Ahmed Mohamed: 'Clock boy' seeks $15m from city and school

[Seth]

My personal preference is to send them all back to the homeland of Islam

Over one billion Muslims in the world so Saudi Arabia is not going to be able to accommodate them all

That's not our problem, it's their problem and we should make it their problem.

And it does not want to accommodate any at all given how it has taken in none of the Syrian refugees

Yup, because Saudi Arabia is one of the most violent and dedicated Islamic states on earth and it is a constant sponsor of exported Muslim terrorism. Fuck them.

Islam is too big to be confined to a physical border anyway for it is the worlds fastest growing religion

Not if the rest of the world is determined not to let it metastasize.

Kierkegaard said that you can stop the march of an army but not an idea and this is very true of Islam

I don't care about the idea, I care about the army. Contain the army in one place and never let them out and you contain the danger to everyone else. They can stew in their ideas for as long as they like, so long as they don't try to export it.

Also the internet makes a mockery of physical borders as ideas are freely disseminated in cyber space

Indeed, like the idea that Muslims should be shipped off to Saudi Arabia and dumped in the desert where they become Saudi Arabia's problem.

[Seth]

...

Apologists argue that, yabbut that's the old testament. It's been superseded by the New Covenant, which is all lovey-dovey. Three point need to be highlighted about this bullshit.

...

Fourthly, the Jesus narrative marks him out as the enforcer of the Laws of Moses.

Matthew 5:17-18, KJV

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

... and all that he spoke was the holy word of God...

John 1:12-14, KJV

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth."

Already debunked. Try again.

[Seth]

Seth wrote:

Wayback Machine fallacy. What happened then is utterly irrelevant to what's happening today, and today we do not see Christian death squads blowing themselves up and murdering non-Christians. So whatever you think about the Bible or Christianity the fact is that it's nothing like Islam today, and never has been.

Way to miss Hermit's point...

You have been banging on endlessly about how the holy books of Islam contain many barbaric passages. No one will disagree with that. But you become extremely defensive about christianity - I wonder why? Hermit has merely pointed out that both testaments of the christian bible contain equally barbaric passages; and it is a fact that the majority of christian denominations (certainly including the catholic church) include both testaments in their bible, and I have certainly heard many a reading from the old testament (typically not the really gory bits, but they are there and available to a fire and brimstone preacher like the late Ian Paisley...) in catholic services. If modern christianity was serious about repudiating the old testament, it would not publish it and would not quote from it, leaving it as a purely historical reference source for history-minded theologians. But they don't...

Yes, it is true that modern christianity behaves differently, in the sense that even its fundamentalist sects do not act as IS does (at least in part because they are constrained by functioning and effective secular law enforcement agencies, and not operating in the political chaos of the Middle East). But given that both religions have extremely offensive and barbaric sections in their writings, but many of the adherents of both can effectively ignore them as they practice their religion, one cannot make absolutist statements that the Koran and Hadith forever hold muslims in an iron grip, compelling them to lie to the infidel and enslave them. We no longer think it appropriate for bears to eat small children because they have irritated religious old men; in time, it is perfectly possible that a secularised Islam will quietly sweep its nasty historical baggage into the dustbin of failed ideas...

And I pointed out that Christians behave differently from Muslims despite the passages you allude to because Jesus repudiated those passages with his entire life and philosophy and made rules for Christians different from the rules of the Old Testament, which is rather the point.

Whether those passages remain in the Old Testament is not relevant because Christians as a whole do not use them to kill others in order to enforce their vision of the will of God. Muslims do, and they do so in direct obedience to the relevant passages in the Koran.

I would like to see "secularized Islam" arise so that it could join other religions in peaceful co-existence, but I do not see that happening any time soon, and the threat we face is real and immediate and requires real and immediate response. If "peaceful Islam" is unwilling to do what is necessary to repudiate and reject the violence that is inherent in Islam and forego it's pretensions to global rule in the name of Allan to a degree that convinces the rest of the non-Muslim world of the honesty and resolve of their intentions, then there is no good reason to believe their protestations of peacefulness at all, given the express commandments to lie to us whenever necessary to advance the ultimate victory of Islam.

I've laid out what they need to do to convince me that they are truly interested in living in peace with others. If they don't do those things, then it is my belief that they are lying and constitute a clear and present danger to the entire non-Muslim world and must therefore be suppressed in ways that will minimize the potential for violence from any Muslim, whether moderate or radical.

[mistermack]

As has been pointed out, the Old Testament is every bit as nasty as the Koran.
But it really doesn't matter. It's the application of religion that counts.

The Jews have the Old Testament as their holy book. And there are plenty of fundamentalist Jews around.
But they have found ways around the nastiest bits and even the most fundamentalist Jews don't present a problem to people of other religions.

The difference with Islam is the current culture in Islam. It's the level of indoctrination. It's far closer to a cult than any other religion. Kids are filled full of that shit, for hours a day. And told that it's literally the word of god. And let's face it, if god says it's ok, then that overrules everyone else.

While there are modern Muslims who cherry pick, the kids are still being fed the poison, as if it were god's truth. The parents might be fairly tolerant, but the kids are "radicalised" by others. It's pretty much unique in the modern world, for the kids to become more religiously extreme than the parents. That's down to the culture of Islam, the free rein given to any loony who wants to preach fundamentalism.

But there's very little that we can do.
The Muslims are here, in their millions. The damage has been done. You can't discriminate against the ones that don't break the law.
Just remember who let them in. And who is still letting them in. In the UK, that includes both Labour and Conservative governments. And the Liberals are just as bad.

I would personally put an instant block on any Muslim immigration, from outside the EC.
The damage may have been done, but why keep doing it?
Cameron is full of shit. He promised to get immigration down to less than 100,000.
Last year, there were more than 200,000 from OUTSIDE the EU. Let alone the EU influx of about 150,000.
If Cameron had kept his word, none of those 200,000 need have been allowed entry. ESPECIALLY the Muslims.
While we have a duty to treat the Muslims that are here fairly, there's no duty to let any more in.

Right now, I would vote to come out of the EU. And restrict all immigration to one-in, one out.
the country is bursting.
We could do with the few that are very highly-skilled, but we don't need any more unskilled people, so they should lock the door.
With exceptions made for countries like Australia etc, which have historically received immigration from the UK.

[JimC]

mistermack wrote:

...With exceptions made for countries like Australia etc, which have historically received immigration from the UK...

OK cobber, we're all coming over to take your jobs and fuck your sheep women!

[Seth]

As has been pointed out, the Old Testament is every bit as nasty as the Koran.

And as I have pointed out, Christianity does not follow the Old Testament, just the New Testament of Jesus Christ...therefore the term "Christian" not "Jew."

But it really doesn't matter. It's the application of religion that counts.

Correct.

The Jews have the Old Testament as their holy book. And there are plenty of fundamentalist Jews around.
But they have found ways around the nastiest bits and even the most fundamentalist Jews don't present a problem to people of other religions.

Correct.

The difference with Islam is the current culture in Islam. It's the level of indoctrination. It's far closer to a cult than any other religion. Kids are filled full of that shit, for hours a day. And told that it's literally the word of god. And let's face it, if god says it's ok, then that overrules everyone else.

While there are modern Muslims who cherry pick, the kids are still being fed the poison, as if it were god's truth. The parents might be fairly tolerant, but the kids are "radicalised" by others. It's pretty much unique in the modern world, for the kids to become more religiously extreme than the parents. That's down to the culture of Islam, the free rein given to any loony who wants to preach fundamentalism.

Correct.

But there's very little that we can do.

Wrong.

The Muslims are here, in their millions. The damage has been done. You can't discriminate against the ones that don't break the law.

No, but we can arrest and deport any of them that do break the law. And the law I'm specifically referring to here is 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

We need to amend that law to state that any immigrant to the United States who is not a naturalized citizen who engages in treason gets the same penalty, and if not death, gets stripped of their citizenship and deported after they serve their sentence.

That's all we need to arrest ever radical Imam and radicalized Muslim in the United States and get rid of them tomorrow. We simply define advocacy of the Islamic Caliphate, advocacy or participation in any way of any Koranic passage, fatwa or other command that advocates or commands violence against the United States or any of its citizens as being acts of levying war, adhering to and giving aid and comfort to enemies of the United States.

Preach Jihad in an American mosque, go to prison for five years to life, be hung from a lamppost on Constitution Avenue till the crows peck out your eyes, and be deported when we're done with you, whether you're a corpse or not.

We have all the legal tools we need to arrest, charge, convict, punish and deport any Muslim who preaches strict adherence to Koranic commandments.

Just remember who let them in.

Oh, I will remember to the end of my days who let them in: Barack Obama and the Democrat Progressive/Marxists, all of whom should themselves be arrested, tried and executed for treason as well.

And who is still letting them in. In the UK, that includes both Labour and Conservative governments. And the Liberals are just as bad.

Not my problem.

I would personally put an instant block on any Muslim immigration, from outside the EC.
The damage may have been done, but why keep doing it?
Cameron is full of shit. He promised to get immigration down to less than 100,000.
Last year, there were more than 200,000 from OUTSIDE the EU. Let alone the EU influx of about 150,000.
If Cameron had kept his word, none of those 200,000 need have been allowed entry. ESPECIALLY the Muslims.
While we have a duty to treat the Muslims that are here fairly, there's no duty to let any more in.

Right now, I would vote to come out of the EU. And restrict all immigration to one-in, one out.
the country is bursting.
We could do with the few that are very highly-skilled, but we don't need any more unskilled people, so they should lock the door.
With exceptions made for countries like Australia etc, which have historically received immigration from the UK.

Yup, nobody has a "right" to emigrate from their homeland to somewhere else.

[JimC]

Seth wrote:

...we can arrest and deport any of them that do break the law...

For ones without citizenship, or those with dial citizenship, sure, if their activities warrant it. But for those who are clearly citizens, often born in your (or my) country, it would be very difficult legally...

[Seth]

Seth wrote:

...we can arrest and deport any of them that do break the law...

For ones without citizenship, or those with dial citizenship, sure, if their activities warrant it. But for those who are clearly citizens, often born in your (or my) country, it would be very difficult legally...

Not really. All that is required is a law that strips the citizenship from anyone convicted of treason. Canada's looking at doing precisely that right now, and so should we.

And if they become "stateless persons" as a result because nobody will take them in, like some of the terrorists at Gitmo, we simply deport them to international waters, about 2000 miles offshore, in one-man rubber rafts, and forget about them.

[surreptitious57]

Contain the army in one place and never let them out and you contain the danger to everyone else

This might have worked when Islam was in its infancy but it is no good now. For one thing how exactly would you contain them?
Would you make it illegal for them to travel beyond their own borders? Even supposing that that was achievable how would you
prevent the spread of information? Would you deny internet access to the entire Muslim world? And what about those outside of
it who wanted to become radicalised? Would you deny them internet access too? Do you see how impractical all this is? If it was
that simple terrorism would no longer exist. The fact of the matter is that there are no easy solutions. And especially when you
are dealing with those not at all afraid to die for what they believe in

[JimC]

^^^^^^^

[mistermack]

Oh, I will remember to the end of my days who let them in: Barack Obama and the Democrat Progressive/Marxists, all of whom should themselves be arrested, tried and executed for treason as well.

Wrong. The American people let them in. Because the US government is created by the American people at election time.
Obama was elected because the Republican candidates were a load of shite.
Right now we've got the Conservatives because Labour are a load of shite.

The country gets the mis-management it deserves. That's democracy. In any case, if you check, you will find that Muslims were flooding into the US during Bush's time, just as now. In fact, it was Bush's wars that gave them the excuse.

[Brian Peacock]

Contain the army in one place and never let them out and you contain the danger to everyone else

This might have worked when Islam was in its infancy but it is no good now. For one thing how exactly would you contain them?
Would you make it illegal for them to travel beyond their own borders? Even supposing that that was achievable how would you
prevent the spread of information? Would you deny internet access to the entire Muslim world? And what about those outside of
it who wanted to become radicalised? Would you deny them internet access too? Do you see how impractical all this is? If it was
that simple terrorism would no longer exist. The fact of the matter is that there are no easy solutions. And especially when you
are dealing with those not at all afraid to die for what they believe in

Indeed. Would Seth like to see Muslims barred from practising their religion entirely simply because he asserts every Muslim is defined by the actions of a radical few? It's a sharp irony that those defenders of Christianity who are so quick to define all Muslims by the actions of a radical few, and then call for oppressive measures to be applied to Muslims at large, would not countenance the same thing being applied to them and are exactly the ones who are advocating social and military solutions every bit as reprehensible as the Jihadists whenever they cite their own religious preferences in justification.

"My religion is peaceful, therefore I'm going to bomb your house."

[Brian Peacock]

Oh, I will remember to the end of my days who let them in: Barack Obama and the Democrat Progressive/Marxists, all of whom should themselves be arrested, tried and executed for treason as well.

Wrong. The American people let them in. Because the US government is created by the American people at election time.
Obama was elected because the Republican candidates were a load of shite.
Right now we've got the Conservatives because Labour are a load of shite.

The country gets the mis-management it deserves. That's democracy. In any case, if you check, you will find that Muslims were flooding into the US during Bush's time, just as now. In fact, it was Bush's wars that gave them the excuse.

Bloody terrorist coming over here and stealing jobs from our own home grown terrorists.

As if the mass shootings of Jihadits is any different than the mass shootings of regular home grown cranks and nutters.

We got into all this because Seth wanted to justify Anthraxing a 14 year old school boy for being a Muslim. Everything he's said subsequently to justify that remark marks him out as a someone who maintains that wherever it is they are proposing is always justified because they are the ones proposing it. He is of the 'Never Wrong' brigade. If only the whole world thought as Seth, acted as Seth, and believed Seth, then we'd all be better off, and Seth would be acknowledged as 'The One', the hero of the world and a true light to guide us through the darkness.

[JimC]

Oh, I will remember to the end of my days who let them in: Barack Obama and the Democrat Progressive/Marxists, all of whom should themselves be arrested, tried and executed for treason as well.

Wrong. The American people let them in. Because the US government is created by the American people at election time.
Obama was elected because the Republican candidates were a load of shite.
Right now we've got the Conservatives because Labour are a load of shite.

The country gets the mis-management it deserves. That's democracy. In any case, if you check, you will find that Muslims were flooding into the US during Bush's time, just as now. In fact, it was Bush's wars that gave them the excuse.

Bloody terrorist coming over here and stealing jobs from our own home grown terrorists.

As if the mass shootings of Jihadits is any different than the mass shootings of regular home grown cranks and nutters.

We got into all this because Seth wanted to justify Anthraxing a 14 year old school boy for being a Muslim. Everything he's said subsequently to justify that remark marks him out as a someone who maintains that wherever it is they are proposing is always justified because they are the ones proposing it. He is of the 'Never Wrong' brigade. If only the whole world thought as Seth, acted as Seth, and believed Seth, then we'd all be better off, and Seth would be acknowledged as 'The One', the hero of the world and a true light to guide us through the darkness.

It's his amazing humility that makes him a true hero...

[Seth]

Contain the army in one place and never let them out and you contain the danger to everyone else

This might have worked when Islam was in its infancy but it is no good now. For one thing how exactly would you contain them?

By international military force of course.

Would you make it illegal for them to travel beyond their own borders?

Yes.

Even supposing that that was achievable how would you
prevent the spread of information?

That's impossible, but wherever Islam pops up international military action to put it down and transfer them to the Muslim state would follow.

Would you deny internet access to the entire Muslim world?

Yes.

And what about those outside of
it who wanted to become radicalised?

Kill them.

Would you deny them internet access too?

Yes.

Do you see how impractical all this is?

Nobody said it was going to be easy, but the alternative is for everyone but Muslims to live as slaves to the world Caliphate and that is unacceptable.

If it was
that simple terrorism would no longer exist.

Nobody's really taken sequestering Muslims seriously since the Crusades and the Ottoman Empire.

The fact of the matter is that there are no easy solutions.

Nobody said it was going to be easy. We are at war with radical Islam. And by "we" I mean every non-Muslim on earth, of every religious faith and no religious faith at all because Islam calls for all of us to be killed or enslaved to Islam. When the FUCK are you going to understand this and come to the realization that if radical Islam is not extirpated from the face of the earth it will remain a threat to civilization for the next thousand years?

And especially when you
are dealing with those not at all afraid to die for what they believe in

Then let's satisfy their thirst for entry into Paradise by giving them what they crave: death.

They say "Death to infidels!" I say "Death to Islam." That's fair don't you think?