Those crazy Muslim bastards did it again

[Seth]

You can be arrested in Germany for posting stuff like that I've read. Don't share it on Facebook. Thought police about, we're well out of Europe.

And that's why I don't live in Germany. Fuck Germany and it's censorship. Fuck Merkel and her appeasement. Fuck the UK and it's "hate speech" laws.

And if I was stupid enough to be on Facebook in the first place, which I'm not, I'd post it in a heartbeat.

[Seth]

Man, the French and Belgians are copping it lately. This is really terrible.

Not so much. They punted when the jihadis killed 3000 Americans, so now they are getting a turn. Perhaps this will put some steel in their spines. Finally.

Dumb comment. The US/UK/Australia invasion of Iraq has lead to the creation of ISIS.

Bullshit. Mohammed lead to the creation of ISIS.

[Seth]

The reality is they are waging total war on our civilisation, and they are winning. Until we return the complement by waging total war on theirs nothing will change. Upto now the West has been stifled by a vocal PC segment, comprised of fifth columnists and assorted malcontents. When Trump is elected we should be able to ignore them and begin to deconstruct Islam. Eradicate all their holy sites in the middle east and they'll be lost. Seriously it would be far more effective than talking them out of their religion one at a time. What stopped Japan? It wasn't jaw-jaw.

Wait till the pilgrimage to Mecca, kill a bunch of turds with one stone...

[Seth]

If you claimed Stalin, Hitler, Idi Amin or Pol Pot was the "Best of Men", the final prophet of god and teach your children that he is to be imitated in word deed and in fact gesture. I would question your sanity.
Worship a slave- trading paedophile who used mass- murder and torture , lived on the profits of banditry and intimidation and who laughed as his friends raped innocent captives I question your morality.
OBVIOUSLY Not all Muslims are terrorists, and not all Nazis gassed Jews ....

All Nazis were responsible for the gassing of Jews because they supported and participated in Nazism, which is an inherently and self-defined violent sociopolitical system that calls for the enslavement and killing of all non-Nazis.

All Muslims are responsible for Islamic terrorism because they support and participate in Islam, which is an inherently and self-defined violent sociopolitical system that calls for the enslavement and killing of all non-Muslims.

You can't be part of a violent drug-running criminal biker gang and expect not to be prosecuted for conspiracy for the crimes committed by the gang. If you don't want to be deemed a conspirator, even if all you did was serve beer and sweep up at the clubhouse, then you'd damned well better turn in your colors and get the hell out.

Islam is no different from a violent drug-running criminal biker gang except that it's bigger and, because it hides beneath the cloak of "religion" and lies about its intentions, gulls the weak-minded into defending it.

[Galaxian]

Two erroneous posts, Seth. First this one:

France can't even erect effective anti-vehicle barriers? FFS!

There were effective barriers, but the police moved one aside to allow the truck through to deliver ice cream to a restaurant.

Well, the facts show that there were not effective barriers because he got through and killed 80 people. That's simply indisputable. And what brain-dead cop manning a barrier allows a giant truck through it to "deliver" anything to anyone during a massive pedestrian celebration without opening the fucking truck and checking it for bombs and guns and thoroughly checking out the driver's story and identity by confirming the delivery with the restaurant?
That is a monumental security fuckup for which those involved need to be cashiered and held criminally responsible.

See my post here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1669178

Then this post, more serious, & as equally misconstrued as the title of the thread:

Don't care if ISIS ever claims responsibility, it's responsible, as is every other Muslim who isn't killing violent Muslim jihadis at this moment. No more sitting on the sidelines acting pious, either you go out and kill the people you yourself (referring to "moderate Muslims") call apostates or you are fifth-columnists and sympathizers who get cut no slack.

The guy committed suicide by cop.

He did it in a way to go out in a blaze of glory.

The rest of your rant is rich BS from The Armchair Avenger. Bears no resemblance to reality

[JimC]

I will say that Islam as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence...

...the same way that Christianity as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence? KKK? Anti-abortionists assassinating doctors in the name of Christ? The people who used biblical texts to justify slavery? Professor Lane Craig who uses the Bible to justify genocide?

Why not?

And it need not be the absurdity of apologising for events long past. Spokespeople for any religion should be making their opposition to people using their religion in violent ways in the present crystal clear; that is a way of taking responsibility...

[Hermit]

I will say that Islam as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence...

...the same way that Christianity as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence? KKK? Anti-abortionists assassinating doctors in the name of Christ? The people who used biblical texts to justify slavery? Professor Lane Craig who uses the Bible to justify genocide?

Why not?

And it need not be the absurdity of apologising for events long past. Spokespeople for any religion should be making their opposition to people using their religion in violent ways in the present crystal clear; that is a way of taking responsibility...

Why exactly should Quakers, Unitarians or even Catholics for that matter, take responsibility by making their opposition crystal clear to people like, say, anti-abortionists who have committed murders in the name of Christianity?

[JimC]

If they want to claim that they are part of the overall christian faith, then I think they should. Again, not to do so means that they, as self-styled christians, are complicit.

(and I don't mean the absurdity of constant apologies, but, for example, if a Unitarian spokesperson was asked directly what he though of another self-styled christian justifying the killing of witches because of biblical passages, if he chose "no comment" as a response, he would be tarred with the same brush...)

[rainbow]

I will say that Islam as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence...

...the same way that Christianity as a religion needs to take some responsibility for the actions of those who use its religious texts as a reason for violence? KKK? Anti-abortionists assassinating doctors in the name of Christ? The people who used biblical texts to justify slavery? Professor Lane Craig who uses the Bible to justify genocide?

Why not?

And it need not be the absurdity of apologising for events long past. Spokespeople for any religion should be making their opposition to people using their religion in violent ways in the present crystal clear; that is a way of taking responsibility...

Your confusion is due to a lack of understanding of the true purpose of religion.

[JimC]

Amplify your cryptic remarks, if you will.

Personally, I don't see a single "true purpose" for religions, rather an accretion of a witch's brew of purposes over the millennia...

[Seth]

Two erroneous posts, Seth. First this one:
See my post here: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1669178

I did so, and what a complete waste of time that was...

[Seth]

If they want to claim that they are part of the overall christian faith, then I think they should. Again, not to do so means that they, as self-styled christians, are complicit.

Except that anyone who terrorizes, harms or kills anyone else is not a Christian, by definition, because Christ never, ever commanded his followers to harm anyone. Therefore, someone doing harm while pretending to be a Christian is not, and Christians are not complicit in anything such a person does.

Islam is different in that it, as both a sociopolitical movement and a religion, explicitly commands followers to kill and enslave non-Muslims. Therefore, trying to deflect, derail and deny Islamic evil by tossing the red herring of Christianity is a ludicrous fallacy of the first water.

[cronus]

Proof is in the pudding. Christianity mellowed out over time as it's scriptures were more easily read by the common folk. Islam gone the other way. The difference between them is now so great it isn't really useful to call Islam a religion. Better to consign it to a pathological political ideology like communism, and have done. That is where it is and since I've no belief in God why should I care what some Muslim believes?

[Hermit]

If they want to claim that they are part of the overall christian faith, then I think they should. Again, not to do so means that they, as self-styled christians, are complicit.

Except that anyone who terrorizes, harms or kills anyone else is not a Christian, by definition, because Christ never, ever commanded his followers to harm anyone.

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. - Luke 19:27

Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death. - Mark 7:5

[Sean Hayden]

The Kingdom breaks forth