Patterico's Pontifications

9/2/2014

ISIS Degenerate Beheads Second Journalist on Video

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:51 pm

We all knew this was coming.

A new video appears to show the execution of Steven Sotloff, the second American killed by a self-professed member of the Islamist terror group ISIS.

In the video, which appeared online today, Sotloff addresses the camera, saying, “I’m sure you know exactly who I am by now and why I am appearing.”

“Obama, your foreign policy of intervention in Iraq was supposed to be for preservation of American lives and interests, so why is it that I am paying the price of your interference with my life?” the journalist says calmly as the black clad militant holds a knife casually at his side.

Later the video then cuts to the militant who says, “I’m back, Obama. I’m back because of your arrogant foreign policy towards the Islamic State [ISIS].”

“… [J]ust as your missiles continue to strike our people, our knife will continue to strike the necks of your people,” the figure says.

The camera cuts again and the militant appears to kill Sotloff.

Animal.

302 Responses to “ISIS Degenerate Beheads Second Journalist on Video”

  1. I would quote the whole “evil and good men doing nothing” thing, but Obama ain’t a “good man”. Prayers for the family, especially the mother.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  2. Hit them with everything we’ve got… before they strike a blow that will make these Godless
    acts look like amateur hour.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  3. With the current POTUS? I expect we’ll have plenty of dark hours. (stop with the “dogwhistle”!)

    felipe (40f0f0)

  4. hiding in plain sight

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738933/Revealed-Islamic-State-s-banker-director-private-Muslim-primary-school-Birmingham.html

    he’s worked with one of the rockstars that has been mentioned in the past, al arifi

    narciso (ee1f88)

  5. “… [J]ust as your missiles continue to strike our people, our knife will continue to strike the necks of your people,” the figure says.

    As Far as I’ve witnessed they seem to also attack/murder/slay their People. Unless the only people they are concerned with are the adherents of Isis itself. Other muslims not included certainly not other members of their own communities all over the world , also not included in ‘their people’

    neda (d4c16b)

  6. It is my firm belief we should send a Marine force of about 25,000 to Irbil, land them
    and their equipment, tanks, artillery and air support, give them the mission of wiping
    ISIS to the last man. No reporters, no media, no political interference. Find em,
    kill em, go home. I mean where ever they are, Iraq, Syria no matter. That is what
    Marines are for, what they are good at and why we have them. Not there to make
    political changes, just there to wipe out ISIS.

    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (58e67e)

  7. I guess it’s going to take another 9/11 for Americans to wake up from their slumber. I know it is our history and our nature: We always wait.

    Despite the intention, it does end badly sometimes.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  8. Has anybody visited any lefty sites for their reaction to this attack on their favorite golf-player?

    nk (dbc370)

  9. As Far as I’ve witnessed they seem to also attack/murder/slay their People.

    We need to bring more psy-ops to bear in all of this. There are a lot of bad actors in the Muslim world — Hamas, al Qaeda, ISIS, Baathists, etc. — who don’t really like each other and tend to spend a great deal of time arguing among each other. Yes, they form temporary alliances when it is convenient and when they share a common enemy, but maybe the new front in the War on Terror is simply to help spread dissent among the various radical groups and have them turn on each other. One thing I learned when reading The Looming Tower is that the whole concept of one Islamic group declaring another Islamic group to be apostates only goes back to the last 20 years or, so we should do everything we can to abet and accelerate that phenomenon.

    And when Obama Administration sniff that we don’t know who to bomb when ISIS is fighting Assad’s Baathists, why can’t the answer be to bomb all of them?

    JVW (638245)

  10. Many many important decisions are not being made because of the upcoming midterm elections.

    elissa (c92042)

  11. Has anybody visited any lefty sites for their reaction to this attack on their favorite golf-player?

    nk, how about the old “they’re only hurting themselves” line trotted out over at Slate? Located right next to the article which says that Israel is behaving just as badly as Russia, by the way.

    JVW (638245)

  12. Both of the videos share a similar look. I’d be surprised if this and the Foley beheading weren’t filmed consecutively. I’m nearly certain that David Cawthorne Haines is already dead.

    Bobby (f7407a)

  13. priorities, Mr Feet…

    kinda like you and tacos.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  14. So more Americans will die? To do what? Who do we shoot – do we send 25000 to Libya, 50,000 to Syria, 75,000 to Iraq?

    EPWJ (8b746f)

  15. EPWJ, the answer is to only deploy US forces in areas where we have at least one side working with us. Everywhere else gets introduced to the wonders of air superiority and naval fire support.

    OmegaPaladin (f4a293)

  16. there is nothing wrong with the middle east outside the borders of Israel that couldn’t be fixed with a nice thick, even, coat of VX & HD…

    repeat PRN.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  17. 16. So more Americans will die? To do what? Who do we shoot – do we send 25000 to Libya, 50,000 to Syria, 75,000 to Iraq?

    EPWJ (8b746f) — 9/2/2014 @ 11:19 pm

    Clausewitz speaks.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  18. We are doomed.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/09/isis-beheads-second-american-journalist.php

    Washington has contacted about two dozen countries for help in freeing the three, but no foreign government appears to have influence over or even significant contact with IS, which has declared an Islamic caliphate in parts of Iraq and Syria.

    “What we’ve found is that ISIS isn’t responsive” to outreach, said a senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity….

    Your average kindergartner has a better grasp of reality than this klown kar administration.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  19. #20: “unexpectedly”

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  20. Isn’t it ironic that after the press carried the administrations’ water by calling the Foot Hood massacre a “workplace accident” that one of their own would suffer a workplace accident as well?

    kennymac (4964b3)

  21. “Both of the videos share a similar look. I’d be surprised if this and the Foley beheading weren’t filmed consecutively. I’m nearly certain that David Cawthorne Haines is already dead.”

    An opportunity to save on production costs? I should think catering alone would run into the thousands out there

    Colonel Haiku (4aa570)


  22. …appears to show the execution of Steven Sotloff…

    Appears to show is correct, and not because they weren’t immediately sure it was Steven Sotloff, but because I suspect it doesn’t actually show the execution, and someone standing off camera may have been the one who did it.

    In the case of James Foley, according to a press report by someone who had seen the whole video, the knife appeared too small to do the job, and at the end there was a different, bigger, knife.

    The organization formerly known as ISIS is not only brutal and immoral…

    It LIES!

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)


  23. “evil and good men doing nothing” thing

    Coined probably around 1938 to refer to the appeasement of Nazi Germany, but attributed to Edmund Burke – and is somewhat similar to some thinbgs he said – and popularized by the League of Women Voters in 1944 as part of a get out the vote drive.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  24. When Obama suddenly released 5 big name Islamic terrorists then incarcerated at GITMO supposedly in exchange for the deserter Sgt. Bergdahl the shock reverberated throughout the nation. Why so many top terrorists released for one American who walked away from his post and who was denounced by his fellow soldiers for likely helping the enemy? And why violate the specific 30 day notice to Congress required by the Defense Appropriations Act?

    The Administration claimed time was short, Bergdahl needed emergency health care, but when we saw him on video tape there was no indication he was in extremis. Now we hear he’s getting a promotion and many thousands in back pay. Crazy? Inexplicable? Or just another example of the Obama regime adding insult to injury while pulling the wool over Uncle Sam’s eyes again?

    Without their top leaders detained at GITMO, ISIL feels free to boldly behead Americans and upload the barbaric images to the Internet without fear of retaliation either in-kind or in some other deterrent way. We wouldn’t respond in kind, of course, but they couldn’t be sure of that, they don’t think like we do. They’re more practical, more direct, more immediate, and more effective.

    Before going ahead with the beheadings ISIL needed proof their guys were safely in friendly hands (in Qatar) and well out of reach should the plan backfire.

    ropelight (efa0f7)

  25. 6. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (58e67e) — 9/2/2014 @ 7:49 pm

    Find em, kill em, go home. I mean where ever they are, Iraq, Syria no matter. That is what
    Marines are for, what they are good at and why we have them. Not there to make political changes, just there to wipe out ISIS.

    And have Bashar Assad or original Al Qaeda take over some places??

    That’s what Barack Obama would call “not a strategy.”

    While he’s pondering, the organization called ISIS by most of the mainstream media executes some prisoners to make it look like they are intimidating him.

    I think it has some other purposes too, but one purpose it does NOT havem is the stated one.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  26. You know one reason Benjamin Netanyahu did not want to destroy Hamas was that he was afraid it would be another Fallujah – that is, some other extreme Islamist group, maybe ISIS itself, would take over.

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-i-didnt-want-an-israeli-fallujah-in-gaza <blockquote<
    Netanyahu told Channel 2 in a lengthy interview that he did not rule out reconquering Gaza and uprooting Hamas in the future — as many of his critics and detractors have demanded — if conditions necessitated such a move, but warned that such drastic action would come at a heavy price and would carry lasting consequences for Israel.

    In order to drive home his point, Netanyahu referenced the US’s war in Iraq and specifically the many battles and heavy casualties it suffered in its attempt to cleanse the city of Fallujah of militant forces, an attempt which he said was quickly undone once the military left the territory.

    “The US fought against a smaller Gaza called Fallujah… Fallujah is a tenth the size of Gaza. The great United States fought in Fallujah, its Gaza, sacrificed hundreds of soldiers who fought bravely… Went in once, twice, three times,” he said.

    “Thousands of Iraqis were killed there. Many thousands. And in the end it went out and al-Qaeda came back.”

    Netanyahu said he believed an attempt to conquer Gaza temporarily in order to oust Hamas would carry a similarly high cost in soldiers’ lives as well as in civilian casualties. “If we pay those prices, and they are heavy prices, we may need to stay there,” he said. But such a continued presence would waste precious resources at a time when Israel must also contend with threats on ther fronts.

    We have al-Qaeda on the fence now in the Golan Heights,” he noted, referring to the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front which in recent days has taken over territory adjacent to the Israeli border, including Syria’s only border crossing with Israel. “The Islamic State is racing towards us and al-Qaeda is on the Golan borders… I chose in this reality not to invest all of our resources in this one arena (Gaza).”

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  27. OmegaPaladin (f4a293) — 9/2/2014 @ 11:38 pm

    the answer is to only deploy US forces in areas where we have at least one side working with us.

    That could have been one purpose of the execution of Steven Sotloff (they;ve now kille dthe last American prisoner they had)

    Not to deter the United States – to deter others.

    Or to encourage the ransoming of prisoners.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  28. 27. ropelight (efa0f7) — 9/3/2014 @ 6:25 am

    When Obama suddenly released 5 big name Islamic terrorists then incarcerated at GITMO supposedly in exchange for the deserter Sgt. Bergdahl the shock reverberated throughout the nation.

    Why so many top terrorists released for one American who walked away from his post and who was denounced by his fellow soldiers for likely helping the enemy?

    Obama wanted to wipe his hands of Afghanistan and say it was over, and he couldn’t do that as long as one POW was still there. Other Americans, maybe, but not a POW, and Bergdahl still counted as a POW.

    The terrorist negotiaters (Qatar) kept making small concessions. As soon as the proposal arrived at the minimum he would accept (which was these people would not be back in Afghanistan so long as any U.S. troops remained) he accepted.

    And why violate the specific 30 day notice to Congress required by the Defense Appropriations Act?

    The Qataris and other double agents supplied them with sufficient reasons.

    The Administration claimed time was short, Bergdahl needed emergency health care,

    I think that was disinformation – Qatar knew exactly what kind of disinformation the Administration needed, and it was supplied.

    Now we hear he’s getting a promotion and many thousands in back pay.

    Otherwise they’d have to call him a deserter.

    Without their top leaders detained at GITMO, ISIL feels free to boldly behead Americans

    No, the people detained at Gitmo belonged to Al Qaeda, not ISIS.

    They are as separate now as the Chinese Communists weer from the Russian Communists.

    Earlier, most Islamic recruits in Syria were going to other organizations. Now they head to ISIS/ISIL.

    Earlier, before their victories since January, some left ISIS for other Islamic terrorist organizations, which they had relationships with.

    We wouldn’t respond in kind, of course, but they couldn’t be sure of that, they don’t think like we do.

    Actually they would like us to respond in kind. ISIS does not want any prisomners taken, because they might talk.

    Before going ahead with the beheadings ISIL needed proof their guys were safely in friendly hands (in Qatar) and well out of reach should the plan backfire.

    These guys did not belong to ISIS, but to al Qaeda.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  29. JVW (638245) — 9/2/2014 @ 8:09 pm

    And when Obama Administration sniff that we don’t know who to bomb when ISIS is fighting Assad’s Baathists, why can’t the answer be to bomb all of them?

    Exactly.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  30. Steve57

    So what is your solution? Remember in the 70′s and 80′s kidnapping, deaths of Americans was almost a weekly occurrence. So do we occupy the middle east? I mean, airpower really? After what happened to Saddam in 91 I think everyone got the memo to not march in neat military formations. They appeared out of no where and they can disappear just as fast – doesn’t mean that they are gone

    EPWJ (db4127)

  31. There’s bad news and good news by the Golan Heights.

    The bad news that Jihadists are now on Israel’s northern border, replacing the Syrian government at some UN checkpoints on the Golan Heights.

    The good news is they are al Qaeda jihadists and their allies supported by Saudi Arabia, and not from ISIS/ISIL/Daesh supported by Qatar and Turkey.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  32. Powerline: but no foreign government appears to have influence over or even significant contact with IS,

    Or they’re denying it.

    IS does have foreign contacts. Their whole media team is foreign.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  33. It’s been reported that 11 commercial airliners are missing from the Tripoli airport after Islamists took over; and at least one American killed fighting for ISIS worked at the Minneapolis airport–Obama’s policies are going to result in a second 9/11, and then who will he blame? Even Bush has been out of office too long for that.

    rochf (f3fbb0)

  34. Juss a little workplace violence ya’ll know.

    Move along.

    Rodney King's Spirit (8b9b5a)

  35. #33 It would not be hard to create a mass extinction event in that small part of the world. And that would solve all problems and send the right message.

    Round them up. Push them into each other and kill them all. Including those “innocents” caught in the cross fire. Let Allah sort it out.

    Rodney King's Spirit (8b9b5a)

  36. Kill ‘em all and let Allah sort it out? Yikes.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk
    narciso (ee1f88) — 9/2/2014 @ 6:18 pm

    This is me rolling my eyes at you linking the Daily Mail. :roll: You can do better than this, I’m sure.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  37. #36.

    You can’t send unknown Boeing planes over the U.S. border, or even the Atlantic.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  38. In case some are unaware, here’s a gauge of the Daily Mail‘s inaccurate reporting. This should be relevant to readers of this blog, which largely originated from the LA Times‘ inaccurate reporting.

    Complete list of things that give you cancer, according to the Daily Mail.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  39. 41. Yes but the pictures are incomparable.

    ‘Sides who around here cares to read?

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  40. #40–see article above

    rochf (f3fbb0)

  41. 33. …After what happened to Saddam in 91 I think everyone got the memo to not march in neat military formations. They appeared out of no where and they can disappear just as fast – doesn’t mean that they are gone

    EPWJ (db4127) — 9/3/2014 @ 7:00 am

    If they unable to use mass, i.e. concentrate combat power at the decisive place and time, they cannot win or hold territory.

    Yes, they will be gone. At least from the area you intend to either control or deny them. We’ve done it before. They may not be gone in the sense they are hiding in caves making grandiose videos. But once we destroy all those tanks, artillery pieces, humvees, and what have you, and take away their precious caliphate they will no longer be recruiting jihadis. They will also no longer be making millions a day selling oil on the black market. Because that’s the draw; that’s the advantage they have over other groups. That’s the source of their strength. They have seized a small, oil-rich country.

    And we most definitely can destroy that. And humiliate them in the process, thoroughly demoralizing anyone who might be tempted to join the glorious Islamic State.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  42. Steve57 (e0f6ab) — 9/3/2014 @ 9:53 am

    If they unable to use mass, i.e. concentrate combat power at the decisive place and time, they cannot win or hold territory.

    They can use mass, as long as they are not getting bombed.

    If they are getting bombed, they cannot win territory, but they can hold it, unless there are also at least some ground troops, even if it is the horse cavalry, as in Afghanistan on 2001.

    They have seized a small, oil-rich country.

    Created a new one, the size of Belgium, out of parts of Syria and Iraq.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  43. what about Nabil Awadi and the Muntada Trust, with links from the Telegraph do you take issue with,

    there’s at least one former Gitmo detainee, Iskraen, who has proven to be a ISIL cell leader,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  44. here’s another one:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/19/ex-gitmo-detainee-moazzam-begg-charged-terorism/

    previously he recruited the underwear bomber in England,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  45. It’s been a secret till now, or not mentioned, but Sotloff was Jewish.

    Not only that, he was, or had been, a Zionist (he held Israeli citizenship)

    He came to Israel in 2005 or 2008 to pursue his undergraduate degree at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, and went there last year to attend a wedding of a fellow student.

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/steven-sotloff-dual-us-israeli-citizenship-report-article-1.1925991

    Fearing his faith would put him in danger, Sotloff prayed in private and secretly fasted during religious holidays by pretending to be sick, a now-freed captive once held alongside the journalist said.

    Debbie Schlussel accuses him of being a supporter of Hamas and ISIS and claims he converted to Islam.

    http://www.debbieschlussel.com/74430/steven-sotloff-proud-jewish-supporter-of-hamas-isis-rebels-his-anti-us-friends-deeply-loved-islam/

    She says she has a letter from someone who knew him at the IDC that says, in part:

    There is zero chance that ISIS doesn’t know Steve is Jewish. They have had him for a year. Even if he were totally removed from the internet tomorrow, they could use a variety of search tools to find this information. The only reason ISIS hasn’t mentioned this fact in their propaganda videos in my opinion is in case the US did agree to trade him, they would be able to do so without suffering a major backlash inside jihadist circles for giving away (not beheading) a Jew. It should be noted that Steve’s family have already been quoted in an article since he was taken which confirmed his Jewishness, so the case isn’t so clear cut and Gregg isn’t acting on their behalf on anything more than a very unofficial capacity in any case.

    There is essentially nothing productive being accomplished by a virtual online witch hunt being conducted by a group of former classmates of Steve’s except that they feel important, which is something at least. I would possibly even leave it at that, but you pretty much hit the nail on the head in your article. I went to school with Steve, I knew him. He was about as crazy of a jihadi apologist as I’ve ever heard of. He spent his life hunting for the unicorn-like Islamist moderate and was shot at, teargassed, and beat up as a result.

    (This Gregg tried to get her to remove references that he was Jewish by claiming he worked for the Mossad)

    She compares him to the man who loved grizzly bears and says ” when you know your head is about to be sliced off, reading their stupid anti-American statement anyway (especially when you know it won’t save your life), isn’t brave.”

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  46. Death to the IS-holes!

    Colonel Haiku (e23ff0)

  47. Do you know what’s amazing?

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2014/09/obama-we-can-make-isis-a-manageable-problem-if-we-organize-the-middle-east.php

    We know that if we are joined by the international community, we can continue to shrink ISIL’s sphere of influence, its effectiveness, its financing, its military capabilities to the point where it is a manageable problem.

    …[W]hat we’ve got to do is make sure that we are organizing the Arab world, the Middle East, the Muslim world, along with the international community to isolate this cancer.

    There is so much wrong with this, ranging from delusional to just infantile. But about 40% of Americans will think it sounds like pure genius.

    The Battle of Karbala was in 680A.D. Shiites and Sunnis have been at each others’ throats ever since. But Obama has a solution! The Muslim world just needs a community organizer. And despite the fact he never had a single success as a community organizer in the south side of Chicago, apparently he has a candidate for the job of community organizing the Muslim world in mind.

    I’m sure all over the Muslim world people are slapping themselves on he forehead saying, “Why didn’t we think of that? It’s so simple, and it was right in front of us for 1300 years!”

    If anybody says this is Bush’s fault, you’re going to get slapped. Because if anybody thinks it’s still Bush’s fault they by definition are just stupid enough to think we can defend the US through community organizing.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  48. Well the Huntress was right about his penchant to bafflegrab, I think he meant forming a coalition,
    which is sort of what France and the UK have pressing him to do,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  49. narciso (ee1f88) — 9/3/2014 @ 10:16 am

    The Daily Mail, the Telegraph, and the Washington Times. You find these sources credible. OK. I disagree.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  50. How many times do Putin and Xi Jinping have to take turns driving him around the negotiating room until he gets rug burns on his hands and knees before he gets the hint there is no such thing as the international community?

    Flashback:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/21/south-korea-prudent-response-sinking

    Hillary Clinton today raised the stakes in the confrontation with North Korea over the sinking of a South Korean warship, warning that Pyongyang would face international consequences for torpedoing the vessel.

    …”The evidence is overwhelming and condemning,” she said during a joint press conference with the Japanese foreign minister, Katsuya Okada. “The torpedo that sunk the Cheonan … was fired by a North Korean submarine.

    “We cannot allow this attack on South Korea to go unanswered by the international community. This will not be and cannot be business as usual. There must be an international, not just a regional, but an international response.”

    What was the strong, not-business-as-usual international response to the overwhelming evidence of North Korea’s guilt?

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/09/south-north-korea-un-warship

    The draft statement “condemns the attack” and expresses “deep concern” over the investigation’s findings that North Korea was to blame.

    It calls for “appropriate and peaceful measures to be taken against those responsible”.

    But it does not identify who is responsible and “takes note” of North Korea’s response “that it had nothing to do with the incident”.

    …The draft statement “underscores the importance” of preventing further attacks or hostilities against South Korea or in the region, and stresses “the importance of maintaining peace and stability on the Korean peninsula and in north-east Asia as a whole.”

    And how’s this for delusional? Susan Rice had just been passed around the UN security council like a pre-teen girl at a Pakistani sex party in Rotherham. So what does she say?

    When a reporter asked whether she believed the statement directly blamed North Korea for the attack, Rice replied: “We think the statement is very clear … It expresses the council’s judgment that the attack on the ship is to be condemned and that no further attacks against the Republic of Korea should be contemplated.”

    She says, “Let’s all do this again sometime real soon.”

    And they did! Four months later North Korea celebrated its complete and total victory at the UN security council, followed apparently by a rockin’ good at the after party where Susan Rice was the party favor, by shelling South Korea’s Yeonpyeong Island.

    And here Obama is, four years later, crawling back to the same “international community” that exists only in his hallucinations. About to get bi#@$ slapped by reality again.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  51. 51. …I think he meant forming a coalition,

    narciso (ee1f88) — 9/3/2014 @ 10:51 am

    I disagree. I think it’s even worse than it sounds.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  52. Any durable coalition, say the UK, Australia, Canada, et al, would probably be regarded in the kind words of then Senator Lurch,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  53. Steve57

    They are like the IRA of the middle east very low level insurgency – very difficult to eradicate or even locate – I understand the impatience but this is a war for proxys – I agree we need to train them and raise our own low level armies – no amour arty vehicles – just cash and rifles

    EPWJ (e66119)

  54. EPWJ, comparing them to the IRA is ridiculous. In fact, it’s borderline delusional.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  55. Also, EPWJ, there is nothing impatient about my response. ISIS has been a growing threat for years, and unlike the community organizer-in-chief I’ve spent more time thinking about it than golfing.

    But then, I don’t golf. And clearly the only amount of time this guy spent thinking about it was to rationalize kicking the can down the road for as long as possible. Which is why he was dismissing them as the J.V. team a few months ago. Which was already months after Maliki was begging for whatever help he could get to combat them.

    He made things worse by waiting. We could have nipped this in the bud last fall. Now it’s going to be much harder.

    Obama calls this a cancer. You apparently want it to get to stage IV before you’ll pay attention.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  56. this is a war for proxys – I agree we need to train them and raise our own low level armies – no amour arty vehicles – just cash and rifles

    A recipe for losing by proxy. ISIS wouldn’t be much against a well trained, well equipped western force. As France proved in it’s intervention in Mali in 2013 (Operation Serval). But ISIS has aleady proven it can beat exactly the kind of inadequately armed, inadequately trained, and inadequately vetted pick-up team you prescribe.

    Naturally you, EPWJ, choose option B, the type of force ISIS can easily beat, and will no doubt attract recruits from.

    One would think the current events in Libya might have taught you a lesson about “leading from behind.” One would be wrong.

    It’s sad when France has greater strategic insight and resolve than the US.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  57. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOxkVRNIOKM

    NBC Chief Foreign Correspondent: ‘Quite Ridiculous’ for Obama WH to Not Have ISIS Strategy

    This guy was on MSNBC’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports.” Engel talks about how this has going on for over three years. It has been well documented by news agencies. This just may be getting on some people’s radar scope (cough, cough, EPWJ, cough cough, Obama, cough, cough) and it might seem to the uninformed I’m “impatient” for “all of a sudden” wanting a strategy.

    But it only seems impatient to urgently press for action now if you had your head in the sand for the past few years.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  58. Also, if you step back and look at the broader picture Obama never developed a strategy for dealing with Muslim militant extremism because he refused to admit it existed. For narrow, short-sighted domestic political purposes he wanted to pretend the only Muslim terrorist organization was “core” AQ. And that was being annihilated. As one observer put it, if he managed to beat the 2001 Yankees roster he could declare victory. He wanted to pretend the 2014 Yankees were an entirely different team and had nothing to do with “core” Yankees.

    Obama likes to compare ISIS to cancer. Which is funny, because when you’re dealing with cancer you don’t try to degrade and contain it so you can build a coalition of doctors and cancer advocates and come up with a negotiated solution.

    “There can be no chemical or radiological solution to cancer. There can be no victors or vangquished. The only long term solution is a negotiated settlement where the equities of all parties are represented.” Dr. Barack Obama, cancer expert.

    But if we are to use the cancer analogy, Obama wants to just concentrate on the original tumor. And if he can eliminate that tumor he can declare victory. And pretend the other tumors that have grown since then as the cancer spread throughout your body don’t represent a threat.

    We don’t need a strategy for dealing with the al-Shabaab tumor or the Boko Haram tumor or the ISIS tumor. We need a strategy for dealing with the cancer. Which Obama will never do because he has to deny the cancer exists.

    “This has nothing to do with Islam.”

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  59. Steve57

    Some questions:

    1. Where are they? Hint they are NOT in Iraq
    2. What well trained force is going to confront them?
    3. What country is going to allow us to set up an advanced base to attack them from
    4. How are we going to get this advanced force there
    5. In the time we do all this they will scatter

    This has been going on since the 1930′s, welcome to the middle east beyond Fox News

    EPWJ (29d77c)

  60. Steve57 (e0f6ab) — 9/3/2014 @ 12:07 pm

    He wanted to pretend the 2014 Yankees were an entirely different team and had nothing to do with “core” Yankees.

    Were like a Junior Varsity squad that had put on uniforms of another team.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  61. EPWJ (e66119) — 9/3/2014 @ 11:04 am

    They are like the IRA of the middle east very low level insurgency – very difficult to eradicate or even locate

    They long ago surpassed the Irish Republican Army.

    The only similarity to the IRA is that they know how to build bombs – but they built much better and bigger bombs than the IRA ever did.

    Sammy Finkelman (da8ac2)

  62. Sammy the IRA fought and held 20 to 50,000 British troops (Steve57′s fantasy western force) at bay with a few hundred men – killed thousands of them –

    ISIL has captured unguarded airports, universities outlying towns, and a flight of AH64′s killed most of them some time ago.

    When you see pot bellied sedentary arabs holding AK’s in the air with fresh laundered clothing…….

    Also all these horrific massacres, long on details short on photos, remember most if anything they captured takes significant logistical support and training to deploy – too many armchair experts – we will all solve the worlds problem of middle east bandits (tribal warefare) in the comment section.

    Obama is the wrong leader however don’t think anyone else will do much better than doing nothing

    EPWJ (abd159)

  63. Steve57

    Oh I just saw your response on France and Mali

    Nothing you said I can confirm as being correct. IMO Libya is NOT our concern, it has nothing to do with us and we have nothing to do with them. The worry was, the hand held AA missiles – supposedly he had thousands supposedly – found out there were none or very few. (The Russians only made a few thousand they are frightfully expensive and I doubt Libya was given 80% of the entire USSR production)

    Mali, what intervention in Mali? 6 fighters went there bombed some acres in the jungle and then left and the insurgents are still there. Remember French intervention got us the situation in the Fareast and the problem in North Africa that we have today – bringing up the disaster of the “French” foreign policy like when they delayed the fall of the berlin wall by 15 to 20 years when they withdrew from Nato or when they forced the weaker countries into the Euro – this isn’t an Obama is right thing he isn’t – this is a let them all kill each other thing

    EPWJ (abd159)

  64. Also the middle east is EUROPES problem – so is the soviet union – the NAto countries combined have 3 to 4 times the economic power of the soviet union – to they may have to cancel those summer long paid vacations in Britain or France and Germany may have to extend the workweek to “gasp” 35 hrs from 32 – so be it.

    We will give them weapons money assistance – and that should be it forever – theycant take on a sill band of wantabe poncho villa’s then they reap what the sow

    EPWJ (abd159)

  65. Steve @50 quoting Obama via Powerline

    “What we’ve got to do is make sure that we are organizing the Arab world, the Middle East, the Muslim world, along with the international community to isolate this cancer.

    He’s handicapping himself – and he thinks he’s making it more assured.

    actually I think he wants them in there for the postwar planning.

    You can say you want a good government in Iraq before going further. You can’t say that with Syria. And if you don’t need that Syra, you don’t need that with Iraq, either.

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  66. 65. EPWJ (abd159) — 9/3/2014 @ 12:50 pm

    Sammy the IRA fought and held 20 to 50,000 British troops (Steve57′s fantasy western force) at bay with a few hundred men – killed thousands of them –

    They may have, sort of, kept 20,000 or whatever number of British troops at bay (in the sense of preventing peaceful life) but I don’t thik they killed thisands of them.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army_campaign_1969%E2%80%9397

    According to the Conflict Archive on the Internet (CAIN), a research project at the University of Ulster,[155] the Provisional IRA was responsible for the deaths of 1,823 people during the Troubles up to 2001.

    This figure includes ‘republican’ killings not attributed to any group. It is just under half of the total deaths in the conflict. Of that figure…

    1,013 (55.5%) were members or former members of the British security forces, including:

    700 British military personnel: 652 from the British Army (including the Ulster Defence Regiment/Royal Irish Regiment), 4 from the Royal Air Force, 1 from the Royal Navy, and 43 former British military personnel.

    313 British law enforcement personnel: 271 Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) officers, 14 former RUC officers, 20 Northern Ireland Prison Service (NIPS) officers, 2 former NIPS officers, and 6 English police officers.

    581 (31.8%) were classed as civilians, including 34 civilians employed by British forces, 8 members of the judiciary, 19 alleged criminals, and others.
    59 (3%) were alleged informers.

    46 (2.5%) were loyalist paramilitary members: 31 Ulster Defence Association (UDA) members, 1 former UDA member, 13 Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF)/Red Hand Commando (RHC) members, and 1 Ulster Resistance member.

    8 (0.4%) were members of the Irish security forces, including 6 Gardaí, 1 Irish Prison Service officer, and 1 Irish Army soldier.

    excluding alleged informers, 6 were members of other republican paramilitary groups: 4 Official IRA members, 1 IPLO member and 1 Real IRA member.

    Another detailed study, Lost Lives,[7] states the Provisional IRA was responsible for the deaths of 1,781 people up to 2004. It says that, of this figure…

    944 (53%) were members of the British security forces, including: 638 British military (including the UDR), 273 Royal Ulster Constabulary (including RUC reserve), 23 Northern Ireland Prison Service officers, five British police officers and five former British soldiers.

    644 (36%) were civilians.

    163 (9%) were Republican paramilitary members (including IRA members, most caused their own deaths when bombs they were transporting exploded prematurely).

    28 (1.5%) were loyalist paramilitary members.

    7 (0.3%) were members of the Irish security forces (6 Gardaí and one Irish Army).

    Lost Lives states that 294 Provisional IRA members died in the Troubles.[122] The IRA lost 276 members during the Troubles according to the CAIN figures.

    Also, maybe separate:

    During the IRA’s 25 year campaign in England, 115 deaths and 2,134 injuries were reported, from a total of almost 500 attacks.[73] Malcolm Sutton reports 125 fatalities in Britain, 68 civilians, 50 members of the security forces and 7 paramilitaries.[74]

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  67. No, if there is any analogue to the IRA. it is Belmokhtar’s AQiM affiliate, the Brotherhood of Blood,
    he is a part time cigarette smuggling outfit, full time ransoming terrorists

    narciso (ee1f88)

  68. ISIL is Zarquawi’s old outfit, Tawheed (which is unity of belief), they developed contacts across both sides of the Euphrates, Adnani, their spokesman, goes back to that era,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  69. The videotape does not show the execution:

    http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/184700

    After forcing a kneeling Sotloff to recite what is likely a pre-rehearsed script, the screen goes black, only for the recording to begin again showing what appears to be the decapitated body and head of the American journalist.

    The terrorist then shows abducted British citizen David Cawthorne Haines, and threatens to kill him as well if the US and western forces did not stop aiding Kurdish militias pushing back against IS’s advances through Iraq.

    But he was executed at the same time as he was shown in the other video.

    In the other video he is almost bald and is shaven. Here he has some hair on the top of his head and a start of a beard.

    Also the speech by the man in black talks about the bombing of the Mosul dam and what appears to a reference to what happened just last week.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  70. Sammy,

    In 1921 alone over 600 British soldiers died, just in Ulster: 177 to direct fire 99 to accidental death, 152 to Influenza, 26 to suicide, and at least 158 missing bodies never found – you see the british, classified wounded dying later as accidents, or as not dying in Ireland. The war was not very well covered by both sides and is some of the greatest political intrigue ever. So just for 1921 the losses some estimate to be as much as 2,000 british soldiers much higher than the 1,000 soldiers in the last 75 years – that’s so much BS.

    But the telegraph in 2005 broke a story that has now been removed that British casualties were much (several times higher)than officially reported.

    Look I know you like to go and run with these things so go for it but ISIL isn’t nearly as effective as the IRA which would have had a field day had they had the uprising in todays social media

    EPWJ (68f58f)

  71. To destroy, or not destroy, that is the question:

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/09/obama-suggests-isis-must-be-destroyed-or-maybe-not/

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  72. At least Obama understands you can’t tolerate sanctuaries.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  73. They actually do have two other Americans – 2 aid workers.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  74. 66.Nothing you said I can confirm as being correct. IMO Libya is NOT our concern, it has nothing to do with us and we have nothing to do with them.

    EPWJ (abd159)

    Perhaps you have forgotten this little thing called the First Barbary War, and its sequel, the Second Barbary War.
    Perhaps you do not recall that the line in the Marine Corps Hymns “to the shores of Tripoli” refers to the decisive battle of the First Barbary War, the Battle of Derne.
    Perhaps you do not recall that these wars were provoked by the inhabitants of Tripoli, as well as Algiers, Tunis, and Morocco, engaging in piracy and slavery on ships travelling in the Mediterranean, including American ships.
    Perhaps you do not recall that the reason they cited to justify their piracy was their religion, with a specific reference to the Koran.

    I can see why not recalling this would lead someone to believe that Libya is not our concern, and by extension any Islamist state, particularly one that has already shown a preference for raiding, slavery, and such, based on justifications in the Koran.
    I however do recall it, and the two Sumatran Expeditions similarly provoked by attacks on American merchant ships by Muslim pirates, as more than enough reason to consider any Islamist state with such preferences, and most especially any that have already come into conflict with the U.S., to be of great concern, and deserving attention sooner rather than later.
    But that’s just me trying to learn from history rather than just accepting a doom to repeat it and all that.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  75. there’s also the matter of that more recent intervention, some three years ago,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  76. I saw some newspaper articles a little over a week ago that gave some history of ISIS. Maybe II will try to recapitulate some of the important facts.

    The U.S. government captured some documents in Iraq in 2007 that revealed help from Syria.

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  77. 66. …Nothing you said I can confirm as being correct.

    …Mali, what intervention in Mali? 6 fighters went there bombed some acres in the jungle and then left and the insurgents are still there.

    EPWJ (abd159) — 9/3/2014 @ 1:00 pm

    Really? Then how did a couple of French Foreign Legionnaires and Paratroopers manage to get shot in northern Mali if all they sent were six fighters?

    But they didn’t let a few casualties deter them. The French are still there, the insurgents are gone.

    In fact, now that the Islamists have abandoned Mali the French have expanded their operations across several countries in the Sahel region in July. Now the French are operating in Burkino Faso, Chad, Mauritania, and Niger. They still have a reduced security force in Mali.

    http://en.starafrica.com/news/hollande-proposes-operation-barkane-to-replace-serval.html

    The French President François Hollande, has announced that more effective ‘Operation Berkane’ will replace the ‘Serval operation’ in helping West Africa to counter terrorism.When deployed, ‘Operation Barkane’ will boost the efforts of African armies in West Africa in coping with threats,” Francois Hollande said in at a press conference Friday in Niamey at the end of his visit to Niger.

    He explained that threats come mainly from Libya, where terrorist groups were driven southwards into northern Nigeria and boosting extremist sects like Boko Haram.

    For his part, Nigerien President Mahamadou Issoufou, said France and Niger were working hand in hand in Mali and were furthering the reflection on how to counter the threat posed by Boko Haram…

    Thank you for proving you don’t know what you’re talking about, EPWJ. Not that you needed to after absurdly saying ISIS is like the IRA.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  78. “but ISIL isn’t nearly as effective as the IRA which would have had a field day had they had the uprising in todays social media”

    EPWJ – It helps that ISIL has been able to pick up heavy weapons and vehicles that Iraqi soldiers have left behind on bases from which they retreated, but in #62 you claimed ISIL was not even in Iraq, so who has the U.S. been attacking for the past couple of weeks?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  79. daley, do these look like the six Mirage 2000Ds that EPWJ is all France sent to Mali?

    http://sofrep.com/16061/battle-for-mali-operation-serval/

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  80. My aircraft recognition skills are a little rusty daley, but I swear that just doesn’t look like the D version of the Mirage 2000.

    http://sofrep.com/16715/french-and-malian-troops-recapture-remaining-islamist-controlled-cities/

    And look at how they were getting their butts kicked by the Islamists!

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  81. This map is a little dated. The purple dots show ISIS positions or positions that ISIS is contesting. As you can see, just as EPWJ says they’re all in Syria.

    http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OG-AB884_SYRIA__G_20140703145715.jpg

    That is all Syria, right?

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  82. “daley, do these look like the six Mirage 2000Ds that EPWJ is all France sent to Mali?”

    Steve57 – They look like UPS delivery planes to me, but I’m not expert. :)

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  83. “This map is a little dated. The purple dots show ISIS positions or positions that ISIS is contesting. As you can see, just as EPWJ says they’re all in Syria.”

    Steve57 – Without a compass I’m lost. Every place looks the same. It’s all Greek to me.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  84. the clusters are in Iraq, but there is activity in Syria, notably the airbase at Tabda,

    http://www.france24.com/en/20140903-us-extends-niger-drone-capabilities-cooperation-with-france/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  85. Daley,

    They are based in Syria – much of the reporting and intelligence and stories are just that – pure stories – like the PLO was operating in Africa during the 80′s or in Brazil in the 70′s etc

    They made a huge mistake by claiming sovereignty over all the other nutjob groups in the middle east

    EPWJ (db4127)

  86. No the focus was Iraq, and the Salafi fighters, now they sent Al Golani back to Syria, and he founded the Nusra Front

    narciso (ee1f88)

  87. Daley Steve57

    I bow to your established international expertise – so how are we going to deploy this modern western elite fighting force and have them be exactly where they need to be and assume the enemy is going to be able to magically drag fifty ton imaginary tanks without fuel and filters etctobe able to help them.

    Its always good to listen to unverified reports and assume them to be gospel truth – I mean what could go wrong…

    Yes the French have secured Mali – better let the rebels know though that they have been secured

    EPWJ (0c89e8)

  88. So among other things you don’t know about, EPWJ, you’ve never heard of Maritime Prepositioning Ships? All the equipment we need for a ground force to deal with this level of threat is already in theater. I won’t tell you exactly where, but it could be off-loading within days.

    All we need are the troops, and CENTCOM has the contingency plans to get them and the gear where it needs to go.

    As far as airpower, that’s no problem to get that where we need it.

    Any more questions, EPWJ?

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  89. Steve57

    I see you get unnecessarily personal when confronted with someone questioning your “facts”

    the three ships of our entire fleet of 14 down from 50 in the Reagan years, are in an area where if they were given permission to unload (they wont) but if, they can supply realistically maybe 12,000 men (10,000 or more would have to protect the razor thin supply line) the sailing time from diego would be at least 2 to 4 weeks and there is no chance of resupply we would have approx. 15 days to travel track locate and eliminate a force no one knows where they really are.

    There is no way to project the necessary power there to chase down 1500 clowns with AK’s who just were credited with killing 770 soldiers yet no pictures – tribal and gang warfare has broken out all over Irag with bribery and corruption far exceeding anything ISIL is capable of doing.

    People think we can do a dday on a moments notice at the most we can land a brigade a week maybe up to two divisions in a reasonable amount of time that removing ships from Asia and the east coast

    steve we have 14 supply ships – 14, that it. Each can supply a battalion so about one armoured or mechanized division – then its bingo and only for 14 days

    EPWJ (c12453)

  90. Crossposting in case you didn’t see it on the other thread:
    8.FYI, Mike Rogers, chair of the House Intelligence Committee, was interviewed on Hewitt (by guest host John Campbell) about ISIS, here is a link
    http://www.hughhewitt.com/house-intelligence-commitee-chairman-mike-rogers-get-involved-ground-syria/#more-24527
    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/3/2014 @ 6:43 pm
    The GOP Congressmen are nervous after knowing the intel.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  91. Shirley you don’t mean that, they have been stacking like cordwood, from Aleppo to Amerli

    narciso (ee1f88)

  92. steve we have 14 supply ships – 14, that it.

    OMG, EPWJ. Quit trying to become the instant internet expert by googling what you don’t know about. We do not hae just 14 supply ships. Did you not understand that web page you googled wasn’t listing all our supply ships, just the MPS ships?

    The Navy’s 14 Maritime Prepositioning Ships (MPS) are part of Military Sealift Command’s Prepositioning Program.

    What do you think replenishes our carrier task groups and amphibious readiness groups while they’re underway? rowboats?

    the sailing time from diego would be at least 2 to 4 weeks

    And transit time for conventionally powered warships for the 2200nm from Diego Garcia to the Gulf of Oman is 3-4 days. I’ve done it. They are faster than merchant vessels but also thirstier and they don’t transit at full speed. Even if the MPS ships only did 15 knots (all of the one on your web page list higher speeds, and container ships/ro-ro’s truly average 23 kts) that means at most it would take 6 days. Even if they went to end of the Persian Gulf that would only add 2 days.

    And as I said, those ships can do it faster.

    I never said we could do D-Day at the drop of a dime. I said those MPS ships could be offloading in a matter of days. And they can.

    Again, when you don’t know what you’re talking about don’t try and pretend.

    Oh, google TPFDDL, EPWJ. That’s part of contingency planning.

    It does not take 2-4 weeks to get from DGAR to a Persian Gulf port in any ship in the inventory.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  93. “They are based in Syria – much of the reporting and intelligence and stories are just that – pure stories”

    EPWJ – I never claimed they were not based in Syria. Now exactly what parts of the intelligence and reporting do you believe are pure stories? Can be specific here rather than just spitballing?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  94. “Its always good to listen to unverified reports and assume them to be gospel truth – I mean what could go wrong…”

    EPWJ – There you go again with your bobbing and weaving routine. Since I did not cite any specific reports and neither did you, which ones are you claiming are unverified? Do you not believe that U.S. planes are actually attacking ISIL convoys or positions? Do you believe those reports and videos are unverified?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  95. Here’s a handy little poster that shows all the ships in the Military Sealift Command for 2014. There are 12 dry cargo/ammunition ships in the combat logistics force alone. That’s just one type of “supply ship.”

    http://www.msc.navy.mil/posters/MSC_USNavyShips.pdf

    steve we have 14 supply ships – 14, that it.

    Indeed.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  96. Just for everyone’s edification, the Military Sealift Command operates five categories of vessels. Two don’t include “supply ships;” service support (hospital ships, ocean going tugs, etc.) and special mission (hydrographic survey, missile range instrumentation ships, etc.)

    “Supply ships” would fall under the categories of combat logistics force, prepositioning, and sea lift.

    And even within the prepositioning program there are a lot more than 14. This should have been a hint.

    The Navy’s 14 Maritime Prepositioning Ships (MPS) are part of Military Sealift Command’s Prepositioning Program.

    If you want to see where I grabbed that quote, EPWJ linked to it above. But apparently didn’t read it carefully.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  97. steve is maybe not privy to the latest information, I have the official register and the 2013 issued may 2014 from the NIP that shows the naval shutdown and the current status –

    steve – those ships are in non ready reserve status no crews – would take a mobilization order to move them – good luck getting Obama to do that

    at the height to land 29,000 men at dday and at Okinawa removing the carriers and warships and Just looking at the supply support and troop ships – its a big big number – given that things are much more efficient its still requires several dozen 10,000 ton ships – no country on this earth has EVER landed a division or corp which is what 25K men are except the USA in WWII the brits and Japanese landed reinforced brigades that could have been considered a division but not a corp which is 2 divisions much less an armored one.

    But people are telling me we can do that right now to get Isil

    So believe who you want – steve says the official Navy sources are wrong I say they are right.

    EPWJ (775325)

  98. Here we go again..

    there is only 14 ships that can land mil equipment in an immediate use condition

    sure any any container ship can ship DISSASSEMBLED military equipment and stores – sure if you have a harbor and a large warehouse complex and a few thousand soldiers to spend weeks assembling the equipment then run off into battle sure there are thousands of those ships

    But to park a tank, a Humvee, an artillery piece and its tow truck, motorized rocket batteries and the endless train of supply trucks personnel carriers – there are just 14. these ships are fast but the oceans are vast that’s why they are prepositioned. 3 in diego Garcia are at issue here

    Also the issue of munitions, fuel, airlift, airlift supply and when you fight a war on the other side f the world 90% of the effort is to project 10% into combat.

    Its a long ways away. Years ago, decades ago we should have sent a marine division and an armored division permanently based in Israel and non of this whole freakin 40 years of nonsense would have happened

    Steve the country cannot afford to send armored corps or all our marines everytime someone get harmed overseas – how many nuns and social workers were gutted in the central American unrest the numbers are high – onve a month a hear about an oil family murdered in south America many from Houston, didn’t see the calls for the skies to rain paratroopers over Petrobras.

    I wish we would unleash the CIA to spend no stone unturned to kill those who kill AMericans – take the cuffs off and let all leaders know if you plot and carry out the deaths of our people you will die.

    Cheaper than maintaining an nvasion fleet to launch a dday in all seven seas…

    EPWJ (0e7ed5)

  99. Military Sealift Command ships are government owned, but civilian crewed. You do not need a mobilization order to crew them.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  100. You do realize I’m not referring to commissioned naval vessels, right? And when I referred to container/RO-RO ships I meant exactly that. Ships that can carry containerized cargo and also rolling stock you just drive on and drive off.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  101. steve its over, mscc ship are out of service and req a mobilization

    its a little more than just ro-ro’s – but the point is they are untouchable because they are unreachable except by light or irregular forces

    EPWJ (0c89e8)

  102. Nice try EPWJ.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  103. I mean, that’s funny.

    USNS Mendonca, one of those Military Sea Lift Command Shughart class RO-ROs that’s supposedly inactive and would require mobilization, participated in JLOTs off of Alaska this April.

    http://mscsealift.dodlive.mil/2014/04/25/usns-mendonca-and-jlots-in-alaska/

    USNS LCPL Roy M Wheat, another MSC (PM5) RO-RO, was underway just last month, arriving in Jacksonville on the 19th of August.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  104. I think you don’t understand the difference between “inactive” and “Reduced Operating Status.” Because that’s what Mendonca has been in at Bremerton since 2010. And it doesn’t take a mobilization order to order a ship in ROS underway. Just a few days.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  105. EPWJ – What about the unverified reporting and intelligence? What the heck does our number of ships have to do with that?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  106. daley, he’s not even right about the number of ships.

    106. steve its over, mscc ship are out of service and req a mobilization

    EPWJ (0c89e8) — 9/3/2014 @ 11:25 pm

    Ships in Reduced Operating Status aren’t “inactive” or “out of service.” They remain in service and are in fact on the active list. They operational, and can be brought up to fully operational status in 96 hours. Because they’re operational vessels they can be brought into service by DoD. In fact, DoD is required to do so a certain number of times a year just to check their readiness. They don’t require anything of the sort of mobilization order to crew and get underway.

    But this is nothing new. As I mentioned these ships are kept in ROS for years. It has nothing to do with any recent budget cuts or Barack Obama. It’s just that the military doesn’t often need their lift capability.

    He had me confused for a moment until I realized he was just making another of his word salads.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  107. according to a FB page i follow for an old CG cutter up there, the RO-ROs go out for a few hours, or more, on a routine basis. if nothing else, they need to have everything run every so often, just for maintenance reasons. machinery w*ks better and lasts longer if you use it every so often.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  108. EPWJ (db4127) — 9/3/2014 @ 5:51 pm

    They made a huge mistake by claiming sovereignty over all the other nutjob groups in the middle east

    No, no, IS claims sovreignity over all the Moslems in the world – its immediate goals are to rule from approximately Pakistan to Morocco. (not Indonesia?)

    That’s why the name was changed from Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham [al-sham = Greater Syria or “the Levant” = Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Jordan approximately)

    Now they didn;t carry too many al Qaeda people with them outside of Syria.

    I don’t know who, if anyone, is supposed to be the caliph of the Boko Haram caliphate in Nigeria.

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  109. 112. …machinery w*ks better and lasts longer if you use it every so often.

    redc1c4 (abd49e) — 9/4/2014 @ 1:07 am

    Hangar queens never seem to work right.

    And besides, crews work better if you use them every so often too.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  110. EPWJ – I know you don’t like facts, but this is the kind of bluster and nonsense that leads to bad places for you. Every time.

    JD (dc108d)

  111. JD,

    Bad places? The facts are this – lets say steve’s right we have a bazillion kagillion super fast unsinkable swimming tanks and super duper AP’s that don’t need fuel or supplies and they are going to all go star wars – on who? Where are they going to go? Seriously think through the fox hysteria, we can’t make all these tribes cooperate or die for their country then roving gangs like ISIL who are essentially a Syrian Tribe, stop doing bad things until they meet a bigger tribe who’s going to kill them.

    rinse repeat, been going on for an eon, ten years from now it will be someone else, then another group.

    14 ships that’s it JD that all they left us with – Tom Clancy started his career writing about this VERY subject of the fast roros and how when we had 3 dozen, they were too few –

    But you have better things to do than to listen to me so I wont bore you anymore

    EPWJ (e8c813)

  112. That is not what he said, which is SOP for you.

    JD (dc108d)

  113. Id like to remind everyone, that the member of ISIS who decapitated the American had a sincere heartfelt belief that what he did was moral. He truly believed that God supported his actions. Who are we to judge him? It is just not right to persecute religious people like this, and force them to stop doing what God commands.

    Gil (febf10)

  114. Gil – thanks for reminding everyone how mendoucheous you are.

    JD (dc108d)

  115. Your atheist buddies, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and their offshoots, killed about 100 million people within living memory, jacknape.

    nk (dbc370)

  116. *jackanape* Or several other words with “jack” in them.

    nk (dbc370)

  117. 118. “Who are we to judge him?”

    Mothers, it is not enough to give in to instinct and love unconditionally.

    At the first sign your Sweetie Pie is morally so defective it is your duty to smother the child or we all suffer greater harm.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  118. I forgot Lenin, Trotsky, and Dzerzhinsky; still talking about slaughter in the millions.

    nk (dbc370)

  119. The most offensive thing about Gil’s brand of homosexuality is that it contains the worst qualities of feminimity and none of the virtues. Bi**hy queen.

    nk (dbc370)

  120. Let’s review.

    Here’s the MSC inventory.

    http://www.msc.navy.mil/inventory/

    Every single ship is either fully operational or on a reduced operating status. They are all active. ROS ships are maintained by civilian contractors, and MSC manages the contract.

    None are “inactive” or “out of service” or in a “non ready reserve status.” How do I know this boys and girls? Because they would be on this list if they were.

    http://www.marad.dot.gov/documents/i140731.pdf

    Ships that are in a lesser readiness status are in the National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF). That includes ships in the Ready Reserve Force, which have readiness status of either 5 to 10 days.

    102. steve – those ships are in non ready reserve status no crews – would take a mobilization order to move them – good luck getting Obama to do that

    EPWJ (775325) — 9/3/2014 @ 10:19 pm

    RRF ships are not owned but maintained by the Maritime Administration (MARAD). Ships in “non-ready reserve” are actually transferred to MARAD by their sponsors.

    It doesn’t even take a mobilization order to activate a RRF ship. Let alone a ship in the MSC inventory that is just being maintained in ROS.

    But look for yourself. MARAD’s NDRF inventory is up to date as of 31 July 2014. Count for yourself. There are about 46 RO-ROs that could be activated in 5-10 days, in addition to what the MSC has available.

    No, 14 ships aren’t all they left us with, JD

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  121. 116.JD,

    Bad places? The facts are this –
    . . .
    EPWJ (e8c813)

    That’s because the facts are that we don’t need to make them all cooperate, we just need to be the bigger tribe that comes along and kills whichever one gets uppity.
    Yes, that has been going on for eons.
    Yes, no single group has been successful for all of those eons.
    That doesn’t mean we don’t try, particularly when the alternative is sitting around waiting to be the next target of the raiding tribe of the moment.

    Now of course that means actually doing something other than trying to find a local tribal dictator of convenience of the moment. Indeed it means doing that evil “imperialism” and “oppression of the natives” and “nation building” and all that jazz.
    And of course all those fun buzzwords make a great series of further excuses not to do it, much as you have jumped from first denying we had any reason to be involved in the first place to insisting we couldn’t get involved because we don’t have the ability to project the power needed even if we wanted to. That still doesn’t make any of those anything but excuses rather than actual reasons not to see to our security by dealing with an enemy that cannot be controlled in any other fashion.

    That leads into the only reason why we “can’t” intervene – we lack the will.
    That is and always will be the core reason why nations don’t step up in cases like this, followed inevitably by the core reason why nations fail and disappear from history.
    I myself am not particularly prepared to disappear from history, so I will advocate doing what needs to be done, even if it is no longer popular because we have gotten too “civilized” and “beyond” such “brute force” methods.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  122. “No, 14 ships aren’t all they left us with, JD”

    Steve57 – I agree that is patently clear from all available evidence. Since there are no air strips left to fly materiel into Iraq, can’t we just transport what we need via the intercontinental railroad?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  123. Watching this video makes me wish we could transport Martha’s Vineyard and the Hamptons to Northern Iraq and Syria.

    Rodney King's Spirit (8b9b5a)

  124. daley, I think they’re still doing required engineering surveys of the bridges. We don’t want another collapse like what happened in Minneapolis a few years back. But if everything checks out, why not?

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  125. Correction.

    …There are about 46 RO-ROs ships of all types in the RRF, of which 35 are RO-ROs, that could be activated in 5-10 days, in addition to what the MSC has available….

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  126. 130. And what about airplanes? C-5 and C-130s?

    They did capture a big (military) airfield, but there are still airfields in Iraq. That’s how U.s. troops are coming in now. They are not going in by bus from Kuwait or Turkey.

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  127. Steve57 – They could also use the Wile E. Coyote Acme Low Earth Orbit Sling Shot Container Resupply Vehicle Method.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  128. 131. … And what about airplanes? C-5 and C-130s?

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5) — 9/4/2014 @ 1:35 pm

    Compared to the ships we’ve been talking about, you’d need at least 200 C-5 loads to equal one of their loads.

    C-130s are good in their role, but their job is intratheater and tactical.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  129. Plus we only have 14 C-130s. :)

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  130. How did equipment get into Afghanistan and Iraq? (I know a lot was trucked into afghanistan from Pakistan, and must else overflew Russia.)

    Sammy Finkelman (fb61e5)

  131. @nk 120
    This claim is often flashed about. It’s silly. As if tomorrow you got definitive proof there was no God youd go out raping, killing and steeling. Of course not. God is not required for us to follow the golden rule. Empathy and the ability to think is all.

    Heres a few points on Hitler:

    1. He self identified as Christian – documented in speeches
    2. He was baptized a catholic and never excommunicated (nice job Church this seems a lot like tacit approval)
    3. The Nazi Army had “Gott Mit Uns” – God With Us on their uniforms
    Its a tough sell to claim he was an atheist. But even if he was its a tougher sell to claim atheism led to the atrocities he committed. Atheism is a single position on a single subject – the refusal to accept a god claim. That does not lead to mass murder by itself.

    Gil (27c98f)

  132. The cargo trucked into Afghanistan from Pakistan started out from the port of Karachi.

    Just to get ahead of this, the Kuwaiti ports of Shuwaikh and Shuaiba were the most important ports during the invasion and occupation of Iraq. If we were doing it again I imagine we’d use Um Qasr in Iraq since it’s closer.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  133. You go with that Gil.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  134. Gil @136, Hitler used the pretense of religion for the same reason Stalin reestablished the Russian Orthodox Church in 1943. He was a devout atheist like Hitler, but he needed to use religion to unite and motivate his people who weren’t devout atheists.

    So what’s your point? You take liars, propagandists, manipulators, and opportunists at face value?

    That’s not very smart, Gil.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  135. Oh, and Stalin was actually studying to be a Russian Orthodox priest when he dropped out of the seminary to become a socialist revolutionary. And an atheist. So I guess despite the fact he helped destroy the Russian church with the passion of a zealot and condemned priests, nuns, and bishops to torture and death in Siberian labor camps or NKVD dungeons he was still a Christian.

    The Gospel according to Gil.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  136. I suppose I suppose I should mention that Mao Zedong was like Hitler and Stalin raised by a devout mother. And he embraced her religion, too. That religion was of course Buddhism.

    See, that’s what ties what may have been the three greatest mass murderers together. Not the fact that the founded totalitarian, genocidal, and officially atheist mass movements.

    No, it was their religious upbringing when they were children.

    I can’t find any information on Pol Pot’s early childhood, but I’m pretty sure he was a Buddhist too. And we all know Buddhism is the enemy of all mankind.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  137. atheism is just another religion, albeit without a moral code, express or implied.

    its followers are second only to the head bangers in their hatred of all other religions, except for Islime, to whom they turn a blind eye.

    it’s almost as if they were scared of the religion of pieces or something.

    it that manner, they are much like the ACLU, who will sue over public accommodations for Christian beliefs, but if they’ve ever uttered a peep over moose slime perks in public schools, etc, i’ve never heard about it.

    funny how that w*rks.

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  138. if the greatest promise, in the world, is John 3;16, then the greatest curse is unbelief:

    http://weaselzippers.us/198620-man-arrested-after-beheading-woman-in-london/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  139. Not collecting stamps is just another hobby, albeit without postage, express or implied.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  140. atheism is just another religion, albeit without a moral code, express or implied.

    Once again, atheism is a single position on a single subject. It is the refusal to accept a god claim. How on earth do you expect someone to make a leap from “I dont believe in God” to “I want to commit mass genocide”. I certainly do not think that way.

    Atheism is also not a religion. I am not required to have faith to be an atheist. I have an open mind. If you can demonstrate with good evidence the existence of a God then I will accept it. But honestly most God claims are on the same level today. Everyone has their holy book, everyone claims supernatural omnipotence, everyone knows “what god wants”, everyone has prophets. And they are all mutually exclusive. They cant all be right, how do you pick the right one? By virtue of where you were born? But guess what, they can all be wrong.

    Gil (febf10)

  141. @steve 139

    Hitler used the pretense of religion for the same reason Stalin reestablished the Russian Orthodox Church in 1943. He was a devout atheist like Hitler, but he needed to use religion to unite and motivate his people who weren’t devout atheists.

    Steve, there is no reason to think that atheists can be driven into genocidal tendencies through their atheism. It simply does not follow. What is their motivation? But Religion, now that can be used as you plainly see and admit.

    Gil (febf10)

  142. Gil, did you ever read “mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis?

    You are correct in saying that not all religious claims, including that there is no God (which actually would be harder to prove, logically, than that there is a God), cannot all be correct,
    just like not all answers to 2+2=? are correct.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  143. @narcisco

    if the greatest promise, in the world, is John 3;16, then the greatest curse is unbelief:

    I wonder if drowned “witches” thought this same thing.

    Gil (febf10)

  144. Well, they might have considered it a toss-up between “pure” unbelief and self-interested hypocrisy and heresy, which certainly are not the same as belief.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  145. Once again, atheism is a single position on a single subject. It is the refusal to accept a god claim. How on earth do you expect someone to make a leap from “I dont believe in God” to “I want to commit mass genocide”. I certainly do not think that way.

    No, Atheism is an absolute statement that there is no divine being, as you immediately confirm.
    Not believing in the claim of someone else is completely different from that.

    That YOU do not make the jump from your belief in the non-existence of a divine being in no way proves that nobody else can, has, or will make such a jump.

    Atheism is also not a religion. I am not required to have faith to be an atheist.

    Well, yes it is.
    And well, yes you are.
    You have the absolute faith that a divine being does not exist without any evidence to back up your claim.

    I have an open mind. If you can demonstrate with good evidence the existence of a God then I will accept it.

    The failure of someone to prove the existence of a divine being does not constitute proof of the absence of a divine being.
    This is the critical logical fallacy that atheists invariably engage in to assert that their beliefs do not operate on faith.

    But honestly most God claims are on the same level today. Everyone has their holy book, everyone claims supernatural omnipotence, everyone knows “what god wants”, everyone has prophets. And they are all mutually exclusive. They cant all be right, how do you pick the right one? By virtue of where you were born? But guess what, they can all be wrong.

    And guess what else, you can be wrong too.
    Once again, the failure of any specific religious believer to prove their specific religion does not constitute proof for your religion.

    Steve, there is no reason to think that atheists can be driven into genocidal tendencies through their atheism. It simply does not follow. What is their motivation? But Religion, now that can be used as you plainly see and admit.

    Well yes, there is.
    As has been cited – Hitler and Stalin. (And Hitler absolutely self-identified as an Atheist.)
    Added to them Mao, Pol Pot, and the Kims.
    Further added to them Robespierre.
    And dozens of minor mass murderers who felt that Theists of one or all types should be exterminated.

    The motivation is quite simple – control. Most Atheists demand “faith” in the government they control. Any other focus of faith thus competes with their absolute power. Intolerance will aggravate the matter, but ultimately it all comes down to wanting to be in control.
    This is why you can find, with very little effort, declarations that anyone who does not “believe” in anthropogenic global warming should be convicted as murderers, including demands for the death penalty from people who otherwise claim to oppose the death penalty under all circumstances.

    And so again:
    Atheism is firmly established as the second most intolerant religion on the face of the earth.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  146. @MD

    You are correct in saying that not all religious claims, including that there is no God (which actually would be harder to prove, logically, than that there is a God), cannot all be correct,

    I do not believe there is no god. I simply do not believe there is one. There is a difference. I am not claiming there is no god. I have nothing to prove, and it would be folly to try to prove there isn’t a god. It is impossible. Just like it is impossible to prove any negative. Just like you cant prove there isnt a supernatural invisible spaghetti monster. That’s why the recent claim by whoever it was that put up money if someone could disprove global warming is a joke.

    And no I have not read Mere Christianity. Is there something particularly compelling about it? What is the best argument put forward in it? I am familiar with other books like Frank Tureq’s I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist, and I have watched many talks by William Lane Craig among others.

    Gil (27c98f)

  147. 147. Steve, there is no reason to think that atheists can be driven into genocidal tendencies through their atheism. It simply does not follow. What is their motivation? But Religion, now that can be used as you plainly see and admit.

    Gil (febf10) — 9/5/2014 @ 2:21 pm

    Ah, Gil, there is no one so blind as one who will not see.

    No, the atheists have given us plenty of reason to think they can be encouraged to indulge murderous tendencies through their atheism. And that is the fact that the most murderous ideologies have been officially atheist.

    This is why the murderous atheist ideologies that deny the existence of god and demand to create heaven on earth since there is no afterlife have always persecuted religion. It offers an alternative vision to that of the tyrants acting in the name of the people.

    As Solzhenitsyn observed, to kill millions you need an ideology. And the most murderous ideologies are atheist, since there is no one left to answer to.

    Not that they don’t have their gods.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/venezuela/11072928/Our-Chavez-who-art-in-heaven-Venezuelas-Socialist-party-delegate-rewrites-the-Lords-Prayer.html

    A member of Venezuela’s Socialist Party has rolled out a variation of the “Lord’s Prayer” to implore beloved late leader Hugo Chavez for protection from the evils of capitalism.

    “Our Chavez who art in heaven, the earth, the sea and we delegates,” red-shirted delegate Maria Estrella Uribe recited on Monday at the PSUV party Congress.

    “Hallowed be your name, may your legacy come to us so we can spread it to people here and elsewhere. Give us your light to guide us every day,” she said in front of an image of Chavez.

    “Lead us not into the temptation of capitalism, deliver us from the evil of the oligarchy, like the crime of contraband, because ours is the homeland, the peace and life forever and ever. Amen. Viva Chavez!” she exclaimed to applause.

    That’s the kind of zealotry that produced the concentration camp commanders for the Nazis, the gulag guards for the Soviets, the torturers for the political prison camps in North Korea, the executioners for the Khmer Rouge (that would be “Red Khmer” for you non-French speakers, just so you don’t miss the communist connection) killing fields, the party functionaries who starved millions in the Ukraine and later in China during the Great Leap Forward, etc. There are only the rewards here on earth for those good servants of socialism and advance toward the worker’s paradise, and earthly punishment for the wreckers and the hoarders and the boot licking lackeys of the capitalists.

    Atheist zealotry. Christianity and Buddhism doesn’t compare.

    There’s one exception. Islam. But then Islam is about 20% religion, and about 80% ideology/personality cult. How do I arrive at this figure? Because the Quran, the “word of Allah,” is the shortest of Islam’s holy books. The Sirah, the is far longer, and the hadiths, the colleced acts and sayings of Muhammad and his closest companions, and then their immediate followers, and their followers (the first three generations) is far longer. So Allah actually only has a small role to play in Islam, and in reality and despite Islam’s claim to strict monotheism, actually elevates Muhammad to a place of equality with Allah. For instance in Surah 5:33:

    http://quran.com/5/33

    Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

    The Quran speaks so often about “Allah and his Messenger” it’s clear that they are partners in this enterprise. In fact, some of the Quranic verses concern Muhammad’s special status above other Muslims. Conveniently revealed to Muhammad just at the right moment he needed them. Such as how he could have more wives than anybody else. Or when he wanted to make his adopted son divorce his wife because the Prophet wanted her for his own. And then when he was criticized the verse that said it was done just to prove that it is good in the eyes of god to marry your son’s divorced wife. Right before the Prophet abolished the practice, so he was the only one to benefit.

    My favorite self serving verse has to be Surah 33:53:

    http://quran.com/33/53

    O you who have believed, do not enter the houses of the Prophet except when you are permitted for a meal, without awaiting its readiness. But when you are invited, then enter; and when you have eaten, disperse without seeking to remain for conversation. Indeed, that [behavior] was troubling the Prophet, and he is shy of [dismissing] you. But Allah is not shy of the truth. And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. And it is not [conceivable or lawful] for you to harm the Messenger of Allah or to marry his wives after him, ever. Indeed, that would be in the sight of Allah an enormity.

    I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall of the tent (and I bet there were lots of them) when Muhammad is sitting there saying “hey, this isn’t me saying this, it’s Allah, but …”

    Essentially, Islam is a personality cult nearly as much as the atheist cults.

    As far as Hitler and Stalin went, they used religion to motivate people who would not fight for the Fuhrer or the Vozhd (leader, roughly, in German and Russian) to at least fight for God and country.

    Which is different from using atheist ideologies to conduct murder and genocide within their own borders. You must remember at least in the Soviet case (which I know more about offhand) Stalin had to release nuns, priests, bishops, etc., from their gulags and prison cells to reconstitute the Russian Orthodox church. They weren’t going to lift a finger to help him, but they would to help Russia and Russians.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  148. “Steve, there is no reason to think that atheists can be driven into genocidal tendencies through their atheism.”

    Gil – In fairness, I don’t think anybody here has claimed that all atheists are genocidal maniacs. Just sayin’.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  149. @Sam

    And so again:
    Atheism is firmly established as the second most intolerant religion on the face of the earth.

    Who are you arguing against? I just told you I do not claim there is no god, and don’t believe that. But nevertheless you come in and say as an Atheist I assert positively and have faith there is no god. Then argue against that. Why don’t you argue with my position?

    I agree with you absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That is why I do not assert there is no god. I simply say that you have not made the case there is one, and so I am withholding belief.

    Well yes, there is.
    As has been cited – Hitler and Stalin. (And Hitler absolutely self-identified as an Atheist.)

    Stating the names of Hitler and Stalin does not demonstrate a link between atheism and desire for genocide. As for Hitler positively identifying as an atheist, I don’t think you can make that case open and shut. There are many well documented examples in Mein Kampf and speeches him claiming that he was doing “the creators work”. In some speeches he claimed to be a catholic. Historians disagree to the extent of his Christianity one way or another. He referenced the devil when talking about Jews – atheists do not believe in the devil. Yes sure you can of course say that this was all a ruse, but you cannot truly claim to know. What source is there when Hitler declared his atheism?

    Gil (27c98f)

  150. Ah, Gil, there is no one so blind as one who will not see.

    No, the atheists have given us plenty of reason to think they can be encouraged to indulge murderous tendencies through their atheism. And that is the fact that the most murderous ideologies have been officially atheist.

    Steve, atheism alone cannot lead to any such thing. As you say you have to mix it with an ideology – since atheism is not one. But regardless of this, even if this point is granted to you, it has no bearing on whether a particular religion is true.

    Gil (27c98f)

  151. Gil,

    Well, it is interesting to see that you have taken the time to do some reading/watching. I had never heard of Tureq before, but checking out his site I came across this recent post of his:
    http://crossexamined.org/still-havent-found-youre-looking-c-s-lewis-bono-argument-desire/,

    which mentions one of Lewis’ arguments, as well as mentioning someone I am familiar with, Peter Kreeft. (Kreeft’s book “Making Sense Out of Suffering” I thought was the most “satisfying” treatment of the “problem of evil” that I’ve seen, though I am not nearly as widely read as I would like to be.)

    As I recall, it being a long time since I read it, among Lewis’ arguments are: our desires indicate the existence of something that is desired, the post I linked. Another argument is the fundamental universality of much of morality, why is there a common morality, what is the source.

    I think that the basic purpose of existence is the first and most important question, “Why am I here?”, which includes whether there is a God, and what is the relation between God and “Man”. Everything else lines up after that.
    In front of the undergrad dorm complex at UPenn is an etching of a stack of books with titles on the spine, the next to top book is philosophy, the top book is theology. I was impressed by the sentiment, but in general I think the reality of practice is far different.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  152. 155.Who are you arguing against? I just told you I do not claim there is no god, and don’t believe that. But nevertheless you come in and say as an Atheist I assert positively and have faith there is no god. Then argue against that. Why don’t you argue with my position?

    I agree with you absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. That is why I do not assert there is no god. I simply say that you have not made the case there is one, and so I am withholding belief.

    Then you are not an Atheist but an Agnostic.
    Since you identified as an Atheist I rebutted you as an Atheist.
    You cannot blame me because you misidentified your actual beliefs.

    Stating the names of Hitler and Stalin does not demonstrate a link between atheism and desire for genocide.

    No, but it proves that your claim that because you are Atheist (even though you are an Agnostic instead) and do not make the leap to committing genocide does not prove that others who are Atheists cannot make such a leap.

    As for Hitler positively identifying as an atheist, I don’t think you can make that case open and shut. There are many well documented examples in Mein Kampf and speeches him claiming that he was doing “the creators work”. In some speeches he claimed to be a catholic. Historians disagree to the extent of his Christianity one way or another. He referenced the devil when talking about Jews – atheists do not believe in the devil. Yes sure you can of course say that this was all a ruse, but you cannot truly claim to know. What source is there when Hitler declared his atheism?
    Gil (27c98f)

    You are wrong.
    The overwhelming evidence from Hitler’s speeches and other writings is that he absolutely self-identified as an Atheist, and utterly despised anything and everything religious.
    At the most it can be demonstrated that he expressed the most approval for Germanic Paganism for the purposes of unifying people around a cultural standard, but everything else he said about religion, including the greatest approval he gave to Islam, was solely for self-serving purposes.
    While revisionist historians do love to argue otherwise, both to preserve the status of Atheism and to attack Christianity, closer examination of the quotes they provide invariably demonstrate that they have selectively redacted, misattributed, or confused the context of the passages they select.

    As for referencing the devil, my father was Jewish.
    He regularly exclaimed “Jesus Christ!”.
    Did that mean he was secretly a Christian?
    I can assure you he was not.
    Indeed, I am sure you have said at some point that today is “Friday”.
    That name is derived from “Frigg’s Day”.
    Are you really a follower of Asatru who believes in the divinity of Frigg?
    You are confusing the use of religious terms as exclamations or even simple descriptors with belief in the religion that provided them.

    As you say you have to mix it with an ideology – since atheism is not one.

    Well, yes it is; just as it is a religion.
    Atheism is a belief system.
    An ideology is a belief system.
    Therefore, Atheism is an ideology.
    It is a rather limited ideology; and most typically found in conjunction with other ideologies, particularly the most popular sect of Atheism known as “Science” (which is the belief in the absolute supremacy of science, even when not proven, as opposed to the Sciences, which study various subjects, but do not require belief without evidence), and the various strains of Marxism.
    Nonetheless, Atheism absolutely meets the definition of being an ideology.

    To note that in combination with particular names:
    Hitler was an Atheist.
    National Socialism includes Atheism as part of its ideology.
    Stalin was an Atheist.
    Stalinism (Soviet Communism) includes Atheism as part of its ideology.
    And so forth.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  153. nonsequitor, you left AQ, active in Libya, Syria (Nusra Front) and in Iraq

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/obama-we-will-defeat-isis-like-we-did-al-qaeda/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    narciso (ee1f88)

  154. Shirley, he wasn’t serious…

    Maybe he was trying to out do VP Biden in the “Say what!?!?” dept.
    It seems that Biden was talking to folks in Detroit about a living wage while wearing a gold shirt from a club that some say has a $650,000 membership fee:
    http://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-sebonack-golf-club-shirt-2014-9

    My goodness, if Romney had ever done something like that…

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  155. gold golf

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  156. The overwhelming evidence from Hitler’s speeches and other writings is that he absolutely self-identified as an Atheist, and utterly despised anything and everything religious.

    Come on man do some basic research even wikipedia which i would think is biased toward disowning hitler from christianity says that he never made public statements claiming to be an atheist. Meanwhile Mien Kampf is full of references indicating he was not. The list of quotes in his speeches and Mein Kampf is crazy long. Where are your sources? Also what of the German Freethinkers League which hitler shut down. All this indicate what atheism?

    Furthermore Atheism has to do with what a person believes, and Agnosticism has to do with what a person knows. Quite simply a theist believes there is a god, an Atheist does not. I am an Atheist. I am also an Agnostic though I believe it is quite chicken shit to just say “I dont know if there is a god”, that is why I identify as an atheist.

    Gil (27c98f)

  157. @MD

    I think that the basic purpose of existence is the first and most important question, “Why am I here?”, which includes whether there is a God, and what is the relation between God and “Man”. Everything else lines up after that.
    In front of the undergrad dorm complex at UPenn is an etching of a stack of books with titles on the spine, the next to top book is philosophy, the top book is theology. I was impressed by the sentiment, but in general I think the reality of practice is far different.

    I am familiar with some variations of Peter Kreeft’s argument from desire. It is a nice thought, but unfortunately it boils down to wishful thinking – we all desire to live forever (perhaps in afterlife), or that that our lives have some permanent meaning. Just this desire is not evidence. My daughter really wants a unicorn, and I really want to travel at the speed of light. Many people really really want to find Bigfoot or Elvis living.

    Another argument is the fundamental universality of much of morality, why is there a common morality,

    There are many problems with this approach. There is not really an absolute morality. That is a difficult sentence to put out there, but im being sincere. Morality changes with time. Not long ago the Church thought it was moral (even steve justified it) to sentence Galileo to house arrest. It used to be moral to kill witches. Slavery etc. Youve recommended some books to me, let me recommend one to you “The Moral Landscape” by Sam Harris. You can find talks from Sam if you search youtube for that subject. There is a short one on TED and a longer version too. The basic argument is that morality is about human well being, and we can all learn what can maximize human well being. For example honor killings dont maximize well being and are immoral. But to take that example, a devout extreme muslim may think he is morally justified by God to execute his sister, and a Christian cant really say much against him besides “youve got the wrong book”

    I think “why am i here?” is a very natural question, and it is scary to think there is no purpose. That in the end we are insignificant compared to the cosmos. But for me the wonder and amazement of all the little things that had to go just right to bring me here make life even more precious. They make me want to build my own meaning into life (family, decency, compassion), to enjoy my time here and leave the place a little better than i found it. I dont think it is necessary to have a God to live for or an afterlife to arrive to facilitate these desires.

    Gil (27c98f)

  158. we have been around for a blink of a eye, in cosmic time, yet there is a learned arrogance that we are all that is,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  159. 157. …it has no bearing on whether a particular religion is true.

    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 4:41 pm

    ?!?!?!

    Talk about a non sequitur. Who was arguing for the truth of a particular religion?

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  160. Some of the biggest zealots I have encountered worshipped at the altar of atheism.

    JD (41da8c)

  161. Gil, you had me fooled into thinking you were interested in exploring the different sides of a discussion. You switch back and forth between saying what you don’t believe as if you aren’t claiming much, then you make dogmatic statements you present as acknowledged truth.

    Maybe you have, maybe you haven’t, seen my reference to the trial in “The Brothers Karamazov”. One can sometimes take the same set of observations, and come to opposite conclusions, one makes a decision, then lives with the consequences.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  162. MD – give him time and he will tell you what you think.

    JD (41da8c)

  163. Furthermore Atheism has to do with what a person believes, and Agnosticism has to do with what a person knows. Quite simply a theist believes there is a god, an Atheist does not. I am an Atheist. I am also an Agnostic though I believe it is quite chicken shit to just say “I dont know if there is a god”, that is why I identify as an atheist.
    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 6:38 pm

    I missed this one before. You really do want it both ways depending on the moment.

    Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian in sincerity, rather than just a political maneuver, there is no way his overall belief system and behavior were consistent with being a Christian than my claim to being a Martian. There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  164. This is interesting. I made another post after you, JD, and I see the phrase:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    And I didn’t even use the “V” word.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  165. I do not believe Gil is not a mendacious time wasting douchenozzle.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  166. 165. I’ll promise to give you a hat tip when I use that.

    Caveat: The wife says my promises are worthless.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  167. I work with High Schoolers and they were inconsolable about the state of school Lunch.

    We didn’t speak her name tho cause of the cameras and microphones.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  168. Gil just likes the attention of adults.

    There’s a fix for that.

    gary gulrud (46ca75)

  169. @MD

    I wrote a sincere post in 164. I don’t understand why you are telling me I switch back and forth. Ive consistently said I don’t believe in god. And am discussing it with you why the sudden pull back?

    Gil (27c98f)

  170. Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian in sincerity, rather than just a political maneuver, there is no way his overall belief system and behavior were consistent with being a Christian than my claim to being a Martian. There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    That’s fine MD I agree he did not behave like a typical Christian. I think then its fair to go the other way and say he did not behave like a typical atheist no? Lets be fair from both ways.

    Gil (27c98f)

  171. Gil, it’s truly a mystery.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  172. Continuing with the Islam-isn’t-really-a-religion theme, this has to be my second most favorite self-serving Quran verse. Surah 33:50.

    http://quran.com/33/50

    O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [of captives] and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet [and] if the Prophet wishes to marry her, [this is] only for you, excluding the [other] believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, [but this is for you] in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.

    Can’t you just picture it? Muhammad and his companions are sitting around eating a camel when all of a sudden one of his hot young cousins comes by to serve tea and as she wanders away Muhammad says, “guys I feel a revelation coming on.”

    Allah speaking through Muhammad’s mouth: “My prophet can have any woman he wants, and he can all the women he wants. Not the rest of you Muslims, just him.”

    Then he turns and says to his companians, “I would never say that on my own behalf, but apparently it’s the will of Allah.”

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  173. Come on man do some basic research even wikipedia which i would think is biased toward disowning hitler from christianity says that he never made public statements claiming to be an atheist. Meanwhile Mien Kampf is full of references indicating he was not. The list of quotes in his speeches and Mein Kampf is crazy long. Where are your sources? Also what of the German Freethinkers League which hitler shut down. All this indicate what atheism?

    Furthermore Atheism has to do with what a person believes, and Agnosticism has to do with what a person knows. Quite simply a theist believes there is a god, an Atheist does not. I am an Atheist. I am also an Agnostic though I believe it is quite chicken shit to just say “I dont know if there is a god”, that is why I identify as an atheist.
    Gil (27c98f)

    You want to be Atheist or Agnostic or both depending on which is more convenient for you at the moment with an equally fluid and subjective understanding of what terms like “belief”, “faith”, and “ideology” mean, and I should do some research?
    Shirley, you jest.

    Hitler also shut down various trade unions.
    Does that mean he didn’t believe in the “workers” part of the National Socialist German Workers Party?
    As I said when you asked why Atheists would go on rampages directed at religions it is because of control.
    Nazism had no room for “freethinkers”, Atheist or otherwise. They wanted one, and only one, ideology to be paramount, and any challengers had to be eliminated.

    Meanwhile, it seems you are in fact an Atheist, and that you absolutely have a belief, that you cannot support with any evidence, as to the existence of any divine being.

    I think then its fair to go the other way and say he did not behave like a typical atheist no? Lets be fair from both ways.

    No, he behaved pretty much like a typical Atheist.
    Atheists typically disparage religious believers, and seek to outlaw their beliefs, or at least their right to live according to their beliefs, just as they claim their beliefs have been outlawed in the past.
    Indeed many typically take that further to wanting all religious believers eliminated in one way or other.
    I would also note that Atheists are routinely deceptive about their beliefs, both in how they present and in the self-deception by which they convince themselves that they are not acting on faith in asserting their beliefs.
    The only break is, much as with Muslims, between those who just engage in the rhetoric and those who are actually willing to engage in it.

    I suppose if you really insist on scoring some point it would have to be phrased this way:
    Hitler was an atypical Atheist because he was actually able to engage in the mass murder of believers.
    However you would then have to accept that:
    You are an atypical Atheist because you don’t advocate for the elimination of believers, only for reducing them to second class citizens by denying them freedom of conscience.
    I’m not sure why you would to score points that way, but if you insist there you have it.

    Sam (e8f1ad)

  174. 179.

    Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian in sincerity, rather than just a political maneuver, there is no way his overall belief system and behavior were consistent with being a Christian than my claim to being a Martian. There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    That’s fine MD I agree he did not behave like a typical Christian. I think then its fair to go the other way and say he did not behave like a typical atheist no? Lets be fair from both ways.
    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 9:39 pm

    No, not fair. Doc isn’t saying to compare Hitler’s belief system and actions to a typical Christian. He said to compare it to the Christian faith. You see, there’s source you can go to for that. It’s called the Bible.

    If Hitler really believed the Jews were the enemies of the German volk, and perhaps of himself personally, how was he supposed to treat them?

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A43-48&version=NIV

    43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

    Which is why you do not compare and contrast Hitler’s evident belief system and actions to a typical Christian. Because none of us are perfect. Rather you compare and contrast his belief system and actions to the faith.

    If you can read words off a page, you can determine if Hitler behaved toward his enemies like a Christian is supposed to behave toward his enemies. Did he?

    Similarly, the reason I go to the Muslim sources (the Quran, the Hadiths, and Muhammad’s biography) to test the claims of Muslims like those in IS that they are following in the footsteps of their prophet and are true Muslims. I do not compare their actions to those of “typical” Muslims but rather to their faith. And it’s pretty easy.

    Last month IS released a video showing how it “enlightened” dozens, perhaps hundreds, of Yazidi men by forcing them to convert to Islam.

    http://news.yahoo.com/islamic-state-video-shows-conversion-yazidis-islam-222013045.html

    BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Islamic State, a militant group that witnesses and officials say has executed hundreds of members of Iraq’s Yazidis, has released a video that seeks to show it enlightened hundreds of members of the religious minority by converting them to Islam.

    … Mostly young men, they prepare for the conversion ritual.

    “Right now you are infidels. After this you will become Muslims and you will have rights,” an Islamic State fighter tells them. “Repeat after me.”

    What the IS butcher had them repeat after him was the Shahaydah, the Muslim profession of faith; “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.” That’s pretty much all there is to it, followed by acting like a Muslim in public.

    Every western “Islamic theologian,” and by that I mean political leader, denounces IS as perverting Islam, and claim what IS is doing has nothing to do with Islam.

    Let’s test that, too.

    http://quran.com/9/29

    Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

    Well, the Quran definitely tells the IS butchers they are supposed to fight the unbelievers. But this verse only tells them to do so until they pay the Jizyah, the protection money which pays Muslims not to persecute them. And to humiliate them.

    But what’s this?

    …who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture

    This applies to those who were given the scripture, or the people of the book. So it’s not exactly on point, since Muslims consider Yazidis to be nothing more than pagans. So they don’t fall into the above category. What does Islam say about them?

    As I said, the holy books of Islam include the hadiths. One of the most sacred hadith collections is Sahih Bukhari, who along with Sahih Muslim are usually refered to as the “two sahihs.” There are other hadith collections that are also considered sahih, which means correct or authentic, but Bukhari and Muslim are considered to be head and shoulders above the rest.

    http://www.quranexplorer.com/Hadith/English/Hadith/bukhari/001.008.387.html

    Bukhari :: Book 1 :: Volume 8 :: Hadith 387

    Narrated Anas bin Malik:

    Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

    Their only option is to convert or die.

    It sure looks to me like IS is following Muhammad (Allah’s Apostle) and adhering to the tenets of their religion by forcing the “polytheists” to convert or die (and I could cite more evidence but that will do for now). In fact, for everything they do that disgusts us, such as the mass slaughter, beheadings, crucifixions, rapes, sex slavery, etc., I can find substantial Islamic theological support to show they’re actually getting it right. Which is why on an earlier thread …

    http://patterico.com/2014/08/30/why-is-it-so-hard-to-take-a-stand/

    … I said it’s really hard for “moderate” Muslims to take a stand because they aren’t so much moderate as kept in the dark about what their religion actually says. When they try to argue with the salafists they find the extremists are more knowledgeable and have the better argument from a doctrinal P.O.V. The thing is, these “moderate” Muslims are typical Muslims. Which is why I don’t compare the IS butchery to them, but rather to their faith.

    The problem with atheists is that there are not source documents for me to compare and contrast the belief system and actions of a particular atheist against. And as I’ve shown, the actions of other coreligionists isn’t a guide.

    Not for me. And also not for atheists. Which is why I pointed out earlier that atheists are more susceptible to joining murderous ideologies.

    Fortunately they tend to write their own source documents to give me ammo. All you have to do is look at how atheist “ethicists” like Dawkins and Singer would treat those they view as subhumans if they were given the chance.

    http://articles.philly.com/1999-09-21/living/25489559_1_disabled-infant-bioethics-peter-singer

    Not Your Usual Ethics Professor Peter Singer, Who Heads Princeton University’s Center For Human Values, Is Sure That Animals Have Rights. He’s Not So Sure That Disabled Infants Do.

    By Gwen Florio, INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
    Posted: September 21, 1999

    PRINCETON — Always, it comes back to the baby with hemophilia.

    Mention Peter Singer, and his detractors – who are many and very vocal – will take you directly to the chapter in his Practical Ethics entitled “Taking Life: Humans,” and this startling passage:

    “When the death of a disabled infant will lead to the birth of another infant with better prospects of a happy life, the total amount of happiness will be greater if the disabled infant is killed.

    “The loss of happy life for the first infant is outweighed by the gain of a happier life for the second. Therefore, if killing the haemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, according to the total view, be right to kill him.”…

    When it comes to who is human and who is subhuman or nonhuman, Hitler and Singer only differ by matter of degree.

    They were/are both atheists. One is reviled as the most evil man in history. The other is a highly paid professor. Sure he doesn’t act like Hitler. He’s riding the gravy train. But his ethics and Hitlers aren’t that far apart.

    Singer at the 2010 Global Atheist Convention:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5WA9I4AaFg

    Peter Singer – Ethics Without Religion

    This is where your atheist morality leads, Gil. Pretty much wherever the atheist wants to go. Including claiming the right to kill the subhuman.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  175. I hope you enjoy the video, Gil. I’m sure it’ll send a thrill up your leg. Singer points out about how you can leave your wallet on the table at an atheist convention, which must mean atheists are uber-moral people. I am amused how Singer’s sense of morality can include both not stealing a wallet but killing an infant.

    Adolf Eichmann was just an ordinary clerk in all respects. He probably wouldn’t have stolen your wallet from a table if you walked off and forgot it. He might even have shouted out to you, “Hey, you forgot this.” And he also sat at his desk and planned the extermination of the Jews.

    I know you’ll enjoy what follows when he starts to caricature religious arguments about God-contered moral systems. Then he constructs straw men, and knocks them down. I know you’ll enjoy that because that’s what you do. Like when you distorted doc’s argument into the one you’d rather make.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  176. I just told you I do not claim there is no god, and don’t believe that. But nevertheless you come in and say as an Atheist I assert positively and have faith there is no god. Then argue against that. Why don’t you argue with my position?

    . I am an Atheist. I am also an Agnostic though I believe it is quite chicken shit to just say “I dont know if there is a god”, that is why I identify as an atheist.

    I wrote a sincere post in 164. I don’t understand why you are telling me I switch back and forth. Ive consistently said I don’t believe in god. And am discussing it with you why the sudden pull back?
    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 9:33 pm

    In one post you chastise someone for supposedly misrepresenting your position as being an “atheist” and claim that you are agnostic. Then you turn around and say you are “both” an “agnostic” and an “atheist”.

    Maybe you are trying to make some fine points, but if you are, then accusing someone of misrepresenting you seems a bit much.

    If anyone out there wants a further discussion of something that Gil or I said, post it and I’ll check later today.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  177. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/6/2014 @ 7:02 am Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  178. This Gil’s a real pill…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  179. Doc, good news. Your comment is out of moderation.

    187. This Gil’s a real pill…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/6/2014 @ 8:07 am

    Yes, he is. Note how he commits the logical fallacy of changing the subject in addressing doc’s argument.

    Doc: “There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.”

    Gil: “That’s fine MD I agree he did not behave like a typical Christian.”

    Doc is clearly talking about an objective standard. There is a substantial body of authoritative literature one can refer to (not just the Bible) to learn what the Christian faith consists of.

    Gil would rather discuss the subjective. So he changes the subject to the behavior of individual Christians.

    But then he did that to me as well. And others. It’s a typical diversionary tactic I find among atheists. Although I have to admit not just atheists.

    That’s one reason I linked to the video of “ethicist” Peter Singer speaking at the Global Atheist Convention in 2010. Beginning around the six minute mark he starts arguing against his misrepresentations of the arguments of the adherents of God-centered systems of ethics.

    As an aside, it’s a lot easier to establish with absolute certainty the complete superiority of the atheists’ utilitarian system of ethics over God-centered systems of ethics at an atheist convention, considering there is no one around who will object to the misrepresentations of the other side’s arguments let alone offer a rebuttal.

    But mostly to establish that without God, maximum utility is really the only basis for atheist morality. Peter Singer, like most atheist “ethicists,” is just such a utilitarian ethicist. But then the “scientific socialists,” which is another name for Marxists, also would have argued that they were utilitarian ethicists. Given that the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the establishment of the tyranny of the proletariat would result in the maximum utility for the most people, utilitarian ethics demanded that the communists eliminate millions of people who stood in the way.

    Bill Ayers, Obama’s political mentor, also confirmed this. To bring about the communist revolution he and Bernardine Dohrn not only knew they would have forcibly reeducate tens of millions of people and kill millions more, they were willing to do so. But then, so was Mao during his great leap forward. And so were other utilitarian ethicists.

    Essentially, utilitarian ethics can be encapsulated in the phrase “the end justifies the means.” If then consequences of ones actions maximizes the benefit for the most people than it is morally justified.

    The only difference between the utilitarian ethics Mao or Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot or Kim il Sung is that they were willing to kill on a large scale while (so far, at least in publid) Singer is willing to justify killing on a smaller scale. Only infants, and only for a month after birth.

    As a further aside, Obama is beyond a doubt a “scientific socialist.” This is why he can’t deal with ISIS or Putin. He is, like all Marxists, convinced that people are products of their material conditions. Which is why he is ideologically committed to his conviction that the “extremism” we see in Africa, the M.E., southern Asia, etc., has nothing to do with Islam. Rather it is a product of the unequal global distribution of economic resources. Which results in such ridiculousness as this.

    http://www.jammiewf.com/2014/senior-u-s-official-what-weve-found-is-that-isis-isnt-responsive-to-outreach/

    Obama’s “pragmatism,” i.e. Marxist ideology, commits him to misunderstanding the world. Which is somehow fitting as this was exactly the failure of Marx and Engels, who remained committed to their ideology while mistaking it for empirical truth long after events rendered it obsolete. Hence Marxists were dumbfounded when WWI did not result in communist revolution in the industrialized societies of western Europe as their “science” predicted.

    We are heading for a similar doom.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  180. Steve

    FYI

    EPWJ (8f5c4e)

  181. It does seem to be that the modern ethos, disregards the nature of evil, like Arendt trying to understand Eichmann.

    http://www.historytoday.com/david-cesarani/eichmann-dock-again

    the Belgium museum shooter, Nemmouche, having first been a torturer of a French journalist, Nicolas Henin, is another example

    narciso (ee1f88)

  182. Steve57 – But those genocidal maniac and eugenist atheists have the advantage of not being science denying Christofascist God botherers according to Gil. :)

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  183. Nihilism is wasted on the young.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  184. EPWJ @189, thanks for the info, but I was already aware of these impending cuts. Which is why I’ve been saying for over a year that the administration’s so-called pivot away from Europe and the M.E. and toward Asia was nothing more than a pivot away from national defense and toward domestic spending.

    All anyone really needed to know was that under this administration the 30 year shipbuilding plan was already inadequate to meet the Navy’s projected force requirements. Then with the budget cuts this administration has imposed it would be impossible to even build those ships.

    While the administration was talking about pivoting toward the Asia-Pacific region, it was cutting the Air Force and the Navy. This makes no sense, assuming the Obama administration was sincere about pivoting toward the Asia-Pacific region which requires a robust naval and air presence. But of course, I’ve never been guilty of believing this administration was ever sincere about anything.

    “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”

    Don’t think this lesson wasn’t lost on the allies we are now abandoning to take their chances with China years ago.

    But this doesn’t change anything about the MSC’s PM5 (sealift) Large Medium Speed RO-ROs remaining in an active status. They have not been taken out of active service or placed in a non-ready reserve status. Not only have I shown my work so far, I’ve actually found the announcements of the contracts to retain them in ROS status for the MSC.

    http://www.naval-technology.com/news/newsgd-amsea-wins-us-navy-sealift-contract-4220595

    GD AMSEA wins US Navy sealift contract

    25 April 2014

    General Dynamics American Overseas Marine (AMSEA) has received a contract from the US Navy to continue operating and maintaining military sealift ships.

    Under the latest $32.7m deal, AMSEA will provide services for the Navy Military Sealift Command’s seven large, medium-speed, roll-on/roll-off ships (LMSR).

    …The latest contract, which is a modification to a deal signed in 2010, is potentially valued at $238m over a seven-year period.

    Here is the 2010 contract information.

    http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/LMSRs-Keeping-US-Troops-Abroad-Supplied-with-Heavy-Equipment-06124/

    Jan 15/10: American Overseas Marine, a Quincy, MA-based unit of General Dynamics, received external link a $27.2 million firm-fixed-price contract for the operation and maintenance of 7 government-owned Bob Hope-class LMSRs.

    For 6 of the 7 Bob Hope-class LMSRs, work will be performed at US East Coast, Gulf Coast and West Coast ports where the ships will be primarily maintained in reduced operating status. When needed, these 6 ships may be activated and fully crewed to transport US military equipment worldwide. For the 7th Bob Hope-class LMSR, work will be performed at sea in support of the US Marine Corps’ afloat prepositioning mission.

    Exactly as I said, these ships remain active with the MSC. They are in a higher readiness status then the ships maintained by the MARAD (contracts managed by the Military Transportation Command and NOT by the MSC as is the case with these RO-ROs). Moreover I’ve been able to confirm that it does not take a mobilization order to activate these ships. By which I do not mean bring out of an inactive status, because they aren’t in an inactive status. But bring up from a reduced operational status into a fully operational status. And these ships are not uncrewed. Keeping them in ROS requires a full-time crew of 10. When fully operational they require a crew of 25-30.

    I have similar information on the remaining 4 RO-ROs in PM5 (Sealift).

    http://www.militaryindustrialcomplex.com/contract_detail.asp?contract_id=11240

    …If all option periods are exercised, the contract is expected to be completed by September 2017…

    Since these ships remain active with the MSC and have not been transferred to the MARAD to be maintained in Ready Reserve or a lower readiness status (i.e. retention) as of 31 July 2014, clearly the options have thus far been exercised.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  185. Steve

    we didn’t have the sealift capacity in Reagans time, I mean even a force of 50 roros of 100,000 tons is not enough, and worse yet we don’t have the ability (lack of frigates) to escort them adequately

    EPWJ (598909)

  186. Also that report just came out today or yesterday just passing it along

    EPWJ (598909)

  187. You know Christ told you guys what to do when somebody like Gil shows up: Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Hmm?

    nk (dbc370)

  188. EPWJ, logistics isn’t the problem and I think you know it. Not now, and not during the 2003-2011 Iraq war. We were able to maintain a force of over 100,000 personnel in Iraq years. Even after Obama announced he was withdrawing all combat forces in early 2009, there were still 50,000 “support” personnel to be left behind. Even if we were to fight a proxy war, that will take the same logistical effort to maintain those proxy forces in combat that you claim is beyond our means. Who else but us is going to keep the Iraqis and Kurds in beans and bullets?

    There is no way we’re going to prevail by fighting this entirely by proxy, though. We wouldn’t need that large a force to deal with ISIS. At least not on the Iraq side of the border. But we do need a ground force there for a variety of reasons. Not the least of which is that US ground forces train constantly with US air forces to work effectively as a team. It isn’t something that just happens. Expecting the Peshmerga and now degraded, demoralized Iraqi security forces to just jump into the deep end and swim is wholly unrealistic. It will take time no one has.

    I know you don’t want to hear it, but there it is.

    Speaking of the 2003-2011 Iraq war, we didn’t escort the ships supporting combat operations during that time period, so unless you know something about the Islamic State’s blue water anti-shipping capability I don’t why we would need to start escorting them now. We’re not talking the Battle of the Atlantic here.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  189. I would use the LePoint piece, but I don’t know how many parles vous

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11079100/Brussels-museum-shooting-suspect-was-Syria-hostage-torturer.html

    wouldn’t the approach, if the Turks are cooperating, be from the med, preferably through Latakia

    narciso (ee1f88)

  190. @Steve 183

    Their only option is to convert or die.

    Hmm that sounds very familiar to me from somewhere. Oh I know. Hannity just provided a forumn for this on his TV show…. not for muslims, for a Christian. Watch until 2:30.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5B2Z-i0i1o&t=0m25s

    Gil (27c98f)

  191. Again you are lying, Gil. There’s no other word for it. IS is following the example of their prophet and the commandment of Allah when they go on the offensive to subjugate the whole world to Islam.

    http://quran.com/9/29

    Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

    Note, not “fight those who fight you,” or “fight those who threaten you with war.” The commandment is that they fight those who do not believe as they do.

    The question Hannity put to Robertson is what our response should be since they have declared war on us.

    That is not “exactly what they say,” as the idiot in your youtube video claims. Robertson isn’t talking about waging a war of religious conquest as ISIS is waging. We have no commandment from the Lord telling us to do anything of the kind. He’s discussing our national security options. He would prefer as a Christian not to kill them, hence the talk about how he would rather convert them and how he hasn’t given up entirely on them. But at the end of the day we have to defend ourselves against the Islamic threat. And to defend others, because while Christians may be commanded to love their enemies (hence Robertson’s preference to convert them) we can not demand others turn the other cheek.

    This is a distinction that’s obvious to everybody except the dishonest.

    In fact, Robertson is not saying anything the Pope hasn’t said.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/08/18/pope-oks-protecting-iraq-minorities-wants-un-ok/14241193/

    Pope Francis on Monday endorsed military action to stop Islamist militants from attacking religious minorities in Iraq, a rare pronouncement that goes against the Vatican’s usual guidance against the use of force.

    …James Bretzke, a priest and professor of moral theology at Boston College, said popes in recent history have all lined up against any military intervention, including World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War and, most recently, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

    “This is the most pronounced endorsement of the use of force of any pope … in the last 100 years,” Bretzke said.

    …Throughout history, he said, such “excuses” to stop an unjust aggression have been used by world powers to justify a “war of conquest” in which an entire people have been taken over.

    “One nation alone cannot judge how you stop this, how you stop an unjust aggressor,” he said. “After World War II, the idea of the United Nations came about: It’s there that you must discuss ‘Is there an unjust aggression? It seems so. How should we stop it?’ Just this. Nothing more.”

    Robertson, whether he is aware of it or not, is channeling Aquinas. The Pope is channeling Aquinas and is aware of it. Yo will find no similar commandment to the Surahs of the Quran commanding the faithful to fight the unbeliever until they are killed, convert, or submit and pay the jizyah in the Bible. But Christianity does permit the use of force to prevent injustice. Nothing more, as the Pope observes.

    I personally wouldn’t have Phil Robertson or the Pope on my show to discuss national security policy. If I had a show. But you will note I’ve been advocating killing as many IS butchers as we can find in the open, destroying all the military equipment they have captured, ejecting them from the oil fields that is funding their operations, and humiliating them before the entire world so that we demoralize any recruits that may be tempted to join the glorious jihad.

    Keep it up. Demonstrate you are incapable of and have no intention of ever arguing anything in good faith. Not that we need any more evidence. I pointed out how you committed this exact failure of logic when you demonstrated your bad faith in misrepresenting Doc’s argument. But keep scoring own goals against yourself if you wish. And also keep demonstrating that good old fashioned atheist sense of morality, which apparently not only includes killing the subhuman in the name of the greater good but rank dishonesty.

    Did you enjoy the Singer video?

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  192. Professor Bretzke seems to suffer from similar category error,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  193. Actually it’s just the way I excerpted the article to avoid it going into moderation, I believe. I think it’s the Pope who is committing the category error.

    Like I said, I wouldn’t go to either Robertson or the Pope for my national security policy. And I might go to Robertson for insights into economics since he turned making duck calls into a multi-million dollar business, but given his comments on the subject never the Pope.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  194. @Steve
    What am I lying about? Phil Robertson just read a whole bunch of passages from the bible, then said the way to handle ISIS is to convert or kill them.

    Gil (27c98f)

  195. The question Hannity put to Robertson is what our response should be since they have declared war on us.

    Ahh so the only solution to war is either religious conversion or genocide.
    Noted.

    Gil (27c98f)

  196. This is a distinction that’s obvious to everybody except the dishonest.

    Ding ding ding. Dishonest would be a step up for Gil.

    JD (a00966)

  197. Keep it up. Demonstrate you are incapable of and have no intention of ever arguing anything in good faith.

    Oh Steve, God love ya.
    Is your idea of a good faith argument against someone to quote snippet of his work second hand and then conclude that his ethics are the same as Hitlers?

    God has commanded genocide in the bible. He has commanded the killing of babies. God sent angels to kill firstborn children regardless of guilt or innocence. Do we then compare him to Hitler? Oh no, God has a reason. Whatever God does is part of the plan, and it is predefined as good because God cant to bad he is the essence of good and love.

    And in the same vein, Phil Robertson can advocate dealing with enemies by either converting or killing them, but in this cases its ok because “they started it” and whatever else justification youve put in your text wall.

    It all amounts to special pleading. Your case is special and unique no matter what.
    Good on you!

    Gil (27c98f)

  198. Dishonest would be a step up for Gil.

    Hi JD
    Thanks for your thoughtful participation. Is your best response to arguments always “your lying”?

    Gil (27c98f)

  199. Gil:

    It does seem to work well.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  200. It does seem to work well.

    LIAR!

    Gil (27c98f)

  201. I rarely lie, although I never told my kids there was no Santa Claus until they were about seven.

    You are here to tell people they are stupid for being religious or something. That is not an argument nor a debate. What you are doing is typing things for a reaction. If it makes you feel good about yourself, I have no problem with that.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  202. Has Gil ever made an honest point?

    Don’t put new wine in an old wineskin.
    Can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
    Can’t get blood out of a turnip.
    A fish has no need for a bicycle.

    John Hitchcock (5131d7)

  203. 209. Dishonest would be a step up for Gil.

    Hi JD
    Thanks for your thoughtful participation. Is your best response to arguments always “your lying”?
    Gil (27c98f) — 9/6/2014 @ 9:48 pm

    That would be “you’re lying,” not “your lying.”

    http://www.wikihow.com/Sample/You%27re-Your-Usage

    You’re and Your Usage Cheat Sheet

    You’re welcome, my illiterate, dishonest Gil.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  204. You are here to tell people they are stupid for being religious or something. That is not an argument nor a debate.

    Nobody is stupid for being religious. I never said they were.
    I think this whole mess started when I pointed out the ISIS beheaders are devout muslims who believe they are following God’s wishes. Turns out that stirred up some uncomfortable questions inside some people because it immediately devolved into accusations about atheists, genocide, stallin, pol pot and hitler. Not to mention several pages on why Islam is not a real religion as Steve57 has so conveniently shown.

    Now the contention seems to be that in one case religion leads to immoral behavior (beheading), and the next atheists (like Hiter) use religion to inspire others to commit genocide. But not Christianity. That cant possibly lead to bad things. If it does, those people weren’t true Christians.

    Next, were told that when muslims give the choice to either convert or die its immoral. But when Hannity provides a platform for this exact same statement its ok, its different. You know why? Because they started it! Christians you see aren’t commanded to do it by God, so its ok to only react in this way.

    But really all these points im making, they don’t count. Im just a stupid dishonest liar who doesn’t understand what he sees or reads, and I argue in bad faith too. Sure thing – whatever you need to get you through the day.

    Gil (27c98f)

  205. Man, you are one confused leftie atheist.

    But I repeat myself.

    As I said on the thread when discussing Galileo, I can’t help it you can’t understand what you read. Or what you here.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  206. *Or what you here hear.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  207. “Im just a stupid dishonest liar who doesn’t understand what he sees or reads, and I argue in bad faith too.”

    Gil – The problem is you show no evidence of having read the responses to your comments, for example, Steve57′s lengthy reply to your comment about Phil Robertson’s appearance on Hannity as if for some reason you believe Phil Robertson speaks for all Christians with your retarded understanding of religion.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  208. “As I said on the thread when discussing Galileo, I can’t help it you can’t understand what you read.”

    Steve57 – That didn’t happen all that long ago, almost yesterday, btw. LMFAO

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  209. 215. Im just a stupid dishonest liar who doesn’t understand what he sees or reads, and I argue in bad faith too.

    Gil (27c98f) — 9/6/2014 @ 10:59 pm

    John Hitchcock @213, make a note. Gil has finally made an honest point.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  210. Thanks for the laugh, Gil.

    JD (a00966)

  211. Gil (febf10) — 9/5/2014 @ 2:21 pm Steve, there is no reason to think that atheists can be driven into genocidal tendencies through their atheism. It simply does not follow. What is their motivation?

    It is not that atheism, by itself, would motivate anybody to kill, but rather, it removes an argument NOT to kill – because, in the atheists eyes, theer may not be any such thing as right or wrong.

    Their positive motivation an be any kind of selfishness or a stupid philosophy.

    But Religion, now that can be used as you plainly see and admit

    Yes, the WRONG religious beliefs.

    It’s in the Bible: Deuteronomy 12:30-31

    Take heed to thyself that thou be not ensnared to follow them, after that they are destroyed from before thee; and that thou inquire not after their gods, saying: ‘How used these nations to serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.’

    לֹא-תַעֲשֶׂה כֵן, לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ: כִּי כָל-תּוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר שָׂנֵא, עָשׂוּ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶם–כִּי גַם אֶת-בְּנֵיהֶם וְאֶת-בְּנֹתֵיהֶם, יִשְׂרְפוּ בָאֵשׁ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶם. 31

    Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God; for every abomination to the LORD, which He hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters do they burn in the fire to their gods.

    There are certain religions, or religious beliefs that should not and must not be tolerated.

    (I don’t think Islam as a whole is in that category. Most of what’s really repugnant now is new theology traceable to Max von Oppenheim in 1914.)

    One thing people are forgetting – they talk about Mohammed, but not about what the first Caliph did, because you won’t find a lot pf the really bad stuff after Mohammed.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  212. Now Gil is a bitter pill.l

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  213. Colonel – I wonder if Gil can get a drivers license with that terrible tunnel vision problem he’s got.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  214. If he lives in California, he can, but only if he’s an illegal alien.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  215. People are pollution, but not illegal aliens.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  216. 215. Gil (27c98f) — 9/6/2014 @ 10:59 pm

    the ISIS beheaders are devout muslims who believe they are following God’s wishes.

    I’m not sure that’s true at all.

    One of the original 1993 World Trade Center bombers was recorded on tape as saying “There is no God.”

    Of course, this was a lot earlier.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  217. as if for some reason you believe Phil Robertson speaks for all Christians with your retarded understanding of religion.

    Of course Phil doesn’t speak for all Christians. What I would have expected is not some justification of Phils comments, but outrage at him and at Hannity for being stupid enough to have a reality tv star on his show discuss this topic. Does he ever have the Kardashians on?

    Gil (27c98f)

  218. 198. Steve57 (e0f6ab) — 9/6/2014 @ 6:02 pm

    US ground forces train constantly with US air forces to work effectively as a team. It isn’t something that just happens. Expecting the Peshmerga and now degraded, demoralized Iraqi security forces to just jump into the deep end and swim is wholly unrealistic. It will take time no one has.

    You won’t need any U.S. troops below the rank of Lieutenant, if you even need Lieutenants.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  219. It is not that atheism, by itself, would motivate anybody to kill, but rather, it removes an argument NOT to kill – because, in the atheists eyes, theer may not be any such thing as right or wrong.

    Sure it removes an argument why not to kill. But there are many more reasons that will stop someone from killing another. I do not wish to live in a society where killing is acceptable. I don’t believe it will maximize our well being. So it can be easily understood as wrong. Why is it necessary to posit a God to accomplish this? We are social animals with empathy and the ability to consider consequences this is all that should be required. The “golden rule” is something easily understood and its value is obvious.

    Gil (27c98f)

  220. As I said on the thread when discussing Galileo, I can’t help it you can’t understand what you read.

    Come up with something a little more current wrt Christianity and maybe someone would take you seriously. Pathetic!

    hadoop (f7d5ba)

  221. 229. Gil (27c98f) — 9/7/2014 @ 10:56 am

    it removes an argument why not to kill. But there are many more reasons that will stop someone from killing another.

    There will be practical reasons for not killing, but they don’t always apply, and obviously there’s no argument against aggressive war.

    I do not wish to live in a society where killing is acceptable.

    Actually, I don’t think the Nazis, or the Mongols did either – when talking about a subset of human beings. A society where any person can kill another is obviously impractical, and unsafe for everybody.

    But you could base not killing on loyalty, or real or imagined blood relationships, or belonging to a privileged group, or maybe even sentimentality the way you wouldn’t want to kill a dog or a cat.

    I don’t believe it will maximize our well being. So it can be easily understood as wrong.

    Where did you get the idea that well-being should be maximized?

    And whose well-being?

    Maybe some people just wnat to stay in power or continue in the jobs they have?

    Anyway, you can argue that it is maximized by killing some people (counter-revolutionaries against good government)

    Or that some people should be benefitted at the expense of others.

    Why even here we have the argument that the well beibng of African Americans should come at the expense of non-Americans.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  222. Why is it necessary to posit a God to accomplish this?

    In the final analysis, most arguments for morality rest upon a belief in God.

    Because that is pretty necessary in order to say “All men are created equal.”

    Without a God, why should you say that?

    And without a God, who created all people equal, what is the argument against slavery?

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  223. Especially when you have the theory of evolution.

    Which posits that at some point, human beings were not human beings.

    You get then into ” All men and animals are created equal” or “Some men are created equal”

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  224. We are social animals with empathy and the ability to consider consequences this is all that should be required. The “golden rule” is something easily understood and its value is obvious.

    The Golden Rule is of religious origin.

    (I am linking to a bad website, but the translation of the Talmud is not changed from the 1930s Soncino translation – they claim there’s no copyright any more)

    http://www.come-and-hear.com/shabbath/shabbath_31.html

    On another occasion it happened that a certain heathen came before Shammai and said to him, ‘Make me a proselyte, on condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot.’ Thereupon he repulsed him with the builder’s cubit which was in his hand. When he went before Hillel, he said to him, ‘What is hateful to you, do not to your neighbour: that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof; go and learn it.’

    The Golden Rule.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  225. We get it Gil. Your disdain and scorn for religion is an established fact. This is all redundant bibble babble from you.

    JD (548f4a)

  226. 188. Steve57 (e0f6ab) — 9/6/2014 @ 1:26 pm

    Obama…. is ideologically committed to his conviction that the “extremism” we see in Africa, the M.E., southern Asia, etc., has nothing to do with Islam. Rather it is a product of the unequal global distribution of economic resources. Which results in such ridiculousness as this.

    http://www.jammiewf.com/2014/senior-u-s-official-what-weve-found-is-that-isis-isnt-responsive-to-outreach/

    Maybe this explains why his strategy needs an economic component.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/08/28/statement-president-0

    And we’re going to cobble together the kind of coalition that we need for a long-term strategy as soon as we are able to fit together the military, political and economic components of that strategy.

    Obama’s “pragmatism,” i.e. Marxist ideology, commits him to misunderstanding the world. Which is somehow fitting as this was exactly the failure of Marx and Engels, who remained committed to their ideology while mistaking it for empirical truth long after events rendered it obsolete. Hence Marxists were dumbfounded when WWI did not result in communist revolution in the industrialized societies of western Europe as their “science” predicted.

    We are heading for a similar doom.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  227. Obama’s “pragmatism,” i.e. Marxist ideology, commits him to misunderstanding the world. Which is somehow fitting as this was exactly the failure of Marx and Engels, who remained committed to their ideology while mistaking it for empirical truth long after events rendered it obsolete.

    They had to know it wasn’t true. They were frauds.

    Hence Marxists were dumbfounded when WWI did not result in communist revolution in the industrialized societies of western Europe as their “science” predicted.

    Well what is said, is that this did comport with their theory. Since it was the wrong place.

    We are heading for a similar doom.

    ????

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  228. 164. Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 7:03 pm

    For example honor killings dont maximize well being and are immoral.

    You could make an argument that it does maximize well being, but is nevertheless immoral.

    But to take that example, a devout extreme muslim may think he is morally justified by God to execute his sister,

    Actually, this is a loophole.

    In Islam, a murder can be forgiven by a close male relative, and well, what happens if the person who commits the murder and the person who hasa the power to forgive is the same person?

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  229. Gil: and a Christian can’t really say much against him besides “you’ve got the wrong book”

    And can you say anything more?

    What are you saying?

    Is it:

    All books that teach morality are wrong?

    If so, it would mean do whatever is good in your own eyes.

    If not, then there are some books, maybe Kant or Hume, or Aristotle – or Confucius maybe, but a book or books.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  230. ISIS did this, not really to intimidate, or terrorize, but to appear powerful.

    And they were timed to be done when Obama seemed to hesitating about military action, so it could look like they scared him off.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  231. 221. Thanks for the laugh, Gil.

    JD (a00966) — 9/7/2014 @ 6:34 am

    He’s a hoot. But it dawned on me how consistent he is. He consistently argues irrationally, emotionally, superficially, and from a state of ignorance. Hardly a commercial for the superiority of the open-minded atheist over the “superstitious, primitive,” close-minded religious zealot, is he?

    Of course, Gil has to commit errors of logic in order to maintain his anti-religious bigotry. Which is why when Doc said that the test of whether or not Hitler was a Christian is how his evident belief system and his actions compared to the Christian faith. Gil changed the topic and conceded that Hitler did not behave like a “typical Christian.”

    Which is obviously not the test Doc had prescribed. But then Gil can not go to the original authorities and compare Hitler’s actions (or for that matter Phil Robertson’s statements) to them. Because an objective test would shatter his emotion-based prejudices. Well, that and he’s too intellectually lazy and frankly I don’t think he’s capable of understanding what he reads. So he has to keep everything on a superficial and subjective level. Hence his manic insistence on comparing one individual’s actions to another individual’s actions, while stubbornly resisting knowing what is or isn’t behind those actions.

    For instance, the Bible is full of violence. In fact, British officers fighting in the Middle East in WWI actually were able to use the Old Testament to prepare the battlefield since the terrain had largely remained unchanged. The New Testament is full of violence. Some of the Parables Jesus uses are violent, and Jesus did die a violent death. The Quran is full of violence.

    So what is the difference? The violence in the Old Testament tells of how God intervened in the affairs of the Isrealites at a certain time, a certain place, and against a certain people. Or it may be used to teach a lesson. For instance, God did command Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. But then God stopped Abraham from doing so. It was a test of Abraham’s faith, yes. But it was also a lesson. The pagans around the Israelites practiced child sacrifice. But God wanted to teach his chosen people that their God would never demand that from them (and this is why mothers with post-partum depression who kill their children are never acting from a religious basis when they do so; they didn’t have a vision but a violent delusion). In the New Testament the violence may be used to teach Christians about judgement day, or what they will have to endure to follow Him.

    The violence in the Bible is not a prescription for future action. It is confined by the surrounding context to a particular time period which has ended if it is not being used allegorically. It is not a guide to future action.

    In the Quran the violence is not only a guide to future action, it is a commandment that is binding on all Muslims. It is not confined to a particular time, place, and situation, and binding only on certain individuals. It is an open ended duty of all Muslims at all times and in all places.

    This is easy to prove, if one is in fact open-minded and arguing in good faith.

    For instance, was Phil Robertson saying we need to offer the IS butchers the same deal they offer the Yazidis? No, of course not. That’s ridiculous. And again, it’s easy to prove. Because Jesus the Son of God told his apostles exactly how to spread the Gospel.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2010&version=NIV

    Matthew 10

    5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7 As you go, proclaim this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ 8 Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy,[a] drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.

    9 “Do not get any gold or silver or copper to take with you in your belts— 10 no bag for the journey or extra shirt or sandals or a staff, for the worker is worth his keep. 11 Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave. 12 As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13 If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

    16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.

    21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.

    Anybody see anything about Jesus commanding his apostles to go from town to town giving people the choice of convert or die? No, the worst he tells them to do is to shake the dust from their feet, warn them of judgement day, and move on to the next. And to flee when persecuted.

    Phil Robertson knows this, although Gil and his ilk do not. Which is why because of some superficial similarities the atheists in their ignorance and bad faith take his statement out of context and claim it is the same when it is not. What was Phil Robertson talking about? This.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%2012&version=NIV

    Love in Action

    9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.

    14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.[c] Do not be conceited.

    17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”[d] says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

    “If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
    In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”[e]

    21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

    Phil Robertson would overcome evil with good. Given that the Gospel is the “good news” he’d rather share it with the IS members and convert them. As far as is possible, as far as it depends on him, he’d rather live in peace. But since IS has declared war on us, then Christianity permits self-defense. It’s also a Christian duty to come to the defense of others. That’s what he was talking about.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  232. Now, how is the violence in the Quran different than the violence in the Bible.

    Simple. The violence in the Quran hasn’t occurred yet. It is not a recitation of how Allah intervened in the past in the affairs of Muslims. It is an exhortation, a command, of what Muslims must do in the future.

    http://quran.com/2/216

    Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.

    en·join [ in jóyn ]

    1. command somebody: to command somebody to do something or behave in a particular way

    2. impose something: to impose a condition or course of action on others

    By the way, this isn’t a complete compilation of all the verses of the Quran that command Muslims to fight in the way of Allan and convert unbelievers by force. It’s really just a brief sample. And all of it is from quran.com which has the Arabic text and the English transliteration on the same page. So I won’t provide anymore links so this doesn’t go into moderation. If you search on the terms “quran” plus the chapter and verse number (i.e. 2:216 as above) your search engine should take you right to it. Or you can enter chapter (Surah or Surat) and verse (Ayat) after quran.com/ as 2/216.

    2:224
    And fight in the cause of Allah and know that Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

    3:56
    And as for those who disbelieved, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter, and they will have no helpers.”

    I just included 3:56 to show, in addition to how violent Islam’s attitude toward the infidel is, how much of a complete break it is from the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. The suffering of Job is a demonstration of his faith. Christians are commanded to bless those who persecute them.

    In Islam believers are rewarded in this world as well as the next. Suffering in this world is a sign of unbelief. Despite Islam’s claim to be the last revelation in a long tradition beginning with Moses, it’s the polar opposite of everything that came before.

    4:74
    So let those fight in the cause of Allah who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter. And he who fights in the cause of Allah and is killed or achieves victory – We will bestow upon him a great reward.

    4:76
    Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah , and those who disbelieve fight in the cause of Taghut. So fight against the allies of Satan. Indeed, the plot of Satan has ever been weak.

    4:95
    Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] – other than the disabled – and the mujahideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred the mujahideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to both Allah has promised the best [reward]. But Allah has preferred the mujahideen over those who remain [behind] with a great reward -

    5:33
    Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

    The above is the Surat, Al-Mā’idah, that Michael Adebolajo referenced in his impromptu video to justify his murder of Drummer Rigby on the streets of London, with blood still on his hands. And he is in fact correct; he was commanded to do what he did. Major Nidal Hassan laid out his reasons in a more methodical, premeditated way in his powerpoint presentation. But he was in fact theologically correct. In order to be righteous in the eyes of Allah, he must do certain things. He had no choice. This, again, answers Yasmine what’s-her-name’s question about why it’s so hard for Muslims to take a stand against “extremists” like those in the Islamic State. Because they actually have a very firm grasp of what duties their holy texts enjoin, command, and impose upon them.

    I should probably say their understanding of those texts may not be the only possible understanding. But it is an understanding that has a broad and firm basis in those texts and subsequent centuries of scholarship and jurisprudence, and no casual Muslim will ever be able to out-argue them.

    8:12
    [Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.”

    There are those who claim that “jihad” is to be waged in a spiritual sense. There is no way to interpret the above Surat, Al-’Anfāl, like Al-Mā’idah and many others, in a spiritual sense. Hence the beheadings.

    8:15
    O you who have believed, when you meet those who disbelieve advancing [for battle], do not turn to them your backs [in flight].

    8:39
    And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah . And if they cease – then indeed, Allah is Seeing of what they do.

    8:57
    So if you, [O Muhammad], gain dominance over them in war, disperse by [means of] them those behind them that perhaps they will be reminded.

    The differences between the Bible and Quran are glaringly obvious. Which is why Gil must avoid them in order to maintain his illusions.

    Ironically he’s more of a prisoner of his pro-atheist superstitions than religious people are of what atheists like to accuse them of as their superstitons.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  233. …The violence in the Quran hasn’t occurred yet. It is not a recitation of how Allah intervened in the past in the affairs of Muslims…

    There are such passages. The Quran claims Biblical and historical figures as devout Muslims, and there is historical violence. Oddly, the Quran claims Greek polytheists such as Aesop and Alexander the great as Muslim monotheists. But then, what do you expect? Muhammad was in fact an illiterate caravan trader. He couldn’t write down his own revelations; he had to recite them and have scribes write them down. He didn’t know he was getting his history and his Torah and his Bible wrong. Until later, when it was too late, after he had dictated his “revelations” to his scribes.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  234. 197.You know Christ told you guys what to do when somebody like Gil shows up: Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Hmm?
    nk (dbc370) — 9/6/2014 @ 5:29 pm

    Yes, and I believe there is something in the OT about engaging a fool is like pulling the ears of a mad dog.

    Every so often Gill momentarily tries to sound interested in dialogue, like dropping names of some Christian apologeticists and succeeds in getting me to think maybe a little something good is churning in his head.
    nk, feel free to slap me out of it next time you see me relapse.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  235. True, true, nk and MD, but do not forget Ezekiel 33:7-9:

    7 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me. 8 When I say to the wicked, ‘You wicked person, you will surely die,’ and you do not speak out to dissuade them from their ways, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. 9 But if you do warn the wicked person to turn from their ways and they do not do so, they will die for their sin, though you yourself will be saved”.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  236. I just like to use Gil as a foil to make observations about the state of the world. He’s useful for that because he’s so deeply indoctrinated he thinks he isn’t all the things he’s been indoctrinated to believe about others.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  237. I agree, Gil is a good foil.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  238. But I did try to engage him in dialogue, felipe.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  239. Yes, you did. With honesty and good faith, sir.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  240. I think this was a bit of an indescriminate coffee clatch, with some more involved than others:

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/who-lost-britain-14-culprits/?singlepage=true

    narciso (ee1f88)

  241. true that, felipe and steve57

    As you may have noted, at times I don’t so much address Gil or others directly, but I will challenge a point for observers, lest people be left with the wrong impression,
    as in a talk I linked before, where some poor freshman at Berkeley was confused, because his high school chemistry teacher said a person could not be both a Christian and a chemist, end of story, and here was a college professor claiming to be both a Christian and a chemist,
    go figure…

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  242. LOL, that would confuse me too, MD.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  243. you cannot co-exist with people who want to kill you.

    nor shall i try.

    #HarmonyChurchRules

    redc1c4 (abd49e)

  244. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/7/2014 @ 5:35 pm

    Yes, and I believe there is something in the OT about engaging a fool is like pulling the ears of a mad dog.

    No, no, no. That’s interfering with a fight or quarrel (which you have to admit is true, even if you should)

    Proverbs 26:17

    He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife not his own, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

    Engaging with a fool is nearby, and there are two (contradictory?) proverbs about it:

    Proverbs 26:4-5.

    Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

    Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  245. Steve57 (e0f6ab) — 9/7/2014 @ 2:50 pm

    Muhammad was in fact an illiterate caravan trader. He couldn’t write down his own revelations; he had to recite them and have scribes write them down.

    The fact that he didn’t write thinbgs down doesn’t mean he couldn’t read and write. They had an al[habet – that’s easy to learn. What kind of a businessman and trader could he have been if he couldn’t write?

    Things are much easier this way with someone else doung the writing.

    And then, Jeremiah had a scribe. It’s work.

    Are you saying Mohammed had a scribe who travelled with him on business?

    He didn’t know he was getting his history and his Torah and his Bible wrong.

    And his Talmud – that is there are some statements there that are based on something in the Talmud.

    He gopt everything orally, from people who maybe didn’t know all that much.

    I figured out even how he put Haman in the time of Pharoah. He confused him I think with a story about Baalam (and Job and Jethro) in the agada in the Talmud.

    Until later, when it was too late, after he had dictated his “revelations” to his scribes.

    They didn’t settle on a final text till the year 903 CE, over 250 years after his death. There are very old korans in Yemen with different text.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  246. You have to remember, a lot of the stuff he based what he said on was not wrtten in Arabic. He almost certainly only knew Arabic.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  247. narciso (ee1f88) — 9/7/2014 @ 6:51 pm

    It’s amazing to see those numbers, how much the problem has grown since 2001. I can understand Bush and Blair trying to clarify that they were not interested in fighting every person who was in some way “culturally” Muslim, but they were foolish to the extreme they did so.

    I read somewhere the other day that while some are becoming radicalized, many younger Muslims are also turning away from it altogether, often to atheism (of course, in many Muslim areas there is not enough known about Christianity for it to be a choice, it is Allah of the jihadists or no god).

    There is more in heaven and in earth than we know in our usual daily life, and it majors in deception. Britain is guilty of wrongdoing as all countries, but once it had elements of bright faith that went into all of the world that have largely faded.
    Ditto the US, a far cry from the Great Awakenings. Once schools of higher education were founded in large part to teach ministers, and even UPenn, proud to be non-sectarian and started by deist Ben Franklin was first led at Franklin’s request by George Whitfield, a preacher in the First Great Awakening, and now, don’t mention the J word, and the G word only with a “g”.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  248. Sammy, thank you for the clarifications.
    Indeed, as we were discussing above, sometimes there is not a one rule fits all, but principles which are always true, but wisdom is necessary to know when to apply which one.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  249. You know the story about the engineers who were arguing about who designed the human body. The mechanical engineer claimed credit for his specialty because of the musculoskeletal system. The hydraulic engineer ditto for the circulatory system. The electrical engineer insisted that the nervous system was the hallmark so it had to be an electrical engineer. The civil engineer remained silent. “Well”, one of the other asks, “what do you have to say?” “Nothing”, he replies. “No civil engineer would have put a sewer outlet right next to a recreational area.”

    nk (dbc370)

  250. I hear you Doc @251. I do much the same thing.

    “I’m back, Obama. I’m back because of your arrogant foreign policy towards the Islamic State [ISIS].”

    “… [J]ust as your missiles continue to strike our people, our knife will continue to strike the necks of your people,” the figure says.

    Mostly because I think it’s important for people to understand Islam in this day and age.

    8:12
    [Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.”

    And of course, understanding Islam requires taking it seriously. It is entirely different from Judaism and Christianity. Muhammad didn’t understand that. He thought that he had been predicted in the Bible. He thought that the Jews and Christians would confirm his “revelation.”

    21:7
    And We sent not before you, [O Muhammad], except men to whom We revealed [the message], so ask the people of the message if you do not know.

    There are numerous verses in the Quran that establish prior revelations (the Torah and the Gospels) as the test of the veracity of of his revelation. There are some superficial resemblances between Islam and the Abrahamic religions. But those are just a veneer. Muhammad was an illiterate caravan trader (although I understand there is some disagreement if he was completely illiterate or could read or write to some degree, but he was no scholar). He got it horribly wrong. In fact the Quran and the Gospel (at least, I’ll leave it up to any Jewish commenters to detail how he got the Torah wrong) are in direct conflict. The Quran denies the central tenets of Christianity, particularly Christ’s divinity and resurrection.

    5:72-73
    They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” while the Messiah has said, “O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord.” Indeed, he who associates others with Allah – Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the third of three.” And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.

    9:30-32
    The Jews say, “Ezra is the son of Allah “; and the Christians say, “The Messiah is the son of Allah .” That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded? They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him. They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses except to perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.

    Did I mention Muhammad thought the Bible predicted his coming? It did. Just not in the way he had been led to believe.

    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20John%202&version=NIV

    1 John 2:

    20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.[e] 21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22 Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a person is the antichrist—denying the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

    Was Muhammad ever P.O.d when he found out that not only wouldn’t Christians confirm his “revelation,” they rejected him as the liar and the anti-Christ who had been predicted in the New Testament.

    This is key to understanding Islam, and why later Surahs about the “people of the book” are so violent and hate-filled. It has a direct bearing on what we see going on today. And it doesn’t matter if you believe in Christ or are an atheist. As a matter of fact, you can’t really consider yourself an educated man in the context of Western Civilization if you don’t have a good grounding in the Bible. One of my favorite atheists was Christopher Hitchens. One of my favorite atheists still extant is Pat Condell.

    Make sure to visit him at his “Godless Comedy.”
    http://www.patcondell.net/

    Gil, of course, is not an educated man as he has repeatedly shown. But he still has his uses.

    A good resource for understanding Islam is a series of videos put together by a former Army Major and intelligence analyst, Stephen Coughlin.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhZe7eZK4dw

    Stephen Coughlin, Part 1: Lectures on National Security & Counterterror Analysis (Introduction)

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  251. I appreciate the work you do in linking and bringing information, Steve57.
    There is a post over at PowerLine with a video of ex-Muslim now Christian “Brother Rashid” appealing to President Obama to learn what a “Koran believing Muslim” really believes.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  252. 255. …What kind of a businessman and trader could he have been if he couldn’t write?

    A typical one for his day, Sammy. You didn’t need to read or write to trade or barter.

    They didn’t settle on a final text till the year 903 CE, over 250 years after his death. There are very old korans in Yemen with different text.
    Sammy Finkelman (728434) — 9/7/2014 @ 7:44 pm

    Yes, Sammy, I know. When Muhammad was still alive he named four men as the best from whom to learn the Quran.

    http://sunnah.com/bukhari/63/

    `Abdullah bin Masud was mentioned before `Abdullah bin `Amr who said, “That is a man I still love, as I heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying ‘Learn the recitation of Qur’an from four from `Abdullah bin Mas`ud — he started with him–Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudaifa, Mu`adh bin Jabal and Ubai bin Ka`b.”

    And these four couldn’t even agree how many Surahs were supposed to be in the Quran. Abdullah bin Mas’ud said it should only have 111 chapters, while Ubayy bin Ka’b insisted it should have 116. Today’s official Quran has 114. When Uthman compiled it (note: he’s not on Muhammad’s list as one of the four best reciters of the Quran and asked everyone to turn in their copies, Ubayy bin Ka’b told people to hide theirs rather then give them to Uthman.

    There are still at least two Arabic versions with different diacritic marks, different letters, different texts really.

    So much for the “miracle” of the perfectly preserved Quran.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  253. 261. I appreciate the work you do in linking and bringing information, Steve57.
    There is a post over at PowerLine with a video of ex-Muslim now Christian “Brother Rashid” appealing to President Obama to learn what a “Koran believing Muslim” really believes.

    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/7/2014 @ 8:56 pm

    It’s important to arm yourself with as much good information as possible. There’s a lot of misinformation. Stephen Coughlin goes into that. How it’s important to avoid what groups like CAIR who want to deceive us about the true nature of Islam put together to throw us off the scent. Instead to seek out authentic sources.

    Unfortunately, President Obama is one of the people who are hell bent on deceiving us. He is committed to insisting that no religion teaches what Islam in fact teaches. When he or other western “Islamic theologians” like British PM Cameron get in front of the TV cameras after some terror attack or similar Muslim atrocity and lecture us about how what we saw some knife wielding ”
    “Allahu Akhbar” shrieking barbarian just do has nothing to do with Islam, you can be very sure it does have everything to do with Islam. But they are relying on their Muslim Brotherhood advisory panel, who are of course there to shield the very terrorists they pretend to denounce. So I’m afraid “Brother Rashid’s” entreaties will fall on deaf ears. Consequently it’s up to each of us to learn for ourselves. Which is why I provide the links (sometimes I know I go too link heavy). The last thing I want to be is the resident expert on Islam. Everybody needs to know exactly what we’re looking at. I know almost everybody outside the beltway or the confines of a University campus gets it at a gut level, but that’s not a substitute for really knowing and understanding.

    Over at Pat Condell’s Godless Comedy the video at the top is “the real enemy within.” It’s a good watch. Essentially he goes on an epic rant about how leftist extremists such as those who’d rather commit child sacrifice in Rotherham, England, and let Pakistani Muslim rape gangs prey on 1400 white girls than be called a “racist” or “Islamophobe” are more dangerous than the Islamic extremists. I highly recommend it. He nails it as only Pat Condell can.

    Steve57 (e0f6ab)

  254. @Sammy

    Where did you get the idea that well-being should be maximized?
    And whose well-being?

    Human well being. We are social animals with empathy and the ability to consider consequences to our actions. The conclusion that it is in our own interest to maximize well being is not hard to make. If we start with simple ideas like life is better than death, and pleasure is better than pain, security is better than chaos and build on them we can come up with a moral system.

    Gil: and a Christian can’t really say much against him besides “you’ve got the wrong book”
    And can you say anything more?

    Hi Sammy good question. Yes we can say more today. We can build a system of morality based on our best understanding of how to maximize human well being. We can refine it as our understanding grows, and we can demonstrate how we are right with data – not by simply saying “youve got the wrong book” or “youve interpretted god’s will incorrectly” which of course are unsatisfactory answers.

    What are you saying?
    Is it:
    All books that teach morality are wrong?
    If so, it would mean do whatever is good in your own eyes.

    It’s not black and white. There are very good ideas in some books.Religion was one of our first early attempts. It has valuable lessons we can take, but we can do better, we can build on it. I do not advocate that everyone should do what they feel is good, but rather everyone do what will maximize human well being.

    The Golden Rule is of religious origin.

    While many religions adopt The Golden Rule, it is not clear that religion (certainly not Judaism) was necessary to come up with it. For one thing we find it in the writing of Confucius who predates Rabbi Hillel and was a philosopher. It is also in found many other religions and locations around the world.

    Gil (27c98f)

  255. @MD
    I truly am interested in continuing our conversation. I made a serious post in 164 which I am disapointed you did not respond to. I presume you were upset by my exchanges with Steve. Please dont let that affect you. Steve regularly refers to me as illiterate, stupid, dishonest and the rest and my tone with him reflects that. I have not responded to you in the same way.

    If it was something else, please tell me what gave you the impression I am not sincere in our discussion I will do my best to correct or clarify it.

    Gil (27c98f)

  256. He explained it to you up thread. It is not the least bit surprising you didn’t pay attention.

    JD (548f4a)

  257. Steve regularly refers to me as illiterate, stupid, dishonest and the rest

    He only says that because it is so clearly true.

    John Hitchcock (5131d7)

  258. You, Gil, have been referred to a veritable library of information for your research, yet you choose to not even peruse the information. Not that you could understand any of it, if you did. You, on the other hand, spend your time speaking with forked tongues out of both sides of your mouths on both of your faces.

    John Hitchcock (5131d7)

  259. Gil, you are a hoot. Doc didn’t get tired of dealing with you because of any exchange you had with me. Doc got tired of you because you are arguing in bad faith with him.

    172. Furthermore Atheism has to do with what a person believes, and Agnosticism has to do with what a person knows. Quite simply a theist believes there is a god, an Atheist does not. I am an Atheist. I am also an Agnostic though I believe it is quite chicken shit to just say “I dont know if there is a god”, that is why I identify as an atheist.
    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 6:38 pm

    I missed this one before. You really do want it both ways depending on the moment.

    Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian in sincerity, rather than just a political maneuver, there is no way his overall belief system and behavior were consistent with being a Christian than my claim to being a Martian. There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/5/2014 @ 8:34 pm

    Changing the subject, the Red Herring argument, Misdirection, whatever you want to call it. It is the logical fallacy you most commonly live by. How did you answer him after he already called you out on it? By doing it again.

    179. Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian in sincerity, rather than just a political maneuver, there is no way his overall belief system and behavior were consistent with being a Christian than my claim to being a Martian. There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    That’s fine MD I agree he did not behave like a typical Christian. I think then its fair to go the other way and say he did not behave like a typical atheist no? Lets be fair from both ways.

    Gil (27c98f) — 9/5/2014 @ 9:39 pm

    Why should anyone try to engage in a dialogue with you since you rather want to deal with your own straw men?

    And now you’re blaming me. LMAO. That’s you, Gil. That’s you to a “T.”

    Steve57 (685cca)

  260. My last comment is in moderation. But I pointed out that that Doc didn’t get tired of dealing with you, Gil, because of the tone of your exchange with me. He clearly got tired of dealing with you because of his own exchanges with you. As he put it in #172, ” missed this one before. You really do want it both ways depending on the moment.”

    John Hitchcock @268 is exactly right. You can’t talk out of both sides of your mouth out of both faces and constantly expect to have it not two ways at once, but all ways from every direction. I’ve practically provided a roadmap of just how you employ a string of logical fallacies to argue in constant fact-free bad faith, yet you don’t get a clue.

    I am especially amused at how you are now blaming me for others getting sick of you , Gil. I really do find it funny. It epitomizes you, Gil.

    Steve57 (685cca)

  261. 265. …Steve regularly refers to me as illiterate, stupid, dishonest and the rest…

    Gil (27c98f) — 9/7/2014 @ 10:32 pm

    Hey! I resent that.

    I have called you illiterate and dishonest. Also irrational, emotional, superficial, ignorant, bigoted, prejudiced, close-minded, dogmatic, ideological, superstitious, blinkered, and indoctrinated.

    But I never actually called you stupid.

    Of course, I never argue against it when you call yourself stupid…

    Steve57 (685cca)

  262. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/5/2014 @ 8:34 pm

    Even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian

    I don’t think he ever claimed to be a Christian – at least not often or for long. What the Nazis claimed to be were “Gottglauber” – believers in God – but they most definiotely did not beleive in anything like the Ten Commandments etc. He blamed the Jews for the existence of a”conscience” among mankind.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  263. Heh. I see the Pat Condell video I recommended @263 last night, “The enemy within,” is at the top of the page over at PowerLine this morning.

    http://www.powerlineblog.com/

    While I was there I also noted that “Brother Rashid” and I use some of the same online sources, i.e. sunnah.com.

    Great minds truly do think alike.

    Steve57 (685cca)

  264. kimball’s review goes into some of the British example of these type of deceptions, that got them to this point, I think he’s a little harsh on the English Defense League, who were the only active element confronting the Salafi in those areas

    narciso (ee1f88)

  265. Gil (27c98f) — 9/7/2014 @ 10:32 pm

    As JD and Steve57 pointed out in my absence, I already explained at 172, and then further clarified
    at 185 MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/6/2014 @ 7:02 am, why I considered it no longer reasonable to take you seriously.
    Furthermore, I didn’t see anything at #164 that needed responding. You said you were already familiar with all of the arguments and found them wanting and had found your own way to answering life’s questions.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  266. Gil, I don’t know what you are, but it’s neither strong nor weak atheism; both are described here — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism . You might want to look at Wikipedia’s list of the flavors of agnosticism — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism#Types_of_agnosticism . I suspect you’re a weak agnostic.

    htom (412a17)

  267. Sinning daily and not repenting, I pray there is no God. (No, that’s not the correct quote.)

    There’s a character like that in Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita” who, having given power over himself to the Devil and is killed by him, remains unrepentant even in death and the Devil grants him his wish — that there be nothing after life. I wonder what Gil’s sins are. ;)

    nk (dbc370)

  268. One sin, which is quite common, is suppressing the truth of the knowledge of God.
    I think at the root of multiculturalism is objection to any objective morality. If there is no objective morality I can do what I want. If I can do what I want, then I guess others can do what they want, too (though it is often argued the other way around, who are we to judge them, they have their own beliefs and culture).
    But reality intervenes, and it becomes clear that there must be some kind of boundaries of right and wrong, and if one wishes to continue to deny that, one gets in increasingly bizarre extremes of rationalizing to explain things.
    Traditional “Christendom” has its guilt, too. Too often cultural trappings and preferences have attached themselves to God’s truth, and we minimize what the impact should really be on our own lives.

    I thought there were some interesting links at PowerLine on the topic at hand as well:
    http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/are-the-orcs-winning/?singlepage=true
    http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/06/face-the-truth-about-islam-and-terrorism

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  269. ISIS rule getting more harsh in Raqqa, Syria:

    http://www.syriadeeply.org/articles/2014/09/6055/raqqa-residents-isis-continues-impose-harsh-living/

    Travel outside the province now more difficult.

    More ISIS checkpoints and patrols.

    Many people planning to leave.

    All buildings used by ISIS painted black.

    Almost no business is to be conducted during prayer hours, and people should not even be on the streets. Errands must be run between the five daily calls to prayer. Stores close for prayer at the mosque.

    Women forced to wear black and cover their faces.

    Men and women kept separate – women generally need a male companion to attend school, or go any where, especially to another province, and are also prohibited from addressing male vendors – making the simplest transactions very difficult.

    Executions and floggings now common.

    Cigarettes, hookah and alcohol prohibited and anyone caught consuming them punished.

    Sammy Finkelman (728434)

  270. @MD

    I missed this one before. You really do want it both ways depending on the moment.

    Hi MD.
    Sorry I missed responding to this. Look I don’t want it both ways. Theres 2 options right? Either God exists or he doesn’t. It is possible to not believe either of those propositions. Sounds a little weird, but consider I flip a coin and hide it. Do you believe its heads? If the answer is no, then am I right to claim you are making a positive assertion that it is tails? No Im not. In this case it is possible to not believe either.

    You are without belief in heads or tails. Just like when I say I don’t believe in god, it does not mean I believe the opposite (there is no god). I am open on the matter.

    Regarding 164 I was hoping to at least discuss the merits with you. Why you don’t find my points about the topic compelling etc. Or what you thought about how I get meaning in my life. Its ok we don’t have to.

    Gil (27c98f)

  271. Hi htom
    After reading those lists I suppose I fit into the negative atheism category where I have no belief and make no assertion that there is no god.

    Gil (27c98f)

  272. MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/8/2014 @ 5:13 am

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  273. Ok Steve, I know you require things to be phrased exactly the same way for some reason. Let me explain why I was not changing the subject. The statement you claim I am changing the subject from:

    There is no way one can begin to harmonize Hitler’s actions with any thing resembling Christian faith, if the phrase “Christian faith” has any content of meaning.

    To

    That’s fine MD I agree he did not behave like a typical Christian.

    1. Hitler’s actions are his behavior
    2. When saying “behave like a typical Christian” it is understood that this means “behave within the confines of Christian faith”
    There is no change in subject. Why are you mincing words? Because you have no leg to stand on.

    All your “roadmaps” that you’ve written, with all the text walls, you haven’t demonstrated anything whether it be why Islam isn’t a “real religion” or how I argue in bad faith. Go ahead and keep on thinking what you like though. Its amusing.

    Just look at 202.
    I make a simple statement – Phil Robertson said “Convert or Kill them” and right away you respond claiming Im lying. Its a matter of record right there on tape Phil said that. No matter, you’ve decided im lying. Then you launch into an Islam vs Christian debate (subject change) then bring up that the pope has said similar things, then conclude with “Gil is arguing in bad faith again”.

    No doubt youll twist this into my bad faith again. Yawn. Its you who cant keep on topic.

    Gil (27c98f)

  274. Gil, I don’t need to twist anything you say. Everything you say comes pre-twisted. I just point it out.

    I provided quotes from the Bible and the Quran. Where in the Bible does Jesus, the Son of God, command his followers to force people to convert, and to kill them if they won’t?

    Does Allah of the Quran command his followers to force people to convert, and to kill them if they won’t?

    Steve57 (685cca)

  275. Gil, do you get paid for trying to waste our time?
    If anyone out there thinks Gil has made a point that you would like to see addressed, pipe up, and I’ll likely oblige, if I can.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  276. Arschloch.

    nk (dbc370)

  277. I make a simple statement – Phil Robertson said “Convert or Kill them” and right away you respond claiming Im lying. Its a matter of record right there on tape Phil said that. No matter, you’ve decided im lying. Then you launch into an Islam vs Christian debate (subject change) then bring up that the pope has said similar things, then conclude with “Gil is arguing in bad faith again”.

    Gil, why do you do this? Everybody can go back and look at what I wrote. Do you imagine people are just going to take your twisted caricature of my argument at face value? Do you imagine they aren’t going to scroll up and see if I actually wrote what you said I wrote?

    Why is it that everyone has the same consistent criticism of your “style” of argumentation? That the only options are that don’t read what people write, can’t understand what you read, or deliberately mangle it. And we can all provide something like three examples of you doing it.

    I’m not good at Jedi mind tricks; I like to think I’m persuasive, but nobody is that persuasive. If you weren’t doing it in plain sight we all wouldn’t have arrived at the same conclusions.

    Steve57 (685cca)

  278. Gil is just target practice, nothing more.

    felipe (40f0f0)

  279. Gil just wants you to listen. To his feelings, his aspirations, his desires, his hurts, his unzufriedenheitichweissnichtwieheistdasweltanschauung. Just listen. And remember, it’s not about the nail! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4EDhdAHrOg

    nk (dbc370)

  280. Here is a link to the full video and a transcript of the Phil Robertson interview on Hannity which Gil insists on misportraying. It doesn’t switch over to a young Turks podcaster after 2:30.

    http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/09/03/%E2%80%98duck-dynasty%E2%80%99s%E2%80%99-phil-robertson-isis-convert-them-or-kill-them

    The context is clearly Hannity saying he does not believe ISIS will leave us alone and that we will have to deal with them, Robertson agreeing, saying his preference would be to convert them, get them to renounce their evil ways, but he doesn’t think that’s feasible so they would probably have to be killed.

    It is the actions of ISIS which are causing Robertson’s statements, because both he and Hannity don’t see ISIS stopping. Gil wants you to believe Robertson’s religion makes him say we need to make ISIS convert or die to parallel what ISIS tells its victims, which is a complete mischaracterization and typical of Gil.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  281. Gil, there are many more ways than two (is / is not) to think of God. There may be God for those who believe, and not for those who do not, and maybe for those who wonder. There may have been God, but He’s taking a long nap. It may be reality that’s the dream, and reality is God. (other sophomoric babbling omitted.)

    htom (412a17)

  282. Gil, this is one point on which you are twisting things.

    2. When saying “behave like a typical Christian” it is understood that this means “behave within the confines of Christian faith”

    That is ridiculous. “Typical Christians” do not behave within the confines of the Christian faith. Neither to “typical Muslims” adhere closely to the tenets of their faith.

    It is never “understood” that to behave like a typical Christian means to behave within the confines of the Christian faith.

    Anybody with a passing familiarity with human behavior could tell you that. It is in fact a rare, small subset of nominal adherents to a particular faith that actually live their faith. Most nominal adherents live their lives with religion being one, usually minor influence on their lives. And their behavior generally reflects that other influences (pop culture, economic forces, their interpersonal relationships, politics, what have you) are far more important influences on them.

    This is why Mohatma Gandhi (himself something of a piece of work and not the paragon of virtue he’s made out to be, but still an astute observer) said this of Christianity and Christians.

    I know of no one who has done more for humanity than Jesus. In fact, there is nothing wrong with Christianity … The trouble is with you Christians. You do not begin to live up to your own teachings.

    It is, in fact, very difficult to be a good Christian. If a “typical Christian” actually did behave within the confines of the Christian faith, that would mean it is easy to be a good Christian, and there would be no real need for organized religion at all.

    By the same token, “typical Muslims” do not behave according to their own faith. And there’s a reason for that. Typical Muslims don’t even know what they are.

    For this we should all be grateful. But this is why groups like IS murder, maim, and crucify what we think of as “their fellow Muslims.” Because groups like IS and Al Shabaab don’t think of them as Muslims at all. They consider them hypocrites who call themselves Muslims but don’t even try to live up to Muhammad’s example.

    But back on point, this is you being you, Gil. This is why Doc responded to you in this way.

    170. Gil, you had me fooled into thinking you were interested in exploring the different sides of a discussion. You switch back and forth between saying what you don’t believe as if you aren’t claiming much, then you make dogmatic statements you present as acknowledged truth.

    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 9/5/2014 @ 8:26 pm

    Your dogmatic statement that “[w]hen saying “behave like a typical Christian” it is understood that this means “behave within the confines of Christian faith” is absurd. I will not acknowledge it as truth. No one with two brain cells to rub together or an once of sense would acknowledge it as truth. It’s 180 degrees out from the truth.

    Not that I expect much from you in terms of recognizing your inability to argue rationally, or your unwillingness to argue rationally.

    But it precisely because, as Gandhi said, most Christians do not live up to their own teachings that you don’t compare one Christian’s behavior to another Christian’s behavior to determine if it conforms to Christianity. You compare each Christian’s behavior to the actual teachings of Christianity. Same for Muslims.

    Steve57 (685cca)

  283. Steve57. There is no debate. Which Christians…REASONABLE or NOT, behead those who they disagree with on camera? None. What Christian group is killing, beheading and executing those who disagree with them in the name of Jesus Christ?? None.

    It’s that easy.

    Gus (70b624)

  284. That’s progress, Gil. Then the question becomes, why the difference? And this is where it’s important to go to the authoritative texts. I’ve listed various chapters and verses from both the Bible and the Quran to illustrate the differences. I won’t do it again at length, but here’s an abbreviated version.

    (longer excerpt and link @242) In Matthew 10 Jesus tells the Apostles how to spread His word and gain converts:

    11 Whatever town or village you enter, search there for some worthy person and stay at their house until you leave. 12 As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13 If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.

    If people reject the Gospel, leave and go somewhere where you are welcome. That’s it; that’s all Jesus’ followers may do when spreading His word and gaining converts.

    In numerous chapters and verses of the Quran Allah tells his followers how to spread his word and gain converts (all from quran.com, the Sahih [authentic, reliable] International translation of the meaning of the Quran online):

    Surat At-Tawbah

    9:5
    And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

    9:29
    Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.

    Muslims believe this is the revealed, uncreated word of Allah. They are commanded to fight and kill pagans until they convert to Islam. Only if they become Muslims will their “blood and property” be safe from Muslims. The “people of the book” (Jews and Christians) have an option open to them that’s closed to the pagans. They can submit to the supremacy of Islam and pay tribute to the Muslims and accept a second-class status.

    So, Gil, do you see a difference between the two religions? And is it possible that if there is a difference it explains the difference between adherents of the two religions?

    The answer is important for two reasons. One reason, which is minor and I only mention it because you mentioned it, is that when Phil Robertson was talking to Hannity he could not possibly have meant those words how you (and the guy in your YouTube video) chose to interpret them.

    But for the sake of argument, let’s say he had. That just shows why you don’t look at a “typical Christian” and assume that their behavior falls within the bounds of the Christian faith. As Gandhi observed, there’s nothing wrong with Christianity. The problem is that the typical Christian doesn’t live up to the teachings they claim to adhere to. If you look at the behavior of a typical Christian, they don’t turn the other cheek. But that doesn’t mean Christ didn’t command them to.

    The most important reason is that this country will never develop a sane Middle East policy unless we understand the nature of the threat. On this point, it doesn’t matter if you’re an atheist, a Christian, a Sikh, a Hindu, a Buddhist, whatever.

    But here, typically, is where atheists go off the rails and make mistakes that religious people don’t. Because when atheists try to understand the “root causes” of the jihadist threat they dismiss the idea that it could possibly be due to religion. Which is why they stand up before TV cameras and say that what these people are doing has nothing to do with Islam. Because, since they don’t take religion seriously, they can’t conceive of others taking religion seriously.

    Which is why they talk about factors such as poverty, government oppression, the lack of education and health care. What have you. But as you note, Christians aren’t running around beheading people who don’t follow Christ, or enslaving non-believers, etc. To make a direct comparison, Arab Christians who grew up in even worse conditions of poverty, government oppression, without education or health care (due to their second-class dhimmi status) aren’t running around blowing up markets or beheading people etc. So what explains the different behavior of an Egyptian Muslim and an Egyptian Coptic Christian, or a Syrian Muslim and a Syriac Orthodox Christian? Hint: it is the one factor that atheists have trouble taking seriously, and therefore generally don’t go to the trouble of trying to understand.

    Phil Robertson takes his religion seriously. And consequently he understands the jihadists better than Barack Obama and other atheists. Which is why he said we would have to kill the jihadists if they adhere to their Muslim faith.

    http://quran.com/9/111

    9:111
    Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise.

    They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed.

    [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment.

    They will kill in the name of their religion until they are killed. That’s just an unfortunate fact. Christianity permits (but does not command, merely allows) self-defense. As the Pope said:

    “‘Is there an unjust aggression? It seems so. How should we stop it?’ Just this. Nothing more.”

    Christians are permitted to use only that amount of force in their own self-defense, the defense of others, and by extension to their societies, that is sufficient to stop an unjust aggressor. But if we take the jihadists at their word, and given their actions thus far there’s no reason not to, the only amount of force that will be sufficient to stop them will be that force sufficient to kill them in large numbers.

    Notice that I am not currently arguing for the truth of one religion or another. I am telling you that in order to have a strategy to deal with a threat, one must understand the nature threat. In general religious people (not just Christians) are better at this than atheists because atheists are generally committed to the proposition that all religions are equal; equally false. Hence Nidal Hassan’s massacre at Fort Hood was just “workplace violence” (neither Islam nor even Hassan’s name was mentioned in the Army report). Despite the fact that Hassan had given a powerpoint presentation detailing what he was about to do to save his soul (fight in the cause of Allah), was shouting “Allahu Akhbar” as he was shooting up Fort Hood, and now wants to become a citizen of the Caliphate, this administration refuse to acknowledge the possibility that Hassan was motivated by the specific tenets of Islam. They just can’t take that possibility seriously. And consequently they don’t bother to go any deeper than that.

    Even an atheist should be concerned about this particular blind spot. Again, not all atheists suffer from it. I mentioned Pat Condell and Christopher Hitchens. They get it (got it, in Hitchens’ case). All religions are not equal in this regard. Christianity, Judaism, etc., are non-entities when it comes to global terrorism. It’s a waste of time and resources to pretend they’re all the same. Yet that’s how we’re wasting our time and resources. That and persecuting people who don’t tow the “Islam is a religion of peace” official line of BS.

    Again, I suggest you scroll up to #261 and follow the link to the YouTube videos of former Army Major Stephen Coughlin’s briefing on the nature of the jihadist threat. You don’t have to take any religion seriously to learn what the jihadists take seriously. Which is the important thing at the moment.

    Steve57 (b7cfe5)

  285. I should add that just as a “typical Christian” doesn’t typically adhere to the teachings of Christianity because it is difficult to do so, the same goes for Muslims. And the Quran has something to say about that:

    http://quran.com/2/216

    Surat Al-Baqarah

    2:216
    Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.

    A typical Muslim is generally peace loving and a pretty nice guy. They see what IS and other terrorists are doing in the name of Islam and are repulsed by it just as much as any other decent person. It is “hateful” to them, as the Quran even acknowledges.

    Moreover, a “typical Muslim” firmly believes that what the butchers who comprise terrorist groups such as IS or Boko Haram are doing in the name of Islam is blasphemy. That it runs counter to the teachings of Islam. A week and a half ago a Muslim and professor of journalism at the American University in Dubai, Yasmine Bahrani, wrote a WaPo op-ed that illustrated this Muslim perspective and became the topic of a comment thread.

    http://patterico.com/2014/08/30/why-is-it-so-hard-to-take-a-stand/

    The common refrain is: “That’s not Islam.” Of course it isn’t. Muslims know that, but we need to understand that others do not. And here’s the problem: To much of the world, the Islamic State, Nigeria’s Boko Haram and other such groups do represent the Muslim community. Today, say the word “Islam” and few think of the glories of our history and culture. Rather, they picture masked men with knives. And as long as our condemnations remain tepid, we give the impression that we accept the crimes of murderers whose savvy YouTube productions reach far and wide. Like it or not, the Islamic State is winning the public relations war.

    Sadly, mainstream Muslims have no choice but to come to terms with the fact that groups of people are car-bombing, shooting, starving, kidnapping and beheading people in the name of Islam — not to mention blowing up churches and mosques. Where is the anger? Is it possible that the marches in support of Palestinians are well-attended because Muslims hate Israel more than we hate criminal gangs who have hijacked the narrative of our religion?

    The problem is, those “criminal gangs” haven’t hijacked the “narrative” of their religion. Most Muslims are kept in the dark about what their religion actually teaches. This is due to the doctrine of abrogation.

    http://quran.com/2/106

    2:106
    We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?

    To sum this doctrine up, earlier verses of the Quran are abrogated or annulled by later verses of the Quran. So it is possible to find very tolerant and inclusive verses in the Quran. During his Meccan period Muhammad did preach tolerance and coexistence. He had no choice; he was vastly outnumbered. Later, after he fled to Madina and gained allies (under false pretexts, but I digress) he then preached conquest and forced conversion.

    But according to Muslim theology, the other reason for the doctrine of abrogation is that the first generation of Muslims were all pagans. There were something on the order of 360 gods who were worshiped in Mecca. They were at first given only so much as they could absorb of the new religion. They had to be brought along step by step. After they had been brought up to a certain level, the earlier teachings were abolished and a new “revelation” was issued in its place. For instance, at first alcohol wasn’t entirely forbidden. It’s use was restricted. So, for instance, at first in Mecca it was OK for the new Muslims to drink as long as they didn’t show up to prayers drunk. Eventually those earlier rules were abrogated and alcohol was forbidden entirely.

    By the same token Hassan al Banna, who founded the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928, looked at what he considered the enslaved (colonized by the infidels such as his British-ruled Egypt) ruins of the Muslim world and decided the only way to repair the damage and return the Ummah to its former glory was to do what Allah and his messenger did at the beginning. Bring people back to the “true Islam” step by step. This is a generally accepted principle in Islam. How couldn’t it be; it’s in the Quran and it follows the example Muhammad set with the first, best generations of Muslims?

    This is why Muslims are discouraged from studying their holy texts on their own. They’re spoon-fed what their religious leaders think they are ready to absorb. They have no clue that the butchers in IS, etc., are actually following their holy texts and Muhammad’s example to the letter.

    Steve57 (b7cfe5)

  286. yes, they called that pre Islamic state, dhaliyah,(sic)

    narciso (ee1f88)

  287. “Jahl” is an Arabic term used by Muslim theologians for ignorance of religious truths. Jahl-i-Basit is simple ignorance, while Jahl-i-Murakkab means complicated ignorance or confirmed error.

    Al-Jahiliya means the age of ignorance, which is what Muslims call the period of history before Islam.

    Steve57 (b7cfe5)

  288. true, but some Salafi regard the insufficiently devout in that state, Harf and co, think that is some sort of cold cut.

    narciso (ee1f88)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7237 secs.