// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Nuke Britain Today, etc.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nuke Britain Today, etc.

    A man has been arrested for quoting Winston Churchill.

    Today Paul Weston, chairman of the party Liberty GB and candidate in the 22 May European Elections in the South East, has been arrested in Winchester.

    At around 2pm Mr Weston was standing on the steps of Winchester Guildhall, addressing the passers-by in the street with a megaphone. He quoted the following excerpt about Islam from the book The River War by Winston Churchill:

    "How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the faith: all know how to die but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith."
    All true, though in defense of Mohammed he may have had a point about the women, given what happened next:

    a woman came out of the Guildhall and asked Mr Weston if he had the authorisation to make this speech. When he answered that he didn’t, she told him "It's disgusting!" and then called the police.
    Never, ever, EVER give in to the temptation to white knight, even when denouncing Muslims.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
    All true, though in defense of Mohammed he may have had a point about the women, given what happened next:
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #3
      The only appropriate thing that comes to mind is the Psalm 94.

      Comment


      • #4
        That's just shameful. I knew the Brit's weren't big on free speech, but...really?
        "If you believe, take the first step, it leads to Jesus Christ. If you don't believe, take the first step all the same, for you are bidden to take it. No one wants to know about your faith or unbelief, your orders are to perform the act of obedience on the spot. Then you will find yourself in the situation where faith becomes possible and where faith exists in the true sense of the word." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

        Comment


        • #5
          Hold the H-Bomb. It is important to give the liberalizing forces within Islam room to breath at the same time as not antagonizing the extremists because then you give them a reason to fight. They are an enemy who has a very long term stealthy strategy so you need to be thinking in the same way and being effective over several decades. The fight against extremist Islam as it is against any extreme ideology has to be very carefully considered. We need to be better than them at everything and be able to prove it to the world. I would give you examples where we are failing miserably to provide a good example but I am sure you can think of a few yourselves.
          “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
          “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
          “not all there” - you know who you are

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
            Hold the H-Bomb. It is important to give the liberalizing forces within Islam room to breath at the same time as not antagonizing the extremists because then you give them a reason to fight. They are an enemy who has a very long term stealthy strategy so you need to be thinking in the same way and being effective over several decades. The fight against extremist Islam as it is against any extreme ideology has to be very carefully considered. We need to be better than them at everything and be able to prove it to the world. I would give you examples where we are failing miserably to provide a good example but I am sure you can think of a few yourselves.
            Or, y'know, we could just deport Muslims for being Muslims, and ban immigration from Muslim countries, thereby rendering their long-term subversion strategy immaterial.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
              Or, y'know, we could just deport Muslims for being Muslims, and ban immigration from Muslim countries, thereby rendering their long-term subversion strategy immaterial.
              No. You need to work on the ideology, not the people. It means getting rid of subversive ideas from religions so that people are at ease with the world they live in. Many religions teach that the world is evil and due for destruction – it is not the world that is evil, but the ideology.
              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
              “not all there” - you know who you are

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                No. You need to work on the ideology, not the people.
                False dichotomy. The ideology created the people. The ideology evolved the people. i.e., the ideology attracted, promoted, and rewarded the people among them who fit the ideology better. It's a vicious feedback loop, but one of the things about evolution is that isn't not unlimited from every starting point, so removing people who have a particular proclivity for the destructive aspects of their religion puts a cap on its destructive capacity.

                It means getting rid of subversive ideas from religions so that people are at ease with the world they live in. Many religions teach that the world is evil and due for destruction – it is not the world that is evil, but the ideology.
                The best way to get rid of subversive ideas, whether Islam or cultural Marxism, is to force them to deal with reality, which means in this case quarantining Muslims in their home countries as the barbarians they are and cutting off all outside aid until they yield to reason, force, or the inevitable starvation that their religion forces on them. I foresee epiphanies of philosophically charitable moderation only when the unearned charity is cut off, and those with lying tongues and hardened hearts are dealt with according to their words and deeds.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
                  False dichotomy. The ideology created the people. The ideology evolved the people. i.e., the ideology attracted, promoted, and rewarded the people among them who fit the ideology better. It's a vicious feedback loop, but one of the things about evolution is that isn't not unlimited from every starting point, so removing people who have a particular proclivity for the destructive aspects of their religion puts a cap on its destructive capacity.
                  The best way to get rid of subversive ideas, whether Islam or cultural Marxism, is to force them to deal with reality, which means in this case quarantining Muslims in their home countries as the barbarians they are and cutting off all outside aid until they yield to reason, force, or the inevitable starvation that their religion forces on them. I foresee epiphanies of philosophically charitable moderation only when the unearned charity is cut off, and those with lying tongues and hardened hearts are dealt with according to their words and deeds.
                  No, no. no. You are far too antagonistic. What you need to do is shake their hand and help them to get a good modern education excised of all the supernatural guff that you learned in Sunday school. I see you left out Christianity from your list of religions with destructive ideas. I would include it.
                  “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                  “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                  “not all there” - you know who you are

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                    No, no. no. You are far too antagonistic. What you need to do is shake their hand and help them to get a good modern education excised of all the supernatural guff that you learned in Sunday school.
                    Those without a sense of the supernatural will be in a worse position than those with it, and will glom onto weaker abstractions, darker obsessions and more utterly ahistorical attitudes ('shake their hands' is extremely bad advice for those who have been taught by their history, religion, and culture to respect only power) than those who grow up with the humility of noting that some events may indeed fall outside of any easy human explanation. Man is both made to search out mysteries and offer an approximation of the unknown that others can understand, and you cannot avoid the supernatural, only avoid discussing any strange events.

                    I see you left out Christianity from your list of religions with destructive ideas. I would include it.
                    Funny that you should mention this right when I started reading a new blog:

                    One of the things that puzzled me about my mother as a child was her regard for poor people, especially Mexicans. Poor people were always to be regarded as special and any bad conduct on their part excused as the result of oppression by the rich. Things that would have been totally unacceptable by middle-class people- even pretty marginal lower middle-class people like ourselves- pride, arrogance, insolence, aggressiveness, violence, fornication- were not to be criticized in the poor.

                    The poor I saw were not the meek, sweet sufferers of Matthew but pretty nasty people you didn’t want to be around, especially if you were a small, weak child like myself. This Christianity stuff seemed not only pretty stupid, completely out of touch with reality, but self-destructive to its practitioners- unless they were hypocrites who never actually had to deal with the nasty behavior of poor people, such as my mother. I had to go to school with these people, and my mother was convinced any problems I had were because I wasn’t nice enough. She never met these kids though.

                    My mother’s ideas were not unique to her, she was just part of the social justice thinking of 1960′s liberalism. But were did these ideas come from?

                    I have talked about the pro-communist terrorist sympathies of Jesuit Ignacio Ellacuria in my politics blog. I was reading a little more about him, and I think I see the source of his error and that of liberation theology.

                    Ellacuria regarded the poor, or oppressed, as the “crucified people”, which is to say that the poor are Jesus in suffering. This idea comes from the church as being the body of Christ. In whatever sense this may be, it is not true in the sense of Jesus as crucified, as the sinless sacrifice for all sin.

                    There is a Catholic idea that human suffering is part of the redemptive process of humanity. First of all, only the suffering of the sinless Christ can act as atonement for sin. All humans, unlike Jesus, have sin and so are not acceptable sacrifices. Human suffering can and sometimes should produce sympathy in us, but human suffering is the result of sin- either experienced by the sinner as the result of his sin, or by the people he has sinned against- and so cannot atone for sin. The suffering of Jesus was a completely free choice of his own and not involuntary or compelled in any way.

                    Humans are not Jesus. To set aside any human, or group of humans as being Jesus is to confuse the very important distinction between the two.
                    The attitude of the man's mother seems to be parallelized in yours. It is a lazy, narrow, and extremely provincial attitude at best, and the kindest thing I can say to those who evince it is that as long as it is held, its holder will accomplish nothing of any importance for God or Man, but may serve as the willing agents for all sorts of evils.
                    Last edited by Epoetker; 05-02-2014, 04:15 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Epoetker View Post
                      The attitude of the man's mother seems to be parallelized in yours. It is a lazy, narrow, and extremely provincial attitude at best, and the kindest thing I can say to those who evince it is that as long as it is held, its holder will accomplish nothing of any importance for God or Man, but may serve as the willing agents for all sorts of evils.
                      He is speaking about the ideas he formed as a child. Are you suggesting that you and he have never grown up?
                      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                      “not all there” - you know who you are

                      Comment

                      Related Threads

                      Collapse

                      Topics Statistics Last Post
                      Started by Whateverman, Yesterday, 08:11 PM
                      0 responses
                      9 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Whateverman  
                      Started by shunyadragon, Yesterday, 07:16 PM
                      8 responses
                      33 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post shunyadragon  
                      Started by Whateverman, Yesterday, 12:47 PM
                      10 responses
                      38 views
                      0 likes
                      Last Post Starlight  
                      Started by Ronson, Yesterday, 10:00 AM
                      33 responses
                      278 views
                      2 likes
                      Last Post Ronson
                      by Ronson
                       
                      Started by seanD, 10-18-2020, 05:25 PM
                      2 responses
                      63 views
                      3 likes
                      Last Post seanD
                      by seanD
                       
                      Working...
                      X