Donald Trump: No Islam, Please!

Donald Trump, being the businessman and entrepreneurial baron that he is--and thus expertly knowing how to sell--should be forgiven for hyperbolically saying what repressed and frustrated crowds want to hear; the recent phenomenon of real far right-wingers suddenly ranking high in European polls and elsewhere in the world should help to put things into perspective. What Trump said regarding Islamism should not immediately disqualify him from being a runner for the Oval Office. At best, critics may accuse him of being a demagogue--plenty of wiggle room to make this argument! But to compare him to Hitler is uncalled for; he has not ordered the deaths of millions of Jews--he has simply proposed to keep adherents of a certain popular death cult out of the country on safety grounds.

Who is David Cameron to criticise Trump when the Prime Minister hasn't even done enough about Islamic radicalisation in the UK? And what type of criticism is Dick Cheney's 'Donald Trump is opposed to everything we stand for and believe in'? People who oppose majorities are known as contrarians and sometimes they are right! (In some contexts, to be called a contrarian is a compliment.) People who sheepishly follow majorities often don't think for themselves; they just follow the trend. If the sickeningly and unknowingly pro-fascist Liberal Left want to analogously bring Hitler into the equation when impugning Trump, they should know that supporters of the vox populi fuelled the Nazi engine and are thus partly responsible for the Holocaust. What would have happened if contrarians like Emile Zola were dissuaded from publicly impugning the rampant anti-Semitism in the early 20th century? Imagine if nobody ever defied the majority by defending the wrongly accused, such as Alfred Dreyfus?

Donald Trump has merely said what many of us are thinking but are too palled to express, and what very few of the candidly corageous are doing in the worldly arena. (As an example of the latter, and quite tellingly, José Eduardo dos Santos--president of Angola--tolerates all religions but one, for he knows the adherents of such justifiably banned religious ideology are only loyal to one set of rules: Sharia Law.) And while liberals refuse to acknowledge this simple fact, many nitwits signed a petition to have Trump banned from the UK on the grounds of racial hatred. To those people, I vehemently ingeminate that it is not about race. Any person--of any race--can be a Muslim; and if you think the majority are dark-skinned with roots in Mesopotamia, think again: Indonesia has the largest Muslim population in the world. (And may we never forget how they decimated scores of Christians and unbelievers as soon as Timor got their independence from the Portuguese.)

I'm not just an atheist, I'm an anti-theist, too, because I think belief in gods will always have a tendency to lead to pernicious Orwellian dystopias run by theocratic politicos, and everywhere you find Islam, in particular, you will find trouble in the form of opposition to native traditions and culture. Need I remind everyone that Muslims in the UK have denounced and vituperated British soldiers whilst demanding Sharia Law in sickening protests? (Never mind the murder committed by Michael Adebolajo and Adebowale, I'm talking about so-called moderates--many of which wear Taqiyya, the divinely permitted licence of deception, up their sleeves!) Yes, it is a good idea to expel Syrian Muslim refugees and send them to the many neighbouring countries in and around the Levant--who refused to help with the migrant crisis, by the way--where they can more easily find suitable job positions. (Saudi Arabia, in particular, which is partly responsible for the Islamism observed in al-Qaeda and ISIS, currently refuses any kind of migrant influx.)

On the moderate Muslim note, let's not forget that many mosques in the UK have helped and harboured Islamic fugitives, such as the jihadi terrorist 'Mohamed Mohamed' who was disguised in a burqa by a mosque in Acton. So how can some Western Liberals say Trump is worse than Islamic hate preachers, and call for his immediate ban from the UK and from the US presidential election, when we've had anti-Western 'Islam-for-UK' activists for decades, such as the 'untouchable'--I guess Trump had a slight point about the frightened 'politically correct' British police, too--Anjem Chowdary, whose protégés went on to do his dirty work which included murder. (I was only 13 when I first heard of one of the victims of his brainwashed confederates--the scene of the crime was very close to home: East Ham College, where my eldest sister was studying at the time.) I've worked in Southall for a few years, too, and I've seen and heard many young Muslims who attend the local mosques. They express a hatred for Jews, homosexuals, infidels, and Western powers, with gusto. Any media that only airs those so-called Muslims willing to speak out against ISIS are in cahoots with the government's propagandists. Shame on them!

Ask yourself how many Muslims would say that Salman Rushdie and Charlie Hebdo 'deserved what they got'? And isn't it sickening to hear our crowd say, 'They asked for it.' (As if the atrocities need some sort of justification and the victims were wrong for freely expressing themselves!) The following intentions, acts and beliefs, which can be observed in many UK Muslims, can be traced back to--and inspired by--suras in the Qur'an, the Hadith, and Prophet Muhammad's teachings: hatred for infidels (tribalism); homophobia; rape and drubbing as methods of punishment and discipline for women; misogyny; misology; swinophobia; infibulation; arranged marriage; honour killings (yes!); death for apostates and the list of flagitious ideas goes on. It's irksome to witness our society continuously making concessions for adherents of an insidious popular (among people not used to thinking) cult based on the terrible delusion that all religions are the same and equally deserving of respect. Sam Harris was on the money when he stated that Islam is the mother lode of bad ideas in a confrontation with that actor Ben Affleck, the twonk who said criticising Islam is 'racist'.

Jihad and martyrdom is uniquely emphasised in Islamic scripture; it makes no sense to say that ISIS is pretending to adhere to Islam and giving it a bad name when: a) hideous instructions are found in the Qur'an so it already has a 'bad name' since its foundation; b) Muhammad was a vile warrior with a thirst for conquest; c) Where are the Buddhist suicide bombers? There is obviously something profoundly wrong with Islam. Take a look at the Qur'an and see for yourself ... Why couldn't the media worldwide defy the terrorists after the Charlie Hebdo atrocity by taking to the streets with placcards depicting the Prophet Muhammad? (Depicting the prophet is 'haram' IN Islam--not in other religions or secularism--so why should every non-Muslim be made to follow this rule? As it's often said, if you find something on TV offensive, don't watch it--and may I append that perceived offence doesn't warrant the murder of BBC producers either.)

We are not asking moderate Muslims to actively condemn ISIS on a daily basis as anyone can do this. We are asking them to look at their faith and actively criticise it ... and then reform it to a more civil and cosmopolitan standard. If they are not prepared to do so, then perhaps it's time for them to rethink how bad they'd like to remain in Western democratic nations--it might mean the renunciation of their Islamic apotheosis or their migration to a land that holds the same ideals. What I don't want to do is make any more concessions than I already do. I don't think it's right for a school to give Muslim parents the option to refuse their children an educational visit to the local Church. What should be called into question are the reasons for such refusal as it's not very ecumenical. (Unless they disagree that all religious paths lead to the same 'mountain of truth' as we were once taught in RE.) What are such parents afraid of? That their child might suddenly express a wish to be Christian? Have any Christians thought about calling them 'Christianophobic'?

As a secular parent, I have no reservations about my children visiting a Church to learn about charity and a religious ideology that many hold dear--it's just an educational trip, for goodness' sake, and the priest, however much he'll be speaking from a believer's point of view, won't be proselytising anyone. Once upon a time, capitalist politicians who were aggressively more conservative than Donald Trump were welcome in McCarthy's war against communists. Today's main fascist villain is far worse as it's not just a political orientation like Leninism, it is a religious one, and religion appears to be a dangerous trump card in today's world more so than ever before as we now have nuclear weapons. Reforming Islam may also prove difficult to people like Quilliam's Majid Nawaz as the Qur'an purports to be the 'unalterable word of God'.

PS: By the way, I've always suspected Jeremy Corbyn on being dodgy! By the sounds of the latest news, he'd be quite happy to have an Islamic Communist UK seen as the Labour partisan has been having regular meetings with terror suspect Abdul Raoof Al Shayeb of Bahrain--who ironically disguised himself as a human rights activist and appeared to be planning a terrorist attack in his home. Corbyn has also been criticised for quoting Albanian Communist dictator Enver Hoxha. Oust Corbyn in favour of Hilary Benn to run the Labour Party!

[ Post made via Android ] Image

The recent mass shootings in San Bernadino, CA, and in Paris, both apparently committed by Islamic extremists, are certainly very disturbing. However, there are about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, the vast majority of whom just want to live a normal, peaceful life.

Combating ISIS, and similar extremist groups, is very challenging. Even if the U.S. and our allies tried to "carpet bomb" ISIS-held areas on the Mid-East, who would step in to fill the power vacuum? U.S. and allied ground troops could not occupy the region forever. And multiple regional ethnic and religious sect groups have no interest in cooperating, rather than fighting each other.

Donald Trump says we should not allow Muslims to enter the U.S. (even Muslim diplomats?), and we should require all U.S. Muslims to be registered. Unless you send police into mosques, how exactly do you find all the Muslims? Should the police stop anyone who looks like they are from the Mid-East? Suppose they say they are a Christian or are Jewish? One of the founding principles of this country has been the ideal of freedom of religion.

About 30,000 people in the U.S. are killed by firearms each year, and about 10,000 of these deaths are homicides.

I recommend these articles -

• "US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data from Mother Jones' Investigation" - motherjones.com Includes list of names of gunmen, the vast majority of whom have not been Muslims.

Here is a quote from article - "Are All Terrorists Muslims? It's Not Even Close" - dailybeast.com "Honestly when is the last time we heard the media refer to those who attack abortion clinics as 'Christian terrorists,' even though these attacks occur at one of very five reproductive health-care facilities. That doesn't sell well, after all, we are a so-called Christian nation ..."

The Muslim Suffi poet, Rumi, is one of the most popular poets in the world, including in the U.S. His philosophy was based on peace and love. Two of his poems -

"Out beyond ideas of wrong doing and right doing, There is a field. I'll meet you there"

"Be certain that in the religion of Love, There are no believers and unbelievers. Love embraces all."

Also see YouTube video - "Rumi and the Play Of Poetry" Poet/translator, Coleman Barks, recites poems by Rumi, accompanied by Celtic/Appalachian music.

Thank you very much for your input, jasmine2. Let me start by reminding you (or informing you) that when the Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa to have Salman Rushdie killed for his apparently 'blasphemous' novel--causing this one to go into hiding--the millions of good Muslims you speak of were eerily silent on the matter. (And the many who took to the streets in Western democratic countries called for the author's death.) And this was the so-called wise Yosuf Islam on the matter of endorsing Rushdie's condemnation:

*'Under Islamic Law, the ruling regarding blasphemy is quite clear; the person found guilty of it must be put to death. Only under certain circumstances can repentance be accepted ... The fact is that as far as the application of Islamic Law and the implementation of full Islamic way of life in Britain is concerned, Muslims realise that there is very little chance of that happening in the near future. But that shouldn't stop us from trying to improve the situation and presenting the Islamic viewpoint wherever and whenever possible. That is the duty of every Muslim and that is what I did.' *

I don't know if you are aware of this, but the United States has nowhere near the same number of Muslims as France or the UK. Last I checked, Muslims in the US only constitute just over 1% of the population (so no wonder more crimes have been committed by the Christian majority there) compared to 5% in Britain and 8% France (probably more now). You apparently have no idea what is like to live surrounded by many of them. I do. If you really want to make a case for Christian opprobrium, be my guest; I already pointed out in the OP that I dislike religion in general as it leads to conflict. (You could have mentioned Balkans War and how in the '90s the largely Christian Serbian army began to decimate scores of Muslims in Bosnia.) :-)

But make no mistake: you hear of suicide bombers and you really don't have a clue what's going on if you don't think, 'Muslim'. Even in the United States, with its minute Muslim minority, could not escape the venomous clutches of Islam. If you live there and you don't mind Islamic terrorist attacks because, as you pointed out, America already endures crimes committed by Christians, fine, but do you really want a second group causing death and civil unrest? Nobody is saying Christians don't do it, but we are pointing out that Muslims do it and so far have not even attempted to reform their faith. The anonymous author of Terrorist Hunter (I recommend that you read it) went undercover to monitor proceedings at Muslim conferences in the States and described a shocking level of intolerance among Muslims living in the West. The author witnessed Arab-American children performing skits in which they killed Jews and became martyrs. Sheikh Ikrima Sabri, a mufti once appointed by Yasir Arafat, once said: 'The Jews do not dare bother me, because they are the most cowardly creatures Allah has ever created ... We tell them: In as much as you love life, the Muslim loves death and martyrdom.' This guy actively encouraged child suicide bombers by preaching not in Palestine but at the Twenty-sixth Annual Convention of the Islamic Circle of North America, in Cleveland, Ohio! :shock:

As Sam Harris puts it in The End of Faith:

'On almost every page, the Koran instructs observant Muslims to despise non-believers. On almost every page, it prepares the ground for religious conflict. Anyone who can read passages like those quoted above and still not see a link between Muslim faith and Muslim violence should probably consult a neurologist.'

The Pew Research Centre for the People and the Press once conducted a global survey on Muslims by posing the question 'Is Suicide Bombing in Defence of Islam Justifiable?' and the results were quite disturbing when they compared the options 'Yes', 'No' and 'Refused'. (What's more, places like Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Iran, Sudan, Iraq, and Palestine were never included.)

jasmine2 wrote: However, there are about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, the vast majority of whom just want to live a normal, peaceful life.

Yes, they want a 'normal, peaceful life' under Sharia law for everyone--whether non-believers want it or not! 8-)

jasmine2 wrote: Combating ISIS, and similar extremist groups, is very challenging. Even if the U.S. and our allies tried to "carpet bomb" ISIS-held areas on the Mid-East, who would step in to fill the power vacuum? U.S. and allied ground troops could not occupy the region forever. And multiple regional ethnic and religious sect groups have no interest in cooperating, rather than fighting each other.

You've no idea what you're talking about. The US government is partly responsible for the creation of ISIS as the CIA has spoon-fed al-Qaeda and other Islamic groups in the Levant against Syrian dictator Assad and have been profiting from weapons sales by supporting Kurdish militias against Sunnis and Shiites:

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=16921

jasmine2 wrote: Donald Trump says we should not allow Muslims to enter the U.S. (even Muslim diplomats?),

Especially diplomats as they are the most conniving! 8-)

jasmine2 wrote: and we should require all U.S. Muslims to be registered. Unless you send police into mosques, how exactly do you find all the Muslims?

With spies and informants just like in the days of Malcolm X and his former coterie of Muslim black supremacists. The FBI had no qualms about infiltrating fishy mosques. Muslims have duties and are not hard to find.

jasmine2 wrote: Should the police stop anyone who looks like they are from the Mid-East?

Absolutely not. As I pointed out in the OP, it's not about race or nationality. It's about beliefs; in this case, adherents of a dangerous ideology which can never be compatible with civilisation.

jasmine2 wrote: Suppose they say they are a Christian or are Jewish? One of the founding principles of this country has been the ideal of freedom of religion.

Unfortunately, Taqiyya allows Muslims to lie to the infidel. Freedom of expression so long as you don't force it on others and harm them in the process. After all, that is why the KKK are not welcome by the White House. The First Amendment also includes the separation of church and state, and yet, they've already cocked that one up, haven't they? 'God bless America'; 'In God We Trust'; and 'No atheists in the Oval Office'.

jasmine2 wrote: About 30,000 people in the U.S. are killed by firearms each year, and about 10,000 of these deaths are homicides.

That's because America needs a better vetting system. In Europe, it's mostly knives. These are different matters. Like I said before, if you want more domestic problems, continue to let Syrian Muslim refugees in. :mrgreen:

On guns in America:

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=17046

jasmine2 wrote: Includes list of names of gunmen, the vast majority of whom have not been Muslims.

Well, duh! Muslims are a minority in the States anyway. :-D

jasmine2 wrote: The Muslim Suffi poet, Rumi, is one of the most popular poets in the world, including in the U.S. His philosophy was based on peace and love.

You've mentioned him before. I'm sure his peaceful and loving nature is attributable to him and not his Sufism. He's nothing but a cherry-picker. :mrgreen:

I also recommend:

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=17046

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=17199

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=16302

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=15125

All these links are extensions of my argument. Enjoy! :-D

The Qur'an is borrowed from both Jewish and Christian myths. Again, an angel recites the word of God to an individual from an illiterate part of the world, in an epoch when people in general knew much less about the world let alone the cosmos. Jews were the first to hear of such plagiarism, and to discard it. (This only added to the roots of Islamic anti-Semitism.) The only thing in its favour is the fact that Muhammad, the son of Abdullah, is existentially more probable than Jesus. :-D

Religion is the true problem, it just so happens that centuries of poverty and lack of education have left Islam in a dark age (and all religions have one or more if they survive long enough, - but then again one could say that religion is a permanent dark age). I'm pretty relaxed about Muslim immigration.... in a 100 years there won't be any religious people outside of mental asylums (because that's where they belong, to be viciously frank). It's even maybe a good thing because we can educate their children in secularism and evolution..... Do you think religious schools should be banned? I don't think the government should fund them (in Australia we fund religious schools A LOT) at the very least. And religious institutions should be taxed like businesses, because that's what they are. Children shouldn't be lied to by adults, especially hypocritical ones who only pretend to be religious.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

In the Islam debate it's important to make terminological distinctions to avoid all the confusion. The fascist pseudo-Left fails to differentiate between individuals and ideas. It's the simplest concept to comprehend, yet the most salient, and as such most people skip over it. I loathe Islam and Christianity. Anyone who finds it offensive to say they hate Islam and Christianity by consequence supports intolerance, war, murder, suppression of society, and a litany of other crimes.

What it means to be an adherent of a religion has been obfuscated, and perhaps there never actually was a conclusive definition of a true religious devotee. What percentage of a religion's population genuinely follows (or intends to follow) every word of their beloved canon? If it's not 0%, it's close. But what percentage of the Christian community says that they support every word of the Bible? It's quite large. Religion is irrational and self-contradictory as always, and this makes it more difficult for us secularists to understand precisely what is going on. There is a difference between Islam and a Muslim. The "Muslim" is only a Muslim in that she calls herself a Muslim.

So to say that Muslims are violent and dangerous is logically absurd. But those who follow the Quran and the Hadith and Shariah are of necessity violent and dangerous.

Have you read Sam Harris's new book on "Islam and the Future of Tolerance," Summerlander? I have no time to read what I like these days, so I haven't been able to pick it up. Love to hear what you think of it.

SunTsu wrote: Religion is the true problem

Damn right! :mrgreen:

SunTsu wrote: Children shouldn't be lied to by adults

Touche! 8-)

deschainXIX wrote: The fascist pseudo-Left fails to differentiate between individuals and ideas.

It's what pisses me off about them the most. And it doesn't help when Hollywood actors--such as Ben Affleck--spout the same nonsense. :roll:

deschainXIX wrote: I loathe Islam and Christianity.

Me too. ME TOO! So many died because of such cults! Religion plagues mankind. Religion really poisons everything. Spread this useful meme: Religion poisons everything! :shock:

deschainXIX wrote: But what percentage of the Christian community says that they support every word of the Bible? It's quite large.

And what's funny is that you could recite the most hideous passages from Deuteronomy to Christians whilst pretending you're reading from the Qur'an and they would agree with you that they are vile and incompatible with civilisation.

deschainXIX wrote: So to say that Muslims are violent and dangerous is logically absurd. But those who follow the Quran and the Hadith and Shariah are of necessity violent and dangerous.

Bingo! 8-)

deschainXIX wrote: Have you read Sam Harris's new book on "Islam and the Future of Tolerance," Summerlander? I have no time to read what I like these days, so I haven't been able to pick it up. Love to hear what you think of it.

I might be getting it for Christmas. :-D

I fear that Majid Nawaz, as a Muslim, almost stands alone in his quest to reform Islam. He seems to mean well and Sam Harris supports him in order to encourage other Muslims to do the same (because he's learnt that Islam is not going away anytime soon). The trouble is that the emphasis that the Qur'an is the 'unalterable word of God' is strong--so much so that many believe it shouldn't even be translated from Arabic--and I fear a humanistic exegesis from an ethnically Pakistani English simply won't do. According to the Qur'an, Muslims are not supposed to befriend non-believers. Nawaz has already committed the sin of just engaging in a civil conversation with Sam Harris and tolerating this one's atheism.

I am currently reading Stuart Prebble's Secrets of the Conqueror: The Untold Story of Britain's Most Famous Submarine. It's about the HMS Conqueror's derring-do during the Cold War and the Falklands conflict. War, history and politics. (The author had to wait for years to publish the book because it contains material that was top secret at the time.) I will read Islam and the Future of Tolerance eventually! ;-)

In the future, Maajid Nawaz is remembered like a messiah who refined the exegesis of the word of God in the Koran, Summerlander. So, you see, he did succeed in reforming Islam. By the way, excerpts of Islam and the Future of Tolerance are available in audiobook format on Sam Harris's blog.

Sure. And they have shrines dedicated to Quilliam disciples. How Nawaz manages to persuade every Wahabist and Salafist, in the future, to adopt his benign and tolerant version of Islam, I don't know. :roll:

ISIS is now recruting youngsters from villages in Afghanistan and even 'stealing' troops from the Taliban. Afghanistan, like Syria, is another disaster waiting to happen. (Worse than it already is and has been.) Wait and see! :shock:

Meanwhile in Borneo, the largest Asian island in the Pacific, there is a place where Christmas is banned! Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei, who implemented Sharia Law in the largely Sunni territory, has decided that Muslims could be theologically compromised if exposed to non-Muslim religious propaganda. And the native imams--who tend to discriminate against religious minorities such as Christians and Buddhists--agree! Anyone who is found to be celebrating Christmas could face up to five years in jail; this includes festive greetings (in public or online) and the wearing of Santa hats. :sad:

So while in the West our multicultural democracies are very careful not to depict the Prophet Muhammad for fear of death or being labelled 'Islamophobic', the Eastern Islamic States clearly discriminate against our way of life and traditions. Perhaps the Sultan is trying to forestall the tragedy of mass apostasy in Islam as the penalty for defectors is death. Who knows! Most Muslims in Brunei, it seems, hold the opinion that Christianity is outdated and that Islam is the final and only divine revelation. And don't get them started on Buddhism ... :geek:

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Well, Saudi Arabia has become even more divisive as they've criminalised Christmas and the sentence is twice as heavy as Brunei's:

http://screwlife.com/2015/12/20/saudi-arabia-sharia-court-introduces-10-years-jail-term-for-anyone-who-celebrates-christmas/

You still doubt that Islam will take over, Summer? :twisted:

I don't doubt that the world could take many turns. I just doubt your future! :mrgreen:

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Trust me when I say that most of my possible future will come true for yours. Muslims can pretend to be moderate in order to promote their jihadist agenda. Remember the Muslim family who claimed to be victims of Islamophobia and racism when they were barred from boarding a flight to the States at Gatwick airport? Well, it was found that Mohammad Tariq Mahmood--who demanded to know 'Why'--had a Facebook account (under the name of 'Hamza Hussein') with ties to al-Qaeda and the Taliban; and one of the brothers had previously been denied entry to Israel. Taqyya, Summerlander ... Taqyya.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12068221/Was-mosque-link-reason-for-British-familys-US-travel-ban.html

Humankind will be better off without religion. The tenets of any faith beget views about the world which are disproportionate to the real state of affairs. It doesn't matter what gender, race, or ethnic group one belongs to: we are all sentient beings and the fact that we're humanly conscious means that we are all capable of suffering and deserve compassion (as long as we treat others with the same respect that we wish to get).

I've had Mormons trying to convert me but they failed and I let them know that all their claims have no real evidence and, what's more, are unfalsifiable. This prompted them to give me a look as though I was an anomaly and certainly one that needs to be saved. It was an insult to my fundamental being. All religions subscribe to this pious rationale: We are created 'sick' and we are required to be 'well'.

We need to find our humanism again and drop dangerous ideologies such as Christianity, Judaism, and last but certainly not least, Islam. :shock:

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Well, the killing of Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr in Saudi Arabia is bound to inflame the civil war within schismatic Islam in the Middle East. This certainly isn't going to help Syria as Iran backs Assad while Saudi Arabia backs the rebels. Sunis, Shiites, Alawites ... it's a bloody religious mess! I can totally understand Trump's Islamophobia. :twisted:

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I still would not vote for Donald Trump... :roll:

I'd like to remind everyone that this year we will have an American presidential election and urge Americans to cast their ballots wisely. So it's time to say goodbye to President Obama and then herald the least of all repulsive evils.

Given the nature of modern politics, don't expect overall improvements, but do go for the candidate you think is least likely to fuck things up. If history has anything to offer us, it's its lessons. Remember the '80s when banks and rich corporations plotted to remake America in order to serve them? Remember how the worst of capitalism elected the greedy Hollywood puppet Ronald Reagan - causing corporate US and Wall Street to be almost in complete control?

Do we want the likes of Don Regan, the chairman of Merrill Lynch - the richest and biggest brokerage firm in the world which Summerlander once surveyed when working as a researcher for Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC - who landed the post of Treasury Secretary during the Reagan administration so he could enact the tax cuts that the rich wanted? Imagine a Chief of Staff of this ilk as the president's reputation inevitably fades ...

We don't want a repeat performance of the Reagan days, when America's working infrastructure was largely destroyed on purpose to obliterate unions - causing many to lose their jobs, freezing the working people's wages, and employees forced to toil twice as hard like slaves. Let's not forget that while Ronnie flirted with your Margaret Thatcher, Summerlander, the aristocracy had their top income tax rate cut in half while the lower classes lived on borrowed money until their household debt was nearly 100% of the gross domestic product. Bankruptcies were rife; millions lost their minds and had to be incarcerated; anti-depressants sold like there was no tomorrow as insurance and pharmaceutical company greed constantly raised the cost of healthcare. Meanwhile, the stock market and America's CEOs smiled - the goal had been to reach short-term profits all along... Now imagine Donald Trump in the White House!

Beware of politicos and their greedy networks! Vote wisely and try to be... er, optimistic. :-P

I suppose you prefer Clinton and Sanders over Trump, then. (Two individuals who are completely deluded about political correctness and the real source of jihadism.)

Talking to yourself, I see.

Now I'm talking to you ... :mrgreen:

I recommend watching the most recent episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. He devoted an entire episode to Donald Trump. 8-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnpO_RTSNmQ

OR should I say, Donald Drumpf. ;)

Thanks for sharing it but I seem unable to watch the entire thing at the moment. Could you highlight Oliver's main points on Trump for us?

[ Post made via Android ] Image

It was very subtle, I know. Give it another try and find the part where he mentions Donald Trump ;)

No can't watch it. Can you break it down for me?

By the way, I did find an example of a sick attempt to smear Trump's campaign: http://www.snopes.com/make-america-white-again-trump/

George Carlin sees it all. It's all about sexual insecurities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qqARrbi1h8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb5LbocZ2qE

:lol:

I know it's comedy and it's not supposed to be dead accurate but George Carlin overlooked the instance when the US government waged a war against the Christian Serbian army to protect the Croats and Muslims from the ethnic cleansing that was going on in the late '90s. Most of the Serbs were white! :mrgreen:

As for penis size and intelligence, I don't think they relate--what is Rubio on about? And if Trump becomes president, I'm more concerned about how he's going to run the country. :D

But you are right--it is about insecurities. When the serial rapist Bill Clinton was mortified that the size of pecker might be publicly revealed, he quickly decided to bomb both whites and browns and make headlines about his power as a president and a distraction from the Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky affair. (And many other victims!) :!:

Anyway, whatever Trump says he will do as president now may be made redundant once he is in the Oval Office and presented with geopolitical and foreign policy facts. He may well be advised to change his strategy. I just hope he sees Turkey for the unreliable ally that it really is. Erdogan is an Islamist blatantly working with ISIS in order to trounce Assad's hold on Syria. And while the US backs the the quasi-Marxist Kurdish armies against jihadists (seen as Peshmerga miserably failed to save Sinjar), this is what the Turks are doing to help (sarcasm intended):

https://www.rt.com/news/335375-turkey-bombs-pkk-iraq/

Religion is poison and presidential candidate Ted Cruz should be questioned about attending a 'religious freedom' event led by a homophobic pastor preaching from Leviticus and the Bible as the source of his morality. The man of God's solution to solve the so-called problem of homosexuality in America is that the US government should round up gay people and execute them. Meanwhile all people keep talking about is the fact that Trump said he reckons Islam hates the United States.

[ Post made via Android ] Image

Ted Cruz is the American version of an ayatollah, the ultimate broachment of the wall between church and state. Yet when it comes to Islamists having a role in government, conservatives are the first to join us secularists in protest. I realize Cruz is trying to scoop up the evangelical right bloc in the US and that he's a two-faced liar, but I also think he actually believes a lot of the vicious nonsense he spews.

And I'm not sure the same can be said for Donald Drumpf. The man is so much of a caricature I have trouble believing he's actually as radically right-wing as he purports himself to be. Some of his policies are notably liberal, like single payer healthcare. My guess is that if (or when) he makes it to the general election he's going to run to the center and actually have a chance at winning the presidency. After all, the polls have him beating Hillary Clinton in a gen election. That's why Bernie, who, according to the polls, is beating every Republican, has to win!

I don't know enough about foreign policy. It's so complex nowadays that probably only 5% of people have any idea what they're talking about. I'm going to pick up and read Michael Weiss's book ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror. I've been watching videos with him and the man seems to understand the nuances, subtleties, and complexities of the entire Middle Eastern region better than anyone else I've seen.

That's interesting, the US backing Marxists! :lol:

[ Post made via iPhone ] Image

Welcime back, deschainXIX! Do give us your feedback on Weiss's book and your impression of what is going on in the Levant. I agree with your views about the presidential race and it is indeed ironic that the US is backing a Marxist army abroad. (Sometimes I imagine an alternate universe where the Russian revolution led to the birth of a ripe capitalist nation as Karl Marx envisioned it and America was simultaneously transformed into a socialist empire.) 8-)

[ Post made via Android ] Image

I had the displeasure of Donald Trump visiting my home town, so I went to one of his rallies (he must wear a bulletproof vest, because there were no metal detectors and no security guards whatsoever--and I was standing not seven feet from the guy!--but this was before he received death threats from the Mexican drug cartel). And, let me tell you, the meme about his followers being atavistic, violent animals is not media hype. I've never been more horrified to be a part of a crowd in my life.

They were literally screaming about shooting down a plane transporting Hillary Clinton to her rally. And they weren't joking! :lol:

Thank you for letting us know that the meme about his followers is based on reality. We can't yet be certain about Trump's real intentions and I dislike Hillary Clinton--and know her to be deceptive and ignominious from reading the Hitch's No One Left To Lie To (this horseman was seldom wrong)--but I must say that her proposal for action in Syria at the start of its civil war was quite different from Obama's, a president who was reluctant to be remembered for having engaged in a war and yet buckled before the strident demands made by belligerent military officials in Washington. I can't say any more than this. I think after we finish our Richard Dawkins books I will have to read Islam and the Future of Tolerance by Harris/Nawaz and you can devour Michael Weiss's ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror. I think it's important that we understand--or at least get a good glimpse of--the geopolitics involved about something that is happening in our time. I am also planning to say quiten a lot about the 2014 Ukrainian revolution quite soon ...

I loathe that reptile Hillary Clinton too. I want Bernie Sanders in office, the only true progressive choice we have. Clinton is a demagogue who believes in nothing, a politician in the purest sense of the word. She supported the Iraq War--as did Hitch, which is one of the only things I disagree with him on, and I'd be interested in hearing what you think about that--and deliberately opposed gay rights until it was unpopular to do so. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders has been battling theocracy, hawkishness, and regressive traditionalism ever since he became a politician. He was doing fairly well in the primaries until Tuesday; now the inevitable has begun to set in. I didn't know Hitch wrote about Hillary Clinton. I wish I had read it sooner so I'd have more evidence of her lies to throw at establishment Democrats!

I think I said this before, but...

If Trump had said "Islam is bad," I would agree with him. But he's going farther than that and saying Muslims are bad. And what he means by Muslim is anyone who identifies as a Muslim. You and I, as logicians with a vested interest in philosophy, could argue over whether or not someone is actually a "Muslim" if he or she doesn't conform to every tenet of the religious texts. But the Donald isn't interested in intellectual gray areas.

His policy of surveilling, documenting, reporting, and banning Muslims is symptomatic of a global upswing in fascism for which the regressive left, with its veiled totalitarianism and language control, in combination with media neutrality, is largely responsible. Germany, I'm sure you're aware, has seen a significant rise in the popularity of far-right political groups. Many, like Trump, fail to make the distinction between individuals and ideology. You can hate a virus without hating those who have contracted the virus; and religion is, quite literally, a linguistic virus, a meme that has evolved to infect minds living in the unsanitary conditions created by groupthink and "cultural identity." There are wonderful Muslims and despicable atheists. But the former do not have their faith to thank for being good people--they have modern, humanistic values inspired by the philosophy of the Enlightenment to thank for it. As do we. So different ideological systems can compete within one brain, thus isolating the human being as an individual.

Failing to make this distinction is what leads to sectarian sentiment, which leads to violence in its extremity.

This is what authoritarianism and fascism, when adopted by a governmental authority, means--the scapegoating of vast groups of people into black-and-white categories without any tolerance for ambiguity or regard for the sanctity of human autonomy. Trump's criticism of Islam has none of the nuance or consideration that ours has, Summerlander. He is merely riding the wave of hatred, taking advantage of the present psychology, which is one of projection of failures onto a scapegoat. Just replace the word "Muslim" with the word "Jew" in all of Trump's rhetoric and the problem immediately manifests itself.

I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about the revolution, which I hadn't even heard of until now! :lol: Perhaps this isn't the place for such a big topic. But the biggest geopolitical issue at the moment is indisputably the European migrant crisis; do you have an opinion about what sort of policies western countries should be adopting for the admission of migrants? I'd imagine you oppose freely open borders, as that permits economic immigrants and terrorists in as well as genuine refugees.

'Demagogue' aptly describes the former First Lady who supported her husband's triangulations and double-crossed quite a few pawns during their administration. (The book centres mostly around William Jefferson Clinton as a despicable Senator; rapist and accuser of his victims; aggressive, cold and dishonest president; and abuser of power and policy--also providing us with the perfect instance of how it's okay for the White House to come up with a spurious conspiracy theory but not the public.) It's a good read as the Hitch goes to town.

About Hitchens's stance on the Iraq war ... I really don't know what to tell you here, I mean, he went to Iraq and he saw with his own eyes how the Bathist government treated its people and we're reminded of how Saddam Hussein ruthlessly usurped the throne, committed atrocities during the Gulf war and the oil wells he was destroying. (His son Uday, cut from the same cloth, was raping and killing like there was no tomorrow.) The Hitch looked at Iraq like a house where people were being held hostage and someone had to intervene--this analogy is an attempt to describe my best guess at the impression Iraq made upon him; his Kurdish friends also without an officially recognised land of their own didn't help and he despised the anti-war protesters at home (the equivalent of our pseudo-liberals today who aid Islamic fascists). I'm probably not doing it justice and I'd advise you to check out Arguably in order to better understand his position. (I read it ages ago and it's thicker than the fucking Holy Bible.) :mrgreen:

You must have good reasons for opposing the Iraq war and I'd love to read them and see how they clash with our horseman's firsthand experience. I guess he had a way of looking at things and this meant that, as a global civilisation, we should always oppose and fight against Orwellian dystopias. We also know that he loved the way things are--a world full of conflicts and religion (which he really wished in his heart to stay with us till the end unlike Richard Dawkins)--and distrusted utopia proposals.

I don't know a lot about Bernie Sanders but, if he happens to be the lesser of all evils, then it's a shame he'll never make it to the Oval Office. Regarding Donald Trump and Islam: I couldn't agree with you more; it seems he's taking it too far now and treading on dangerous grounds. The problem, as Sam Harris has illustrated ad nauseum, are the barbaric passages of a plagiarised and politicised ideology. Religion is poisonous everywhere--including matters of state.

Now, the Ukrainian revolution is a very interesting watershed which deserves a topic of its own. There is a lot to cover but one thing should be clear to everyone: they fought hard and justifiably so. Ukrainians are a different breed to Russians. They can run their own country if they are left alone by the likes of Vladimir Putin for sure. The news at the time didn't cover it--I watch a whole documentary and I felt like I was there. I was nearly in tears! Their solidarity was amazing and they sang their beautiful national anthem as they warded off Yanukovych's oppressive forces--the brutal Berkut and the criminal Titushky paid to kill and to make protesters look bad. Once the shit hit the fan in Maiden, even Ivan Sydor, the bellringer at Mykhaylivs'kyi Monastery was called at 1.30am and urged to do something. So, with Bishop Agapit's blessing, he rang the bells on 11 December, 2013. They hadn't tolled since 1240 when the Mongol-Tatars invaded Kyiv! Very historical and Christopher Hitchens would have loved it! ;-)

The European crisis: somehow vet everyone. It's a fucking mess and it's not surprising that many are voting for far-right politicos who want to close the borders! :shock:

I think the next president will be Donald Trump. It may be terrifying to many as he appears to be unqualified to do the job. But at least, unlike Hillary Clinton, he has named the main religious problem we face in this day and age. Islam. This cult of death will wipe us all out before we even get the chance to truly reform it. Jihadists will eventually get a chance use atomic bombs on infidels—and their love for Allah and their eschatology will prevent them from hesitating—whilst the disgraced liberal Left continue to defend Islamic fascists till the end.