I understand the extreme reaction to last night’s events in Paris, believe me. Lots of people instinctively want to strike back against the people and ideologies responsible for the terror, and I agree with them. But when you completely demonize a couple billion people? That I cannot co-sign, and I’m about to tell you why. I fully realize that many of you are more hardline on all this than me, and that’s fine. It’s my blog, though, and so I wanted to come and explain things from my perspective.

I’ve known many Muslims throughout my life. My dear friend comes from that background, even though she is no longer practicing. I can tell you all that I’ve never met a kinder and more introspective person during my time on the planet. You’ve heard her talk yourselves; would you consider someone like her an enemy of the state? I saw many people on Twitter saying exactly that last night. If they had their way, every single Muslim would be thrown out of the West. Do you think they would make a distinction about her no longer practicing? What about her family, who are all law-abiding and peaceful, but still practice Islam? These are the questions that go through my mind when I see bloodthirsty tweets and “deport them all” kinds of messages.

Do not misunderstand me here. I’m not in favor of massive, unfettered immigration. But Nora and her family didn’t come to the United Kingdom in that manner. My friends from college didn’t come to the United States in that manner. I realize that letting followers of Islam into the West is going to cause some issues, undoubtedly. You simply can’t tell who is an extremist and who isn’t sometimes. This is the price we pay for being the beacon of the world, though. If we close up our countries and turn into complete monsters, then we are no longer upholding the ideals of our civilization.

Does this mean that Islam should be exempt from criticism? No. I have many problems with the religion, as I do with all religions. I see the subjugation of women and it bothers me deeply. Master Milo talked about gays being put to death in many Muslim countries for their sexuality in his column today, and he’s completely right to call that out. The sponsors of the terror and the people who help in any way must also be brought to justice. I don’t know that large scale military campaigns are the answer, though. In fact, I’m almost certain that they are not. ISIS is doing some terrible things, and I can understand a limited coalition to take them out. But going any further is not something I support. Why? Because it just causes more terror.

Bill Maher talked about it on his show last night

“I’m going to ask you this question that people asked after 9/11, because I don’t think we still know the answer: Why do they hate us?”

 The panel then fell silent—before panelist Dylan Ratigan brought up the U.S. funding Saudi Arabia as one reason that Islamic terrorists are upset with America.

“That’s not what terrorists say,” said Maher. When you capture one, or when they leave a note, you know what they say? Because you’re in Muslim lands. I have a crazy idea: Why don’t we get out of Muslim lands?”

To me, this is something that needs to be examined. We can’t get involved in every single military conflict they have going over there. They don’t want us and we don’t need to waste the treasure in both blood and money. Let them sort their own shit and we can help from afar in whatever ways we can…and that doesn’t mean drone strikes and F-22’s. Speaking of those drone strikes, I’m not saying we should take that tool out of our repertoire completely. There are places for it, like with Jihadi John the other day. But over-reliance on this is the cause of some of the resentment. We shouldn’t apologize for defending ourselves, but recklessness is a net negative.

Anyway, these are just a few of my thoughts on the matter. As many of you know, I originally come from a liberal background, even thought the SJWs and corrupt pols have driven me into independence. You can feel free to disregard my post as just the rantings of another deluded appeaser because of all that. But if we change so much that we no longer resemble the old West, then what have we really won? In my opinion, nothing. The death of so many innocent people yesterday was tragic, and I weep for every single one of them. But the death of Western civilization would be tragedy on a much larger scale.

      1. “I have a crazy idea: Why don’t we get out of Muslim lands?”

        I have a crazier idea: Why don’t we deport Muslims back to their homeland since they hate us so much? :^)

        1. And, make it illegal to indoctrinate children into religion. Allpw the teaching of it to continue, but only after the age of 16.

          1. I think this point is irrelevant, we have 100’s of religions in this world but only 2 creates big problems: Muslim and SJW

          2. Actually, it’s a lot more than two that create big problems. All the Abrahamic religions are at war with each other, Buddhists are at war with Hindus, Christians, Muslims, and Jews, Taoists are at war with all of them, etc.

            Point being, all religion is horrid and horrible. If it gets binned, things would get a hell of a lot better.

  1. Oh thats Jihadi John? I thought this was another nickname for Mcintosh. I’m not joking here since I know how serious the situation is. I really thought it was another name to make fun of Josh.

  2. Bravo Ralph, I’m with you 100% 🙂 Some here might disagree with your opinion but I doubt any regulars will hold it against you. If they do…fuck ’em.

    I grew up in a very multicultural suburb and yes, there was quite a few muslims, mostly Albanians, Turks, Croatians and Afghans but there were a few of each from pretty much everywhere. I called many of them friends. They never argued about religion and very rarely brought their old world beefs with them.

    Most left to escape poverty or war and had no intentions other than to live free and without war/political despots.

    Condemning the majority for what a radical few do is ridiculous and no different than the radfems do to us as men/gamers. I’ve got no objections to identifying the radical ones and fucking them off back to where they came from but the peaceful majority are not to blame.

    1. I do not think it is such a tiny minority polls and studies show huge support for groups like ISIS. Anti-Semitism,gender segregation and discrimination,objections against freedom of speech, like you mention Turks over 80% of Turks living in the West voted for Erdogan in the recent elections.

      1. Like Bill Maher asked, why do they support ISIS? If we continue to meddle in their affairs, bomb their countries and kill their citizens why wouldn’t they feel conflicted about ISIS?

        Also I think that although they’d be supporting ISIS in Arab countries, I doubt most would be cheering at the attacks in Paris. They’re 2 different situations.

        Not sure what you’re getting at with Erdogan, he’s come out in opposition to these attacks and Turkey is about as moderate as a Muslim country will likely ever get in our lifetimes.

        I’m not saying their isn’t issues but it’s not black or white and violently lashing out is what got us here in the first place though I do agree that immigration should be brought to a halt, it’s probably best for all involved at this point.

        1. Islam has been “violently lashing out” since the 7th century. Im European so I am familiar with the history. They attack , we lash out, and they pretend to be victims. So I do not believe in the whole we are victims so let me kill you now kafir narrative. The point of Turks voting for Erdogan in such large majorities is to show these Turks living in the West are not as moderare as you suggested. Islam started in the 7th century. Muslims occupy lands that used to belong to non-Muslims peoples and cultures. So when you ask me who started it I know who started it in fact it is described in the Qu’ran.

          1. “Islam has been “violently lashing out” since the 7th century”

            Yeah all religions have been doing that period, not just Islam. Ultimately we’ve been lashing out since we evolved, only the excuses have changed. And we go ’round and ’round….

            Bush used terms like Holy War and Crusade after a Saudi national attacked the US and used it as justification for the war in Iraq. Western religion can be just as fucking bad.

            You’re still with the black and white worldview after all that bullshit popped off?

          2. People sure love putting up the strawman of Christinanity dont they? Its comparing apples and oranges. But i will entertain you. Tell me how many people did Jesus kill ? For the first five centuries or so of Christianity Christians were a persecuted minority. Islam within a hundred years of the death of Muhammad stretched from India to North Africa. I think US foreign policy should change , I think the tactics used in the so called “war on terror” are wrong. So if that is having a black and white view I do not know. I do know this , no majority Muslim country , ever in the history of the world has ever had the sort of freedoms and rights that Europeans and other , children of the enlightenment enjoy.

          3. I think Western military tactics and strategy have been disastrous and counter productive but they came from the idea that, inside every Muslim there was an American trying to come out. The globalist view that all cultures are equal and want the same basic thing is still very dominant and it is causing disaster after disaster. Like Afghanistan requires at least a generation to recover you need to break down ethnic,religious and cultural ties and outlook. Otherwise its like fighting a hydra you cut one head off and out pops another Taliban.

          4. There was that whole burning-witches-at-the-stake thing in Cathoic Europe.
            And in Boston.
            And the whole Holy Crusades deal.
            And the Inquisition.
            And the folks who went to South America and burned and tortured those who wouldn’t convert. That was a fun time too.

            Also – last I checked it was Muslim civilizations that produced Algebra, the number zero, toothbrushes, universities, coffee, and hospitals. I eel like coffee is the important one.

          5. I am familiar with the history but do not find them relevant when talking about Islam. Islam is not Christianity. Islam is not the Catholic Church. On witch burnings though, Islamic countries still practice witch trials to this day. Saudi Arabia , the Gulf countries Pakistan , Afghanistan certain countries in Africa. I will say this about the crusades though the Crusades were a belated defensive reaction to Muslim conquests by the Catholic Church. The theological role of the Pope is vital to understanding how Holy War could develop out of Christian theology.

          6. You’ll get no argument from me about Jesus vs Muhammad. Although I believe neither to be the son of any God, Jesus was definitely the nicer of the 2 if the stories are to be believed.

            But I’m not talking about Jesus and that fact is blatantly obvious. You’re attempting to bring him up as a bait and switch and that is what a “strawman” actually is. You’re arguing like a feminist, they also love incorrectly using that word.

            This back and forth “they hit us so we hit them” will never end if we, as a supposedly intelligent species, continue to learn nothing from history and jump straight to the typical knee jerk reaction of intolerance and violence.

            I’ll say it again just incase you missed it earlier. Islamic radicals can fuck off back to their oppressive little homelands if they refuse to assimilate and respect our laws. They Are Not Fucking Welcome And Neither Are Their Laws.

            If you want to instantly deport the criminals and radicals amongst them, I’m 100% with you but I am not going to blanket and call for the mass exodus of an entire religion because of an act of terrorism carried out by 8 deranged psychotics.

          7. Islam is a radical religion that has never shown the ability to be , what you term, moderate. The few examples we have historically of Muslims and non-Muslims living within one polity have all turned into disasters (Balkans,Spain many others Pakistan breaking away from India etc) so there is no reason for you to assume there is this great moderate religion somewhere that is the true Islamic religion that is like Christianity and the “extremists” are simply misunderstanding Islam.

          8. Bush is a idiot who let muslim terrorists enter USA to destroy the twin towers. How mighty christian of him, he is just a tool of Israel. And then, we invite resentful muslims to live in Europe and America, brilliant.

          9. What nonsense. There was a Sultan of Rome for a few centuries and that has never quite gone away, as it still occupies Istanbul. Has there been a King of Arabia? Let’s be honest: non-Muslim countries could seize all the oil and gas they wanted for free. When has that consideration ever gone the other way? The only places in Europe Muslims have occupied and left are ones they were kicked out of, not because they apologized and left. The United States is the only great power in history to not seize all they could. See: Canada and Mexico.

  3. There are good people among the Muslims and they will need to take a stand against the zealouts who they claim misunderstand their religion. I take a very dim view of Muslim migrants in the West while you have some with their head screwed on right like your friend Nora i’ve seen polls that show widespread support against basic Western principles and they are justified from within the religion. (not to mention all the crime) There is not a single majority Muslim country that has basic rights and freedoms and there has not been one in history. I saw a petition floating around saying until ISIS is defeated we should ban migration from Muslim countries. And that seems to me like a wise thing to do. We need the good Muslims to reform their societies from within. I think we’ve reached the point where it is becoming a matter of survival. No one is helped by seeing the West go under.

  4. I know I’m gonna get trashed in the comment section for this but I’ll say it anyway. I was crying like crazy after I got off the air, I remember being on the phone with Ralph and just weeping for a couple of hours straight. People that I considered my friends were saying some of the most heinous things I’ve ever heard not realising that their death wishes for all Muslim people effects my family too. I didn’t want to lose those friends because of their moment of anger so I quietly excused myself from those group chat. I finally understood the guilt that those white people feel when they wear those ‘I’m sorry for slavery’ t shirt, because I felt like I should be doing the same. I’m not even Muslim anymore and I feel like I should be apologising to everyone ‘I’m sorry they died. I’m sorry that I couldn’t help. I’m sorry you’re hurting.’ The Muslim community needs to take responsiblties to report potential threats, you’re not allowed to pull the ‘dindu nuffin’ card when you’ve actively turned a blind eye. I do think maybe we need to stop taking in immigrants from Muslim countries right now unless they’re highly skilled workers or such. Oh and thanks for the lies about me Ralph.

    1. What do you think of that petition banning migration for as long as ISIS is not defeated? What do you think is the best way to defeat these misunderstanders of Islam? Can I ask what your family thinks of you being a “murtad” ? Because in Pakistan (im assuming you are of Pakistani origin) the punishment for apostacy is death. So when you say im no longer a Muslim I think are you not afraid someone will “honor” kill you?

      1. Just as the percentage of Muslims who think its part of their faith to commit acts of terrorism is tiny, the percentage of Muslims who think its part of their religion to commit ‘honor killings’ is as tiny. This is particularly true in countries like the US and the UK. Headless chicken outrage stories in fishwrapper papers are not a reflection of reality sparky.

        I also suggest you pick up a Bible and read Leviticus and Deuteronomy…or in fact most of the text from page 1 to the end. Christianity, literally interpreted, demands ‘honor killings’ for a whole range of ‘crimes’ including apostacy and defying your parents, as does the mother of both Christianity and Islam – Judaism. Examples of Christian and Jewish honor killings crop up every so often….do you also advise your ex-Christian mates to beware because of what the Old Testament says about heretics and apostates?

        The swipe at Nora is unwarranted, and your suggestion that she is under
        any degree of danger belongs in the same paranoia shitpile as InfoWars
        and Chemtrails goons.

        1. You claim its a tiny minority do you know how many Islamic countries have the death penalty for apostacy or things like blasphemy? Its not a tiny minority “sparky”. Pakistan has some of the worst laws on the planet in this regard. I was also talking about supporting terrorist acts not committing them. The US army is also a tiny minority of Americans. Honor killings are increasingly common in the West but they are not an indication of support obviously women are scared that their parents or family members will kill them if they announce their apostacy. The Old Testament ,unlike the Qu’ran , is bound by time and space. So a rule God gives as law in a book like Leviticus only applies to that tribe in that time. The Qu’ran unlike the books of the Old and New Testament is alleged to be the verbatum word of God. as dictated to the Islamic Prophet by the angel Gabriel valid for all time. So its place in Islamic theology is much more that of the stone tablets with the 10 commandments on them that Moses brought down from the mountain. I was not making a swipe at Nora I would never put Qu’ran verse 4:34 into practice , unless its in self defense.

        2. Your religious false equivalence denounce your SJW roots. Keep crying about the crusades faggot, no one sane buys your bullshit anymore.

    2. The hate’s mostly due to unfocused anger Nora and although I get why you’d feel guilt, honestly you’ve got as much control over the radicals as the rest of us, ergo the guilt is misplaced.

      Keep ya head up 🙂

      1. Are they radicals? A military elite is always a minority. The issue is then how much grass roots backing they have. For example Timothy McVeigh of the Oklahoma City bombing had no grass roots backing in America. Radical Muslims obviously have considerable support and on a global basis.

    3. You don’t owe anyone an apology angel, just as your parents don’t either.

      I dont feel the need to apologise for stuff British people do in the here and now or back in history…or as an ex-Christian for what Christians do now or back in history…..and lets face it being British means apologising at the drop of a hat is bred into me from birth.

      Chin up, eyes forward, and march into a better tomorrow. Ignore the idiots who try to drag you down….its not their fault they are all tards.

          1. Most Americans aren’t aware of this, but the US Census Bureau classifies folks originating in the Middle East as white. Always cracks me up when I hear a ‘nice, white, xtian’ heap invective on Arabs!!

          2. Incorrect. Take out the Indonesian, Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi Muslims and you may be close.

            I the moment you are just coming off as ignorant.

            Don’t be that guy

          1. He specifically meant those guys. To be honest i’m sick and tired of the moral signaling and false platitudes of these type of people. 120 white french people dies(no Obama, it was not all of humanity) and the first thing they think is how bad is the islamophobia being hurled against muslims. Way to reframe an terrorist act. Traitors showing their true colors.

      1. No one owes anyone an apology for immoral acts unless they express approval of those acts. Simply being a member of a religion doesn’t rise to that level of approval. The issue as I see it is whether large numbers of a religion pressure people to express approval of immoral acts via peer pressure and indoctrination. People are people. There are good people who live under bad institutions and good institutions. The issue is when a theology becomes an institution. How do others not members of that religion fare?

        1. .❝my neighbor’s mom is making $98 HOURLY on the internet❞….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $87, p/h..Learn More right Here….
          ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportTiptop/GetPaid/$97hourly… ❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

    4. As I said in the chat, Terrorists are Terrorists. They demand attention. If you are Terrorist is doesn’t matter your religion.
      Bad people will be bad regardless of their religion and good people will be good regardless of their religion.
      A question I was asked was how would I feel if some Indonesian Muslim blew up Sydney shopping Mall. Well in answer, Aussies have been specifically targeted. In was not in Australia but in Bali. Muslim Terrorists targeted a nightclub known to be frequented almost exclusively by Aussies.
      84 of us died and hundred injured
      Still I hold my opinions.
      Investigate Terrorists and their supporters. Be careful on who you let waltz through your borders. Do the people you have coming in have association with questionable groups, criminal background, relatives of known Terrorists, and so on.
      This should be bare minimum.
      I have Muslim friends and I won’t throw them under a bus because of some Terrorists. I refuse to.

      1. C’mon now, imagine the shitstormic overreaction if the terrorists turned out to be white supremacists. Remember Dylan Roof media reaction?

          1. Don’t be like the media, tell me the religion of the terrorists, and if their terrorist act was motivated by muslim religion :^)

          2. They are bad people acting in bad intent and using a perverse understanding of Islam as a justification. The Westboro Baptist rely on their perverse understanding of Christianity to justify their action and to carry out their acts with righteous zeal

          3. No, nor do I need to. If you are saying “Can you show me them acting out badly and immorally on a perverse understanding of Christianity, all whilst justifying such actions by the zealous belief in their religion ” should be very easy.

            If you are saying that it doesn’t matter unless they are committing Terrorist acts, I call bullshit, on your premise.

          4. So you find them bad or immoral if they hold a sign saying “God hates fags”? Forgive me if i am strawmanning you :^)

          5. But i’m still curious about the behaviour you don’t like in Westboro Church. I will probably find no big deal, but feel free to share if you want.

          6. Don’t be ridiculous. Westboro was a family and a handful of friends. ISIS is fundamentally aligned with Wahabbist beliefs. S. Arabia is Wahabbi and it is the spiritual (though not juridical) center of Islam. How can Mecca and Medina be deemed “perverse”?

          7. Okay we can do so very easily. IF what you are saying is true and conclusive, then you will be seeing no a small army of Terrorists but rather nations of Isis Terrorists and as Muslims number in the billions, you will expect millions of Isis. Do we have that or do we have a small effective and scary army?

    5. Nora, thanks for saying this. It’s easy to get lost in hatred and anger. It really helps to hear things from your perspective.

    6. I have no wish for anything bad to happen to Muslims. In their own countries they are mostly friendly, cultured and respectful people. They want the same thing everyone wants: a family and a means to support that family and be happy. The issue is one of whether Muslims in numbers play well with other cultures. The problem as I see it is there is an aristocratic-type of supremacy baked into the religion when it comes to non-Muslims. Within Islamic theology, even the lowest Muslim is a jewel compared to a non-Muslim and there is no turn the other cheek. How could there be in a religion founded on conquest? The Koran often reads like a manual on how to manage conquered populations. Islam is a prisoner of its history. Islam has a riddle of a problem: to express great and voluntary tolerance for others in a power structure would be to erase the very nature of Islam itself.

    7. Oh and the deportation only applies to the radical or those supporting radical actions because of all the immigration done

  5. Far as I am concerned there are only two types of Muslims: Muslims in name only, and actual Muslims.

    There is no such thing as a “moderate Muslim”. Not in this day and age. Even “moderate” Muslims support the establishment of Sharia Law, the execution of ex-Muslims, the subjugation and oppression of non-Muslims, and the execution of homosexuals and “adulterers”.

    A “moderate” Muslim is just not willing to go out and take violent action to establish these things. They also are clearly unwilling to do what is within their power to oppose the “radical” Muslims in their midst.

    Some good videos to give a perspective on Islam and the West.




    1. Bullshit

      I wish that there were no Islam, just as I wish there were no Christianity and Judaism, because all three Abrahamic faiths are a plague on humanity.

      I could easily replace the word Muslim with Christian in your post and every word would stand equally true, especially in the USA. In fact, I could easily also insert Mormonism in there.
      In Burma and Sri Lanka I could just as easily replace Muslim with Buddhist.
      In China I would simply need to replace the faith of Islam with the political cult of Maoist Communism.

      And for every video you find that decrys the crimes committed in the name of Islam, I will find another that demonstrates Christianity is also associated with oppression and terrorism.

      Like this….


          1. Oddly, no one seems to complain about Bronze Age governing systems (monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, republics) in the Space Age, nor do they seem to run from hunter-gatherer economic systems (socialism) in this current age.

            But, hey, keep on confusing rhetoric for reason.

          2. Only idiots believe in the progressive fallacy that mankind is marching towards some future perfection. Despite what the advertisers say, newer isn’t always better. But make your personal attacks. Show everyone that Reason’s White Knights have abandoned Reason for SJW-style insanity.

          3. Is strawmanning what you do? Is that your whole debating style?

            When we think of all collective sins thrust onto (or into) a person or an animal, we may think it a strange practice and that casting collective guilt elsewhere is perhaps a bit silly at best and wicked at worst. If you do a sin, it is your sin and you need to own it and not cast it aside, YET more ancient societies saw scapegoating as both plausible and rational things. It was meaningful and powerful and cleansing the society of ill-will and grudges and so on was important. The scapegoat had to exist for the betterment of the community.

            Blood sacrifices are a rite as ancient as humanity. Deriving power from the sacrificing to the Gods of livestock, people, virgin boys and girls. The appeasement to the Gods was acknowledged. One can imagine that such an act would have been a tangible burden to a tribe.

            “Look, all-mighty God. We are sacrificing half of our livestock to appease you. In your mercy please take this as apology for transgressing and upsetting you. I beg you to lift the disease that has infested our tribe so that we can live.”

            Now obviously either the disease kills them off or it doesn’t. Without the knowledge of bacteria and viruses and hygiene and so on, all such manner of illness was barely manageable and very much the domain of Gods.

            So the blood sacrifice to appease the Gods was a mighty powerful narrative.

            Now what was Jesus’s sacrifice and why was it necessary? Jesus’s sacrifice was the combination of two of the biggest Bronze Aged devices for cleansing a community and appeasing the Gods.

            However we do not live in such a society today. When the chips are down we do not murder our kids or kill our pets and the community would turn against us for doing so.

            Why do you think that is? I mean there are STILL Christians about, but we do not adhere to such community principles?

            Because, Bronze aged traditions do NOT translate well into the Space Age and it leads to dissonance.

            “Only idiots believe in the progressive fallacy that mankind is marching towards some future perfection. Despite what the advertisers say, newer isn’t always better. But make your personal attacks. Show everyone that Reason’s White Knights have abandoned Reason for SJW-style insanity.”

            So all you wrote here was a gigantic strawman. I do not really give a damn about which tradition is best or more moral or more progressive. I am no SJW myself.

            Bronze Aged traditions do not often translate well. The are many reasons. They are all contextualised.

            Let’s say that you are the local Jewish headman in a village and many people have suddenly taken very ill and start dying after eating pork that is on the turn? Let’s say that it was in your memory of this happening a few times in your lifetime. You MAY come to the conclusion that it was not the families themselves that God was smiting (no idea of germs remember) nor was it spells cast on the family BUT a message that he was angry at people eating pigs. So the solution is to call it a new religious practice and ban pork. People stop getting food poisoning and so you made a good call. But was it a God commandment or simply a practicality?
            Would such a tradition be outdated in today’s times with refrigeration? We do not know, once a God made mandate it stays even if technology and science move and and past the initial traditional practicality.

            Are you getting any of this?

          4. I get that you are trying to make a reasoned (dialectical) argument from a historically falsifiable rhetorical statement, that you confuse religious practice for religious doctrine, and cannot differentiate a term of logic from a political movement. Furthermore, you’ve responded to rhetoric with dialectic. In other words, like an SJW, you are projecting with your accusations of strawmanning, since you don’t even understand what you are arguing for, much less against. Brush up on your apologetics. Start with the Axial Age. And remember, a slogan is not an argument.

          5. Much better.

            To contextualise the need for different practices, you need to understand the place and time and attitudes of the people.

            For example we know that lack of scientific knowledge around germs is neither a religious practice nor religious doctrine. We know that various ailments we now can categorise and understand were put down to such things as: curses, evil spirits and other otherworldly causes. Whether or not these were simply spiritual fears or whether they were codified into religious doctrine or were “religious practices”. is neither here nor there. What they do is present an opportunity to view something of historical relevance in a way that is contextualised in point of time.

            These things are the foundation from which we can seriously view a people and a period in time that they existed. My example (which seem a little lost on you) simply point out values that do not follow through to present time.

            As to whom is strawmanning whom, that seems rather obvious.

            “Bronze Age Abrahamic traditions trying to exist in the Space Age.”

            “Oddly, no one seems to complain about Bronze Age governing systems (monarchy, oligarchy, democracy, republics) in the Space Age, nor do they seem to run from hunter-gatherer economic systems (socialism) in this current age.

            But, hey, keep on confusing rhetoric for reason.”

            None of which I was arguing nor do I have any interest in doing do. It is a strawman you can joust to your heart’s content.

            If in the examples of human sacrifice and scapegoating, as I described, we in “the space age” do not understand, nor practice, nor are culturally immersed in such appreciations for the benefit or power of such an act (religious practice), then how could we possibly fully understand the crucifixion (religious doctrine). There is a disconnect.

            We, in the space Age, cannot really contextualise much of the ways and cultural appreciations nor knowledge of the Bronze Aged, Noamdic, Tribal, Middle Eastern people of the religious doctrines. NOR can we understand the practices which underpinned a lot of their religious doctrine nor understand why some of these things were necessary.

            It is not our fault. We have little in common with these people. It is not to say they were better or worse. You could no sooner drop a Middle Easter tribesman from Bronze Ages into your suburban lifestyle than you could be expected to do likewise.

            Pointing this out ought not be a position of such disagreement nor should it be seen as an out there notion.

            Bronze Aged Abrahamic traditions do not translate well. How could they? The religious doctrines are time capsules from which the world have moved on and evolved. They give us a glimpse BUT because we have not the working day to day practices and appreciations we can not hope to examine or understand the coded religious doctrine in the same ways.

          6. Yep, progressive fallacy, aka appeal to novelty or “newer is better”, and a lack of understanding that not only is Judaism an Iron Age religion that has had to be reformulated twice in the Iron Age and once in the Classical Age due to catastrophic events, but that the X Age traditions argument is spurious because the roots of modern religion (to include atheism), art, logic, government, philosophy, and scientific inquiry are all Iron Age. If one area is torn down by being “out of date”, the sum total of human culture and experience falls with it.

            Seriously, you are lacking in the basic fundamentals of the topics you are trying to address to be having this conversation. Please don’t embarrass yourself by sperging out in reply a third time. You are so far off base that, to quote Niels Bohr, “you are not even wrong.” Reason is not supposed to be a cargo cult.

          7. Says the only person pushing progressive fallacy. It wasn’t correct when you first bought it up and no better now.

            I’ve made no such claim of one society being better or worse. In fact I showed that an individual from either time and place would be lost and would miss out on contextualised things that people of that time andbplace would not.

            Hardly a ground-breaking claim, but one that is not wrapped in either time and place being better.

            So that is YOUR strawman, one you made and started arguing against. I will let you fight him yourself and then the conclusions to being a sjw, which must naturally follow. Good luck. Tell me how you go

          8. Easy to claim strawmanning when you start with a factual error about the religion you are criticizing, you do not understand the appeal behind your bumper sticker slogan, and you cannot follow the logic of your argument to its obvious conclusion. But then, as Aristolte said, there are some people who cannot be instructed.

            But you are right in only one thing: this argument has ended. You will not hear from me on this thread again.

          9. It certainly is easy to “claim” strawmanning when you ARE in fact strawmanning.

            I have certainly followed the logic of the argument to its conclusion.

            But let’s look at the one contestable claim that you hang the credibility of your argument on.

            My starting point is inaccurate and illogical and instead of saying

            “Bronze Age Abrahamic traditions trying to exist in the Space Age.”

            I should have said :”Iron Age Abrahamic traditions trying to exist in the Space Age”.

            Now, were that an error on my part, that would still not justify your carrying on, nor would it make my claim baseless. Iron Age Abrahamic traditions trying to exist in the Space Age is still saying the same thing. It is saying that traditions frozen in time do not translate in new eras and must evolve with them.

            Being semantic in this fashion would not make an argument bad or illogical.

            So that is BEST case scenario, however…..I was not wrong and I DID mean Bronze Aged traditions.

            The changes to working iron did not mean that every tradition or lore or belief changed. When was the religious tradition of the old Testament written? From what was it based? How far back in time did those beliefs and the various traditions of those people exist? Are we still talking Iron Age? I don’t think so.

            If I am wrong, (and I do not concede I am) its not that wrong and not worth the insistence of Progressive fallacies or me being a SJW or being illogical.

            You made an ass of yourself, tried to call the argument over, and waddle off with the pretense of intellectual high ground. I am happy you are on your way. I do not like to see people ex[posing themselves in such a manner.

          10. Argument over. Seriously, stop. Consider these last words as polite suggestions for improvement. Take a look at when the books of the Old Testament were written (800BC-100BC, using the Protestant canon and rounding for centuries) . Take a comparative religion course to understand how few religious traditions and even practices carried over from Judaism to Christianity and from those two to Islam. Learn rhetoric, as you didn’t recognize that you were starting from a rhetorical argument, nor the emotional appeal behind your argument, and you foolishly thought I was using reason against you. Learn logic, as you really can’t go from “information has a historical context” to “this religion is wrong” in a logical manner, and certainly without doing violence to the integrity of the entire corpus of non-religious knowledge and practices either.

            My argument, once you engaged, was never really against a rather ridiculous -and factually false- bumper sticker slogan, but that you are too ignorant of the pertinent fields of knowledge to be making the argument in the first place.

            If you need to salve your ego, you may have the last word.

          11. “You will not hear from me again this thread”
            Who wrote this? Oh right, that was you, before you posted again in the thread.

            So apart from “You’re wrong, wrong, wrong….stop arguing with me” Then allowing me to post again in the thread…. Which is cemetery redundant, what have you got?

            The answer is not a lot.

            You inferred a lot from a little and that is not on me. You say that the Old Testament was written around 800Bc at the earliest. What you are not saying is that the author invented these views nor that the practices and traditions came into being around this time?

            Why not? Because it simply isn’t true. These traditions stretch back a lot further. Do they stretch into the Bronze Age and we’re they passed down orally before they were codified. I think so.

            Actually I made no claim on all Abrahamic religions being the same and nor can such a claim be inferred from what I’ve said. When an opponent infers claims you have not made and asks you to defend it, what are they doing?

            So more strawmanning. Religion is wrong. Another argument I never made. It certainly is problematic and care needs to be applied given that we are geographically different and removed from passages of so many centuries. Context will suffer. Is it wrong? No. Never thought, expressed or inferred.

            As to which Abrahamic traditions or indeed which faiths, at this point I’m probably beyond caring, but in referencing them like I was, I was casting a wide net and excluding none. All those traditions will suffer some from the time capsculing effect and context will be lost. Some do better than others no doubt

          12. Ha, thought you’d make another reply. That jab at the end about ego is pure projection.

            It’s late, I will probably reply tomorrow

      1. Oh look, radical Christians killed SEVEN people between 1973 and whenever this documentary was made, you say? Let’s cut it off at 1995 to be safe, yeah?

        Gee, that certain stacks up to all the deaths caused by Islamic Fundamentalists! Let’s compare (and I’ll be more fair and not start the clock until the 1980’s) shall we?

        1981 Vienna Synagogue attack – 2 dead, 30 injured
        1982 Rome Synagogue attack – 1 dead, 37 injured
        1982 Tyre HQ Bombings – 91 dead, 55 injured
        1983 US Embassy Bombing (Lebanon) – 63 Dead, 120 injured
        1983 Beirut Barracks Bombing – 307 Dead, 75 Injured
        1983 Kuwait Bombings – 5 Dead, 86 Injured
        1984 US Embassy Bombing (Lebanon) – 24 Dead
        1985 El Descanso Bombing – 18 Dead, 82 Injured
        1985 Achillo Lauro Hijacking – 1 Dead
        1985 Rome and Vienna Airport Attacks – 23 Dead, 139 Injured
        1985 TWA Flight 847 Hijacking – 1 Dead
        1986 TWA Flight 840 Bombing – 4 Dead, 7 Injured
        1986 Neve Shalom Synagogue Attack – 22 Dead
        1988 Lockerbie Bombing (UK ) – 270 Dead
        1989 Tel Aviv Bus Bombing – 16 Dead
        1990 Egypt Bus Attack – 11 Dead, 17 Injured
        1992 Urumqi Bombings (China) – 3 Dead, 23 Injured
        1992 Israeli Embassy Attack (Buenos Aires) – 29 Dead, 242 Injured
        1993 Shootings at CIA HQ – 2 Dead, 3 Injured
        1993 World Trade Center Bombing – 6 Dead, 1,042 Injured
        1993 Serial Bombings in Mumbai (India) – 257 Dead
        1993 Sivas Massacre (Turkey) – 35 Dead
        1994 Afula Bus Bombing (Israel) – 8 Dead, 55 Injured
        1994 Hadera Bus Station Bombing (Israel) – 5 Dead, 30 Injured
        1994 AMIA Bombing (Buenos Aires) – 85 Dead, 300 Injured
        1994 London Israeli Embassy Attack – 20 Injured
        1994 Dizengoff Bus Bombing (Israel) – 22 Dead, 50 Injured
        1994 Netzarim Junction Bombing (Israel) – 3 Dead, 12 Injured
        1994 Air France Flight 8969 – 7 Dead, 25 Injured
        1995 Beit Lid Bombing (Israel) – 20 Dead, 69 Injured
        1995 Algerian Police Station Bombing – 42 Dead, 286 Injured
        1995 Jammu Bombing (India) – 17 Dead, Over 100 Injured
        1995 Ramat Gan Bus Bombing (Israel) – 6 Dead, 33 Injured
        1995 Paris Metro Bombing – 8 Dead Over 100 Injured
        1995 Rijeka Bombing (Croatia) – 1 Dead, 29 Injured

        Yeah, jeez. Those are TOTALLY comparable rates of violence dude. You’ve made such a good point there.

          1. Oh, I know. Cowards without a point always attack, then run away rather than fight it out (a trait shared with Islamic Extremists BTW).

            But I thought it would be good for anyone reading this to see just how many people radical Islam killed BEFORE 9/11 (and again, that’s an incomplete list).

            Because I know a lot of you kids are unaware of just how long this shit has been going on. You might know of 9/11 (2,977 Dead), or the UK’s 7/7 (53 Dead, Over 700 Injured), but this has been going on for MUCH longer, and the death toll is much longer than pro-Islamists want to admit or realize.

  6. this is where we must stick to the higher principles – Everyone is entitled to free speech, religion and conscience, privacy. All given due process. It is the #SJW trying to kill rights. #GamerGate needs to hold up the torch of liberty.
    Yet there is a true, real, and serious threat. But we still need due process. Refugees aren’t citizens. We must make the critical distinctions.

  7. Y’know Ralph my colonial cousin, most of the time you write stuff that has a brass knuckles punchline and is your meat and drink. Its good solid writing that evolves over time…gets better and cleverer. My favorite dose of Daily Ralph, taken with a big mug of mocha and a menthol smoke.

    Then sometimes you write something like this that shines like a lighthouse. A proper stand out piece, written from the heart. Makes me want to stand up and applaud.

    Well said my friend. Well said.

  8. Honestly, it’s not that they are all evil or etc. But the religion itself, as with any religion, has potential to create extremists. And in its current environment, along with a lot of muslim and arab culture, it’s the most dangerous religion by far.

    yeah, not all muslims, but still more than most think.

    1. “it’s the most dangerous religion by far”

      That is a matter of perspective chum

      Go ask a Muslim in Burma, Sri Lanka or even the far south of Thailand who they think is the most dangerous religion and they will ALL say Buddhists.

      Ask a Uighur Muslim in Western China and they will point at the nearest soldier or policeman working for the Communist Party…they view Communism as a religion there you see.
      Ask a Muslim living in Palestine and they will point at the nearest Jew, and remind you that its Israel who have all the tanks and planes and nukes.
      Go to the Congo or Nigeria and ask a Muslim there and they will tell you its Christian militias and terrorists they fear.

      If you still dont believe me, I also suggest you check out the stats put out by the US FBI, Interpol and Europol. You will find that all three report that of all terrorist attacks, Islamic terrorism in the west accounts for the minority of reported domestic incidents (Less than 10% seems to ring a bell, but its a while since I last looked).

      Perspective mate…..make sure you take it into consideration or you loose it.

      1. That’s fair; however, to my knowledge the branches of Buddhism are far more clearly delineated. As for communism, I get the argument, but it’s really not a religion; everyone is just required to pretend it is, with few truly believing.

        Ask a Palestinian, and they will say they don’t want Jews and their dirty feet in their temples. But OK, they are very very threatened by Israel…so threatened that they have stopped stabbing Jews and unleashing terrorist attacks. Oh, wait.

        I recall seeing that statistic recently; no example was provided of what a ‘terrorist attack’ is, so I don’t believe it to be that legitimate. Regardless, per capita it would still show Muslims as far more dangerous than normal citizens.

        The problem with Islam is that it has not clearly delineated itself enough; I could be wrong on this point, but if you have a kid from moderate parents, it won’t stop him from listening to a radical imam, whereas at least with clearly different branches there is some more of a barrier.

        That said, I am sold on us leaving Muslim lands (especially the CIA). Why are we still there?

        1. “That said, I am sold on us leaving Muslim lands (especially the CIA). Why are we still there?”
          We are doing the wars Israel won’t do.

          1. In general, the US is doing the wars EUROPE won’t do. Or at least has been for the last 50 years. In fact, I’m guessing one of the reasons France was targeted yesterday was because they’ve started stepping up, what with their actions in Mali and all.

      2. More lies, Nigeria was terrorized by Boko Haram, a muslim faction. Muh moral relativism, and even if the rest of your drivel is true, we are talking about western civilization, you know, something no muslim likes. We don’t want muslims just as we don’t want atheist commies as dictators.

      3. Muslims are unique in that every place where Muslims meet non Muslims there is conflict. Do you really think the problem is all those other cultures and not Islam?

      4. The greatest colonial and imperial project in history is oppressed? Did you not ask yourself why there are Muslims in all those places? And since Muslims started arriving into the West in numbers in the 40s and 50s, has anyone been oppressing them? Try building a church in S. Arabia or Egypt and good luck.

  9. Yeah, nice sentiment, but look at what you want to “consider” – getting out of muslim lands.

    Currently, due to unchecked and state-supported migration policies, “muslim lands” would include: London, England, Birmingham, England, Malmo, Sweden, Paris, France, and even parts of Michigan here in the US – https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/11/05/this-u-s-city-has-become-the-first-to-elect-a-muslim-majority-city-council/

    Anywhere there is a majority population of muslims, can in fact, be considered “muslim lands” and muslims often DO consider them their lands after even a single generation. And when surveyed in their own lands, there’s usually a strong majority of those that favor instituting their religious laws into the laws of the state – http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

    This is not some random coincidence. Watch this video from Islam Net Video – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU

    The Islamic men in that video want one point to be made and one point alone:

    Islamic followers who want to instill Sharia law, stone adulterers and execute gays, and subjugate women ARE NOT a tiny minority within the faith. They are the standard believers. That is the everyday belief and they see nothing wrong with it.

    That they use Western democratic systems to instill their own laws that are anti-thetical to western values into the neighborhoods they come to control is a very real problem if you value what the west stands for, Ralph.

    Islam and the West are simply not conducive to co-existing peacfully together. Rather, it is a clash that the west will slowly lose smiling blindly that everything is fine all the while. Unless we insist that they either leave and practice their faith elsewhere, or renounce it and they can stay, the West will be destroyed over time by doing nothing to defend its position.

    The issue isn’t about race, and to a certain degree it’s not even about religion – it’s about ideology and culture. The west’s focus on humane individuality and representative democracy cannot survive with a system that promotes barbaric groupthink and strongman hierarchy within it.

    So it’s time we demand that if they want to stay in the West, Muslims must embrace western values and renounce the culture they brought with them. If they were being logical, it would be the only choice anyway – Islamic culture has led to their own lands falling behind in technology and democracy all throughout the middle east and northern africa, while the West and Asia have thrived. The places most affected by their culture and thus left to come to western lands are shit-shows, and they know it. They need to stop the madness they bring with them, unless they want to turn their new homes into the hellholes they’ve left behind.

    1. Need I point out that there in the US its Christians demanding their faith dictate the laws, and pretty much having a free run of it with your legislatures? That its Christians who blow up abortion clinics and assault and murder their staff? Do I really need to point out to you that in the USA as long as its Christian Sharia Law then its all fine and dandy and moms apple pie all round? 10 Commandments monuments on the front lawns of legislatures and court houses….fine? Fuck the 1st…that there is a historeecul foundin document that informed the writin of the Cunsteetooshun.

      Please save your headless chicken shitshow or take it over to Alex Jones’ Infowars or the nearest Stormfront page.

      Muslims in the UK account for between 5 and 10% of the population and have fuck all hope of changing any laws to institute Sharia. We didnt repeal the Witchcraft laws till the 1950s, so what makes you think a tiny percentage of the population is suddenly going to take over Parliament and usher in the next fucking Caliphate? We may not have a holy document called a written constitution, (which yanks love to harp on about but seem happy to ignore when making state laws), but what we have is the UK Human Rights Act, and above that European law which reinforces that. And that prohibits anything even close to Sharia, just as your own 1st Amendment prohibits it in the USA.

      So no…Muslims are not taking anything over, and I suggest you switch off Faux Nooz and realize the once proud WaPo has fallen a fucking long way since Woodward and Bernstein worked there.

        1. Yeah, original sentiment is actually from Huey Long, and he said,”When Fascism comes to America, it will come under the guise of anti-Fascism”

          The “flag and carrying a cross” bit was added on by butt-hurt liberals who wanted to attack patriotism rather than have it point out exactly their own “class structure must be destroyed to stop fascism” arguments. They try to attribute it to Sinclair Lewis, though no one can actually find a point where he actually said it.

          Nice try though, chum.

        2. Yer kinda getting your ass kicked here tonight man. o.o Mayhaps you should take a break and look at the stats of a various European surveys taken in the wake of the Charlie Hesbo murders?

      1. I get it. You don’t want to face the truth. You’re exactly the kind of person who’s going to smile and say everything is fine until it’s your son or daughter that comes out and says they’re gay and you’ll realize that maybe you don’t want religious extremists next door who think that’s enough of a reason to murder them.

        You’re also deeply ignorant of how US law works or that no, we have NOT had “Christian Sharia Law” on the books once the US was founded. One of the guiding principles of the Constitution is the separation between church and state. Also, yes, we have a federal system that allows states to have a large degree of freedom on how to govern. We’re a big country, it’s kind of a necessary arrangement due to the size of the landmass. If you weren’t from an island the size of California, you might understand how geography is kind of important to governance.

        As for UN laws protecting anything in the UK? Hah! You mean the SAME UN that just put Saudi Arabia on the head of its human rights council? http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/22/why-is-saudi-arabia-heading-the-u-n-human-rights-council.html

        Yeah, that sure sounds promising. No conflict with western values there.

        As for Christianity being “just as bad”. Nope. Not true at all. For every video or post you want to point to of extreme Christians that want to kill people for getting an abortion, I can point to an extreme christian in an Amish community hurting exactly no one. “Extreme” christians at least split into either totally peaceful or totally violent, not just totally violent every time.

        There are always people prone to violence in any religion, but Christianity, BY FAR is the least violent of the three Semitic faiths. It’s also BY FAR the one most conducive to Western Values of self determination since you know, all the philosophers that modern Western states based their laws upon were in fact pretty Christian – Locke, Rousseau, et cetera.

        (and have you ever actually read the Qu’ran? I have. It’s much more direct and much more violent in what it commands than either the Torah or the Bible. Especially since it dismisses all that tolerance Jesus liked to say. And I say this as someone who, I’m guessing like yourself, who puts no faith into any religion)

        So maybe either watch the video I put above – which doesn’t come from Fox or WaPo but directly from the source itself, a Muslim community for muslims online – and see that this is not propaganda, just the truth of the situation. Or don’t and go back to your safe spaces that will feed you with the lies you like on tumblr and Mother Jones.

        1. To be fair, the only reason Christianity is so restrained nowadays is due to the massive influence of the U.S. after it’s founding.

          Islam and, to an extent, Judaism, haven’t had that secular influence. All religion is bad, and the best way to combat it is to promote reason & free speech.

      2. 1-Muhammad is the majority of babies names in UK.

        2- US already have fag marriage, so much for Xtians having a say in the law

        3-Drop your false equivalences and lies.

        4- watch this video:


        5 – This is you:


        6- This is your president:


        7- And this is my response:


      3. In modern times Muslims have killed more Americans in America for religious reasons than Christians have killed other Americans for religious reasons even though Christians in America outnumber Muslims by several hundred times.

        Abortion clinics? Seriously? How do those numbers stack up to 9/11?

  10. This is a copy/paste from a conversation I was having with an excellent and brilliant friend of mine, as a response to an observation he made about the necessity of separating religious literalists and average practitioners.


    Ahhh.. religious literalism. Quite the issue, in many ways. Allow me to speak on this matter in a somewhat fragmented and superfluous way.

    Right now, Sweden is being dubbed the “Rape Capital” of the West, as it has more rape victims per capita than several of the next worst offenders combined. It has a genuine one in four rape statistic verified by police reports, where in one in four women under the age of 18 has reported being raped over the last 20 years. Sweden also possesses an honest, observable “rape culture”, as it is a nation where a young girl can get fucked bloody behind a school yard bush, after which the administrator of the school will admonish the child’s parents for the supposed racism necessary to desire justice for their violated daughter in the first place.

    The overwhelming majority of the criminals indicted in these reports are Arabic immigrants and second generation Arab-Swedes. Despite having one of the lowest international conviction rates on a crime which they are international champions of, a good 70% of the men convicted of rape in Sweden are Arabic in descent and cultural inclination. If Sweden arrested and convicted just a quarter more of the accused than they do currently, that number would easily jump up to an 80% demographic of Arabic rapists.

    The issue with Islam and the cultures it stems from is that they do not have a major reformed community. The vast majority of its practitioners are Orthodox. They hold strongly to the combined cultural moors of their ethnic history along with the commonly enforced dogmas that come with the faith. Uncommon is the Muslim who goes to the Mosque maybe once or twice a year and then lives a very secular life outside of it. Uncommon as those individuals are, there are fewer communities that hold to that behavior en mass. The average Muslim believer is much like my father’s side of my extended family: The McCues are steeped in their faith, as it is the bedrock upon which they establish their identities, their behavioral standards, and their expectations of themselves and others.

    A substantial portion Arabic men in Sweden, some as young as 14, brazenly lay claim to the bodies of women in Sweden. These men are raised in an environment where this sort of behavior is acceptable, even expected. It is both part of their religious background and their cultural background, something that stays with them as their parents raise them in isolation from western civilization and its expectations. Instead, they live a family life in keeping with the laws and customs of their old lands, not the new ones they are residents of. These children are brought up in Arabic Orthodox Islamic households.

    The problem with Orthodoxy is that it is a hotbed for religious literalism, as deep commitment to the word of God is a critical element of the Orthodox lifestyle. It takes only a small amount more zeal, a peppering of psychotic aggressive tendencies, and personal desire to act in absolute adherence to the scripture, to drive a man to enact the bloodiest expectations of the guiding text that informs his daily family life.

    ISIS is hardly the first in a long line of Muslim organizations to take up the banner of their prophet, who himself was a conquering warlord. ISIS will not be the last. More importantly though is that the gangs of rapists who preyed upon the children of Rotherham are not Islamic literalists or members of any terrorist organization, nor are the men who have consumed Sweden with a plague of sexual violence, nor the ones who have taken to passing around orphaned girls like party favors in Syrian refugee camps in German boarders. They’re just regular Orthodox Muslims.

    The brutal reality is that this is ingrained into the majority of Arabic Muslims. Maybe that majority is only 55%. Maybe it’s much higher. It ultimately doesn’t matter, because this is not the case of a few bad apples spoiling the bunch. This is a case of dealing with a religion and a people who by and large have not progressed socially, intellectually, emotionally, or culturally for several hundred years. The most powerful organizations in Asia Minor, outside of a select few secular holdouts, have only grown more deeply entrenched in Islamic Orthodoxy. The regions these hard line adherents of the faith control have developed increasingly radical cultures, which in turn are passed down through the generations.

    I, like you, do not desire to condemn everyday believers of any given faith. Many have committed no crime, have taken no sacrament of blood from unbelievers, and therefore do not deserve to be thrown into the fire of furious public opinion because of the heinous acts of war committed by their erstwhile kindred. I, like you, have called several Muslims my friends. One, an Iranian whose name I could never come close to pronouncing right, instilled in me a profound respect for what the USA can offer the world. He loved what we had to offer, and was upset only on the subject of tea. Evidently we don’t have any really good tea houses, but that’s because we’re a coffee house culture like the Italians and Brits.

    That being said, after all I have seen over the last couple of years, I believe we ignore the danger of the Arabic and Islamic culture, no matter how innocuous individual practitioners might seem, at our own peril. By and large, these people hold vast and irreconcilable differences with Western Civilization. As it stands, just opening the doors and ignoring these major divergences on the misguided, bleeding heart premise that we can all “just get along” is getting us raped and murdered.

  11. It always blows my mind to hear that people actually think the main reason behind extremism in the middle east is their religion. Even people who are otherwise pretty smart, like Sam Harris, actually think this is the case. Any region that went through as much shit politically and economically as the middle east would be filled with extremists.

    Imagine if the United States was invaded by China, and occupied for 14 years. No electricity for months, no police force, private Chinese military equivalents of Blackwater roaming around playing cowboy gunning people down, drone strikes targeting any “military age males” regardless if they even know their identity or even the first thing about them – regardless of any of the other collateral damage next to them. Imagine if the Chinese also sent drones all across Europe, Canada, without even declaring war on those countries – bombing weddings, first responders, “military age males,” month after month for years. Imagine if the Chinese set up puppet dictatorships all throughout the US and Canada for 60 years so that they could control the region and get cheap access to our natural resources, preventing our ability to develop a culture of democracy for decades – with dictators using secret police, torture, and Chinese made weapons to terrorize the whole country under an iron fist for 60 years. Imagine if the US or Canada managed to set up a democracy anyway in the 70s, and then China covertly removed the democratic government and installed hardline religious extremists to rule the country … a Shah for example. Imagine if China also funded the most extreme elements of our Tea Party and northern milita movements and skinheads, gave them training and weapons for a decade so they could fight the Russians. Imagine if China then used their diplomatic control over global economics to then impose crippling sanctions across the whole United States, Canada and Europe off and on for decades, leading to starvation, poverty, unemployment, and ruined lives.

    Imagine the hellhole the US would be in that state, with our culture of gun violence and gun ownership, with our love of militaristic culture and violence, with our intensely religious population that gets offended at Starbucks cups that don’t say Merry Christmas like this was a theocracy. Imagine how many extremist US groups would exist at that point against the Chinese, and all the batshit insane stuff they would do.

    Hell, Americans devolved into rape, looting, crime and barbarism in New Orleans in just 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina, and they were just invaded by WATER!

    Now imagine the whole world ignoring all of that history of cause and effect in geo-politics, and simply saying that the only reason any of those groups exist is because they’re Christian. It’s just the most politically ignorant, historically braindead theory of all time – and it is firmly rooted in racism.

    The religion is the cultural flavoring on top of a long history of economic and political despair. That’s all it is. Look at other times in history when Christianity was in economic and political despair and look at all the insane bloodshed Christians did throughout history, all across the fucking planet. Yet that all went away when they got favorable economic and political results.

    This comment section is filled with racist garbage, and it only flourishes because of incredible, staggering ignorance of history and politics.

    1. Are you seriously claiming that this conflict, and this attack, is only 14 years in the making and is the result of the 2002 invasion of Afghanistan? Do you really think that?

      1. If you read my post, you’d see I referenced stuff for the past 60 years. The whole point of the post is that geopolitical realities are more influential than their religion. Virtually every single expert on terrorism agrees.

        1. 60 years is still WAY too small a mark though. The philosophy which inspires the behavior of ISIS, Wahhabism, dates back to the early 1800s. Furthermore, your whole metaphor ignores the realities on the ground of what the people in entire region of Asia Minor and Northern Africa do to one another and have been for decades. It also ignores the sort of statistics that have swept through nations which have taken on immigrants of a non-radical nature,

          Methinks your perspective here is very narrow, and is derived from a desire to remove religion, and as such arguments against religion, from the equation.

          1. I think religion absolutely plays a role. After a population is that crushed, they tend to move towards religion in a big way. As I briefly stated, religion is the cultural flavoring on top of the true causes, political and economic despair.

            It’s not that different from the Nazis. The ideology is the Nazis absolutely plays a role. But the underlying conditions that actually led to their rise to power in Germany are not purely the ideas, but their crushing loss in WWI, and the total economic collapse of their society …. aka, political and economic despair.

          2. Aye, and that would make sense if the problems that plague the middle east were relegated to the Treaty of Versailles and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, followed by the subsequent colonization of the continent by the English and Dutch.

            However, the region’s problems are longer than that by leaps and bounds. The awful conflict between the Sunni, Shia, and Kurds has been occurring for 14 centuries.. longer than the US, Canada, or European intervention in that region has even existed. We have the Crusades, which introduced a Franko-Christian element to the religious conflicts that swept through the land. Mohammed and his prophets were warlords who created the first Muslim nation in a baptism of blood and fire. Then there is the aforementioned rise and fall of Wahhabism. The Ottoman Empire all but completely annihilated its adherents because of the extreme danger that the philosophy posed to imperial stability, coupled with the acts of violence that its adherents gladly committed in the name of the Muslim faith. That philosophy is now resurgent in the form of ISIS and remote elements of Al Queda, who are hated and feared even by other members of the network.

            The Middle East, under Islam, has seen little outside of one bloody genocide and religious conflict for nearly a millennium and a half now. Its ups, while great, compare little to its downs now. Trying to pin this on anything other than the seemingly eternal violent nature of the cultures of the holy land, who are shaped by their land, their scarcity of accessible resources, and the persistent Orthodoxy of their faith, is an act of religious apologetics.

          3. It’s certainly a complex topic and I’m not an infallible expert by any means. But we can list a history of blood, conflict, religious violence, imperialism, and sectarian tensions all over the world almost uninterrupted right up through World War II.

            You don’t have to go back to the 14th century to bring up the founding of the United States in the context of the genocide of the native americans, with all the cultural and religious dominance that came with it.

            I’m heavily generalizing, but almost everyone has an ugly history. I tend to focus more on the relatively recent past because I think that’s when we start to see more of the divergence between the west and the middle east.

          4. Most of this is good, but the whole thing with Al Qaeda completely misses the mark I was going for. I’m well aware of Al Qaeda’s ties to the CIA, as is anyone who is well studied in the numerous idiotic moves the US made in its various proxy wars with Russia during the Cold War. I did not state that Al Queda was the inevitable outcome of Islam, nor did I do anything to suggest it.

            What I did do is bring up Wahhabism and used Al Queda as context for the sort of people we’re dealing with in the adherents to the philosophy. Al Qaeda, by and large, rejects Wahhabism as an /extreme radical fringe of utterly misguided and dangerously violent Islamists/ who go WAY too far in their pursuit of Jihad. The only group within Al Qaeda that had adherents to that particular nuance of Islamic philosophy are the ones who sacked the city of Mali.

            If you look at the operations the Al Qaeda branch in Mali, and behold their barbarism, you will see many striking similarities to the operation and occupation methods used by the Islamic State In Levant. This is because these individuals hold to the core concepts of Wahhabism. Understanding that Philosophy is key to understanding the ideological mindset of the current heads of the Rogues Gallery in the Middle East.

          5. You literally cannot understand ISIS without understanding Wahhabism. You average Al Qaeda operative is /terrified/ of adherents of Wahhabism. Consider that, and what implications lie within.

          6. Al-Queda is more Wahabbi than ISIS. They are just on a different spectrum from the Saudi ruling Wahabbis, who are considered traitors by each.

          7. See, I disagree with that. If Al Qaeda was more Wahabbi than ISIS, they would have spent much more energy subjugating their own people and destroying icons of cultural significance to the Arabic peoples. Instead, Al’s Qaeda’s older leadership is on record condemning both sorts of actions as inane distractions in the war against the real enemy: The West.

            This stands in stark contrast to the Wahabbi model.

    2. “Hell, Americans devolved into rape, looting, crime and barbarism in New Orleans in just 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina, and they were just invaded by WATER!”
      Guess the race…

    3. Well, the afghanis we put into power take no time at all to start raping little boys, and I kind of doubt Blackwater is to blame for that. Nice apologism you have there.

      1. Apologism is not what I’m doing. Everyone here claims this is solely the result of Islam. Literally any credible anti-terrorism expert will tell you otherwise.

        Nowhere do I say they aren’t reaponsible for their heinous terrorism. But if you actually figure out what kind of factors lead to the creation of terrorists, including histort snd a decent knowledge of how politics influence people, then you stand a far better chance at stopping this shit. Waging warmon a religion is just going to keep filling up their recruitment drives.

        1. I’m not angry, it’s only the French after all, not anyone I actually care about. I just think it’s funny they want to be so open and caring they let terrorists right in. If it was up to me, we’d pull all of our aid and troops out and let the israelis wipe them out the next time they get uppity.

          1. And where did I say it’s the fault of Islam? It’s the fault of the middle east being populated by backwards, barbaric goat fuckers who don’t want to join modern society. Let all those Syrian refugees, the majority of whom look like fighting age males pick up a fucking rifle and defend their homeland, not come here and vote to turn ours into the shit holes they left.

  12. There’s only one answer to why radical Islamists hate us: Because we aren’t radical Islamists. This is why they don’t care if non-radical Muslims are collateral damage either.

  13. I think the argument is more subtle than individual Muslims and instead what the issue is when you have Muslims in numbers. In Egypt no woman or Christian can be president by law and Egypt is not the most radical of Islamic nations. Obviously a culture which produces those types of laws is going to travel to other countries, but only when the numbers can support that culture’s attitudes. For Muslims to have a large cultural presence and yet suddenly adopt a live and let live attitude in other nations would require them abandoning a key supremacist mindset regarding non-Muslims. They would in a sense become non-Muslims themselves. The Wahabbi Saudis, the Muslim Brotherhood and ISIS all share a key “takfirist” doctrine, and that is a theological permission to act against other Muslims when those Muslims act in a “non-Muslim” fashion. So-called “moderates” who may in fact have a live and let live attitude can find themselves as good people living under a bad institution. All cultures more or less shame or force others into compliance with that culture. The issue is that some are more forceful than others. So the question once again goes back – not to individuals – but to culture, in this case, a religion.

    1. My goodness, that sounds familiar, almost like how Japanese Bushido operated. Now if only I could remember how we put an end to that silliness…

  14. Can anyone name a Muslim majority country where non-Muslims are not legally ( or de facto – See: Indonesia) second-class citizens? Yes, that attitude will travel on a plane.

      1. A strange thing to say about a country which was founded to house its 90% Muslim population, where Islam is the state religion and minority religions and atheists are persecuted.

  15. .❝my neighbor’s mom is making $98 HOURLY on the internet❞….A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, $17k Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over $87, p/h..Learn More right Here….
    ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportTiptop/GetPaid/$97hourly… ❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦

  16. You made several good points in this article. I have friends in several countries with similar situations and are dealing with issues with friends too. It’s a tough spot and some people are out of their minds when they react out of rage and anger and blame an entire group.

    1. “It’s a tough spot and some people are out of their minds when they react out of rage and anger and kill an entire group.”
      Fixed that for you.

  17. The calls for deportation are a result of the governments in question refusing to do what the public asked for, stop waging war in these countries.
    They continued anyway so now we tell them to deport the hostile, actual or potential, entities they created and imported.
    This could all have been avoided. They didn’t listen so now, as the required solutions become more extreme with time, we’ll see more people ask for mass repatriation. With time and provocation they’ll come to demand it by force.
    Diversity within borders does not work, that’s why borders were born alongside civilisations.
    Leave now, this isn’t going to get better.

  18. This just furthers our need to stamp out SJW mindsets.

    By conflating the worst practices of Islam with all Muslim people, by saying that criticism of Islamic intolerance amounts to intolerance of Muslims, we’ve witnessed a rise in people who just say “fuck it, you know what? I AM intolerant of Muslims!” We have people who, thanks to our own extremists, have forgotten how to be kind, how to be nuanced, on the subject of Muslims who, for the most part, are trying to run away from the fucking barbarism of their nations.

    It also hurts moderates in Islam who are sincerely attempting to bring about a reformation. How can they hope to convince hardliners when even the west’s liberals are making excuses for horrific acts? If SJWs were around 300 years ago, I’ve no doubt Europe would still be spilling gallons of its own blood over petty Christian disputes as liberal scholars fell over to justify the bloodshed.

    While I agree we need to back off militarily, let others have this quagmire, I doubt that’ll do much. Our ally, Israel, will still need support, and I’ll never sign off on backing away and letting Hamas destroy her. That will, unfortunately, continue to be a convenient excuse for the terrorists to continue attacking at least the US.

    Put bluntly, the threat of militant Islam will be a problem so long as sharia is the goal of hardline groups who see the whole world as Muslim land. Only by standing with moderates and controlled immigration that lets our intelligence agencies pick out the bad seeds is this nonsense ever going to stop.

    1. “how to be nuanced, on the subject of Muslims who, for the most part, are trying to run away from the fucking barbarism of their nations.”

      Including the Syrian terrorist who was saved by Greece. It seems the barbarians are fleeing barbaric lands.

      “Our ally, Israel, will still need support, and I’ll never sign off on backing away and letting Hamas destroy her.”

      cuckservative alert. Israel control their borders just fine while Europe needs to be multicultural according to Sarah Learn Spectre.

      1. Also, let’s be real on Israel, the only reason the entire middle east isn’t one giant jewopolis is because every time Israel wants to retaliate and destroy their enemies, the US and their “allies” engage in finger wagging shame fests.

  19. I grew up in the 70/80’s in the UK, I don’t hate Christians even tho they blew everything up, just sayin. Just because a few christian fuck heads blew shit up didn’t make me hate the whole lot of them, same goes for muslims

  20. Just simply more evidence of how the Social Justice Warrior mindset needs to be completely wiped off the face of the earth as soon as possible.

    Is there actually a SJW that isn’t an utter fucking cunt?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.