How well assimilated do you think these Muslims will be in five years? Ten? At what point does charity toward refugees shade over into civilizational suicide?
“Man ‘injured by harpoon’ during riot on Corsica beach after tourist takes photo of woman in burkini,” by Rory Mulholland, Telegraph, August 14, 2016 (thanks to John):
Riot police were summoned and a man was injured by a harpoon when a mass brawl broke out on a beach in Corsica, apparently triggered by a tourist taking a photo of women in “burkinis”.
The incident came after the mayor of Cannes banned women from wearing the full-body, head-covering swimsuits on beaches of his Riviera town.
The riot in Corsica took place on Saturday in a cove near the village of Sisco in the north of the French Mediterranean island.
“It happened because a tourist was taking photos,” said Ange-Pierre Vivoni, the local mayor, on TF1 television. “And the Maghrebins (North Africans) didn’t want to have their photos taken. It was quite a trivial matter to begin with.”
Things got out of hand when young men of North African origin harangued the tourist who took the pictures, prompting local youngsters to intervene in defence of the visitor.
Police are still trying to establish how the incident turned into a riot, but local media said that a group of older North African men soon arrived, some armed with hatchets and harpoons, and took on the young Corsicans.
The unrest lasted for several hours, during which three cars were burned and four people had to be taken to hospital, one of them for a wound caused by a harpoon. A pregnant woman was among those hospitalised. Bernard Cazeneuve, the interior minister, was forced to issue a statement calling for calm.
Tensions were still high on Sunday, when a crowd of around 500 gathered in the nearby town of Bastia and tried to enter a housing estate with a high immigrant population. They chanted: “To arms, this is our place and we will go where we want.”…

Georg says
Corsicans have made it clear in the past and now they’re not signing up for Islmaic belligerence. Like Muslim gropers learned with Russians, although the locals appear white they will defend themselves vigorously.
islam the religion of killers says
The Russians are the only ones that know how to deal with the scum,,
Wait till they wind up Putin …
Georg says
Although I believe the gravest threat to jihadists to be the United States, and am honored when they declare us their preeminent enemy, they made a fatal mistake worse by calling out Putin. Even if they crapped thunder it’d be futile to face the US with its $17 trillion economy, Europe with a $18.5 trillion economy, Russia with a multi-trillion dollar economy and its steely will– all with ~35,000 whatever you’d call the disparate lot, it’s insulting to many to call them “troops”, and a couple billion dollars along with a bunch of stolen merchandise which they haven’t the slightest ability to repair let alone produce.
It’s been a demonstration of the monstrosity that is stupidity and is a fitting end to the notion of caliphate in 2016 CE. Their economic body is about 1:19,250 of their predominant three enemies. And the coalition is much deeper than that. These aren’t people to learn from.
There won’t be peace until one side stops fighting. And since they refuse to lay down their arms and give up a preposterous devotion, their fight is their annihilation.
linnte says
Five million Muslims have migrated into Europe in the past 3 years, 80% of whom are single males. That’s four million potential TROOPS for the Islamisation of Europe, and potentially four million Islamic State Jihadis. The mere 35 K that you mention are the ones still in Syria. These are the ones calling the shots, along with Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries. All these millions need to hear is “Go!”, and they will act.
Mack Bolan says
If they want to fight to the last man it will be a long fight until we start killing them faster than they can breed replacements.
gravenimage says
Alas, this is not the case. There is a lot of Jihad in Russia, and Putin has actually enabled a nuclear Iran and Shari’ah law in Chechnya. The Russian Orthodox patriarch lauded Russia for taking in more Muslims than Europe.
Russia–just like the West–has been inconsistent in its opposition to Jihad, I’m afraid.
Angemon says
islam the religion of killers posted:
“Wait till they wind up Putin …”
He’ll do what? Reiterate his claim that he’s the defender of the islamic world against the West? Give even more autonomy to Chechnya? Inaugurate another mega-mosque in Moscow?
Debbie says
Time for the Corsicans to line the beach with heads (like their flag depicts).
Marc says
I live in Corsica and it’s not over because we are at home and they have to respect us if they want to be respected . Anyway they aren’t trustable at all .Who can trust people who a are throwing stones on children ,using harpoon and machette .
Jay Boo says
Simple solution. It is a relatively small Island population.
Stop imprisoning Muslims there against their will.
They don’t fit in.
Free them and ship them back to North Africa.
Muslims will be happier there amongst their fellow Muslims.
Johan Elzinga says
Now this is the first time I read this simple but very sensible answer from ANYBODY. Taking those masses back to where they came from, preferrably the same day, seems to me the only sensible thing to do. Only the refugees that are coming from a war zone should be given the right to stay in some safe zone at the north african coast. There should be a calender for all refugees currently in Europe containing a return date for each and every one to such a safe zone, where they will be shipped on this date by force if necessary. And of course, the idea that they can stay in Europe should no longer exist. Yes I know that this goes against the current treaties about refugees but frankly any sensible person should not give a F*K about those treaties anymore because they are only used to take away our souvereignity. That date should only be revised when in say one year it is still not safe for them to return to this safe zone. These safe zones could then be protected by the UN ir even by joint forces together with mr Putin and Europe together- I’m even sure Putin would be happy to help as he understands this threat better than the Europeans.
Ian H says
If Spain took Western Sahara back the EU could ship all the ones causing trouble there.
Veka Fitzfrancis says
Spain doesn’t have the military to do that.
Charli Main says
Spain is to busy singing the praises of its ” Islamic heritage” and importing millions of Moroccans to do anything like that.
Godwin says
Ask Nato to do it.
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Johan: Haven’t seen you here before, and you are very welcome!
May I ask where you are from? If from Europe, you doubtless have a great deal to tell us here about what’s coming (God forbid).
Today in his speech on ‘Foreign Policy’, Trump called Hillary the ‘Angela Merkel of America’. I agree with him. The upcoming presidential election is the last chance for the USA to reclaim its sovereignty and national character. I pray daily for his election.
Jay Boo says
Some Muslims are peaceful & pensive.
Some Muslims are offensive.
(Very).
Oliver says
Jay B–I think that most of the peaceful Muslims are those who are deceased. They, at least, cannot provide support for jihad and anything else.
my non pc views
Trump 2016
Gary Daniels says
Another way to expresss that…..Not all muslims are violent. Some of them are dead.
Kathy Brown, Esq. says
Yes Oliver: Trump ’16, indeed!
However I must disagree with you on a minor point. Even the dead muslims are a danger. This is due to their [disgusting] burial customs. They don’t use coffins.
Allah, apparently, did not approve of clean groundwater.
Peggy says
That’s because not all are needed. If and when they are needed you’ll see how peaceful they really are.
linnte says
Five million Muslims have migrated into Europe in the past 3 years, 80% of whom are single males. That’s four million potential TROOPS for the Islamisation of Europe, and potentially four million Islamic State Jihadis. The mere 35 K that you mention are the ones still in Syria. These are the ones calling the shots, along with Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries. All these millions need to hear is “Go!”, and they will act.
linnte says
Humm. The post on the five million Muslim migrants should have posted on Johan Elzingas comment. Sorry!
linnte says
Exactly Peggy! There is even a verse in the Qur’an where Muhammad tells his henchmen to wait on killing non believers, until they are called. Wish I could remember which aya it is, near the beginning, Sura 3 I think.
gravenimage says
Peaceful Muslims tend *not* to be pensive–instead, they are trying to ignore the violent diktats of their vicious creed.
marina says
The most intolerant and belligerent religion on earth. Brave corsicans fought the hell out of the mohammedans.
marina says
Brave corsicans fought the hell out of these mohammedans.
They could have asked the visitor politely to refrain from taking pics. But they are the followers of the most intolerant and belligerent religion on earth.
linnte says
In a public space, no one can dictate who does what unless it harms someone. Taking a photograph is not harmful. And how could the Muslim men know just what the focus of the cameraman/tourist was? It would have been polite if the tourist had asked if he could photograph the Muslimas. It is what I would have done and accepted what ever answer I got either yes or no. But politeness is not always considered.
Champ says
The war between the civilized man and the savage continues …
I choose the civilized man!
Will France? They must!
Peggy says
It’s too late for France.
Angemon says
Go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you.
Peggy says
I WILL NOT. What are you going to do about it?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“I WILL NOT. What are you going to do about it?”
The same I’ve been doing so far, sunshine – calling it out where I see it and dissecting the pile of nonsensical victim-playing and projection you’ll invariably throw at me in response. Why you think coming to the #1 counter-jihad website and counsel defeat is a good idea is beyond me.
Peggy says
Angemon, you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree.
I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me.
Who are you to decide what we should say? You can disagree with me but your aggressive reply only serves to make you look like an intolerant hall monitor (bully if you will).
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Angemon, you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree.”
Boy, the projection runs strong with this one… Remember: *you* tried to shut me up by appealing to numbers and acting like a chola gutter rat. You claimed that I hated Russia because I mentioned the Russian government’s grip on the Russian media only to, a few days later, claim that the Russian government controls the Russian media. It’s you who loses your s*** when you see something you don’t like.
“I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me.”
Oh, you have “every right”? Is that so? How come? How come you have “every right” of not getting replies you don’t like? Who gives you those rights? What makes your posts above criticism? Guess what, sunshine – I have every right to tell you to go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you. What you’re trying to do is censorship, plain and simple.
Go on – explain, in great detail, how you have all those rights you claim and how they don’t apply to me.
“Who are you to decide what we should say?”
What did you have for breakfast today, lead based paint and retard pills? Where exactly did I claim I decided what you – and I mean “you” as in singular, referring to you as an individual, not the imaginary “we” you like to throw around – should say? I simply told you to take your defeatist rhetoric out of the #1 counter-jihad site. That’s it. Of course, you probably knew this – you’re simply trying to play the victim, and if you have to create a strawman so be it. Go spread your nonsense in pro-islamic forums, I’m sure they’ll love it.
“You can disagree with me”
Not if you have any saying in it, seeing how you claimed it was your right not to have me say to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere. Who gave you that right? How come you want to have some sort of special status exempting you from criticism?
“but”
Oh, here is the “but” – meaning that whatever you said so far (that I could disagree with you) is now completely meaningless.
“your aggressive reply”
“Aggressive”? Pffft – far from it. And if your problem is with the shape of my answer and not its content, then your snivelling attempt to silence me has no legs to stand on.
“only serves to make you look like an intolerant hall monitor (bully if you will).”
Hilarious coming from someone who said it was your right not to have me saying a specific string of words in reply to you. Again, projection runs strong with you – maybe you should run PowerPoint presentations and make some money on the side.
Peggy says
And yet, in another post:
“Yes. this can change if the French are prepared to deport majority of Muslims and start either having more children or import non Muslim migrants”
Consistency is not your forte, eh? Either it’s too late or not – you can’t have both simultaneously.
————————-
No place to reply to the post you said this on but here it is.
That is not a contradiction at all. It can be done but France is not going to do that and I recall you slapped me with your crap more than once when I did suggest that we deport Muslims from Europe and other western countries.
So which is it then? Deport most now or expect to be like Lebanon soon enough?
Which one do you agree with Angemon? Which statement would you have not replied aggressively to if that being he only one? Neither, because you replied to both the same way, so there is no statement or opinion I can make without you trying to turn it into some horrible thing I said that I need to remove myself from here.
You’re not that smart you know.
It’s easy to see what you are doing.
I don’t like you either, but I don’t comment on your posts unless it’s a reply to you commenting on mine.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“That is not a contradiction at all.”
Who am I going to believe – you or my lying eyes? Your words are there for everyone to see – on one post you wrote “It is too late because France will be majority Muslim in just a few short decades”. On another you wrote “Yes. this can change if the French are prepared to deport majority of Muslims and start either having more children or import non Muslim migrants”.
Those are mutually exclusive options. Either France is gone or it isn’t. Pick an option and stick with it.
“ It can be done but France is not going to do that”
Ah, and here it is – gaslighting a third, unseen, option. If it can be done then France is not gone. Is that your final choice?
“and I recall you slapped me with your crap more than once when I did suggest that we deport Muslims from Europe and other western countries.”
Not sure how this relates. Please specify and contextualize the post(s) you’re referring – simply calling it/them “crap” while trying to play the victim is a very poor representation of what I might have wrote. If you’re going to tackle something I wrote please represent it accurately. Or are you afraid?
“ Which statement would you have not replied aggressively to if that being he only one? Neither, because you replied to both the same way”
Again, specify and contextualize my posts. Then start explaining why you think what I said was aggressive, Dr. Mind Reader – that is, assuming they’re relevant to what you wrote here. Which I bet they’re not. I caught you with your paws on the “Glaring Contradiction” jar and you’re just trying to run interference and weasel your way out. Not going to work
“so there is no statement or opinion I can make without you trying to turn it into some horrible thing I said that I need to remove myself from here.”
And here it is – the crybullying. Apparently, telling you to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere is “trying to turn what you said into some horrible thing”. Oh, you poor, little innocent victim! Almost draws attention away from the *fact* that you contacted JW staff to get them to remove posts you didn’t like and now you’re trying to lecture someone else on freedom of speech – a concept that’s so alien to you as not flinging mud in my general direction.
“I don’t like you”
I’m well aware of that. Why else would you go so well out of your way to lie and slander me?
“I don’t comment on your posts unless it’s a reply to you commenting on mine.”
Since when? Because I distinctly remember you going out of your way to go after me when I wasn’t even replying to you. And that’s when you weren’t complaining about me on topics I hadn’t even posted. Not that it is any relevant, mind you – are your personal attacks supposed to be noble and praiseworthy actions just because you allegedly don’t reply to me if I don’t reply to you? Or do they reflect your unwillingness to engage in actual discussion all the same?
Anyway, enough with the freaky sideshow distraction. What’s your final statement on France? Is it far gone or is there hope?
P.S.: Please answer my questions. You wrote, and I quote, “I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me”. Who gave you that right? Why are your posts above criticism? Who made those rules? Who decide which replies to you are halal and which are haram? I’m NOT going to let this drop, you know? You want to go out of your way to act like you have special rights other users don’t? Then you’re going to be questioned on it.
Peggy says
Do you get your jollies off having a go at me every time you think you have a chance?
You are nothing more than a bully.
Do you feel like a big smart man now?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Do you get your jollies off having a go at me every time you think you have a chance?
You are nothing more than a bully.
Do you feel like a big smart man now?”
And here it is, Peggy’s trademark crybullying! Please answer my questions instead of flinging crap in my general direction, like an hyperactive monkey with its feces. You wrote, and I quote, “I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me”. Who gave you that right? Why are your posts above criticism? Who made those rules? Who decide which replies to you are halal and which are haram? I’m NOT going to let this drop, you know? You want to go out of your way to act like you have special rights other users don’t? Then you’re going to be questioned on it.
Godless says
Once again, Peggy posts a tiny thought, then Angemon swoops in to chastise her. She reasonably tells him she has a right to her opinion. Angemon zooms into quibble with her. Peggy responds again reasonably to reiterate her point (“I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again)”) and added the obvious observation to Angemon that “you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree”. Best of all, she called him a “hall monitor” (LOL). I’d say maybe more like a strutting “mall cop” with a Napoleon complex, but either way…
Then Angemon responds to her short and sweet reply with a long convoluted, obsessed response of 470 words!!!
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/08/corsica-muslims-riot-burn-cars-attack-non-muslims-with-harpoons-over-tourist-photo#comment-1502908
Doesn’t Angemon have better things to do with his time than pick on Peggy? Is she that dangerous?
Angemon says
Godless posted:
“Once again, Peggy posts a tiny thought, then Angemon swoops in to chastise her. She reasonably tells him she has a right to her opinion.”
I can never tell if it’s you or voegelinian speaking when you use his speech patterns. My guess is that he wrote the text and you’re simply posting it so he can pretend he had no saying in it. After all, that’s why you came here to begin with. Quick background info on why this “Godless” person is here: a user who was banned many times (voegelinian) had a personal grudge against me and a series of other users because he thought he was entitled to use them as hounds to sic on people he doesn’t like. When he contacted them by mail and furious and franticly demanded them to go after me, they told him to get lost. So he went on PalTalk, whining about me, until he got someone there to do what he demanded from the users here. I know this because when “Godless” first showed up I noticed the disturbing similarities in speech and demeanour, and made public inquiries on it. I made such a convincing case that “voegelinian” had no choice but to spit everything out:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/10/france-radical-prisoner-on-the-run-after-getting-temporary-leave-from-prison-shoots-policeman-in-the-head?doing_wp_cron=1471335776.0408020019531250000000#comment-1308385
Anyway, back on track. This is standard voegelinianesque nonsense and doublespeak – replying to him or someone he’s trying to whitewash becomes “swoop in” or “zoom in”, criticism of him or someone he’s trying to whitewash becomes “attack” or “chastise”, etc. It is hilarious, however, how according to the “godless/voegelinian” hybrid (it’s clear that voegelinian does the “thinking”, godless does the posting so voegelinian can pretend to wash his hands from it) I’m not allowed to have a say – Peggy is allowed to say that France is done, but shame on me if I try to talk back at clearly defeatist rhetoric.
This is the exact kind of bullying, pressuring and intimidation used by muslims and their leftist allies. And voegelinian, through his time here. It’s the ravings of delusional authoritarians who want to decide who says what – par for course for the “godlian” hybrid. Or maybe “voegless” is a better choice of name – having “Godless” is like having “voegelinian”, except it’s less.
“Angemon zooms into quibble with her.”
I posted here before “Peggy” did. If you want to talk about “zooming in to quibble” with someone, start by looking at your own post.
“Peggy responds again reasonably to reiterate her point (“I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again)”) ”
And here it is, the insane authoritarian ramblings. You think it’s reasonable to say that Peggy is *entitled* to have a special status that exempts her posts from replies? Well, why wouldn’t you? That’s exactly what you tried to campaign for to yourself. Of course you think it’s reasonable to have a status that prevents me from replying to you. And now you’re doing what you do best – snipping from the sidelines at those who have the gall to say something you disagree with, regardless of whether or not you’re actively aiding the cause of islam. But that doesn’t matter to you – you just need to knock me down a peg or two because you hate me. And here it is a rhetorical question: what would your reaction be if it had been a muslim apologist saying that France was finished? Don’t worry, I know the answer quite well – you’d be defending the muslim apologist because that meant you’d be attacking me.
So, voegless, what would you have said if it was me, not Peggy, saying that it was too late for France? I bet you’d “swoop in” to “zoom” on me and “chastise” me instead.
“and added the obvious observation to Angemon that “you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree”. ”
No, you idiot, she started with that “observation”. And that was no accident – it was a clear attempt to poison the waters and stack the deck against me by implying that I said what I said just because didn’t like anyone saying something I disagree with. It’s always hilarious seeing people who fling insults to, and lie about, people they don’t like project their feelings on others.
Well, voeg, do you like when people say something you disagree? Like “forget it, I’m not going after Angemon like you’re demanding”? Or “why aren’t you answering Angemon’s questions”? Or “on your seditious nonsense of ‘total deportation’ how do you plan to differentiate muslims from non-muslims”?
It’s you and Peggy who go out of your way to try to silence dissenting speech and stomp down on the people saying it – I’m more than glad to meet it head-on and discussing it in the marketplace of ideas. And you know this very well because I tried many, many times to engage you and discuss your ideas, attempts that were always met with scorn, derision and personal attacks. I got a big bellow laugh on your back-pedalling with Trump though – apparently, when I say something it’s a bad idea and you need to get others to go after me, but when Trump says something that’s a limp-wristed version of what I said, then you have his back.
“Best of all, she called him a “hall monitor” (LOL). ”
Of course you consider petty personal insults the “best of all”, that’s your go-to weapon against people who say things you don’t like.
“ I’d say maybe more like a strutting “mall cop” with a Napoleon complex, but either way…”
Q.E.D.
“Then Angemon responds to her short and sweet reply with a long convoluted, obsessed response of 470 words!!! ”
And here it is, the usual voegelinianesque mischaracterization and appeal to numbers hackjob. Why is my response “convoluted” or “obsessed”? Because voeg says so. Keep in mind that the person calling me “obsessed” is doing so through a third party he recruited elsewhere with the stated goal to come after me – but I’m the obsessed one, apparently. And, in typical voegelinian sloppy thinking, he includes Peggy’s words – which I quoted – in that number.
Not to mention voegelinian has made many posts that surpass 470 words – including in replies to me, IIRC. Does that mean his posts are “convoluted” and “obsessed” as well? Must be, going by his standards – unless, of course, he has two different sets of standards…
“Doesn’t Angemon have better things to do with his time than pick on Peggy? ”
And here it is, more of voeg’s doubletalk – replies and criticism becomes “pick on”.
It’s worth noting that Jay Boo also called Peggy out on that same post the voegless hybrid is trying to defend from big, old, mean, Angemon. Why isn’t JB given the same treatment by “voegless”? Because JB is not me – and whatever grudges voeg may have against JB, they take a backseat when I’m around.
gravenimage says
Godless, *of course* Peggy has a right to her opinions. And so does anyone who might disagree with her calls for surrender.
That is, in fact, how free speech works. You can state your opinion, and then others can state their own; in full agreement, in partial agreement, or in full disagreement.
The right to speak is not the same as the right to brook no disagreement.
gravenimage says
It is *not* too late for France. Here’s a salient article:
“Mayor bans burkinis on Cannes beaches: they show ‘allegiance to terrorist movements at war with us’”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/08/mayor-bans-burkinis-on-cannes-beaches-says-they-show-allegiance-to-terrorist-movements-at-war-with-us?doing_wp_cron=1471221460.3439168930053710937500
Peggy says
It is too late because France will be majority Muslim in just a few short decades.
Their birth rate is well below of being able to be reversed while Muslims are breeding like rabbits.
It doesn’t matter what they do now, in a few decades they will be no better than Lebanon.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“It is too late because France will be majority Muslim in just a few short decades.
Their birth rate is well below of being able to be reversed while Muslims are breeding like rabbits.
It doesn’t matter what they do now, in a few decades they will be no better than Lebanon.”
And yet, in another post:
“Yes. this can change if the French are prepared to deport majority of Muslims and start either having more children or import non Muslim migrants”
Consistency is not your forte, eh? Either it’s too late or not – you can’t have both simultaneously.
Jay Boo says
Peggy says it is too late for France.
Isn’t it time for Peggy to take flight with such defeatism.
Pegasus Peggy
It is time to flap those wings of discouragement
Peggy says
Freedom of speech is allowed in a democracy and if you disagree with what I say then you can, if you wish, put forward your thoughts on the subject but telling someone you disagree with to take flight is a sign that you don’t believe in democracy.
You are no better than those leftist you like to condemn.
I wonder if Mr Spencer would tell me to take a flight or counter with some sort of an argument if he disagreed.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Freedom of speech is allowed in a democracy and if you disagree with what I say then you can, if you wish, put forward your thoughts on the subject but telling someone you disagree with to take flight is a sign that you don’t believe in democracy.”
This is popcorn chewing hilarious – Peggy, who stated she has “every right” not to have me write a specific string of words in reply to her, is trying to lecture people on freedom of speech. Guess what, moron? Freedom of speech means the government can’t arrest you if they don’t like what you have to say. And even then it has its limits – try speaking a lie or openly calling to violence and see how far that gets you. This is a *private* website – ALL speech here is subject to whatever rules the admins decide to have (and, to their undying credit, they’re incredibly unrestricted on that regard – don’t spam, abuse foul language or call for genocide and you’ll probably be OK).
And you know that the admins have the last word on what’s said here because you emailed then to try to have posts you didn’t like removed:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/boston-marathon-jihad-murderers-mother-non-muslims-will-burn-in-flames-of-an-eternal-and-terrifying-fire-an-otherworldly-flame-inshaallah?doing_wp_cron=1471280306.8004200458526611328125#comment-1240861
Let me repeat that for you: Peggy, who not only declared it was her right not to have me write things she does not like but also emailed the site staff to try to get posts she didn’t like removed, is trying to lecture others on freedom of speech and democracy. Not only that, what her post amounts to is “you’re using your free speech to tell me to go away? then you don’t believe in democracy” – apparently, there are limits to free speech, and good, old Peggy gets to set them.
Guess what, sweetheart? The same freedom of speech that allows you to say that France is done allows others to tell you to take your speech elsewhere. But, of course, like any good regressive leftist, freedom of speech ends when someone else says something you don’t like.
“You are no better than those leftist you like to condemn.”
No, you moron – leftists would not tell you to take your speech elsewhere, they would whip up a raging mob to go after you until you were forced into silence. They would paint you as a terrible person and try to make you so toxic that no one would ever hire you, talk to you or even pee on you if you were on fire. This blatantly false comparison is an attempt to silence JB by appealing to emotion – “if you tell me such and such you are not better than the people you condemn”. It is *you* who is trying to be the hall monitor bully censor here. It is *you*, Peggy, who is acting like a regressive leftist – you read something you did not like and now you’re trying to shame the person who wrote it. And what a coincidence – the thing you read you did not like was a reply to something you said so now you’re trying to limit what others can write.
“I wonder if Mr Spencer would tell me to take a flight or counter with some sort of an argument if he disagreed.”
That’s exactly what JB did – he told you to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere.
gravenimage says
Peggy, you can counsel surrender and despair here if you so desire.
But there are bound to be those here who will disagree with you.
There are parts of Dar-al-Harb that have been reclaimed from full Muslim conquest–some after being under the Muslim heel for *hundreds of years*.
There is *no doubt* that things are dire now in France and many other places, and that denial and willful ignorance among so many–including our ‘leaders’–*does not help*.
But declaring defeat when Muslims make up no more than one in twelves–as they do in France–would shame our brave ancestors, who stood up to much graver odds than this.
Angemon says
gravenimage posted:
“Peggy, you can counsel surrender and despair here if you so desire.”
I believe it goes a bit deeper than that, GI. Not long ago, “Ex-Muslim” talked about vigilante justice, and Peggy supported it. IIRC, you made a passing comment about “Ex-muslim” only wanting chaos in the West and Peggy stood by her defence of EM’s comment. On this very page, she defends “violence back at them”. What is this story about? A group of muslims attacking tourists who took a photo of a muslima in a burkini and the locals ganging up to defend the tourists against unwarranted muslim aggression. Heck, the article mentions that not long ago a group of locals marched up to a mostly-migrant area of town chanting “this is our place and we will go where we want”. They stood up to muslim intimidation. By any conceivable notion of consistency, Peggy should be praising them. But what was her knee-jerk reaction? “It’s too late for France”. Defeatism and despair, even when faced with examples of the course of action she supposedly defends.
Champ says
Peggy, it isn’t too late for France …things CAN and must change!
Peggy says
Just from the perspective of sheer numbers it’s gone too far already.
Native French cannot sustain their numbers because they are not reproducing enough and they have already reached the level of being unable to reverse this.
Muslims, on the other had, are growing in numbers at an alarming rate and in a few decades will surpass the native French.
Yes. this can change if the French are prepared to deport majority of Muslims and start either having more children or import non Muslim migrants but does it really seem likely?
I don’t want this fate for France. I want Europe to rid themselves of this plague and prosper again but when a country reaches a point of not being able to replace it’s own population by having children and import a hostile barbaric culture with lots and lots of children it’s only a matter of time.
It’s as simple as 2 ad 2 = 4.
Angemon says
Peggy
“Just from the perspective of sheer numbers it’s gone too far already.
(…)
Yes. this can change if …”
I guess “too far gone already” doesn’t really mean “too far gone already”…
Carolyne says
It is indeed too late for France. What difference does it make if a mayor bans strange swimwear on a beach. He needs to ban Muslims from his town? No matter what they wear they are part of the group striving to conquer the Western world.
Peggy says
That is my take on the situation too.
Unless all or majority of Muslims are deported from France they will simply outbreed the natives there.
It’s simple mathematics.
gravenimage says
Another call for surrender…
c matt says
I agree it is late for France, but not necessarily too late. They still have Le Pen (Marion and Marine). But time is running short. France needs to rid itself of Hollande and fellow travelers.
Peggy says
And then what?
How do you stop the Muslims breeding like rabbits and get the natives to have more children?
Unless this happens, without deportation they will simply lose by sheer numbers.
JSteering says
The English language is wonderful. We have the word “savages”.
Hugh Fitzgerald says
Corsican nationalists have already warned ISIS not to touch the island; hundreds of Corsicans marched in Ajaccio last December demanding “Arabs out, this is our island” and burned Korans. The Corsican nationalists are tough and mean business; they haven’t been fighting, on and off, for independence from France, only to see everything lost to what they correctly call “the Arab invader.”
How did these Arab Muslims manage to settle in Corsica in the first place?
And what effect will the Arab goading of, and attacks on, the Corsicans, and their fighting back, do to tourism, a major source of revenue?
faraway says
They were imported to do labouring jobs especially in the agriculture and building industries.They are mostly not arab but berber muslims from north africa.The corsican population has a strong sense of identity and is less likely to let muslims mess with them than other regions of Europe;also many are armed!
linnte says
So the Muslims are brought in to work in service jobs? I wonder why the Corsicans don’t advertise for American college students to do this work? Or other Western young people? Who in their right mind would turn down a summer in Corsica, or a winter for that matter, to work there? I’m 62, and I would scrub floors all day to be there!
Time for Corsica to remove the Muslims and hire people who would work for cheap just to be there.
Carolyne says
Move over and hand me a bucket, linnet.
Charli Main says
Muslim pirates devastated Corsica for centuries. Corsicans are well aware of the ” joys” that North African Muslim invades bring with them.
Angemon says
Phew, you had me worry there for a second – I actually thought I’d see a news article about muslims acting like savages without any mention of “right wingers” to “even it up”. What does this alleged crowd of 500 trying to enter a high “migrant” area have to do with Maghrebins rioting? Well, Corsicans do it too, you see, so it all evens out!
Dan says
Police are still trying to establish how the incident turned into a riot.
It turned into a riot, because Muslims were involved.
Edgar Allen says
The Amish also don’t like to have their pictures taken for religious reasons.
THE AMISH BELIEVE THAT PHOTOGRAPHS IN WHICH THEY CAN BE RECOGNIZED VIOLATE THE BIBLICAL COMMANDMENT, “THOU SHALT NOT MAKE UNTO THYSELF A GRAVEN IMAGE.”
But the Amish are decent people. They don’t go violent, even if you take their picture.
Here’s an example:
” One day I was driving home and I saw an Amish lady carrying groceries from the store to her carriage. A man with a video camera was right in her face, following her back and forth, no more than three feet away from her. She was clearly distressed. I pulled into the parking lot, walked up to the man, and asked him if he was aware the Amish do not wish to be photographed. He was so surprised that he immediately put down his camera and backed off. I had never done anything like that before, and I guess we both shocked each other. ”
http://www.amishnews.com/photographing.html
But Muslims are not like the Amish. Their default response to ANYTHING they don’t like is violence, often MUSLIM GROUP VIOLENCE.
Wellington says
Being a life-long Pennsylvanian, as I just noted on a different thread here at JW, thank you for your assessment of the Amish v. Muslims. The Amish keep to themselves and they believe what they believe with fervor but NEVER do they try to impose their take on life on others, contra Muslims big time, who are the ultimate control-freaks.
Would that every Muslim worldwide would wake up tomorrow Amish. The world would be far better off for it (and it would include the great bonus of all kinds of pork recipes which the Amish have taken to an art form).
epistemology says
Clearly no comparison, the Amish are peaceful people by nature. Of course you have a right to complain when your photograph is taken against your will, but by no means to become violent. The Cannes mayor’s burkini ban must have been a serious blow to the Muslim honor and their self esteem. In Europe they’re used to getting away with anything as these invaders already consider the continent as their own. But the trend must go on, we the Europeans must make them feel unwelcome any time we can. They have to understand that they have to adapt to our way of life which is precious to us.
After the ordeal France has gone through the country is on a good way. I wish the French all the best, I love the country and wish other nations would follow suit you know whom I’m talking about. But they don’t even ban the full face veil in Germany as that might be unconstitutional.
All the best to you and yours and take care in these terrible times my dear friend
Wellington says
“……..as these invaders already consider the continent their own.”
Chilling but true words, epistemology. If only the leaders of Germany, Britain, France, et al. understood this gigantic truth which you have stated. Yes, if only.
Because, if so, if this were the case, the West has more than enough resources to deal with the scourge which is Islam, thus very much proving once again that the enemy within is far more lethal and destructive than the enemy without. Yes, the Merkels, Mays and Francises of Western Europe are the real problem, not aren’t they?
And you and those you hold most dear also take care, my across-the-pond friend. Yes indeed, take care.
Peggy says
But Muslims are not like the Amish. Their default response to ANYTHING they don’t like is violence, often MUSLIM GROUP VIOLENCE.
————————————
That’s because so far violence has worked. What has a non violent way done for us?
Wellington says
Peggy: Though myself a believer in peace through strength, the Amish set an example which is at least laudatory in the abstract while Muslims set up no example which is so.
Actually, the query you ask is best answered by looking at the contrast between Christianity and Islam. More to the point, at least Christianity offers a free world without violence while Islam offers no freedom and with much control-freak violence.
And please keep in mind my last point, to wit, the world would be far better off if every Muslim woke up tomorrow Amish. Or do you deny this?
Georg says
@ Wellington
Perhpas the common conception of morality being roughly equivalent to niceness/non-aggression is underdeveloped in a world where “everything is everything”, so to speak. What I mean is, how laudable can something which is unsustainable be?
The Amish, and I too like them, are unlikely to survive on their own; they need those who would often be at first thought considered to be less moral (particularyl relative to the Amish– and that frankly points to an absurdity). Or, to be more specific, they need those who are sufficiently militant to allow for their peaceful existence.
To be direct: It turns out their propensity to retreat and appease is in fact undesirable and perhaps immoral for it creates a society which is unsustainable and thus doomed to usurption, with its resultant suffering and ultimate destruction. That’s a gift for an enemy.
Where this comes full circle is with the migrant crisis. Is it really the moral choice to allow them to run amok across Europe? Is the suffering of a Muslim more worthy than that of a non-Muslim and his/her progeny? And what does this do to the sustainability of our societies?
Our societies are more worthy than theirs are. There is a zero sum societal shift as they come here. What is the moral price of exchanging a better society for a worse? How immoral is it to make the ascension of their society over our superior society more likely?
It seems there are things we believed out of niceness which were commendable in the schoolyard, but which must be unlearned in a dangerous world where many with ill-intentions and dangerous ignorance are out for keeps.
Peggy says
Actually I meant violence back at them, not violence just because we can. We need to become violent against them in order t defeat them. No amount of love and welcoming will do it. They don’t respond to nice.
Oliver says
I also (once or twice) read that (all or most) of the American Indian Tribes (now known as native Americans) also don’t like their (I beleive individually but Ok as a group-what I had read) picture(s) taken.
An old superstition that a picture captures the soul (or something similar) and leaves the person.
I do not know if still the case, or just from 1800’s until 1900 or so. I recall( form history and television and movies) Indians fighting; killing, etc- but-not because their picture was taken. (Even after Mr. Eastman developed/invented the camera)
gravenimage says
Considering I took pictures of my Native American literacy students for the library’s yearbook, this is a *very* old superstition.
gravenimage says
Yes–compare and contrast.
Berengaria says
I would like to know how all of these Muslims in every country suddenly popped up like poisoned mushrooms? The UN plan to Islamatize every Western country is getting innocent people killed by Muslim thugs. I detest them.
Thanks to the Brave Corsicans, we have some men who are still willing to challenge the Muslim Invaders. The Battle Continues!
Islam_Macht_Frei says
I think Muslims in Corsica should not get the impression that they can behave as their brethren on the Continent do. Corsicans are a whole lot less likely to put up with the abuse.
Dottie says
First of all, why is it necessary to have housing estates with high immigrant populations to begin with? Every country in the world has major problems when you allow certain groups to “breed” amongst themselves. Better to be assimilated and learn all cultures while still maintaining your own religions. Unfortunately, Muslims live in the past and do not want to progress or hear any anyone else’s opinions that do not match their own. They consider “infidels” a “waste of skin”, so how can you even talk to them in a normal conversation?
On another note, people are continually taking pictures and encroaching on people’s privacy which is something that should not be tolerated – look at what the paparazzi do – in your face! Even reporting gets out of hand these days – they are in your face way too much as well!
Anyway, it’s a sad state of affairs in this world today when the radicals everywhere cause regular people just wanting to enjoy life cannot mind their own business!
gravenimage says
Civilized people do not attack photographers with harpoons. Muslims do, though.
Emilie Green says
“Police are still trying to establish how the incident turned into a riot”
Com’n, ask a hard question.
Muslims were involved. Violence ALWAYS comes with them.
Georg says
Eur says
Todo could be the begining of a “civil war”. The hate against muslims in France and Spain is incredible… well against muslim magrebi people, the worst scum on earth.
Nimrod says
The Muslims there should really take a hint from the fact that the Corsica flag is an image of the head of a beheaded Moor.
Jay Boo says
The Muslims with Harpoons, Hatchet-Man, Butcher Knife religion.
This is what always happens whenever a Muslim puts on his first Islamic Man-Dress and sings “Look at me, I’m so pretty, Witty, and Wise”
Son of the West says
So, they were rioting because it is offensive for then to have their picture taken, because it is creating graven images? And yet, we have incidents of religious intimidation where Muslims have taken pictures and videos Catholics at Mass, not to mention all the ISIS propaganda videos?
What this tells me is that Muslims are fine with breaking their own rules when dealing with infidels, but want infidels to respect Islamic rules. In other words, they are backwards, simple minded hypocrites, acting like spoiled children who will use any excuse to throw a tantrum. Unfortunately, their tantrums come with a body count.
All Muslims out of the West, NOW.
Rufolino says
It’s called Moslem supremacism.
Jake Holan says
Zero Tolerance! These ‘refugees’ came to these shores seeking refuge. They need to abide by the laws and norms of the Country. If dissatisfied, it isn’t the host Country and inhabitants who need to change, should change, it is the refugees or they need to find another country to accept them. Zero tolerance means the first criminal offense, they are deported from where they were last legally a resident.
gravenimage says
Corsica: Muslims riot, burn cars, attack non-Muslims with harpoons over tourist photo
…………………
Madness. And notice that the Muslims there sent for help from their thug buddies, who showed up with weapons.
This mobbing behavior is *very* common with Muslims.
Peter Ahlskog says
Can someone make a map over the world and show where there are no Muslims?? Is it only Iceland?
StuartG says
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
There are only a few left Peter, mainly in the Far East or as you say Iceland.
So this morning I awake to find a quite incredible global Ill Walk With You campaign on social media aimed at reassuring Muslims in Western countries after two were shot in New York. This is of course before we know why they were shot and whether they were shot at all by a Westerner. Among the responses is a Florida based man who claims it is unfortunate not many Muslims live in his area. Is he naive or does he not read the news?
Then the Muslim mayor of London pledges 1.7m GBP to set up an online hate crime unit. No one dares to criticize that.
And how does that social media campaign compare with the Muslim response following one of their atrocities?
Iceland, Japan, Korea, Vietnam and South America seem more attractive places to live every time I read the news.
gravenimage says
I’m afraid even little Iceland is not free of Muslims. They already have an Islamic Center there.
Jim says
What seems to be the problem. Shoot them on site. The sooner the world is rid of them then once again the West can be safe again:
Jay Boo says
Shooting people Indiscriminately is called genocide.
Aussirick says
Jay Boo, ” and the problem with this is ?????????????
Carolyne says
Actually shooting people indiscriminately is not called genocide. Shooting people because they are of a particular race, nationality, group, etc. is called genocide. Shooting muslims is often self-defense.
Joan White says
Ladies & Gentlemen:
May I point out again, please, that ISLAM IS AN IDEOLOGY, PRETENDING TO BE A RELIGION.
Joan in Houston//Sunday night
Rich says
From Corsica to Milwaukee, Black African savages enrich our world with their “diversity”.
Jay Boo says
Islam is not a race
Muhammad Islam’s sociopath pervert was pale skin.
Rich says
Errr…I never even implied Islam was a race. It obviously is not. Not sure why you would infer that. My comment referred to black Africans, not Muslims.
In point of fact, Muslims *also* are savages, but my comment never mentioned them. I referred only to black Africans [as such]. But thank you for your reply.
Charli Main says
Hundreds of millions of ” black African savages” are devout Christians. The war against Islam and its adherentes has NOTHING to do with skin colour.
Rich says
If you’ll notice, I never mentioned Islam or Muslims in my comment. Of course you’re right that the counter jihad is not about skin color.
And?
My comment linked black African savagery in Corsica with black African savagery in Milwaukee. Never mentioned Islam or Muslims.
And as for black Africans who are devout Christians, ask yourself: if they are truly “Christians” what is the likelihood that they behave like savages? Very unlikely, right?
Wasn’t referring to them either, again, if you’ll read my comment. But thank you for the reply.
Charli Main says
@ rich
good to be able to express different opinions on a specific topic without it turning into an abusive, slanging match. I will never agree with your referring to Africans as ” black savages” but i will always respect your right to express your opinion.
that’s one of the fundamental differences between civilised peoples and Muslims.
regards
linnte says
THANK YOU CHARLI! I am really tired of some of the real racists that I read comments from. Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE world, not just white people. Black Americans are AMERICANS and we need to stand together to fight this war!
gravenimage says
The problem here is not race, but the creed of Islam.
Argus Cronus says
What right do these invaders think they have to come into our countries and dictate rules. Their invasion alone is reason for us to kick them out.
Jay Boo says
SHAMU Sighting
Ramadan daily fast & feast in the evening is causing many Muslims to become so obese. that any such grossly overweight Muslim woman wearing a black Burkini might easily be mistaken for a WHALE and be HARPOONED by mistake.
More Ham Ed says
“Police are still trying to establish how the incident turned into a riot…”
It had somethin’ to do with the unholy ko ‘ran.
“Tensions were still high on Sunday, when a crowd of around 500 gathered in the nearby town of Bastia and tried to enter a housing estate with a high immigrant population. They chanted: ‘To arms, this is our place and we will go where we want.'”
Quote: “immigrant population” — media CODEWORDS!
Summary: the Crusades were a response to islamic aggression.
Pete says
gravenimage says
Viva Corsica!
Richard says
thin end of the wedge – first women must cover their hair, then they must wear a burqini on the beach if they want to get a suntan, then no-one may take photographs on pain of death …. whatever happened to 1789 ?
duh swami says
Refugee’s…The environmental cure does not work because you bring your behavior problems with you…
Behavior modification is in order…The B.F.Skinner method or ignoring bad behavior and rewarding the good, does not work with the Islamic hordes…
Only the iron fist will work, but it seems no one in the west has one of thosre..
Mack Bolan says
The liberal left likes to use words like progressive, forward,inclusive, diverse, prowomen, and others, yet they choose to get behind a backward cult like Islam. A group that would gladly stone them to death for doing things they do regularly.I guess they are looking at the fact that there is the possibility of over one billion votes out there worldwide. So who are the Democratic party running a con on, all of the other minorities and fringe groups they purport to support, or the Muslims because the values of one side are miles apart from the other.
Florida Jim says
The world of muslims is very similar to the world of Marxists and Satanists it always ends in a fiery Hell. Let’s locate all of them together in Africa and see how well they do as a nation. Oh, wait that is Africa.
Muslims and Marxists deserve each other the rest of us deserve nice, pleasant people which are not found with the others.
steve says
…….A GROUP OF NORTH AFRICAN MEN ARRIVED, ARMED WITH HATCHETS AND HARPOONS…….Only in Merkels spineless Europe.
OnMyMind says
I believe what is quite interesting is the comment made by some of the young, males – a battle cry of sorts – “…They chanted: “To arms, this is our place and we will go where we want.”…This was especially interesting in light of another article I recently read on Breitbart authored by Virginia Hale.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/14/islam-academic-migrants-want-eurabia-globalists-using-migrants-to-destroy-the-west/
She writes about an Islamic academic, Prof. Abdessamad Belhaj and his views on migrant movement and Eurarbia…
In the article, the author states that the…”The Moroccan academic, who works in countries across Europe, stated that Muslim migrants view “all property as ‘given’ and not ‘acquired’ by work”. Professor Belhaj revealed that Muslims, therefore, believe that by taking Europe’s land, Muslims will be granted wealth.”
If wealth, land and ownership are seen through a Muslim’s perspective are as such then how can this religion/culture ever co-exist with other cultures in it’s most true and unadulterated form? There is no concession – there is only Islam.
Peggy says
Godless said:
Doesn’t Angemon have better things to do with his time than pick on Peggy? Is she that dangerous?
————————-
Thank you for realizing what is happening here and giving me some support. Not many would risk getting Angemon angry at them.
I must be that dangerous. Why else would a simple statement result in him writing a novel.
Perhaps you have noticed that others have said the same thing but Angemon only wants to start something with me and then says that he has the right to reply. Yes, everyone has the right to reply but it would be great if people didn’t attack and tell the other person to take a flight or get off the site. That is trying to shut the other person down without having a rational argument against their post.
Others have disagreed with me here as well but they state what it is they disagree with and are courteous so no animosity from them or me.
Jay Boo has joined Angemon in telling me to take a flight and when I answered him, Angemon couldn’t help himself again and replied for him and started to write War and Peace.
The more he does this, the more he is looking like a fool who can’t control himself.
Now and again, someone does back me up and says something to him.
I feel I need to explain why I contacted the moderator of this site.
It wasn’t because I didn’t like someone’s post or a reply to me. It was because Philip Jihadski and Western Canadian were actually very rude and making statements which had gone too far. My surprise was that the moderator didn’t care about the gutter level of their posts. One particularly bad post was removed but the answer I got back from Marc (moderator) about not being my daddy was disrespectful too. He could’ve simply stated that he allows that sort of talk on this site and leave it at that.
So it wasn’t my being crybully as Angemon likes to call me. It was a matter of pointing out gutter level language being allowed.
Thanks again for your support.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Thank you for realizing what is happening here and giving me some support. Not many would risk getting Angemon angry at them.”
Citation needed, Peggy – are you a mind-reader who can tell what others here think about me?
“I must be that dangerous. Why else would a simple statement result in him writing a novel.”
IIT: Peggy doesn’t know what a novel is.
“Perhaps you have noticed that others have said the same thing”
Indeed they have – they told you you are counselling defeat and that you should take your defeatism elsewhere.
“ut Angemon only wants to start something with me and then says that he has the right to reply.”
Oh, great – more mind-reading. Who said here “It’s too late for France” *before* you did? Why, no one! Oh, and I *do* have the right to reply. That you want to have a special status where I don’t get to reply to your posts doesn’t change it, you tin-pot dictator.
“Yes, everyone has the right to reply”
Q.E.D.
“but it would be great if people didn’t attack and tell the other person to take a flight or get off the site.”
Wait, what was it that you wrote about me? “you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree”. Oh, the irony! Anyway, here it is – language police. You know what would be great? If people didn’t promote defeatist rhetoric in the #1 counter-jihad website. Why are you doing that, Peggy? Why are you taking offence with people expressing their opinions at something you wrote? It’s as if “you really don’t like anyone having a say if you disagree” – hypocrisy much?
“ That is trying to shut the other person down without having a rational argument against their post.”
No, it is not. You might have had a point if anyone who replied to you had did what you did – contacted site staff to get posts removed – but I didn’t do that, and I doubt JB did it. You’re just trying to play the victim yet again. I’ll try to make it as simple as possible, but I suspect that won’t prevent you from purposely missing the point:
Telling you to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere is NOT trying to shut you down. Telling you to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere does NOT erase what you posted nor does it prevent you from keep posting. Contacting site staff to try to get them to remove posts you don’t like – as you did – IS an attempt to shut others down. It would mean that their posts – which you had a problem with – would disappear. See the difference? See why it’s hilarious that you complain about me allegedly not liking others saying something I disagree when I never tried to get anyone else’s post removed while *you* did?
Hypocrisy, thy name is Peggy.
“Others have disagreed with me here as well but they state what it is they disagree with and are courteous so no animosity from them or me.”
Reading comprehension is not your forte? I disagree with your spewing of defeatist rhetoric. I disagree with you saying it’s too late for France. And I got animosity from you. But then again, pretty much anything I’d reply to you would have received animosity in return.
“Jay Boo has joined Angemon in telling me to take a flight”
Ah, so it’s all a conspiracy. “JB joined me”? How about “JB read the same post I read and had the same reaction?”. I think you and King Toot might get along – he’s also into conspiracy stuff…
“and when I answered him, Angemon couldn’t help himself again and replied for him and started to write War and Peace.”
More of your petty personal attacks – still trying to take pot shots at my mental health while simultaneously not addressing any of the points I made.
“The more he does this, the more he is looking like a fool who can’t control himself.”
Not an argument. Oh, and if that’s the case you should *welcome* my posts. Why don’t you, then?
“I feel I need to explain why I contacted the moderator of this site.”
It’s obvious enough. Someone wrote posts you did not like and you wanted to have them removed. You acted like a authoritarian nutjob and tried to censor people.
“It wasn’t because I didn’t like someone’s post or a reply to me. It was because Philip Jihadski and Western Canadian were actually very rude and making statements which had gone too far.”
Like I said – someone wrote posts you did not like and you wanted to have them removed. Apparently, you get to decide what posts are “too far” or not in a website you have no control on. You don’t pay the bills, you don’t get to set the rules.
“So it wasn’t my being crybully as Angemon likes to call me.”
I don’t call you a crybully because of your attempt to censor others by running to the site staff and complaining about posts. Nice strawman. And by “nice” I mean “blatantly transparent”. I call you a crybully because you insult and attack others while pretending you’re the victim.
“ It was a matter of pointing out gutter level language being allowed.”
And yet, you seem to have no problems with gutter level language when it’s you using it…
P.S.: Please answer my questions. You wrote, and I quote, “I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me”. Who gave you that right? Why are your posts above criticism? Who made those rules? Who decide which replies to you are halal and which are haram? I’m NOT going to let this drop, you know? You want to go out of your way to act like you have special rights other users don’t? Then you’re going to be questioned on it.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Why else would a simple statement result in him writing a novel.
(…)
Angemon couldn’t help himself again and replied for him and started to write War and Peace.
”
For s***s and giggles, I counted the number of words in that post – excluding, of course, the bits that Peggy quoted from “Godless”. Total: 339 words. Now, here’s the total of words I wrote on the post Peggy describes as “a novel” and comparable to “War and Peace” – I mean the words I actually wrote, thus excluding the parts where I quoted Peggy. Total: 402 words.
If my post was a “novel” – more specifically “War and Piece” – then Peggy’s post, the one where she complains about how long my post was, is also a novel – another beginning to the aforementioned “War and Peace” written by a jealous competitor?
Peggy says
LOL, you’re completely nuts.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“LOL, you’re completely nuts.”
Why? Because you say so? Fat chance – I held *you* to *your* standards and pointed out your hypocrisy. Whose fault is it that you try to mock and deride other people by ignoring their arguments and instead focusing on the length of their posts when you have written posts that are similarly long?
Hypocrisy, like projection, thy name is Peggy!
Peggy says
GI said:
gravenimage says
August 15, 2016 at 11:43 pm
Peggy, you can counsel surrender and despair here if you so desire.
But there are bound to be those here who will disagree with you.
————————————————
I don’t understand why you feel the need to point out the obvious. I know there are some who disagree with me and I disagree with them. Did I give you the impression that I mind that?
Who was I rude to because they disagreed with me? If you are talking about Angemon then please go back and see my post to which he replied not with reason and a better argument but with instructions to get lost and take my “rhetoric” someplace else.
Do you think that was a civil response to my post?
We disagree from time to time and neither one of us speaks to the other that way.
We all have the right to our thoughts and conclusions but we need to be civil.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“I don’t understand why you feel the need to point out the obvious.”
Probably because you acted like what I and JB did was something inconceivable? Probably because you acted like you wanted to punish me and JB for having the insolence to talk back at you? Probably because you were very clear in saying that you have the right of not getting replies whose content you don’t like?
“I know there are some who disagree with me and I disagree with them. Did I give you the impression that I mind that?”
*ahem*
Again – and you’re purposely answering this by now, there’s simply no other explanation – who gave you those rights?
“Who was I rude to because they disagreed with me?”
Me, for starters. Of course, “rude” is a subjective term. I certainly wasn’t rude to you. I can state that you were certainly were rude to me but, like I said, that’s subjective. Anyway, GI didn’t brought up the rudeness issue. Why are you bringing it up? Could it be that you realize you’re coming across as a rude, obnoxious, rub and you’re trying to justify yourself to GI?
“If you are talking about Angemon then please go back and see my post to which he replied not with reason and a better argument but with instructions to get lost and take my “rhetoric” someplace else.”
I reply with arguments to arguments. Saying that “it’s too late for France” is not an argument so you didn’t get an argument for a response. Had you stated why “it’s too late for France” and things would have went differently. Again, the double-standards are staggering. Arguments? Pfffttt, that’s for others to do – you can simply say that’s “too late for France” without having to explain why you think so.
“Do you think that was a civil response to my post?”
Do you think it wasn’t? If so, why? Do you think telling people a third party can’t control their actions is a civil response? If so, why?
Oh, and please answer my queries regarding that notion of yours where I’m not allowed to say certain things when replying to you.That notion reeks of the same mindset behind the “hate speech is not free speech” con, which is meant to curtail free speech.
Peggy says
There is something seriously wrong with you.
You even reply to me when I wasn’t directing my post to you. Do you normally butt in to other people’s conversations? Oh yes, you do. No matter who I reply to, you don’t wait for them to reply to me you jump in.
Can’t you live without conflict? Seriously, you keep using anything as an excuse to get your anger out.
Of course I reply to you in anger. It’s your approach.
Keep it up, you’re really showing all just how demented you really are. Take one small post and you turn it into a war. All this but I have the right to ask questions crap. You don’t ask, you play smart which you are not.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“There is something seriously wrong with you.
You even reply to me when I wasn’t directing my post to you.”
Oh, look, nice way to address my arguments… No, wait, it’s just more of your petty personal attacks. Again: public forum. I can – and will – reply to whoever I want, regardless of whether or not they are directing their post at me or not. Don’t like it? Too bad.
Am I the only one who replies to posts that are not directed at them? Of course not. Everyone here – and I mean everyone – has done that. If not in JW then in some other situation in their lives. Heck, what are the articles presented and analysed here by the staff if not replying to posts that were not directed at them? You might as well be trying to pass breathing or drinking water as signs that there’s something wrong with anyone…
Now, do you want me to bring up posts where you reply to me even though I was not directing my posts at you? Or are you afraid to be judged by your own standards? I bet you are.
“Do you normally butt in to other people’s conversations? Oh yes, you do.”
Well, this little outburst defeated the previous paragraph and several of your previous posts – if I normally “butt in” on other people’s conversations then you can’t claim or imply I have something against you because I “butt in” in your conversations.
“No matter who I reply to, you don’t wait for them to reply to me you jump in.”
Huh, why should I? How long should I wait? In what world do you live in where these nonsensical rules of yours are actually enforced?
“Can’t you live without conflict? Seriously, you keep using anything as an excuse to get your anger out.
Of course I reply to you in anger. It’s your approach.
”
Seeing how you’re resorting to petty personal attacks and completely – and purposely, I’d wager – ignoring my arguments, I’m guessing you’re projecting again. When you say that I’m angry, it is, in fact, you that is angry.
“Keep it up, you’re really showing all just how demented you really are.”
More anger and petty personal attacks. Where’s the rebuttal to the points I raised? Nowhere – you’re outclassed, and you know it.
“Take one small post and you turn it into a war. ”
More projection. I told you to take your defeatist rhetoric elsewhere – you reacted by coming after me personally. To borrow from Billy Joel, “I didn’t start the fire / It was always burning”.
“All this but I have the right to ask questions crap. ”
Which I, well, *do*. That you think it’s “crap” just shows how you have a problem with free speech. Apparently, like leftists, you seem to think free speech ends the moment someone says something you don’t like. You wrote, and I quote, “I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me”. Who gave you that right? Why are your posts above criticism? Who made those rules? Who decide which replies to you are halal and which are haram? I’m NOT going to let this drop, you know? You want to go out of your way to act like you have special rights other users don’t? Then you’re going to be questioned on it.
gravenimage says
Peggy, I do believe it is best to be civil with allies–I do consider you an ally–and I hope I am civil.
Peggy says
Of course you are. I don’t have any problem with exchanging ideas with you.
You don’t try to belittle me for having different views on some things.
Having friendly exchange is beneficial because that way we are nudged to consider something from a different perspective.
Always a pleasure talking to you.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“You don’t try to belittle me for having different views on some things.”
No, that’s one of your trademarks:
Tom from Brussels says
This incident was widely reported in France as an islamophobic aggression of “peaceful” muslims who didn’t want to be photographed. In fact there was a prelude, carefully avoided by mainstream media. Before the “photo” incident, a French couple went bathing and the women was topless. The muslims hurled insults and stoned them. The couple left.They then turned their attention to another couple who were taking souvenir photos and then attacked the young Corsicans who were all under-age teenagers. The Corsican parents arrived and the first man on the scene was harpooned TWICE.I think they must have been moderates as they didn’t decapitate anybody.For those who can read French: http://www.corsematin.com/article/article/sisco-encore-groggy-apres-les-evenements-de-samedi-soir
Another incident involving “bathing muslims happened Sunday evening:
http://www.corsematin.com/article/carbuccia/rixe-sur-les-bords-de-la-gravona
gravenimage says
Thank you for that link, Tom. Madness.
Baucent says
Of dear, the integration experiment is failing…
Peggy says
Peggy says
August 14, 2016 at 7:57 pm
It’s too late for France.
Reply
============================
Five little words and Angemon has turned it into a circus AGAIN.
Five words, that’s all and he’s off ranting and raving like a lunatic.
Seriously disturbed.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Five little words and Angemon has turned it into a circus AGAIN.
Five words, that’s all and he’s off ranting and raving like a lunatic.
Seriously disturbed.”
This is, of course, demonstrably false. I answered those five words with nine words: “Go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you”. It was you who escalated things. Oh, and you still have yet to explain why you are entitled to have some sort of special status where I can’t reply to you. But, of course, you won’t address my arguments – you know you’re outclassed so you try, instead, to play the victim.
Peggy says
Your nine little words were aggressive.
If you don’t want to escalate things then try being courteous and present your views to counter mine instead of telling me to go away and take my “rhetoric” with me.
Courtesy towards others is having class so it’s you is showing no class.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Your nine little words were aggressive.”
Prove it. I’ll offer an alternative hypotheses: you’re a nasty, little person who dislikes me, therefore anything I say – no matter how innocuous – will be considered “aggressive” and a justification to whatever abuse you throw at me – after all, like you said, I “deserved it”.
“If you don’t want to escalate things”
Again: you escalated things. I simply replied in kind. Well, that’s not entirely true – I’m not going around making posts simply insulting you and ignoring your arguments, like you’re doing to me.
“then try being courteous”
Which I was. You, on the other hand, weren’t. And you admitted that much already.
“and present your views to counter mine instead of telling me to go away and take my “rhetoric” with me.”
My counter to your view that it is too late for France was telling you to go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you. Apparently it worked, since you ended up back-pedalling.
“Courtesy towards others is having class so it’s you is showing no class.”
That is in addition to making remarks about my mental health, having double standards, etc. Yes, I can feel the “class” emanating from you – minus the “cl”…
gravenimage says
Peggy, I’m not ready to write off 66 million people–at least 61 million of whom are our fellow Infidels. France is the heart of Europe.
Nor am I ready to write off the culture that gave us Voltaire, Chopin, Les Misérables, and the Impressionists.
“Five little words” can say a great deal. “it’s too late for unbelievers” is just five words, as well–as is “all is lost, Infidel scum”.
So is “please don’t give up yet!” and “we can win this fight!”, which I much prefer.
Charli Main says
With you on this one GI. It took Spain 800 YEARS to win the fight against the Muslim scum that had invaded their land.
They NEVER gave up. You can lose battles but YOU ONLY LOSE THE WAR WHEN YOU GIVE UP.
gravenimage says
Thanks, Charli.
Peggy says
Thank you for your reply.
I really don’t want to give up. I feel overwhelmed at the magnitude of the problem and have come to that conclusion based on facts.
The Balkans were under Ottoman Empire for 500 years and finally got rid of Islam (not entirely but enough to manage it). Do we really want Europe to go the same way?
No we don’t but the speed at which Muslims are breeding and the native French or non Muslim migrants to France are not having enough children to sustain them is very ominous.
Question is, how do we stop Muslims from breeding so fast and how do we encourage non Muslims to have more babies.
At this rate Islam is very likely to overtake there in a few decades.
I hate the thought of that but I can’t see a solution to that huge problem except deportation which isn’t on the cards.
How do you see Muslims outbreeding the rest? All they need is 50% of the population and they will have their politicians in place. Yes, I am very scared. Once there, there is no getting rid of them.
Look at the Balkans. They finally liberated themselves from Islam, but Islam is very much present there and Islam has been able to get two new countries on Christian land.
Definitely not trying to argue with you. Just want to give you an insight into what I see.
gravenimage says
Peggy wrote:
Thank you for your reply.
I really don’t want to give up. I feel overwhelmed at the magnitude of the problem and have come to that conclusion based on facts.
……………………….
I often feel overwhelmed as well, Peggy. I just meant that we have been able to come back from worse–*not* that it is a sure thing.
After all, the Levant, the Mahgreb, Anatolia, large swaths of central Asia, and the Middle East–save only for Israel–have *never* come back from Islam, and are not likely to, with so many of their Infidel population murdered or driven away.
More:
The Balkans were under Ottoman Empire for 500 years and finally got rid of Islam (not entirely but enough to manage it). Do we really want Europe to go the same way?
……………………….
*Absolutely not*. I just pointed out that it is possible to come back even from full Muslim conquest–I was *not* positing this as a model for us to emulate.
More:
No we don’t but the speed at which Muslims are breeding and the native French or non Muslim migrants to France are not having enough children to sustain them is very ominous.
Question is, how do we stop Muslims from breeding so fast and how do we encourage non Muslims to have more babies.
At this rate Islam is very likely to overtake there in a few decades.
……………………….
It *is* ominous. The first thing to do is to put on the brakes and end more Muslims flooding in; the second is that we should start deportation–and start with known Jihadists.
Israel is also under threat from the Muslim population bomb.
More:
I hate the thought of that but I can’t see a solution to that huge problem except deportation which isn’t on the cards.
……………………….
I think it can be–some nations are starting to turn back Muslim invaders–Poland, Australia–or even deporting them, as Norway is beginning to do.
But none of this will be easy–especially with so many still mired in “political correctness” and willful denial. But we are seeing some signs that the tide is beginning to turn–though it is slow and inconsistent.
More reason for us to *get out and push* even more. Take heart!
Champ says
Peggy, it takes two 2 tango; and as I see it, you give as good as you get.
Take care.
Peggy says
Would you have me not say anything to a response like this?
Peggy says
August 14, 2016 at 7:57 pm
It’s too late for France.
Reply
Angemon says
August 14, 2016 at 8:17 pm
Go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you.
Reply
—————————-
As you can see Champ he is the one who chooses to respond to my posts in an aggressive way. I merely reply to him in the manner which he deserves.
When people disagree with me and say so in a normal manner, my response is reciprocated.
So, can I ask you this? Was his response to my post reasonable and did it deserve a reasonable reply?
Champ says
“Would you have me not say anything to a response like this?”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No; but there has been a lot of back ‘n forth between both of you–not only on this thread, but many others over time.
I am responding, mostly, to the fact that you chose to start a separate argument with Angemon in your above comment:
Peggy says
August 16, 2016 at 8:16 am
Peggy says
August 14, 2016 at 7:57 pm
It’s too late for France.
Reply
============================
Five little words and Angemon has turned it into a circus AGAIN.
Five words, that’s all and he’s off ranting and raving like a lunatic.
Seriously disturbed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In fact I noticed that you did this a couple of times on this thread …
Hey these disputes are between you and Angemon, but imo you seem to be blaming him for the discourse, when it’s both of you–that’s all I’m saying.
Did you really need to start another argument by writing a separate comment? Separate from his original response to you?
To me it looks like you’re trying to provoke him.
Take care.
Angemon says
A little sidenote, Champ. Notice that Peggy often goes into “what do you think about such and such” territory when her behaviour is called into question. It’s classic misdirection – I suspect she *knows* that her behaviour is unacceptable so she dodges criticism of it by placing critics on the spot.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“As you can see Champ he is the one who chooses to respond to my posts in an aggressive way.”
There is nothing aggressive in saying “go away and take your defeatist rhetoric with you”.
“I merely reply to him in the manner which he deserves.”
Ah, so I “deserve it”. Somehow this justifies all your insane ramblings, accusations and petty personal attacks you fling in my general direction. This is the exact same way how leftists justify, for example, attacking Trump supporters or killing cops – they deserve it.
“When people disagree with me and say so in a normal manner, my response is reciprocated.”
Again, this is the exact same way leftists justify doing things they claim to be against – their targets deserve it because they did, said or even *think* something they did not like. But let’s take this “reciprocity” nonsense to its logical conclusion. Did you told me to go away? No, you replied by attempting to poison the well and claiming a special status. You wrote “I have every right to express what I think without you telling me to go away (again) and take my “rhetoric” with me.” You have that “right”? Who granted it to you? Where is that alleged right written?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Would you have me not say anything to a response like this?”
And yet, you expect me not to say anything when you say, for example (one amongst many scores), that I’m “ranting and raving like a lunatic” and claim I’m “seriously disturbed” – because, according to you, I should self-censor and not reply to anything you write.
Kay says
Harpoons? Really, where does one get a harpoon?
I believe the report, yet part of me thinks I woke up into some sort of alternative-universe.
Must be global warming. sarc/off
Cecilia Ellis says
Time to ban pressure cookers, knives, machetes, axes, hatchets, refrigerated trucks, and harpoons, the latter of which no home should be without . . . ?
Peggy says
Champ said:
To me it looks like you’re trying to provoke him.
Take care.
======================
No, I would love nothing better than he just stop taking notice of my comments at all. In fact, I have asked him to do exactly that more than once to which he responded with “I have the right to comment on anything I want”.
Yes, we can all comment on anything we want but when two people are obviously not getting along and really should just ignore each other out of just sheer courtesy then he really should just ignore them.
Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean you should, especially when you know that the other person would just like to be ignored by you and ignore you.
So me mentioning that it was only five little words was not to provoke but because I was really fed up with him jumping down my throat for absolutely nothing AGAIN. That was something that came to me later on and I felt I wanted to express that to him.
This can all be avoided if he would just leave me alone. Sure, I can choose not to respond to him but I am so fed up with him stalking me (yes it is stalking when you are told that the other person wants you to leave them alone).
If you asked me to ignore you I would because it’s a matter of courtesy. So why is it that you seem to put the blame on me and choose to tell me how it takes two to tango but I have not yet see you post one response to him about what he is doing.
Maybe you think I should just ignore his unwanted remarks. But what about him not making any?
Do you agree that it’s acceptable that when you ask someone to ignore you and they refuse to time and time again even on a site like this? Would you appreciate it?
Champ says
Peggy wrote:
“I would love nothing better than he just stop taking notice of my comments at all.”
Peggy, stop taking notice of his comments …
And:
“In fact, I have asked him to do exactly that more than once to which he responded with ‘I have the right to comment on anything I want.'”
You can make this request, but he does have the right to ignore it. You can’t control him, but you can only control yourself–so you could apply this principle to yourself and simply ignore him.
Peggy says
You’re right, I can ignore him and I have tried. I might need to try harder but sometimes I feel that his comment on my post is inaccurate or unfair and distorts my meaning that I fall in the same trap.
Again, you’re right and I will need to do that and allow him to post whatever he wants on my comment. Anyone with any sort of manner would just accept the request and just ignore me, especially when our conversations are not pleasant. I know that if I was asked not to comment on someone’s post I would gladly oblige.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“You’re right, I can ignore him and I have tried.”
But you just can’t help yourself – you are guilty of the thing you accused me of many times.
“I might need to try harder but sometimes I feel that his comment on my post is inaccurate or unfair and distorts my meaning that I fall in the same trap.”
Bulls***. You have tackled exactly 0 (zero) of my arguments here. And I *asked* you, several times, to address them, specifically the part where I trounce down your notion that you have “every right” of not having me replying to you.
Your posts are nothing but abuse directed at me. Because I had the audacity of saying something you don’t like – I “deserve it”, like you put it:
If anyone here replies to distortions and mischarecterizations, like the ones above, it’s me. And what do I get in return? More abuse, all along while you, the abuser, tries to pass as the victim. You railed against me and JB for allegedly not making arguments while all your replies to me contained some sort of abuse and tackled none of my arguments. Good thing I judge people for their actions, not for their words.
“Anyone with any sort of manner would just accept the request and just ignore me”
Again: you’re not a protected class who is above criticism.
“especially when our conversations are not pleasant.”
They’re not pleasant because you flip your s***, fly off the rail and start abusing me at any perceived criticism. You know what? I think you love doing that. I think you love insulting people you don’t like and trying to manipulate bystanders into believing you’re the victim. Why else would you do it so often? Why else would you write post after post (some of them long enough for you to deridingly call “novels” were they written by me, I’ll add) either throwing abuse at me or telling a third party that you’re the wronged party here?
“I know that if I was asked not to comment on someone’s post I would gladly oblige.”
OK then, stop replying to my posts. Let’s see how that works.
Peggy says
Oh, and BTW, have you seen me commenting on any of his posts?
Not for quite a while now because I don’t want any dialogue with him. I just wish he would return the favour.
Champ says
“Oh, and BTW, have you seen me commenting on any of his posts?”
Well, on this thread you’ve responded to him quite a bit, but on other threads I honestly haven’t been paying close enough attention to know one way, or the other. This thread stood out to me since you had initially responded to me.
And the *only* reason I suggested that you ignore him is because you had made this request of him and it isn’t going as you had hoped, so …
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“Oh, and BTW, have you seen me commenting on any of his posts?
Not for quite a while now because I don’t want any dialogue with him. I just wish he would return the favour.”
Buls***. You’re replying to me on this very topic. Oh, and going by your little rule I would not be allowed to reply to posts where you mischaracterize, slander and lie about me – I would no be able to defend myself from your abuse, as exemplified in your August 16, 2016 at 8:16 am post:
Your little rule would let you have a free reign to abuse others while denying them the right of response. Does that sound fair to you?
Peggy says
Sorry Champ, don’t mean to drag this out. Just wanted to clarify something.
Champ says
August 17, 2016 at 12:30 am
“Oh, and BTW, have you seen me commenting on any of his posts?”
Well, on this thread you’ve responded to him quite a bit,
——————————————
I don’t consider a reply to him when he is talking directly to me as commenting on HIS post. It’s my post which he is either asking me something or telling me to get lost..
I meant when he comments on any article, I don’t comment on it because I don’t want to start a conversation with him.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
Champ says
“I think you misunderstood what I was saying.”
Yes–I did, so thank you for clarifying.
All the best 🙂
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“I don’t consider a reply to him when he is talking directly to me as commenting on HIS post.”
And there it is – dual standards. You *reply* to my posts but you don’t consider it a reply because reasons. What you said about not replying to me is factually false – it’s a *lie*, and no amount of semantic gymnastics will change it.
“I meant when he comments on any article, I don’t comment on it because I don’t want to start a conversation with him.”
That is a demonstrable LIE. Here’s one example from many I could point to:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/07/jihad-martyrdom-bombers-hit-3-saudi-cities-including-muhammads-mosque-in-medina#comment-1474491
Angemon says
P.S.: The progression here is obvious. When it was only me replying to you, you threw vile and unfiltered abuse in my direction. When someone else stepped in, you placed you best little girl face, pretended you did nothing wrong and focused on wooing them onto believing you’re the victim here. That’s textbook manipulatory behaviour.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“It’s my post which he is either asking me something or telling me to get lost.. ”
Liar. I did not told you to get lost. You lied about that on *two* posts to *two*different people. You lie on something that’s easily disprovable – why should anyone trust anything you say?
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“No, I would love nothing better than he just stop taking notice of my comments at all.”
We’ve been through this before: you’re not a protected class whose posts are shielded from criticism, no matter how many times you try to say you have “every right” of not having me replying to you.
“Yes, we can all comment on anything we want but when two people are obviously not getting along and really should just ignore each other out of just sheer courtesy”
Then perhaps you should stop insulting, lying about me, attacking me, etc. – as usual, you say one thing and act in another way.
“then he really should just ignore them.”
If I don’t act like your posts are a protected species then I deserve the insults, slander, etc., I get from you. Got it.
“Just because you have the right to do something doesn’t mean you should, ”
Why are you parroting leftist mantra?
“So me mentioning that it was only five little words was not to provoke”
No, the rest of it was – ” Angemon has turned it into a circus AGAIN.
Five words, that’s all and he’s off ranting and raving like a lunatic.
Seriously disturbed.”
“This can all be avoided if he would just leave me alone. ”
Isn’t that eerily similar to what muslims say? “Stop criticizing islam and you don’t get terrorist attacks”. And it’s hilarious that you’re saying this in reply to someone saying *you* went out of your way to provoke me. Which is the truth, like Champ pointed out.
“Sure, I can choose not to respond to him but I am so fed up with him stalking me (yes it is stalking when you are told that the other person wants you to leave them alone).”
Huh, no. That’s not what stalking is. You’re trying to redefine a term so you can use the negative connotations it has to play victim and try to gather sympathy. Again, this is the type of behaviour found in leftist morons.
“If you asked me to ignore you I would because it’s a matter of courtesy.”
Peggy, ignore me from now on. Let’s see how that works.
“ So why is it that you seem to put the blame on me ”
Oh, look, more victim playing – please point to where Champ allegedly did this.
“and choose to tell me how it takes two to tango ”
That is the exact opposite of blaming you – it’s simply telling you that you have *part* of the blame. Which, of course, you’ll never admit. Because you want to pass the idea you’re a poor little innocent victim and you have a problem with anyone saying anything to the contrary.
“ but I have not yet see you post one response to him about what he is doing.”
I suspect that if I were doing the passive-aggressive emotionally manipulatory cringy whining self-pity party you’re trying to do Champ would say something to me. But I’m not, am I?
“Maybe you think I should just ignore his unwanted remarks. But what about him not making any?”
Again: you’re not a protected class.And for all your mentions of “freedom of speech”, you’re actively trying to infringe on my ability to express myself.
“Do you agree that it’s acceptable that when you ask someone to ignore you and they refuse to time and time again even on a site like this? Would you appreciate it?”
Do you think speech you don’t like justifies insulting other people, lying and slandering them, and provoking them? Oh, and do you eventually plan on tackling my arguments or will you insist on your petty personal attacks instead? Because while you claimed that I did not respond to you with an argument, all you’ve been doing is insulting me, without even pretending to address my arguments.
P.S.: Nice preface to “War and Peace” 🙂
Peggy says
Angemon says
August 16, 2016 at 7:55 pm
Peggy posted:
“Your nine little words were aggressive.”
Prove it. I’ll offer an alternative hypotheses: you’re a nasty, little person who dislikes me, therefore anything I say – no matter how innocuous – will be considered “aggressive” and a justification to whatever abuse you throw at me – after all, like you said, I “deserved it”.
==============================
If you feel that way then stop replying to my posts.
Why do you insist on starting any dialog with me? Just ignore what I say if you can but it seems that you can’t.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“If you feel that way then stop replying to my posts.
Why do you insist on starting any dialogue with me? Just ignore what I say if you can but it seems that you can’t.”
Right back at you, Peggy. You already stated, on several topics, that I can’t help myself. What’s your excuse? Oh, yeah – you don’t like dissenting speech and since I said something you don’t like, I “deserve” to be insulted, slandered, etc. Don’t teach Peggy not to be abusive, teach people not to say stuff Peggy doesn’t like.
Peggy says
I don’t need an excuse. I already DON’T reply to any of your posts. Can’t be said about you.
Angemon says
Peggy posted:
“I don’t need an excuse. I already DON’T reply to any of your posts. Can’t be said about you.”
Another demonstrable lie – on this very topic you replied to my posts. Heck, you went out of your way to start s*** with me, as exemplified on your August 16, 2016 at 8:16 am post:
Oh, and you “don’t need an excuse”? Why, then, did you try to excuse yourself by saying that I “deserved it” or that “you tried to ignore me but sometimes blah blah blah”? And if you don’t need an excuse, does that men you reply to my posts because you *want* to? You lie, insult and slander me because you *want* to? Is that it?
Angemon says
“I already DON’T reply to any of your posts.”
She said, replying to one of my posts.
Angemon says
Sorry, what I meant to say was:
She said, replying to one of my posts, in a topic where she stated that if people asked her not to reply to their posts she would do so and where I asked her not to reply to my posts.
Iftikhar Ahmad says
The Burkini was originally designed by an Australian woman, and many non-Muslims wear them. Some people may think they are silly, but at the end of the day, whether a woman chooses to wear a bikini or a burkini it is her choice and people should stop judging others based on how they are dressed, it is petty. Burkinis are now popular among Muslim and non-Muslim women. Why not just respect these women for covering up? Demand is particularly strong among women keen to cover up their curves or protect their skin against the sun. And why not ? We should have respect for these women , is their religion, they can enjoy sea as everyone !For those narrow minded people who are calling this ridiculous think again. If someone wants to cover up then who are you to argue? Freedom to wear what you want is a good thing! Good for skin cancer prevention.It’s a great way to avoid nasty comments about your body in the press.
Tomorrow, Burka would be popular. EVERY year, more than 5,000 Brits convert to Islam. More than half of those who make the switch are white – and 75 per cent are women. But what would make someone want to change their lifestyle so dramatically? Christianity originated not in the Great Britain but in the Middle East. The Christians migrated to Europe bringing their religion with them. Similarly, while Islam too, originated in the Middle East, Muslims migrated to Europe and all over the world. Today, Britain is a multi-faith society and Muslims are part of this society just as Christians and people of other faith. If any one expects Muslims to go back to Middle East, then in all fairness, Christians must go back too because historically, Great Britain was the land of pagans before Romans invaded this country! Islam is fastest growing religion in conversation, why? Because it gives more sense.
IA
Kay says
Amy is back.
Angemon says
Iftikhar Ahmad posted:
“The Burkini was originally designed by an Australian woman”
I’d say “citation needed”, but this is irrelevant to the story, which is about muslims rioting because they did not get what they want. Kudos to the Corsicans who stood up to them.
“and many non-Muslims wear them.”
See above.
“Some people may think they are silly, but at the end of the day, whether a woman chooses to wear a bikini or a burkini it is her choice and people should stop judging others based on how they are dressed, it is petty.”
No, we shouldn’t, and no, it isn’t. We shouldn’t judge people on things they have no choice, like skin colour, height, etc. We can – and should – judge people based on willing choices they make – what religion they follow, how they choose to dress, etc.
“Burkinis are now popular among Muslim and non-Muslim women.”
See my first reply.
“Why not just respect these women for covering up?”
How about you learn something about the subject you’re trying to tackle? The use of burkinis was banned because France has very strict laws about conspicuous religious symbols in public places. How about those women respecting the law of the land instead?
“Demand is particularly strong among women keen to cover up their curves or protect their skin against the sun.”
See my first reply.
“And why not ? We should have respect for these women , is their religion, they can enjoy sea as everyone !”
Those women should respect the law of the land – it’s banned precisely because it is a religious symbol.
“For those narrow minded people who are calling this ridiculous think again. If someone wants to cover up then who are you to argue?”
Law enforcement, perhaps? Patriotic Frenchmen who don’t like seeing the law of their land trampled upon? The law says they can’t use it, so who are they to think they’re above the law?
“Freedom to wear what you want is a good thing!”
Are Christians and Jews allowed to wear crosses in, for example, Saudi Arabia, Iran or Pakistan? Are you planing on going there and telling them how they should allow Christians wear crosses in public?
“Good for skin cancer prevention.It’s a great way to avoid nasty comments about your body in the press.”
Skin cancer is easy enough to avoid. And exactly which press is going around making nasty comments about the general public?
“Tomorrow, Burka would be popular. EVERY year, more than 5,000 Brits convert to Islam. More than half of those who make the switch are white – and 75 per cent are women.”
See my first reply.
“Islam is fastest growing religion in conversation, why?”
Because that, false as it is, is one of the sound-bites muslims like to throw around as if it means anything.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/07/islam-fastest-shrinking-religion-in-the-world
Cecilia Ellis says
Further investigation reveals that the Corsica riot was far more than a burkini battle. An update to the initial report indicates that Islamic supremacism once again raised its ugly head, as evident in the following extract:
“… three Muslim brothers arrived on the beach on Saturday with their female companions and attempted to “privatize” it. The Muslim women, contrary to initial press reports, were not wearing burkinis but were swimming in full Islamic dress.
The first incidents broke out early in the day when the Muslims put up a no entry sign to keep people from coming on to the beach. A couple already on the beach were forced to leave, as were two young boys canoeing in the creek. Tourists, including a Belgian who took a photograph and local passers-by who got too close were insulted, threatened and pelted with stones.
A group of village teenagers then arrived on the beach as they usually did on a Saturday afternoon. At this point the situation deteriorated and conflicting versions were given to the investigators. One teenager claimed he was hit by one or more of the three Muslim males.
The father of the teenager was informed his son was being molested and when he arrived on the scene he too was beaten. Several witnesses indicated to the police that harpoons and a baseball bat were used in the attack.”
https://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/burkini-battle-what-really-happened-corsica
gravenimage says
Thank you for the grim additional information, Cecilia. None of this surprises me.
islam the religion of killers says
“take a picture of a Burkini”
Someone should produce a Playboy Bunny Calendar of Arab woman in burkini’s …
Tight Burkini, budding nipples, sexy pose. skin tight pussy, seductive looks, of course with a Kaffer in the background, put it on the social media only ..
They won’t be able “storm the conference room” (Pam Geller) or blow up the office (Charlie Hebdo) and the images will keep rolling around ….. probably go viral
idiots,,, how dare they poloute our beaches with their burka’s and there aggression