wreck that we must reasonably surmise will unravel as Islam goes down in flames — figuratively and literally, over decades of time – far worse, far more chaotic, far more difficult to damage-control, needless to say, than one skyscraper collapsing onto pedestrians below (however horrible that would be).
Indeed, I reasonably expect that this 21st century will be looked back on – at least by those of us who will continue to exist in the agon of History and missed the train to the End of History – as the century when Islam finally fell apart and became extinct. But that process will be horrifically bloody, only because Muslims will make it so; and PC MCs of the West will be worse appeasers in their Denial than was Neville Chamberlain as Hitler began to darken Europe (unless a real Churchill or two manages to rise up in the meantime).
I’m glad I elicited Kepha to articulate at such length his views on the matter; for now I see that my phrase “grandiose project” was no exaggeration of the full scope of what some evangelists envision. But they are, as I said, confusing two subtly distinct things, and doing it twice, so to speak: 1) confusing the micro and the macro levels; and 2) confusing pragmatic near-term exigencies with protracted, long-term, civilizational concerns. Kepha seems to think that when his interlocutor hastens to point out the subtle distinction in #2, his interlocutor is somehow giving short shrift to the long-term concern. Well, in my view this is not the case; but it depends on how a person defines the proper respect due to that long-term concern. My concern is not to enmesh & entangle the long-term concern with the near-term exigency; Kepha seems to have fused the two in his mind so that they have metamorphosed into One Exigency. This is a disastrous impulse, I maintain, which despite all its good intentions will make matters worse (if too many people get on board with his grandiose project, that is) as it recklessly plays with the fire of a global revival of Mohammedanism spiraling out of control.
To more clearly illustrate what I mean by #2 – “confusing pragmatic near-term exigencies (the problem of Islam) with protracted, long-term, civilizational concerns (the problem of Western deformation)” – I would employ an analogy/metaphor. Let us say there is the head of a household, a father with his wife and two children. As they are a decent and conscientious family, they also try to play a role in the wellbeing of their neighborhood, and more broadly, in the sociopolitical health of their town. Over many years, there has been a deterioration in the neighborhood, probably caused by systemic problems in the town overall, due to issues arguably moral and spiritual in nature. The things that need to be done for those broad, systemic problems are appropriately far-reaching and broad to match the phenomenon needing healing. One day, the man’s home catches on fire. In this instance, one could say that the broad, systemic problems of the neighborhood and town are reflected in the fact that the volunteer fire department is not efficient and has problems of corruption – hence, they aren’t coming to the home in time, nor are they well equipped because the fire marshall is an alcoholic, etc. Were this man and his like-minded friends thinking like Kepha, they would say, “In order to best address this house on fire, we need to step up our measures to heal the town’s general, systemic moral decay and corruption!” No, you don’t need to do that. You just do what it takes to put out the fire, then when and if your family and furniture are salvaged, you resume your broader process of “fighting city hall” and trying to improve your town’s moral and spiritual problems.
My analogical metaphor is not perfect (“analogiae claudicant”, as they say); but it should suffice to get the essential point across.
BobbyFR94 says
Doctors don’t deal with virus, they KILL IT, so why NOT do the same with NAZISLAMISTS ?
Eradication is the way !!!
I’m a frenchman, I can assure you that more & more people here awakes about NAZISLAM !!!
But our governments are LYING fore decades as they support NAZISLAM !!!
voegelinian says
We can’t — and shouldn’t — (try to) eradicate all Muslims. So either the Gung-Ho Wing of the Counter-Jihad, exemplified by the comment of BobbyFR94, doesn’t believe all Muslims are our enemy (and in fact must believe that the dangerous Muslims waging war on us are sufficiently small in number to make the project of eradication plausibly doable) — or, they do believe all Muslims are our enemy and they are promoting a wildly untenable not to mention immoral solution (for one thing, we’d have to bomb our own West to eradicate all the millions of Muslims inside it, living among us).
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“We can’t — and shouldn’t — (try to) eradicate all Muslims. ”
Voegelinian, who made calling people “softies” a mainstay of his posts, is here showing that he lacks the stomach to carry out his reasoning to its only logical conclusion – i.e., he’s as much of a “softie” as the people he routinely decries. His reasoning is the following (and feel free to correct me where and if I’m wrong, voeg):
1 – Islam exhorts muslims to subjugate non-muslims
2 – Islam allows muslims to lie and deceive non-muslims in order to achieve the goal stated in #1
3 – Because there’s no way to tell which muslims are honest, decent, hardworking people who just want to have a sandwich, we must err on the side of caution and assume that ALL muslims are plotting to bring down Western Republics and replace them with a caliphate, even the ones for which no evidence of “radicalization” can be found because one can simply “reverse engineer” a story to explain why there’s no evidence of “radicalization” (I mean, other than them simply not being “extremists” like the evidence says).
4 – Taking #1, #2 and #3 into consideration, the only sensible option is, of course, to throw the Constitution out the window, round up all muslims and drop then from a plane over Sudan, or any other muslim-majority country.
5 – If anyone objects this “total deportation” scheme, regardless of whatever they say, the true reasons for their objections is that they’re infected with PC MC, they think of muslims as “brown people”, they’re acting upon their “ethical narcissism”, they don’t get the problem of islam and they simply don’t have the stomach to do what it takes to protect the West.
Now, I stated that voegelinian lacks the to carry out his reasoning to its logical conclusion. What did I mean by that? Well, voeg doesn’t give us any reason to forsake deportation and go straight to the time and money-saving option – a bullet is much cheaper than an airplane fare, right? And muslims in the West aren’t simply going to march into camps and planes, are they? Not to mention that moving muslims outside of Western nations would just mean that there were more muslims waiting to wage jihad and invade Western nations, including muslims that, because they have lived and worked in Western nations and with Westerners, know the terrain, organizational structures and textbook responses of the Army and Police, keypoints to strike in order to render Western nations defenseless (power stations, Army bases, etc.). Yeah, because #1 and #2, remember? And since we must assume that ALL muslims outside the Western world are plotting and waiting to wage war against the West, until they can finally kill us all in horrific fashion, the only logical solution would be to go out and kill them all before they can get us, which is a scenario that will happen sooner rather than later now that they’re reinforced with millions of people with critical tactical knowledge.
Voeg’s stance is an unsustainable one: he’s trying to “push” an A->B->C->D->E->F->G reasoning while at the same time mocking those that want to go past D based on A->B->C. Pure, unadulterated cognitive dissonance, and I’d bet that accounts for much of his erratic behaviour.
I submit to you the following: voeg thumps his chest and verbally abuses and derides his critics without actually addressing the criticism in question because he’s trying to compensate, i.e., he’s scared that people will realize that, despite all his talk about “toughness”, he’s softer than the people he routinely decries. Simply compare one of his posts dedicated to “pushing” (like a drug pusher?) the “meme” of “total deportation” with his “argument” against doing what BobbyFR94 proposed:
“they do believe all Muslims are our enemy and they are promoting a wildly untenable not to mention immoral solution (for one thing, we’d have to bomb our own West to eradicate all the millions of Muslims inside it, living among us).”
“They do believe all Muslims are our enemy”? Well, voeg, isn’t that what you’ve been saying all along we should be doing? Assuming that ALL muslims are our enemy? Isn’t that your warhorse? The “dreaded A word”? So why are you decrying someone for doing what you pushed for?
“For one thing, we’d have to bomb our own West”? Really, voeg? When did BobbyFR94 said “bombing”? He didn’t, did he? No, you’re just ascribing him words because you know how unsustainable your stance is if you had to face him on a debate. Because his is the logical end to your reasoning.
“A wildly untenable not to mention immoral solution”? How is killing muslims in the West more “untenable” than rounding them up, getting them into planes and parachuting them someplace else? You’d have to round them up just the same, using the same argument to justify it. “Immoral”? Don’t you decry people who bring up moral as being driven by “ethical narcissism”? You have stated before that those you opposed your seditious “total deportation” nonsense did so in order to feel they had the moral high-ground. How is that any different between you and BobbyFR94?
Long story short, when push comes to shove and voeg is faced with the logical conclusion of the reasoning he’s trying to “push” on everyone else, he crumbles down and shows that he’s as much of a “nougatty softy” as the people he rails against regularly. The dissonance between the endgame of what he preaches and his alleged intent of not following it his reasoning to the only logical conclusion exerts an ever-increasing pressure that wrecks his conscience, and his coping mechanism is ratcheting up his braggadocio and “you are al asymptotic softies” rhetoric, all along ignoring the problem stemming from his logic. The moment someone like BobbyFR94 shows up, reminding voeg of his daily state of denial, and he starts acting up like the people he decries – well, as the distorted, jaundiced version of them he propagates.
Unless, of course, option G is his endgame all along, and he’s just feigning outrage up to the point where he can say “well, we rounded them all up, but I’ve been thinking things through, and turns out airplane fares are very expensive…”.
It’s all the more hypocritical when one looks back and sees how voegelinian tried to hold people like Robert Spencer, Fjordman, Horowitz, etc., responsible for Breivik’s actions. Voeg’s reasoning was the following: people like Robert Spencer, and Fjordman, and David Hoowitz, and many others, cried “Fire!”. Breivik came with an axe and hose, kicked out the door and doused the house with water. The people who cried “Fire” then said “Well, it was not that kind of fire”. Voegelinian is doing the exact same thing here: he spends a great deal of time and effort crying “Fire! Fire! We’re all going to die! Something must be done! Someone do something, please, and now!”, and when someone like BobbyFR94 says “How about we get an hose and douse the house with water”, voeg immediately replies “well, no, let’s not be immoral here”.
Truly disgusting, on more than one level.
voegelinian says
bookmarked under “Angemon Has Too Much Time On His Hands” (what could be a bulging file cabinet by now…) — some 1,188 words in response to a post I didn’t even address to him — in which he concludes that my position is “truly disgusting” (that’s all I read, so that I could avoid upchucking my breakfast…). As I’ve said before, if any of the Jihad Watchers who seem to be not watching during the dozens, if not scores, or hundreds of times Angemon has been pestering me over the years with his tissues of sophistry want to paraphrase — without sophistry — what they think is a good argument from Angemon, I’m all eyes. Or, mirabile dictu, should they wish to actually step in to correct Angemon, I would fall off my chair onto my knees and cry tears of joy.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“bookmarked under “Angemon Has Too Much Time On His Hands” ”
Says the guy who is keeping tabs on other users.
“some 1,188 words in response to a post I didn’t even address to him”
Huh, so what? Do I need an invitation from you to reply to your posts now?
“in which he concludes that my position is “truly disgusting” (that’s all I read, so that I could avoid upchucking my breakfast…).”
And yet, you went out of your way to count the words. Also, I can’t take credit for all of them – I do quote you, you know?
“As I’ve said before, if any of the Jihad Watchers who seem to be not watching during the dozens, if not scores, or hundreds of times Angemon has been pestering me ”
Where “pester” means “reply”
“over the years ”
You’ve been saying years for what, 9-10 months now? Can you find a reply of me to you that dates back to years ago? I’m asking you this for 9-10 months, and still no answer from you.
“with his tissues of sophistry ”
Again, you never, ever – not even once – construed a case for why anything I wrote is “sophistry”. Merely asserting that it is won’t cut it, voeg. Also, if you don’t, as you stated, read my posts, how can you say that what I write is “sophistry”?
“want to paraphrase — without sophistry — what they think is a good argument from Angemon, I’m all eyes. ”
That makes no sense, voeg. If you want to know what I say, read my posts. Or does what I say stops being “sophistry” if it’s said by other people? Seems like you have a problem with me, not with what I say. Also, you have, in the past, demanded others to speak about it. Others have spoken, and they’ve stated I make some good points. How did you react to GI, Mirren or Wellington? Oh, yeah – you ignored what they said and tried to shame them into defending you.
“Or, mirabile dictu, should they wish to actually step in to correct Angemon, I would fall off my chair onto my knees and cry tears of joy.”
Again, voeg, if you don’t read my posts, how do you know anything I say is wrong? More evidence that your problem is with me, not with what I write. Also, why don’t you get out of your lazy ass and do what you try to have others do for you, for a change? Lead by example, etc. I’ve shown many, many times I’m up for discussion. Try doing the same rather than playing the victim. Not sure it would be enough to salvage whatever is left of your reputation considering your decade or so of deriding and defaming those in the CJ movement, but can’t hurt to try.
Jim Kenney says
The freedom for individuals we have in the West was won in spite of the efforts of the Catholics, Reform Church, Lutherans and Anglicans. It was won by the sacrifices of the Anabaptists and the works of people like Erasmus, secularists and Enlightenment writers. Each of the first four religious groups readily murdered thousands of people who refused to accept their particular brand of Christianity. What Islamists are doing to each other now, we did to each other 300 to 500 years ago.
marble says
George W. Bush, please take note, Islam lies NOT a religion of peace! (Or have you known that all along?)