Wednesday, September 21, 2011

How Will It End?

In Part the Third, Zenster brings his opus to its full and final close.


Author’s note: This is the third of a three part essay dealing with Islamic terrorism and what can be expected regarding Islam’s ultimate fate. These articles are written in memoriam of the 9-11 atrocity’s tenth anniversary and are dedicated to the 3,000 innocent Americans who were murdered on that fateful day.

How Will it End?

Short answer ― The Muslim holocaust.

There is a proverb whose thread is found both in Aesop and the Bible. It reads:

“The clay pot should keep its distance from the iron kettle.”

Instead of keeping its distance, Islam has cozened its way into Western civilization and, parading under false colors as an alleged religion, it flies a counterfeit Liberal standard of interfaith Multiculturalism. Besotted with its own temporary successes and newfound “purity” ― through a recent reformation leaving it even more violent, intolerant, misogynistic and puritanical ― Islam is in the process of infiltrating Western civilization to an unprecedented degree. However, in this respect, it is the non-industrial Islamic clay pot that is getting too close to the militarily advanced Western iron kettle.

A Talmudic variation of this fable provides a different perspective: “If a pot falls upon a stone, woe to the pot; if a stone falls upon a pot, woe to the pot; either way, woe to the pot” (Esther Rabbah, 7:10). For Islam’s clay pot, violence is the stone. As Islam continues to embrace terrorism it is eagerly drawn to that stone with a dangerous degree of impetus. In its love of death and martyrdom, Islam puts the stone in precipitous motion, which just as often falls upon the heads of Muslims themselves.

In either case ― much as with so-called Islamic martyrdom ― Islam imprudently brings itself into proximity with danger and eventually this will prove its own undoing. Suffused with delusions of adequacy, Muslims think nothing of constantly antagonizing Western powers who long ago perfected industrialized warfare to an extent that Islam can only dream of, despite its supremacist fantasies.

Like a candle that sputters and flares, Islam casts outsized shadows which too many in the West mistake for genuine military potency. The exact opposite is true and it is only by using the asymmetrical warfare of terrorism that Islam holds any sway. It is a schoolyard bully writ large and every bit as cowardly. The brittleness of Islamic doctrine is too often confused with strength and its fanaticism taken for authority.

In a recent Berlin speech, Swiss Member of Parliament, Oskar Freysinger, noted that, “Islam is only as strong as we are weak.” One glimpse of how Islam remains almost entirely reliant upon Political Correctness to drive its Western agenda reveals that this parasitic entity’s success wholly depends upon the frailty of a civilization debilitated by Multiculturalism and self-doubt. This is underscored both by the physical compulsion and violence that lies beneath so much of Islamic doctrine and the fact that no nation in history has ever voluntarily adopted Islam without an application of force being involved.

Politician Barrack Obama epitomizes the danger that Liberals pose to Islam:

Not only do they appease and cower before Islamic bullying but Liberalism also infantilizes Muslim men through the soft racism of lowered expectations. Thus enabled by such hollow victories, Islam is capable of duping itself into believing its own propaganda; a perilous mistake at the best of times and often fatal in a time of conflict.

Little do Liberals understand how they will be among the first who go to the wall should Islam prevail. Nor, in their haste to disarm the world, do they understand that such military ineptitude on their part will see them left with few responses other than nuclear Armageddon when confronted by WMD terrorist strikes. Through appeasement and facilitation, Liberals are Islam’s most dangerous “friends”.

This same Politically Correct doctrine has seen ineffectual campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq that have cost the multinational coalition on the order of two trillion dollars, with America shouldering a lopsided $1.36 trillion share of the burden. That is the cost of keeping in check just two of some fifty Muslim majority countries. Subduing the other four dozen Islamic nations represents at least another staggering $96 trillion dollars of expenditure and countless more military casualties. No single nation or combination of international economies can possibly afford this sort of expenditure.

This inordinate cost of conventional war needed to obtain even a modicum of peace is, perhaps, the grimmest thing about Islam’s future. As the mask slips and “radical” or “fundamentalist” Islam are revealed to be mainstream and fully compatible with regularly accepted Islamic doctrine, Total War ― something Muslims continue to boast of declaring against the West ― looms evermore probable. However, the economic factors alone point directly away from conventional war.

Truth be told, in the absence of that $96 trillion dollars, there is only unconventional warfare left as a survival option. Nuclear weapons represent the sole existing and cost-effective way of managing hostilities with some 1.6 billion people. Like a proverbial trout in the milk pail, this one simple fact is difficult to ignore. Basic economics dooms perpetually hostile Islam to utter annihilation.

Any expectation of Islam pacifying, moderating or reforming itself must be dismissed out of hand. Islam has already undergone a recent reformation from which it emerged as an even more intolerant, more violent, more puritanical and more misogynistic creed. Those Muslims who do seek any pacification or sincere moderation of Islam’s violent doctrine are usually put to death by more devout believers.

Lending some much needed perspective to this nettlesome debacle is a quick estimate of the death toll that reasonably could be expected if Islam somehow managed to take over the world. Here are several, admittedly, rough estimates of what to anticipate from the establishment of a global caliphate.

1.) Extermination of all Jews:
Some 13.5 million people, world-wide would most likely die at the hands of their Muslim oppressors.

2.) Execution of all homosexuals:
We will use what some call a "wildly exaggerated figure" for the sake of including the bisexual and transgender community plus other sexual deviants who would all be put to death under shari’a. Therefore, some 10% of the world's population or 600 million people would fall into this category.

The remaining factors that follow are much more difficult to quantify.

3.) Armed resistance to Muslim encroachment:
It's safe to say that nearly everyone in the counterjihad movement would perish fighting a Muslim attempt to overrun America or Europe. Worldwide, the numbers would most likely exceed that of the Jews. We'll place it at a meager 100 million.

4.) Women denied access to medical care:
This is a huge number because, under Islamic law, women would only be able to be seen by female doctors—an exceedingly small fraction of this world's medical practitioners. We’ll use the figure for global female cancer mortality rates as an example of how reduced early intervention would escalate avoidable deaths, especially among women. That figure amounts to more than 3 million per year.

5.) Liquidation of political prisoners:
Toss in another 10 million dead. Remember, Islam has many enemies, be they perceived or real.

6.) Execution of those who refuse to convert:
We shall use the world’s population of Catholics as a figure representing those who would adamantly refuse to convert or cooperate and be put to death instead. While the number would likely be much higher, this figure approaches over 1 billion.

We now have a total of 1.726 billion people who would die within the first year or so of Islam establishing its global caliphate. This figure is larger than the world’s Muslim population. Millions more would die each year due to Islam’s heavy-handed shari’a law and its excessive demand for capital punishment. Women would keep dying in droves due to the unavailability of female doctors. Emerging homosexuals would be killed as with many other deviants; be they political, religious or otherwise.

Concealed in all this is a small yet meaningful number of so-called “honor killings” that typically involve young Muslim girls or wives who ― through premarital sexual activity or inappropriate dalliances ― have disgraced their families and are put to death for it, typically by their own family members. In a global caliphate, over one million of these murders per year would not be an unexpected figure. Do not think for one moment that Western women would magically be immune from this stricture. Imams and Islamic mutaween (“morals police”) would cheerfully put to death any youthful or adult offenders regardless of their race or belief.

Hidden even deeper in these figures is a calculation which will probably fail to evoke much sympathy amongst knowledgeable Westerners; yet, humanity demands that it be recognized. Should the global Islamic caliphate arrive, there also would be countless more Muslim deaths, just as there are today throughout the MME (Muslim Middle East); except for now these executions would proceed briskly, unfettered by any condemnation from the world community that they, at least marginally, receive today. Rape victims being given lashes or stoned to death and other appalling injustices would flourish.

However crude the above projections are, they do not even account for a world suddenly stripped of many modern technologies considered haram (“forbidden”) by Islam. A sharp drop in agricultural productivity, reduction in medical services ― as noted above ― along with the elimination of food supplies derived from haram animals, such as pigs (including rennet, gelatin, whey and alcohol), would see mass starvations and medically preventable deaths soar upwards. These are just a bare few examples of the unknown death toll that would accompany an Islamic caliphate. Unimaginable as it may seem, imposition of global shari’a could result in the death of up to half this world’s population.

None of this deals with the tremendous loss of Western and world heritage in the form of buildings, monuments, paintings, sculptures, books and priceless documents that would be heaped upon bonfires or pulverized into rubble. The Magna Carta, America’s Constitution plus innumerable other ephemera would go up in smoke. Notre Dame’s fabulous Rose Window would follow the Bamiyan Buddhas into oblivion. They would be just the start of unparalleled and inconceivable vandalism on a global scale.

Rarely, if ever ― even among counterjihad fora ― is there any mention of either the massive death toll or the loss of heritage that would accompany global shari’a law. There remains, especially in the larger public, an almost intentional ignorance of these two devastating potentials. Eventually, in the face of so much stark evidence, it becomes difficult to deny that there exists the will not to believe.

This will not to believe carries its own loathsome price tag. Recent events in Norway show that long before Muslims manage to demographically displace native Europeans there will begin a serious backlash against the Multiculturalists who have imposed this lethal burden upon the West. It is rather doubtful that American and European culture will go quietly into the Politically Correct Islamic night.

Ironically, as Muslims continue to financially drain the West ― through exorbitant military campaigns, increased security measures, petroleum sales and abuse of social benefits in host countries ― they only increase the eventual appeal of cost effective measures that will be required to subdue Islam. There will also come a time when Western nations begin to recoil at the prospect of sending any more soldiers to die for the sake of letting Muslims erect yet another shari’a government and terrorist production facility.

Complicating all of this is how the concept of military deterrence is essentially nonfunctional as regards Islam. A culture that glorifies and worships death is more than difficult to deter. For every bit that the West shrinks from waging Total War, the necessity of posing an existential threat to Islam only increases. When it comes to the ineffectuality of deterrence, no better example exists that of modern day Iran. The ramifications of Ahmadinejad’s tutelage under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini pose some serious issues. Recall Khomeini’s words during his 1980 speech in Qom, the Shi’ite spiritual hub:

We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land burn. I say let this land [Iran] go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world.

When Ahmadinejad threatens to “wipe Israel off the map” it is with the implicit knowledge that Iran, as a country, may perish as a result. In effect, he is turning his entire nation into a gigantic suicide bomber. Neither is this the end of it. Iran’s reckless pursuit of genocide against the Jews could precipitate the Muslim holocaust all by itself. Little known to most people is Israel’s Samson Option. If true, the Jewish state has quietly informed its Arab neighbors that a single WMD strike against Israel will result in the entire MME (Muslim Middle East) being incinerated in nuclear plasma. Hundreds of fusion warheads along with newly acquired Dolphin class submarines and cruise missiles back this up.

There is cold comfort in this for Israel but it also has quite worrisome implications for the West. At a recent pan-Arab conference Saudi Arabia’s king essentially told Ahmadinejad to “sit down and shut up” with his genocidal ravings before the entire MME is annihilated. Should he take this admonishment to heart, then the question is beggared as to who else might be targeted for an Iranian nuclear strike.

It bears mentioning how simple statistics indicate that, beyond a certain as yet undetermined number of Islamic nuclear warheads, there emerges a non-zero probability that one or more of them will fall into terrorist hands. Keeping that in mind, America ― better known to Iranians as “The Great Satan” ― suddenly materializes as a grim alternative target to Israel. What’s more, the Obama administration’s abject appeasement of Islam can only have strengthened Muslim perceptions that the United States lacks sufficient political will to respond in kind should it experience a nuclear terrorist attack.

As noted earlier, Obama and most of his cabinet have little to no military experience. With their being so unlettered in war fighting doctrine, could it not be possible that these appeasers might abruptly discover ― after repeated military budget cuts ― that massive nuclear retaliation was their sole playing card? Again, pro-disarmament Liberals rate as the most dangerous kind of “friends” that Islam could have.

Repulsive in the extreme is how truly avoidable this looming Muslim holocaust really is. A far less costly program of “wetwork” style targeted assassinations directed at the top echelons of Islam’s clerical, political, scholastic and financial aristocracy could see global jihad quickly screech to a grinding halt. Information hoarding is a way of life in the MME and even more so with terrorist leaders. Break enough strands in their networks and they will no longer function. A useful side effect of such a program would be to create numerous power vacuums that would draw violent contenders like moths to a candle’s flame. Subsequent infighting might even match the original fallout with equally fruitful results.

As noted in Part II of this essay, Islam has “unhappy ending” written all over it. Belmont Club’s Richard Fernandez (Wretchard), was one of the first to note this in his 2003 magnum opus, The Three Conjectures:

The most startling result of this analysis is that a catastrophic outcome for Islam is guaranteed whether America retaliates or not. Even if the President decided to let all Americans die to expiate their historical guilt, why would Islamic terrorists stop after that? They would move on to Europe and Asia until finally China, Russia, Japan, India or Israel, none of them squeamish, wrote -1 x 10^9 in the final right hand column. They too would be prisoners of the same dynamic, and they too have weapons of mass destruction.

It is more than safe to say that an industrially and militarily unlettered Islam is not going to take over the world using such a feeble tool as terrorism. As was also noted in Part II, Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast and that pace far outstrips any ability of theirs to perfect the mass production of intricate nuclear weapons nor muster fighting forces of even marginal proficiency. Chronic overreach is a hallmark of Islam and its habit of poking at the Western nuclear dragon with its terrorist pointed wooden stick bodes especially unwell for Muslims everywhere.

Fernandez goes on to observe:

Long before 3,000 New Yorkers died on September 11, Iraq and Iran killed 500,000 Muslims between them. The greatest threat to Muslims is radical Islam; and the greatest threat of all is a radical Islam armed with weapons of mass destruction.

Remember that for eight long years, Iran and Iraq fought to a bloody stalemate using chemical weapons and even ten year-old boys as human minesweepers. Less conservative estimates cite up to a million Muslim fatalities with both nations sending the flower of their youth into an insatiable meat grinder. Now, consider how America rolled up Iraq’s sidewalks in two weeks. This is the “reality gap” confronting Islam and its delusory vision of world domination. No such thing will ever happen.

Given that the global caliphate is forever out of reach, whither Islam? What of its obsessive quest for global supremacy? Handily, Israel provides us with a micro synopsis of the macro global problem. Imagine a tiny nation like Costa Rica routinely beating America’s military posterior like a cheap dime store drum. That is the equivalent of Israel defeating the combined military might of Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Lebanon. Please remember that, in Arab culture, humiliation is worse than death. Abandoning conventional warfare in favor of terrorism, the Arab nations intentionally selected a strategy of low-intensity conflict whose upper limit would not trigger direct intervention by the global community.

Thus was tiny Israel left alone to defend itself against continuous terrorist attacks the like of which no other nation on earth save, perhaps, India has had to endure. What of the much vaunted peace negotiations; the Oslo “Road Map” and so forth? What about the “land for peace” concessions that Israel has so often made in the pursuit of a negotiated settlement?

Few people understand that any sort of “negotiated peace” with Israel would serve to unravel the entire Islamic Arab consciousness. Reaching even the least sort of peace agreement would be a frank admission that jihad had failed. Furthermore, any recognition of a Jewish state would contravene the genocidal doctrine that is a cornerstone of Islam. Acceptance of Israel’s continued existence contradicts Islamic canon on so many levels that any such thing is unimaginable.

Piled on top of this is Israel’s continuous string of military victories against often overwhelming Arab forces. How then to explain that away without an indisputable annihilation of Israel tucked under their Islamic belt? Deprived of any concrete proof that Islam actually can prevail against the eternally hated Jew, please do not begin to imagine that there will be any near term cessation of hostilities, if ever.

Thus we are presented with the micro model of global terrorism. Withdrawal, surrender, in fact, peace of any sort with Islam is simply out of the question. In reality, Islam offers nothing that remotely resembles an actual “peace treaty”. Instead, there is only hudna, a temporarily cessation of hostilities that is specifically designed to permit Muslims the rearming needed to then break that “truce” at their convenience. Whither Israel … whither the global community where Islam is concerned.

So long as the West does not pose an existential threat to Islam’s continued presence on earth, there will be no accommodation of any sort. This is the bottom line. That degree of political will is sorely lacking in the West and, even if it existed, there is little likelihood that anyone involved would appreciate how any such pact with the unbelievers would be broken at the first instant of advantage for Islam.

Islam has always demanded to be paid in its own bloody coin. Violence is the only tender it recognizes and all other currency is scorned as a coward’s coinage. Hudna, taqiyya and kitman all assure that there is no hope of an honorably negotiated peace. Islam wants no such thing. Global domination is its imperative and any re-scripting of those priorities is simply out of the question.

Hardest of all to remember is that this has been Islam’s central doctrine from the very beginning of its existence. The West’s opposition or threat to Muslims has no bearing on why Islam wages its barbarous terrorism against us. The hammer of violence remains Islam’s only tool and we are all nails in its sight. Islam has already determined how it will end. It is merely a matter of survival for the West and to let Islam’s chips fall where they may. Muslims will forever be cannon fodder for Islam’s eternal jihad. Until they realize this and rebel for once and all time against their warlord masters nothing will ever change.

Remember … as always; Islam wouldn’t have it any other way.

That is how it will end.


Part I: “When Will it End?”
Part II: “Why Will it End?”

68 comments:

Egghead said...

Hi Zenster: Your three essays are a great synthesis of the ideas that you have expressed independently over the years.

However, I must disagree that Islam will ever proceed with the execution of all homosexuals.

Islam converts homosexuality into homosexual pedophilia - which is rampant in all Islamic countries - and which acts as a useful tool to spiritually destroy young boys who are encouraged to channel their rage into jihad.

Franklin said...

Gosh! What a brilliant essay, I,II & III.

meo fio said...

Remove homosexuals, eliminate feminism, squash liberalism, these are what all the anti-multicultualists want, yet you are brain washed by zionists to protect jews at all cost, even though jews have always been the biggest supporters of multiculturalism, liberalism, gay rights, feminism, illegal immigration.

Sagunto said...

Hi Zen -

There's a lot to be said in detail, but before discussing specifics, I'd like to say - once again - that I enjoyed your essay. I'll post some of my initial remarks here without any adjustment, since this essay is virtually the same as the one I read before:

So here goes:

- Though your second part deals at length with stealth jihad, the general and final focus is a lot on the level of international politics and military strategy. You run the risk of some parts being read as written by a neo-con, dissatisfied with failing and half-hearted interventionism.

- Relative to the above focus on Islamic terrorism, there's little to be found about what to do about or what will be the likely outcome of the creeping islamization in the cities of Europe. In your second part, after the intermezzo about "the shackles of Christian theocracy", the focus is shifted back to the world stage, to terrorism and the (nuclear) level. It is hard to imagine how military superiority has any bearing on counter-jihad solutions for our day to day lives in this regard, i.e. islamization will continue anyway.

Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.

bupkiss o'toole said...

Brilliant, perceptive analysis. Keep up the good work. Might I suggest looking into to the Unholy alliance between the Muslims and the reptilian Radical traitors who are complicit in our destructions.

Egghead said...

Hi Sagunto,

Now we're getting down to business.... :)

I too was jarred by Zenster's non-sequitur swipe at Christian theocracy (no doubt inspired by his - unconvincing to me - facade of atheism). Hi Zenster! :)

I had meant to comment that, while Islam has murdered and maimed the most people, godless Marxism - in all its flavors - has murdered the most people in the shortest amount of time.

Given more time, godless Marxism will be happy to both compete and cooperate with Islam for blood on its hands.

My worry as implied by your second point here is that moderate Islam will chip away at Western society until we are effectively dhimmis in our own lands.

When Islam combines with leftism, a very nasty mutation will occur. Where each ideology is concerned to control every aspect of human thought and behavior, the Western educated left has the ability to enforce compliance via technology that Eastern "educated" Muslims could neither invent nor administer on their own.

I have said for years that the atheist left plans to use welfare-dependent Muslims as foot soldiers to destroy Western religion and culture and then plans to subsume Muslims into the left via human RFID chips that will be required to acquire ALL societal benefits including food, water, housing, education, employment, medical care, and travel.

It remains to be seen who wins: primitive Muslims or educated leftists.

As Zenster predicts, I think that the educated leftists are playing with (nuclear) fire that may very well get out of their control and burn down the whole world.

Marinco said...

I just downloaded and printed these three essays for thorough reading and study.

These ideas are why I spend my limited time coming here and make my small contributions.

Thank you Zenster. May God bless you and God bless the EDL!

Dave said...

If necessary, Islam will be defeated the same way the American Indians were: by destroying the basis of their survival. Egypt is starving today -- how many more Moslems would die if oilfields were seized and irrigation systems wrecked? As for "sensitive" urban ghettos, surround them with concrete walls and razor wire, cut off the welfare checks, and watch the "youths" burn their own homes down.

Survival is all about food, fuel, and clean water. Secure these for your people, deny them to the enemy, and you win.

It is not necessary to exterminate Moslems 100%, or even 10%. Birthrates are dropping fast in the Moslem world, and a few humiliating total defeats would make them drop even faster. When people rich or poor stop seeing themselves as God's Elect, they lose interest in procreation.

Dymphna said...

Dave--

I almost didn't let your comment thru - a bit heavy on the "starve 'em out" brutal rhetoric.

One thing about the Indians that few people realize: thousands of them elected to becoem homesteaders and join in the Great Move westward. It must've been wrenching to leave their tribal customs behind but they did and they prospered. Which is why so many Americans have Indian DNA, especially in the western parts of the country.

Your idea about treating our underclass in the same way that the Germans treated the Jews is utterly immoral. No humane person would permit such a thing.

However, in terms of control, one of the two senators from Illinois did call in the national guard to East St. Louis (in Illinois) to curb the violence there. I didn't know senators had that power. I didn't read any follow-up, though.

RE: the closing of the Muslim womb.You're exactly right. When the women become educated, the population drops precipitously. Even if the primitive economy that gives them low-quality educations in fifth-rate diploma mills and then can't find jobs for them...it still happens.

Egypt is set for famine this winter. China is buying up all the wheat because it can afford to do so.; Egypt cannot. Already many people are not getting adequate daily nourishment in Cairo. When winter comes, those Cairo Facebook revolutionaries are going to be very very hungry.

And it will be worse across North Africa and the sub-Sahara. It will be awful. Just as bad in Tehran as Iran runs out of oil...

The only group not dropping its birth rate are Pakistani Muslims in Britain. They still live a tribal life and women are NOT educated. The British govt feeds them. True also back in the old home state -- Pakistani women aren't educated out of child-bearing. Yet.

However, all this bad news does not make us safer. It makes those starving ppl with no hope more desperate. We are all at risk when those dominoes start falling.

Ivan said...

You are wrong that no nation has embraced Islam without force being involved. Indonesia and Zanzibar were converted. In addition, the Moros of the Phillipines are converts.

wadingacross said...

Some on here may not be familiar with Biblical eschatology and more so the various "camps" and interpretations.

Anyhow, there has been a continual - and now growing - interpretation and belief that the End Times should be viewed from a wholly Middle Eastern perspective (NOT a European/UN/Roman Catholic one). To that end, there has been a new/renewed understanding that Islam will be the vehicle for the Antichrist.

Reading Zenster's essay with this view of the Bible's eschatological prophecies in mind, there is much that meshes.

Read Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation and other apocalyptic books with Islam in mind. Then re-read Zenster's above essay again.

I believe that Christ's return will utterly end Islam, but it'll do plenty to crush itself before He returns.

Sagunto said...

Hi Eggy -

Good to see you taking part in this discussion. We seem to be commenting vice versa, for your point about the death toll of Russian, Chinese and other Socialisms, was exactly what I thought while reading with some measure of surprise:

"Theocracy of any stripe is the penultimate enemy of human liberty and freedom. Among all forms of governance it has the absolute worst historic track record and is unrivaled for its death tolls."

I have called this the "Theocracy Intermezzo", and I have some reservations, both about the veracity of various historical claims that come with this interlude, and also about its use in this essay. In short: strike the part about "theocracy" and the general point of the essay(s) doesn't suffer at all. If anything, it benefits by becoming (slightly) shorter.

Since it remained part of the essay, I thought it would serve the benefit of further discussion to ask some clear and simple questions pertaining to this rather vague "emerging Christian theocracy" at some unspecified distant past in some undisclosed part of "Europe".

See my comment over here.

(Un)fortunately, tomorrow we'll be gone on a short vacation, so I won't be around to enjoy any in-depth discussion on this issue. My secret hope is that you might be willing to take upon you the honourable task ;-) to repeat any of those questions, in the unlikely event of no real clarification being given.

All the best from Amsterdam,
Sag.

john in cheshire said...

Our leaders in the West should announce what we all know to be true, that we are at war with islam. Once that is recognised, then we can get on with the business of defeating them wherever they rear their ugly heads. By any means. In other words, what do we in the West value most, our civilisation, moral values and religious beliefs, or those of the barbarians and satanic cultists? I know which I'd prefer to live with. But what do we as a whole think?

Zenster said...

Egghead: I too was jarred by Zenster's non-sequitur swipe at Christian theocracy (no doubt inspired by his - unconvincing to me - facade of atheism).

Then please stay jarred. The Catholic Church's near-absolute power in early Europe is a well established fact and I will not waste this site's bandwidth arguing about it.

As to be being an "atheist", that is both incorrect and deeply insulting. Time and again, here at GoV, I have declared myself to be a devout Agnostic and your ability to selectively forget that indicates a slipshod intellectualism that ill suits someone of your apparent intelligence.

I had meant to comment that, while Islam has murdered and maimed the most people, godless Marxism - in all its flavors - has murdered the most people in the shortest amount of time.

For speed and mechanization of slaughter, no one has ever beaten the Nazis. That is why they remain a penultimate evil to this day.

Furthermore, Marxism is a crude beginner compared to Islam, whose historic death toll approaches some 300 MILLION. Bill Warner, the director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam, makes this case rather well. If asked, I will post his breakout of the various holocausts that Islam has visited upon our world.

Zenster said...

Egghead: However, I must disagree that Islam will ever proceed with the execution of all homosexuals.

Islam converts homosexuality into homosexual pedophilia - which is rampant in all Islamic countries - and which acts as a useful tool to spiritually destroy young boys who are encouraged to channel their rage into jihad.


What is it about the way in which Islam executes overt homosexuals that remains unclear to you?

Sure enough, Muslims turn a blind eye to the indiscriminate pedophilia that pervades Islamic countries like yeast spores in a bakery. Aside from that being a damning indictment of Islam and a concrete fact, so what?

Homosexuality, much like romantic love, has no place in Islam. Both heterosexual and homosexual acts are abject expressions of physical dominance and little else.

The shattering of self respect and self esteem are just part and parcel of Islam as a whole. How else to explain the millennium of near-total stagnation that has permeated the MME (Muslim Middle East) like sand.

Zenster said...

Thank you for the kind words, Franklin.

Egghead said...

Hi Sagunto:

Yes! When I read, "Theocracy of any stripe is the penultimate enemy of human liberty and freedom. Among all forms of governance it has the absolute worst historic track record and is unrivaled for its death tolls," I immediately thought, "Says who?!"

Unfortunately, this faulty line of logic opens up the counter-jihad to the well-worn specious leftist atheist argument that is dead-set (pun alert!) on creating World War III by entrenching Islam in the East and inflicting Islam on the West with the endgame being to "prove" that "All religions are equally bad, so government should ban ALL religion in favor of an atheist state religion - fully supported by 'unbiased' science."

Zenster, I would suggest that you remove the theocracy criticism since that tripe bolsters the argument of the left which is emboldened to import more "poor" "innocent" "primitive" Muslims who must only suffer because of their ancestors having been "abused" and "colonized" by Christians at some point. In reality, if the Muslim world had been so lucky as to be colonized by and converted to Christianity in the past, the world would be a far better and safer place to live in today.

Peter Steenkamp said...

This article ignores the power of muslims to recover their losses through procreation. Despite fighting and losing 4 bloody wars against Iran and the USA, countless Iraqis starving because of economic sanctions, and many Iraqis fleeing the country, the population of Iraq doubled from 14 million in the early 1980's to 28 million just 27 years later, and is still growing by over half a million people a year. And many other muslim countries have similar growth rate. 3-5 children per woman is the rule in muslim countries, not the exception.
Meanwhile the people of European ethnicity (including the population in former European colonies like the USA and Australia) usually have birth rates below replacement levels. And in south and East Europe, well below replacement levels with only 1.3 children per woman.
In 1900, ethnic Europeans were about 1/3rd of the world's population. In 1950, about 1/4th. Now, ethnic Europeans are only 14% of the world's population, and a relatively large part of them are too old to have children. Extrapolation of birth rates to the end of this century, reveals that at that time at most a few % of the world's population (perhaps even less than 1%) will be ethnic European while muslims will be half the world's population. Europeans will probably still be technologically superior but what good are high tech weapons when there is hardly anybody left to make them and hardly anybody left to use them? While muslim countries will have literally hundreds of millions of excess population that can be used as colonists or soldiers to invade European countries.

It is entirely possible that the muslim dream of a global caliphate will become a reality in the next century and Western civilizations will cease to exist. Demographic forces point in that direction.

Egghead said...

Zenster: Yeesh! It's hard to keep track. To me, atheist and agnostic achieve the same result which is to DENY God in the here and now - just when God needs human warriors to proclaim God's name and perform good actions in God's name.

At any rate, weren't you trying to persuade everyone that man is naturally good and moral without God? Sounds more atheist than agnostic to me. I believe that I referred you to seek out atheists to see if they could help you make your argument - which is hamstrung by the actual outright murderous performance of atheistic forms of government in modern history.

You claim that "no one has ever beaten the Nazis," but I have read that the amount of people murdered by Communism is outrageously large and kept under wraps because of the current power and presence of Communist regimes like China and Russia. In other words, the media fails to elaborate about Communist murders because the Communists are still around to murder the media - much like the situation with Islam.

Egghead said...

I am posting my thoughts about homosexuality separately here.

My conclusion is that, when a society accepts homosexuality and polygamy, pedophilia increases exponentially. That fact is important to me as a mother.

"What is it about the way in which Islam executes overt homosexuals that remains unclear to you?"

Islam also executes witches, but how many Islamic witches are really executed every year?

The fact is that women face a far greater chance of being the victim of an honor killing than any other group of people.

Based on the explicit example of Mohammed whose behavior is used as a model for all Muslim behavior, overt homosexuality exits at all levels of Muslim society from boys and men kissing, holding hands, dancing together, copulating, and even gang raping young boys in public - to men holding regular semi-private dancing boy parties.

Indeed, a certain amount of overt homosexuality is EXPECTED - even from heterosexuals - which is the reason that President Bush held hands and danced with a visiting Saudi prince.

As I have written before, Islam prohibits overt romantic love - rather than overt homosexuality which exists all over the Muslim world starting with pedophilia that victimizes most - if not all - Muslim boys in Muslim-controlled lands including Western no go zones.

Zenster said...

Egghead: To me, atheist and agnostic achieve the same result which is to DENY God in the here and now - just when God needs human warriors to proclaim God's name and perform good actions in God's name.

You could not be more wrong on so many levels. No Agnostic worthy of the name can ever approach the spiritual barrenness and pessimism of Atheistic thought.

At any rate, weren't you trying to persuade everyone that man is naturally good and moral without God?

My point was that God is not essential in order to identify the path of right conduct. Nowhere have I ever asserted that "man is naturally good and moral". My singular point is that the path of right conduct can be deduced from external reality.

Sounds more atheist than agnostic to me.

Then I suggest that you turn up your hearing aid.

You claim that "no one has ever beaten the Nazis," but I have read that the amount of people murdered by Communism is outrageously large and kept under wraps because of the current power and presence of Communist regimes like China and Russia.

I will request that you DO NOT take my statements out of context. My precise words were:

For speed and mechanization of slaughter, no one has ever beaten the Nazis.

That is a far cry from your illegitimately truncated "no one has ever beaten the Nazis,".

In other words, the media fails to elaborate about Communist murders because the Communists are still around to murder the media - much like the situation with Islam.

And your point is?

I suppose I must now post the figures for Islamic death tolls so that the true magnitude of Islam's toxicity is brought to light.

Zenster said...

Peter Steenkamp: This article ignores the power of muslims to recover their losses through procreation.

It's awfully difficult to procreate in the middle of nuclear plasma. Islam's jihadist juggernaut is headed directly towards a nuclear holocaust for the entire MME (Muslim Middle East).

It is also only a matter of time before some Islamic terrorist somewhere perpetrates an atrocity of such staggering scale that no civilized nation on earth will tolerate the presence of Muslims within their borders.

If and when that happens, those expatriate Muslims will be more than fortunate to be deported instead of being shipped directly to death camps.

Do not think I advocate any of this. I simply predict it.

As always, remember:

ISLAM WOULDN'T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY.

Zenster said...

Egghead: When I read, "Theocracy of any stripe is the penultimate enemy of human liberty and freedom. Among all forms of governance it has the absolute worst historic track record and is unrivaled for its death tolls," I immediately thought, "Says who?!"

Says me and you have yet to provide a shred of evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately, this faulty line of logic opens up the counter-jihad to the well-worn specious leftist atheist argument that is dead-set (pun alert!) on creating World War III by entrenching Islam in the East and inflicting Islam on the West with the endgame being to "prove" that "All religions are equally bad, so government should ban ALL religion in favor of an atheist state religion - fully supported by 'unbiased' science."

I do not know where in the Hell you teased that out of my words but you are more than just plain wrong, you are distorting my message.

As it is, you have yet to disprove how poisonous theocracy actually is. Why not clear up that little mistake before digging yourself any deeper, emkay?

Zenster, I would suggest that you remove the theocracy criticism since that tripe bolsters the argument of the left which is emboldened to import more "poor" "innocent" "primitive" Muslims who must only suffer because of their ancestors having been "abused" and "colonized" by Christians at some point.

You can suggest all you want until you are blue in the face. The only, repeat only argument that my criticism of theocracy emboldens is the need to eliminate this abomination from the face of our planet. There is no possible way to construe from my writings the wild eyed conspiracy theories that you are cobbling up out of whole cloth.

I also advise you to show some common decency and publicly retract your totally false accusation that I am an atheist.

Zenster said...

Egghead: Islam also executes witches, but how many Islamic witches are really executed every year?

Exactly zero. Witchcraft does not exist and any Islamic executions for witchcraft are merely thinly veiled vendettas, revenge by jilted suitors and other such typically Muslim mayhem.

Zenster said...

Marinco: Thank you Zenster.

You are most welcome.

Zenster said...

Dav: If necessary, Islam will be defeated the same way the American Indians were: by destroying the basis of their survival. Egypt is starving today -- how many more Moslems would die if oilfields were seized and irrigation systems wrecked?

None of that is necessary. All that's required is for America, Canada and Australia to stop shipping wheat to the MME (Muslim Middle East), and mass starvation will begin in just a few short weeks.

Despite this fatal vulnerability, Islam keeps stabbing at the West from Hell's heart. This is why I continue to predict such a dire outcome for Islam. There are so many ways for it to fail and, as I noted in Part II of this essay, "Islam is assembling too many enemies too fast." Through its tyrannous barbarity it cannot help but do so. Soon enough, one or the other of the nuclear powers in this world will simply say, "ENOUGH!"

Cyrus said...

Peter Steenkamp: The limiting factor will be food. The numbers of people living in the third world today is only possible because of the green revolution. This can only be perpetuated with chemicals, which in turn rely on technology and manufacturing, and then the knowledge of application. I do not think that any of these will be readily available when the children of Europe are old and feeble. This has been covered in other posts here at GoV, namely that the MME survives solely because it imports food (and by extension water). Without the West and Western charity they will starve. Certainly the Chinese (aging themselves) will not feed the MME and NA destitute masses as they will merely begin farming the land for themselves, as they have already begun doing so.

Franklin said...

Help me out here. How may I translate this wonderful essay into german for a german friend of mine?

Respectfully, Franklin

Franklin said...

Please allow me to rephrase...what an elegant essay! Thank you so much for opening up my mind, Zenster!

Respectfully, Franklin

Zenster said...

Cyrus: The limiting factor will be food.

Actually, as you go on to note, it will be water. I am honored that you have taken my earlier article "Blood for Water" to heart and brought it up precisely where it is most germane.

The entire MME (Muslim Middle East) is teetering on a knife edge of survival. Saudi Arabia has deemed "food security" a national priority. An excerpt:

The landscape is unmistakably desert and hardly looks promising for farming. But agriculture is big business in Saudi Arabia, from Hail in the north to the valleys near Taif in the west to the terraced hillsides of the southwest, made possible mostly by decades of government subsidies and irrigation with water pumped out of caverns deep underground. In 2008, agriculture accounted for nearly 5 percent of the country's annual GDP and employed about 12 percent of the work force.



Nevertheless, only about 2 percent of the country's enormous land mass is arable, even with intensive irrigation and modern farming technology, and the country in modern times has always depended on imported food. That dependence is increasing as the young population continues to grow at a rate that outpaces production. Facing a probable 77 percent growth in its population by 2050, Saudi Arabia is grappling with the realization that its barren soil and dwindling water supply will be insufficient to feed all those people. A quest for "food security," in a world where competition for food can only increase, has moved to the top of the Saudi planning agenda.
[emphasis added]

On top of all this, Saudi Arabia is putting in place massive desalination plants but it is doubtful that they will be adequate to the task of providing both potable water and irrigation for their entire population's drinking and eating needs.

If you think this current war over oil is bad, just wait for the ones that are coming over water.

Zenster said...

Franklin: How may I translate this wonderful essay into german for a german friend of mine?

Contact this web site's owners and ask if one of their German translators is up to the task. Look for the "Email us" link beneath "Contributors" near the top left hand side.

You have my permission to distribute it if proper attribution of authorship and a link to this work at Gates of Vienna are provided.

Egghead said...

My goodness, Zenster, I did NOT "accuse" you of being an atheist.

I described you as NOT being an atheist but rather having an "unconvincing to me - facade of atheism."

Based on our past interchanges and present comments, I actually think that you believe in God more than you do - and I like to poke you about it here and again. :)

But, if it makes you happy, then I publicly recant my statement that you are NOT an atheist. Have a sense of humor! Ha!

I also cheerfully "admit" that you choose to be called an agnostic, but I doubt that anyone here cares as much as you and me - except God. Double ha!

randian said...

If Egypt does suffer mass starvation, never forget it will be the Copts that starve. That it makes the country "purer" will be seen as a desirable side effect.

The problem of water and food will only hasten a real Islamic military invasion into the west. Turkey is no doubt harboring thoughts of taking back Greece and the Balkans, and the desert areas (Saudi Arabia et al) will be happy to help if it gets them the food and water resources they need. Unfortunately for Saudi Arabia, that moves the center of the caliphate to Turkey, exactly where Erdogan envisions it.

Shaunantijihad said...

Islam has the "other" ticking bomb - their productive wombs in the West. There will be no need to fight at all if they simply become sufficient in numbers.

Obviously, this must be reversed. By all means necessary. Yes, including forced sterilisation for those who wish to stay.

Seriously. This is their greatest weapon and our greatest threat.

Shaunantijihad said...

Zenster said

"It is also only a matter of time before some Islamic terrorist somewhere perpetrates an atrocity of such staggering scale that no civilized nation on earth will tolerate the presence of Muslims within their borders."

For me Beslan was enough. But why did this atrocity not provoke the reaction you predict? The answer is the media's cringing dhimmitude and pandering to the multicult, fascist left, and until we change this, the supine indifference will likely continue.

Zenster said...

Shaunantijihad: For me Beslan was enough.

As it was for me too. The magnitude of barbarity involved in gunning down fleeing little schoolchildren, much less raping them beforehand, pretty well erased any sympathy that I had ever been able to summon up for Muslims.

But why did this atrocity not provoke the reaction you predict?

A near universal lack of understanding about the true nature of Islam which these three essays have sought to correct.

The answer is the media's cringing dhimmitude and pandering to the multicult, fascist left, and until we change this, the supine indifference will likely continue.

All of them have much to answer for. They will consider themselves fortunate if only Nuremberg-style trials await them once this is all over.

EscapeVelocity said...

Zenster, that we are headed straight towards Armaggadeon is clear. The bright side is that we will have 1000 years of peace and prosperity under God, once this business with Muslims is over.

Look on the bright side. The Christian and Jewish Prophets have foretold what is coming.

EscapeVelocity said...

The Catholic Church's near-absolute power in early Europe -- Zenster

Yes, over a shattered Roman Empire that covered only part of Europe, all of Europe flooded with ill educated backwards Barbarians.

The Catholic Church brought Europe out of the Dark Ages, it didnt create them or prolong them.

I suggest you look into the lies being sold by Anti Christian Secularists as history.

The Catholic Church wasnt perfect, it is after all a fallible human institution, but it was on the whole the vehicle which Europe road to pre-eminance out of darkness.

EscapeVelocity said...

But I always enjoy reading your thought provoking articles Zenster. Keep up the good work.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: The Catholic Church brought Europe out of the Dark Ages, it didnt create them or prolong them.

Nowhere am I advancing or disputing such notions. I merely referred to how there was emergent Theocracy in early Europe.

I still maintain that absolutist Theocracy ― especially of the sort most commonly seen in Muslim majority nations ― is among the most poisonous to human liberty and freedom.

Despite all the quibbling and haranguing, no one has yet to adequately disprove my statement.

That said, thank you for the encouraging words, EscapeVelocity. They are much appreciated.

You New said...

Nice job, Zenster. Glad to see you are still kicking!

sheik yer'mami said...

# 10: Ivan said...

You are wrong that no nation has embraced Islam without force being involved. Indonesia and Zanzibar were converted. In addition, the Moros of the Phillipines are converts.

Where are the historical records? What do you know that I as a historian don't know?

Zenster said...

You New: Nice job, Zenster. Glad to see you are still kicking!

Thank you very much. I'm glad that you enjoyed the article.

Dymphna said...

@sheik yer'mami -

I didn't know you were a historian! Cool.

It would make sense that you'd know about the Philippines, too.

BTW, I just ran across this review of John Sayles film on the American-Philippines War. I was kind of dreading it because though I like Sayles work very much he's a real leftie when he goes political.

But this reviewer in City Journal calls it "even-handed" in his sub-title:

Yankees Abroad

It's called "Amigo" and in set in the 1900s during the 3 year war:

Amigo offers an account of this period, told from the perspectives of the American soldiers, the Filipino revolutionaries, and the ordinary citizens affected by the conflict. The story, set in the barrio of San Isidro in the largest of the country’s 7,107 islands, Luzon, centers on village leader Rafael Dacanay (Joel Torre). When the Americans arrive in the rural rice-farming community, they quickly rely on Dacanay, whose brother and son have joined the rebels, as a conduit and guide.

If you see it, would you let me know what you think?

Zenster said...

Ivan: You are wrong that no nation has embraced Islam without force being involved. Indonesia and Zanzibar were converted. In addition, the Moros of the Phillipines are converts.

Indonesia experienced Islamic wars before it was entirely converted.

I am currently researching Zanzibar.

As to the Moros, have you ever been to the Philippines? The entire MILF debacle is one endless bloody skirmish, just like what Islam has been famous for throughout its entire history.

Islam also has this nasty little habit related to something called jahiliyya (pre-Islamic period), whereby Muslims eradicate all traces of preexisting cultures in lands that they invade. It can make uncovering traces of violent invasion a difficult task at best.

The Temple of Cyrus in Iran, the Bamiyan Buddhas, The Hagia Sophia along with a gazillion temples on the Subcontinent all experiences Islamic "rebranding".

Islam is singlehandedly responsible for vandalizing this world's historic record more than any other one entity.

Even now the Waqf are destroying priceless Jewish artifacts that they are digging from beneath The Dome of the Rock, even at the risk of structurally destabilizing al Aqsa Mosque.

Should that intrusive abomination topple, guess who will be blamed?

Ghazvas, harams, zawiyyahs, husseinyiah, rabats, takiyahs, call them what you will; a huge number of them camouflage the ruins of similar, if not greater, structures wherever Islam has spread.

What's more, even if Zanzibar did accept Islam peacefully, it would be the exception that proves the rule.

You will have to provide some cites and links before I can accept what is being asserted. Islam's historic trail is drenched in the blood of almost 300,000,000 corpses and it argues strongly against any peaceful adoptions of that creed, ever.

Egghead said...

Anyone who wants to know the TRUTH about the biggest threat to humanity should read the following excellent website:

Democide: Murder by Government

20th Century Democide

randian said...

There's no distinction in Islam between church and state. Hence "murder by government" in Islam encompasses a heck of a lot more than the Ottoman Empire. Exterminating infidels was the official policy of numerous Islamic kingdoms.

EscapeVelocity said...

Zenster, it would take a more knowledgable man than me to disabuse you of your hostility towards all religion in general.

Spengler comes to mind.

The Catholic Church never had the sort of absolute power you attribute to it, in Europe.

Dymphna said...

@EscapeVelocity--

Never try to reason anyone out of a conclusion that was not arrived at using the faculty of Reason.

"The heart has its reasons", etc.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: Zenster, it would take a more knowledgable man than me to disabuse you of your hostility towards all religion in general.

You could not be more wrong. If you have not managed to perceive my personal respect for Christianity, then there is nothing I can say to change that.

Perhaps Gates of Vienna will publish my latest submission, "Islam's Profound Spiritual Error" and that might help you avoid such a baseless misconception.

Did you never manage to read my GoV essay, "Bonum Diffusum Sui"? Feel free to scroll down and see the closing dedication. Here, I'll save you the trouble:

"With loving recognition and profound gratitude to Father Rex Alarcon of Naga City’s Metropolitan Cathedral in the Philippines for our lengthy discussions and the generous sharing of his immense knowledge that provided me with some of the deepest theological insights I have ever experienced."

Sure thing, "hostility towards all religion in general". Yeah, right.

EscapeVelocity said...

Good News...for us all...God Bless


Ten thousand Chinese become Christians each day, according to a stunning report by the National Catholic Reporter's veteran correspondent John Allen, and 200 million Chinese may comprise the world's largest concentration of Christians by mid-century, and the largest missionary force in history. [1] If you read a single news article about China this year, make sure it is this one.

I suspect that even the most enthusiastic accounts err on the downside, and that Christianity will have become a Sino-centric
religion two generations from now. China may be for the 21st century what Europe was during the 8th-11th centuries, and America has been during the past 200 years: the natural ground for mass evangelization. If this occurs, the world will change beyond our capacity to recognize it. Islam might defeat the western Europeans, simply by replacing their diminishing numbers with immigrants, but it will crumble beneath the challenge from the East.

continued...

DCJ said...

Interesting discussion, but does anyone here realize that "penultimate" doesn't mean "quintessential"? It simply means "next to last."

Zenster said...

DCJ: Interesting discussion, but does anyone here realize that "penultimate" doesn't mean "quintessential"? It simply means "next to last."

In the long run, China will make the Islamic terrorists look like boy scouts. Islam is second in line.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: Zenster, it would take a more knowledgable man than me to disabuse you of your hostility towards all religion in general.

EscapeVelocity, it appears you have chosen not to respond to my earnest reply about your baseless charge.

Is that the Christian thing to do?

Have you ever considered that Theocracy is one of the greatest enemies of Freedom of Religion? Isn't that something a Christian, like yourself, should be concerned about?

Zenster said...

Dymphna: Never try to reason anyone out of a conclusion that was not arrived at using the faculty of Reason.

My condemnation of Theocracy is precisely based upon reason. You are sorely mistaken in that respect and I can only wonder how you reconcile your apparent agreement with Escape Velocity in the face of evidence which I have presented.

Dymphna said...

@Zenster--

Apologies are due: here are mine, cup full and running over.

I will be honest: most arguments about religion give me the hives. Literally. I guess I heard too many of them growing up.

OTOH, sitting in a classroom listenig to a lecture on, say, moral theology, no problem...

But I sure shouldn't have stuck my nose in when I wasn't following closely.

I'm sorry. And I even have a firm purpose of amendment here, but I know me: remember what I pointed to re Hesperado's summation of our characterological flaws around here: impatient? Yup.

So I can only propose that I shall avoid the occasions of temptation: i.e., keep my nose out of an argument I hadn't given my full attention.

Mea culpa, old friend

Zenster said...

Dymphna: OTOH, sitting in a classroom listening to a lecture on, say, moral theology, no problem...

I only wish you could have sat around the table with Father Alarcon and myself during the fabulous discussions we shared in Naga City. I'm sure that with your Catholic school education, you would have had a thing or two to contribute.

Mea culpa, old friend

No harm, no foul.

Now what about that "Islam's Profound Spiritual Error" essay of mine? It hits the sweet spot with respect to GoV's ongoing dissection of Islamic terrorism.

EscapeVelocity said...

Its a complicated and difficult topic Zenster.

I stand by my comment.

I admit that Im dead tired of hearing Leftwingers decry Theocracy everytime Christians attempt to participate in democracy and informing the laws of the US.

Absolute Freedom is animalism, it makes animals of men....reduces them to Darwinism.

The seeds of modern democracy as we know it, as sewn in the beliefs of Jews and Chrisians, the covenant of God to each individual man.

Theocracy isnt inimical to freedom. Freedom isnt an absolute good.

This issues are complicated, and it would take a better man than me to disabuse you of your hostility towards all religion.

Just be glad that European Christian Theocratists moved to this land and formed new governments...based upon biblical teachings and worldviews, the acknowledgement of man's flaws and imperfections, and valuing the individual as moral agent and the freewill necessary to allow for moral agency.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: I admit that Im dead tired of hearing Leftwingers decry Theocracy everytime Christians attempt to participate in democracy and informing the laws of the US.

Something of which I take no part in.

Theocracy isn't inimical to freedom.

It sure as Hell is to religious freedom. You should know that better than most.

It is also offensive that you continue to accuse me of "hostility towards all religion". Nothing could be farther from the truth and you are merely deluding yourself by thinking so.

If, indeed, I was hostile "towards all religion", I'd be an atheist and not an agnostic. Perish the thought that you might actually appreciate such a fact.

EscapeVelocity said...

Zenster, even Richard Dawkins acknowledges that Christianity may be a bulwark against something far worse.

He remains hostile to all religion.

This is where you are, but you are not nearly as hostile to Christianity as Richard Dawkins.

Other Atheists have made similar statements. Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and A.C. Grayling, I believe.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: This is where you are…

Ummm … no. It may be where you seem to think I am but it is an enormous hubris upon your part ― not to mention incredibly un-Christian ― for you to take it upon yourself in determining where I stand on such an intensely personal issue.

Do you honestly think that your Jesus would do the same as you are doing?

Egghead said...

Zenster: For you to make a standard rhetorical "appeal to authority" using Jesus as an example is hypocritical of you.

And, yes, you definitely appear to be hostile to all religions.

Perhaps it would be more fruitful for you to concentrate on Islam as an existential POLITICAL threat to the West.

Then, you can leave Christianity - which has inspired the ideals of the individual-empowering great Western governments - alone.

urah2222 said...

Wish them all "ALOHA at the SNACKBAR".

Dr. Shalit

EscapeVelocity said...

Look, I wasnt trying to make a big deal out of it.

Its just a simple observation.

Zenster does focus on Islam as a Poltiical and Existential threat to the West.

Franklin said...

...and, Zenster is correct!

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: Look, I wasn't trying to make a big deal out of it.

Then please refrain from making unfounded accusations.

It's just a simple observation.

Not when you phrase it with respect to facts that are not in evidence.

Zenster does focus on Islam as a Poltiical and Existential threat to the West.

Thank you. It has become something of a life's work for me to do so and I appreciate you recognizing that fact. To your credit, you have come nowhere near the obtuse efforts of others here at totally derailing this thread with meaningless quibbles over well-established historical fact.

EscapeVelocity said...

Zenster,

Agnostism says nothing directly about ones attitudes towards religion.

I suggest you study some sources that are not hostile to Christianity with regards to history and the development of Western Thought and Systems of Governance.

There are deeper tombs on theology and philosophy, but a breezey read on the Catholic Church and Western Civilization...

How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization Thomas Woods Jr.

The secularists really have done a fantastic job of revisionist history, purposely ignoring and instead demonizing Christianity in European History and Western Civilization.

Zenster said...

EscapeVelocity: Agnostism says nothing directly about ones attitudes towards religion.

Which only indicates the complete and total lack of understanding you seem to display about Agnosticism. Being an Agnostic says something very direct about religion that cannot be missed by someone of sufficient perspicacity.

There are deeper tombs on theology and philosophy…

Your Freudian slip is showing and it is difficult to imagine a more intensely ironic malapropism.

The secularists really have done a fantastic job of revisionist history, purposely ignoring and instead demonizing Christianity in European History and Western Civilization.

Again, none of which applies to me no matter how much you wish it did.