Is Islam Really The Biggest Threat To The West?

I understand this will be a sensitive topic, especially with the current election cycle in the United States and the recent (weekly? daily?) attacks now being carried out by ISIS in Europe.  My purpose in writing this post is to a) expose truth and dispel ignorance and b) be a voice of dispassionate reason on a very emotional topic.

I think it is best to start off by making two points clear on my part as author. First—Islam is a problem, but in the same way as guns are a problem. It is people that kill people, not guns, and I believe the same argument can be said of Islam.  This is not to dismiss the real threat of radical Islam, which I am not doing.  That said, there are millions of Muslims living in America and Europe today who are not running around killing anyone.  I know this will unleash the rage trolls in the comments, but this is simple fact. If Muslims truly wanted all us kufar dead, we would be.

Second—ISIS has been proven to be a creation of the CIA and thus has backing and support from western allied NATO nations. America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group is an excellent introduction to why all this terror is being unleashed on the world in the name of Islam.

There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: one between the government and the rebels, another between Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia.

Never forget.  When “they” want you to hate someone, it is because it is useful for them.  Again, I am not as author dismissing the real threat of radical Islam.  I am merely asking you to suspend your anger and look behind the curtain to the wizard pulling your emotional strings.

With these two points made clear, let’s get to the heart of the problem that is Islam’s threat to the West.

A Western existential crisis that has nothing to do with Islam, and everything to do with the West itself.

Islam has forced the West to ask itself two very uncomfortable questions.  What do you stand for?  What do you believe in?

So when we say we are living amongst Islamist, fanatical sharia driven scum… who wish to completely destroy this nation… you just met one of them.

~ Tommy Robinson

The above video is just one of many you will find on Muslim no-go or exclusion zones in Britain and Europe.  Islam is clearly a force in Europe and a growing one in the Americas.  To deny this is to be completely blind to reality. But is the West so blind now with rage we can’t see what Muslims and Islam are trying to open our eyes to in order to see?

If we adjust our lens on Islam but a fraction of a degree, we could phrase the fundamental question it poses to The West from another perspective. A question Tommy Robinson alludes to in his quote above.

What “culture,” what “way of life,” are Muslims threatening to destroy?

An unshakeable and deeply held belief in God, His moral teachings and the potential judgement of an afterlife in hell or heaven? God and Christianity is now permanently expunged from Western consciousness, especially in the media, education, workplace and political spheres of life – i.e. the cultural mainstream of society.


From the end of the Roman Empire through a 1000 years of medieval darkness, to the middle ages of the Renaissance and finally the Enlightenment, Europe (and then America) was a Christian culture, society and people. After 2000 years, it no longer is.  Getting angry about it is not going to change this fact.  For America or Europe to be Christian again is going to require a miracle.  One I don’t see coming anytime soon.

What about traditional marriage between a man and a woman? Please, we know the answer to that one.


What about patriarchal gender roles based on masculinity and femininity?  You know, husband and wife, father and mother?  Provide and protect, home and hearth?  The family as the foundational unit of a just, peaceful and happy society?


ROK and our community of traditional, masculine and proudly heterosexual men, now being threatened with banishment from the whole of the EU, answers that question.  Do I need to even say one word about the current status of democracy and its institutions in the West?


Again I ask you. What culture is Islam threatening to destroy in the West if it takes over? What values and beliefs are Germans, and many other Europeans, now finally starting to stand up and defend as “our way of life?”

Milo Moiré held up a poster reading “Respect us! We are no fair game, even when we are naked!!!” in Cologne, Germany to protest the 1,000-member Muslim rape gang that ran amok on New Year’s Eve.

“I stand for women’s freedom to move freely. For the things we’ve achieved in the past 50 years – for women’s emancipation,” Moiré said.

Swedish Liberal Party Youth Wing Calls for Legalization of Necrophilia, Incest

The Swedish Liberal party’s youth wing proposed legalizing necrophilia and incest Sunday during the group’s annual meeting in Stockholm.

According to the motion filed, two consenting siblings 15 years of age and older should be allowed to engage in sexual intercourse while sex with a human corpse should also be legalized so long as the deceased gave written permission prior to passing.

Speaking with Swedish news site Aftonbladet, Liberal Youth leader Cecilia Johnsson painted the move as a progressive step forward for the Scandinavian country.

“We are a youth organization and one of our task is to think one step further,” Johnsson said.

Johnsson stated that although most of society views the practices as “disgusting,” such acts should not be outlawed by the government.


While I do not condone whole areas of Europe becoming Muslim exclusive zones where no native European can walk without being assaulted, including the police trying to enforce the laws of the state, in consideration of all the above, can you blame Muslims for wanting to isolate themselves to protect their families and children from European and Western culture, values and way of life?

Whatever the West was, it may no longer exist to be threatened or destroyed by Islam

ROK has been documenting the collapse of Western civilization now for years.  I don’t want to end this piece on a sad or negative note, but this video encapsulates I think what all Westerners are feeling right now.

What the West is feeling is not simply anger and fear, but sadness and grief at a loss of culture, of values and of traditions that we in the West have allowed to let go.  We have no one to blame but ourselves for this loss.  Muslims and Islam are simply a reminder of what we once were—proud, distinct and morally grounded in a belief in God, truth and justice.

You can hear this sadness and grief ring out clear in Tommy Robinson’s voice.  He makes some excellent points calling out the real dangers of immigrant Muslims that Trump is raising the alarm on in the US election right now.  If The West and Europe is paralyzed in it’s response to Islam and Muslims, it is because we no longer have a cohesive value system that anyone wants to rally around and defend.  The modern, Western, secular, liberal, safe-space, gender-fluid, do-as-thou-wilt values embraced and enforced by the minority cultural dictators that are our feminist, SJW and LGBT overlords… are empty, vapid, dissolute and ultimately of no meaning to the heterosexual majority of men and women who are being asked to stand up and defend this “way of life” from Islam.

Tommy accurately points the finger of blame at those responsible for this mess, but both he and Watson fail to make the connection between ISIS, radical Islam, Saudi Arabia and thus the CIA’s deep, deep, deep influence on Islam and Muslims in the spread of radical Sunni Wahhabism.

US Sponsored “Islamic Fundamentalism”: The Roots of the US-Wahhabi Alliance

The alliance between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia helped spread the ideology of fundamentalist Sunni Islam all over the globe. The majority of its victims are not citizens of Western countries, but citizens of countries that U.S. elites consider a threat to their economic and geopolitical interests. Many victims of Sunni extremism (often called Wahhabism or Salafism[1]) are in fact Muslims (often with a secular leftist or nationalist political background), moderate Sunni or members of Shiʿite Islamic faith.

Tommy’s voice is a lone voice, but his voice would ring more clear if he also raged and exposed WHY these young Muslims are being radicalized by large political/financial/military Western elites for a specific objective. If radical Sunni Wahhabism is strong in immigrant communities, you need only look to the destruction we, the West, have wrought in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, with Iran in the cross hairs as the last Muslim land left still intact by Western, cultural “enlightenment.”

The threat that Islam poses to the West can be a wake up call.  Not a call to anger and hatred of the other that threatens us, but to look behind our own walls to the enemies within the gates that have allowed this to happen. 

The threat of Islam is also an opportunity for the West to once again define itself. What values beat in the heart of the West today? What do Western hearts ache to express and believe in? About man?  About life?  About our purpose and reason for existence?

Islam has answers to these existential questions that are, I believe, the very real root cause for the West’s malaise, anger and fear of Muslims.  If Islam poses any threat to the West, it is fundamentally a religious, philosophical and metaphysical one.  The West can’t answer Islam’s threat to “our way of life” because we believe in nothing, and have nothing we stand for anymore that is of any real value or based in any way on truth and justice.

The West once had a dream for itself and its people.

Islam’s presence in the West is reawakening that dream that was Rome

But will the West, in its undisciplined anger at Muslims and Islam, directed to that purpose to serve the divide and conquer plan of the elite, simply play the part of dumb animal once again and go raging into Muslim lands as the crusaders did in the past?

Or, will the West actually take a moment to breathe, to look at the other, and realize that the person I am being told is my enemy is actually my ally and friend.

I am not asking you to change your mind about Islam and Muslims based on my words alone. What I am asking you is to be sure, 100% sure, that you are not being played the fool.

O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and
tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of
Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.

~ Holy Quran 49:13

I will completely understand your natural reaction to continue to respond with anger toward Islam and Muslims. But if you could do me just one single request… ask yourself this question. Cui bono? Who benefits from your hate and rage toward Islam and Muslims?

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: British Police: Men Who Try To Get Laid Are Guilty Of Misogynistic “Hate Crimes”

768 thoughts on “Is Islam Really The Biggest Threat To The West?”

  1. Islam is the last masculine monotheistic religion – it gets in the way of globalization.

    1. is it masculine to be like dirty, rapist, insecure, narcissistic, confused, pedophile, wifebeating muhammed? no thank you then.

      1. Dirty- muslims are required to clean.
        Rapist- prove it.
        -other stuff- random accusations
        -pedo- you know that it isnt unusual for girls to be sexually active before the age of 10? You’re just not red pill enough

        1. I dont say muslims are dirty i talk about the prophet. He says it is like medicine to drink camel pee. He had sex slaves and encouraged it in 4:24 in quran and in
          Sahih Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
          Narrated by Abu Said Al-Khudri:
          We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”
          and i dont care what 10-year old girls do, i just care that a 50 year old man is aroused and engaged to a 6 year old and marry her at 9. i think girls below 10 who are sexual active have some deep issues and come from messed up backgrounds.
          in quran 8:39 he encourage holy war:
          Fight untill there is no more fitnah, and the religion is wholly to Allah.
          I would recommend you to read Sahih muslim and sahih bukhari and the Quran.

        2. i mean dirty of mind not litterary. i know muslims are required to wuduh before and after almost everything.:)

        3. and again about children sexual active. many start to explore their body as small children, but its not sexual for them. its like finding your feet. its part of growing up.

        4. Medicine can come from many places. Medicine is to be used as required.
          Up until a certain age. But it is sexual for many, even below the age of 10. Kids know about sex these days, due to media. It would be difficult to understand how they wouldn’t know, actually. My friend works with children and the stuff these kids talk about…they aren’t innocent at all. They experience sexual arousal and orgasm by design. It isn’t unusual at all. Most do not come from messed up backgrounds. This can easily be looked up on forums where people discuss childhood sexuality. “I don’t care what 10 year old girls do” so you are ignoring how they behave, their motivations, etc. If someone is attracted to someone else, and is capable of having sex and is happy, then it isn’t wrong sexually. The western way isn’t always right just because ‘everyone’ thinks so.
          And the hadith you said does not mean it was allowed to have sex with captives; more evidence is needed. 4:24 I read from the Muhammad Asad translation and it says in the footnotes that the ones that your right hands possess are wives and not to commit unchastity; it is a clarification that only sex with wives are allowed.
          Holy war: I could say so many other things that show the opposite. In essence, there were verses of peace and then ‘violent’ verses came about after the Muslims were forced out of Mecca. They specify when; 9:13 for example (a chapter often used to show Islam is violent) says:
          Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!
          This gives a reason. Before one says what, there must be a why.

        5. No matter what children do amongst children, it is still pedophilia that a 52-year old man sleep with a 9-year old girl. He could be her grandfather. And today he would be put in prison.
          Right hand posseses means servers, captives, slaves or maids or what ever you want to call it. It continues in 4:25:
          And whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls. And Allah is most knowing about your faith.
          Most of the more peacefull verses are written in medina before he came to power and showed his true face. The quran has many contradictions.

        6. Actually, pedophelia is primary attraction to prepubescent people. With some 9 year olds it would be considered pedophelia but not others. Different people mature at different times. I suppose attraction to a 17 year old is pedophelia too? Doesn’t matter what children do amongst themselves, as men are attracted to certain things biologically-age doesn’t change evolutionary instincts and drives. Old enough to be one’s grandfather-also not relevant. The point is, sexually active males mate with sexually active females, biologically speaking.
          “Of *believing* slave girls” you’ve refuted your own argument. It doesn’t insinuate force either.
          Yes, because how is one meant to fight before they have power enough? If you’re kicked out of your house because you’re weak, then get stronger before you fight to take back what is rightfully yours. It sounds perfectly reasonable.

        7. 17 year old are past the early puberty. most nine year olds dont have their period yet and definitely not 6 year old girls(as aisha first was when muhammed dreamt about her and she played with dolls on his lap). She was the daughter of his best friend and companion.
          Slave implies it is forced, thats the definition of slave. A property of other. A bond servant. If you read sahih bukhari youcan see it is not very free as you imply and remember the hadith where they raped their captives from war and myhammed was okay with it?
          Sahih Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
          Narrated by Abu Said Al-Khudri:
          We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”
          But fight for what? allah and himself and everybody has to submit to islam which also means submission and not peace as apologists wants you to believe.
          To me its just a man made religion of a deaply disturbed man

        8. I wasn’t talking about most; it is all on a case by case basis. Many do. If they can and want to have sex, then it is ok.
          No, because it said believing slaves only; the rest are not allowed. This is because it is preferred to marry someone with more advantages. If it isn’t possible (dowry is a potential factor) then the slave is allowed. Also, maybe westerners are used to slaves with no rights, but under Islamic rule, they are much better off.
          I already read it and it isn’t near enough evidence to support either view. More information is needed, which I provided.
          Fight for their homes they were kicked out of, their land, etc. Submission to the will of God, ie, do what God says. It doesn’t say everybody must submit to Islam:
          Leave the Abyssinians alone as long as they leave you alone; and leave the Turks alone as long as they leave you alone.
          Source: Sunan Abu Dawud 4302
          To me, it seems like a good socioeconomic system. I see it as the solution to the West’s sex problem: Let the ones who want to have sex, do so under marriage. This resolves the supply and demand, (as you may already know through reading posts on this site) equalizes distribution (less of this 80:20 rule stuff), and places more emphasis on character rather than superficial aspects (because marriage is a responsibility, vs hookups).

        9. I dont think girls are happy to marry of old men and have sex with them at 10. You dont have children do you?
          I see the hadith as strong evidence. It is from the authentic collection that you even do salah, wudu or pay zakat without. The quran also mention slavery and have more verses from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim about it.
          Quran (8:69) also says: But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good. Captives are part of the war booty.
          I see the west and islamic society as two damaged socieities. I don’t think the oppression of islam works. Oppressions brings many perversions as well as two much freedom. You need something in the middle.
          But i dont think slaves are treated fair in islam. We still se maids in fx lebanon and saudia arabia living miserable lives and some of the latrst countries to abolish slavery were muslim. Mauritania were the last in 1981.

        10. You might not think that, but lots of elementary school aged girls watch porn. So do boys. It is called biological evolution.
          I wasn’t talking about how authentic it was, I was referring to what it said. There was no clear yes or no. That’s why I said more evidence was needed.
          Lawful and good- Some things are not lawful nor good, and some are, some things cannot be taken. And it didn’t say do whatever you want. This is self-evident.
          Islam is the middle. Societies previously were the direct opposite, more so than Islam, hence my thinking of it being in the middle. Marriage seems reasonable. I don’t see marriage a oppression.
          What Muslim countries do and what Islam says are not interchangeable.

        11. Yes i am aware of that,, but I don’t see what porn has to do with child marriage. There is a big difference on watching porn and getting married.
          It is clear if you put it together with Quran. If it was a no Muhammad would have said something. They just ask if they should pull out to don’t make the catives pregnant and Muhammad reply that soul that is decided to come to life byy allah will come no matter what. If he thought it was wrong he wouldnt have said this.
          Then islam has failed if no country can follow it. I think it is far from the middle.
          Me to i dont see marriage ad oppression as a matter of fact i married happily when i was 17. I see slavery as oppression and child marriage as well.
          Soceities previously? We have to live in the year 400?

        12. There is a big difference but there are similarities. Watching porn is a reflection of the biological need to reproduce. Why not let them do it rather than other people? It would be beneficial rather than harmful. It is oxymoronic to say that ‘kids’ should be able to watch porn but not have sex with whom they wish. Again, if a young ‘kid’ fangirl wants to have sex with someone famous personality on TV, they can get married and have sex. I expect the age difference to be closer in general, but that isn’t to say that a large age gap is wrong. It is a penis going into a vagina. Age doesn’t change that.
          That’s subjective. To make it more objective, you can use more evidence. This is standard procedure in law, as well as debate. More evidence=more accuracy. As more evidence is presented, we find that Islam seems to be more reasonable and acceptable.
          I never said they can’t follow it, I said that they don’t. Because of greed, corruption, etc. I could say the same thing about so many other things. Rashidun Caliphate followed well, however.
          Good to know we agree, then.
          I was making a comparison; when so much is liberal, then anything opposite will be considered extreme. This is ‘moral relativism’ and does not seek objective truth.

        13. There is still difference in watching it and doing it. And you are likely to regret you decisions when you are older, so if you marry like a child and regret? You will suffer to the end of your life or you will have slept with 50 people. It is not the time for children. They arent full developed, they are still being shaped.
          How that? I think Saudia Arabia is close, Boko haram is also close. Have countries with sharia law.

        14. Doing and watching are different, yes. Doing it is way more fun. “Likely to regret decisions when you are older-” yes, if it something that is to be regretted. But why should it be regretted? It shouldn’t. And actually, virgins that get married are the least likely people to sleep around, so marriage young actually reduces regret and resolves the ‘young kid sleeps around with everybody’ problem. It is beneficial. Kids want and need sex; let them in the most beneficial way possible. Because if they don’t get married, they will resort to other suboptimal alternatives. There is no need to have kids then, as marriage=/=having kids. Everyone is being continually shaped. Kids moreso, yes. Math shapes kids, should we ban that too?
          Shariah is simply someone’s interpretation of that law. If you look at the history, you will find that the Rashidun Caliphate had different Shariah than the ones now. I thought it was obvious: Saudi is a monarchy, they drink and have sex outside of marriage, banned many religious practices, institute the burka which wasn’t even adopted by the early Muslims, etc. all which are against what Islam says. So I don’t understand how you can say that they follow shariah when the early Muslims followed different rules.

        15. Sharia is based on Quran and Hadith, not interpretations.
          What age is it even you think girls should be able to get married in? And should they make their own decisions or should it be arranged. I think anything under 15 is a shame. 15 is also young and many are not mature enough in this age.
          Have islamic and non islamic countries were girls marry young. I have not heard any of these girl said it was a nice thing to be married to an old man, on the other hand i see them looking sad and hear stories of girls who run away. These countries are often poor, undeveloped and girls who just got their period are not ready to carry a pregnancy let alone taking care of a baby or babies.
          What do you think child on child marriage or girls marrying older men?

        16. That is how it should be, but in reality, people interpret what they wish however they wish. They do not follow the way of the early successors.
          I believe they should be allowed to get married whenever they want, and this includes their reason of wanting sex. The earliest age they should be allowed to get married is puberty, os it all depends on a case by case basis Many are not mature because they are fed a steady diet of facebook, youtube, porn, and other such trash. Teens 2.0 author Epstien, PhD argues that adolescence is just a social construct and that people in other cultures around the world have had much higher levels of mental maturity because they were taught. This is supported by them actually taking on responsibilities and successfully accomplishing tasks. Don’t think that they are inherently immature. There are many young people that are much more mature than people twice their age. It is just that kids are taught to be immature by treating them that way.
          This is a problem of forced marriage. (Arranged marriage and forced are 2 different things. But anyway…) People that age should be allowed to marry whomever they wish, so if a couple of 12 year olds, for example, want to get married, that is ok. Actually, 2 young people getting married is the ideal way. Most of them would not want to get married to a much older person. They can, but it isn’t ideal. My point was that they should get to decide, rather than the law. It is up to them at the end of the day. The way I envision it, when they begin to sexually develop and become sexually active, they can talk with their parents and people in order to find a suitable spouse. The islamic way entails discussion about the future, practical concerns, as well as many other factors and methods before getting married.
          I really think this is the solution to the sex problem, as it equalizes the male to female mate ratio, protects people from the harms of negative sexual practices via preventative measures, and places more importance on character than looks, lessens STD’s, and so many other things.

  2. There are a lot of Myths about Islam and its all being fuelled by the war on terror.
    If you look at the realities it is the fastest growing religion in the world, even in the west despite all the terrorism and it being viewed as a misogynist homophobic religion.
    Whats amazing is that Muslims dont even proselytize. They dont even go out to look for converts unlike many Christian denominations.
    I studied the history of religion and I am absolutely sure of one thing. Islam was a Christian reformation movement. The early Muslims were in fact the original Jewish followers of Jesus that the Romans tried to persecute in the early days of Christianity.

      1. Very crude timeline. Dates and events are estimations:
        60 AD First Church was setup by James(Jesus brother) and Peter. They were Jews.
        Paul went to Rome decided to drop Jewish laws and practices.
        325 AD council of nicea tried to merge all Christian sects
        428 AD Nestorius and others didnt agree with others over doctrines.
        Christian sects that didnt agree with Byrzantines were declared heretics and persecuted.
        Many Fled to Persia and Arabia
        570 AD Waraka ibn Nawfal Nestorian Christian priest and cousin of Muhamed recognises his prophesy….
        You can take it from here!

        1. Do you know about the conflict between the North Africans who were followers of the Apostolic Christianity and the Constantinean church in Rome?
          Is it a coincidence that around the year 630 Muhammad began his bloody career of conquest. Beginning around 660, his successors conquered Egypt and later invaded North Africa.
          After conquering all of North Africa, the Arabs crossed into Spain in 711. Their main target in Spain was the Goths, who baptized by triune immersion, and refused to join the church of Rome.
          North Africa—comprising over 600 cities—was the richest part of the Roman Empire. The city of Rome itself was dependent on North Africa for her daily bread. With the rise of Islam, Europe became permanently separated from the Continent of Africa.

        2. yes I know about North Africa. Many of the Christian sects like the Copts were happy to be liberated by the Muslims because they were being persecuted by the Byzantines/Romans.

        3. Copts are still there. Most Jews and Christians converted to Islam.
          You should read some history.

        4. Most of the Nestorian and Arian Christians in North Africa converted to Islam. In fact, they were among the first to convert because Islam seemed the natural continuation of their beliefs.

        5. Read history? Where do you think I get my info from math lessons?
          So you deny there was Muslim conquest of North Africa?
          First invasion in 647, the Second Invasion in 689, Third Invasion in 700. By 709, all of North Africa was under the control of the Arab caliphate.
          You call that voluntary conversion to Islam?
          You should read some REAL history.

        6. So you TOO deny there was Muslim conquest of North Africa?
          First invasion in 647, the Second Invasion in 689, Third Invasion in 700. By 709, all of North Africa was under the control of the Arab caliphate.
          You call that voluntary conversion to Islam?

        7. Conquest of a country and conversion by the sword are two different things. Just because the administration of a country is done by a polity of a certain faith doesn’t mean that faith was forced on the population it ruled.

    1. “Whats amazing is that Muslims dont even proselytize. They dont even go out to look for converts unlike many Christian denominations.”
      Are you stupid? Spend some time in prison, that’s the epicenter of Islamic conversion. The other kind is by the sword. Very few people willingly desire to convert to Islam, outside of insecure women.

      1. True. They always claim that islam is the fastest growing religion and at any given chance the will talk about their religion how it is good. And Inshallah, mashallah, subhanallah, allahu akbar, hamdulilah everywhere. I think many women are attracted because the muslim men plays the game good and they are overly romantic at first while they still have that “bad guy attitude”, they like how islam is presented to them(the man is the MAN, family values, strong community, etc.), maybe they are very young and inexperienced or perhaps of age tired of the same old game and sleeping around and drinking. At first islam can seem very romantic if it is presented by “Abdullahi who said I am the most beautiful woman i have ever seen”. Yuck…;(

    2. Islam is the fastest growing religion because apostasy is discouraged to the point of encouraging murder. Try again.

    3. Being the fastest growing religion doesn’t mean anything. Most people are followers, we are just very developed pack animals. At a time millions joined the nazi movement in germany. At a time many supported apartheid in south africa. At a time there was the hutu/tutsi war in Rwanda. Damnn the inka people used to sacrifice children. Just because pther do it doesnt make it eight and it sure doesnt prove to be from god.

    4. Spot on with your first paragraph. But, not so much in your second paragraph. Islam has a history (an often violent one) of proselytizing and forced conversions.

  3. Extremely well said Maximus, your frame control is on point. This is exactly the kind of direction this conversation needs to take.

    1. Some of our more racist fellow commenters with a penchant for the word “rapefugee” sadly won’t accept your on-point comment.

      1. Wouldnt it be easier to defend refugees if they werent continually raping people? And are you sure that you want to equate people who are against rape with racists?
        Arent you the racist because you defend rapists?
        And are you so stupid that you think the west will continue to tolerate islam when it would be trivial for the west to destroy islam if they had the will to do it?.
        The Russians killed sixty million of their own people – most of whom had done nothing. If they started killing muslims the west would laugh and make popcorn.

        1. It is convenient to ingnore things that are not correct. I did not see anything anywhere in the link you posted to back your assertion, and would be astonished if it were close to being true. More feminist/Marxist dancing on the head of a pin to demonise white men and portray brown people as victims. As we know Sweden is not short of feminists or Marxists.

        2. I call bullshit, fair sir. It’s not Europeans who invented the ‘taharrush’, and just compare the rape statistics of predominantly White countries to the Arab ones.
          But as for Basil’s commentary and this one as well-it’s not really the refugees per se that are a problem. The actual problem is, these people come as colonists-they’re here to stay, bearing in mind the recent integration law passed in Germany.
          Does anyone even pay attention to the fact that millions of people will STAY-and that’s the only problem that will inevitably harm European culture. Either through conflict, or miscegenation.

        3. There are rape games practiced by Europeans. Many white people in Azerbaijan still practice bride kidnapping. As for rape statistics, given the fact most rapists in the West attack an acquaintance and Arabs (who aren’t allowed female acquaintances) simply ambush women, your point is moot.
          As for European culture, I don’t care about it, so that’s that.

        4. Social democrats is the word you’re looking for, not Marxists. Then again, there isn’t much difference the more you move to the left.
          As for the rape thing, I agree. You should note the cultural differences between Arabs and Westerners are as thus: Arab men aren’t allowed female acquaintances, so their rapes will be more… “brazen”. As for white men, they often rape their acquaintances, which is harder to prove.
          I say this because this is often used to demonize entire minorities and used as an excuse to round up any refugee.

        5. Just to nitpick. Most Bolsheviks, who led the murderous campaigns, weren’t Russian so, they weren’t killing their own people. Google ‘Genrikh Yagoda.

        6. White people in Azerbaijan?? And they’re the ones doing the bride kidnapping? Where do you come up with this bs!

        7. This just shows how much you desperately want to focus on one group of people you seek to demonize. Try harder next time.

        8. Social democrats are to Marxism what moderate islamists are to Islam.
          I think you’re dancing on the head of a pin trying to conflate fictitious “one woman in three” campus feminist hysteria rape claims (where a woman who gets hammered and fucks some dude of lower social standing than they would prefer then regrets it) with actual forcible rape by a stranger where physical force is used.
          “I say this because this is often used to demonize entire minorities and used as an excuse to round up any refugee.”
          I think you are referring to something you saw in a film or imagined rather than the spineless law enforcement typical of politically correct western European countries.

        9. Do you even attempt to use logic in your non Internet life? Or are you this nonsensical there as well?
          Because your posts in this thread make little to no sense and all you’ve done is deflect your anti White racism.

        10. Because as far as the alt-right is concerned, Russia is heaven on Earth and can do no wrong.
          The reality, of course, is that Russia is a shithole and has always been a shithole.

        11. Not falling for your us-vs-them mentality =/= Despising white people
          I’m sadly afraid you’re the deluded one.

        12. Your logic isn’t particularly sound. Firstly, I never cited the one woman in three statistic (which changes between five, four, six and two depending on how dishonest the speaker is), I simply cited most rapes in Europe are done by someone the victim knows. Nothing particularly hysterical about that.
          As for your comment on law enforcement, I am perfectly aware law enforcement in Europe is spineless. I’m simply calling out your othering of any refugee as an example of how nationalist hysteria is being used for this exact purpose.

      2. Islam is a religion an idea not a race, its okay to question an idea. even more so when the idea disrespect you.

        1. I’m absolutely sure most people here conflate brown person wearing a white headdress with a Muslim. The alt-right wouldn’t be anti-Islam if it weren’t a religion practiced mostly by non-whites.

        2. Not really. Islam itself was defined as a religion by non-white people (though white is a term that occasionally has shady boundaries) and is completely different from usual White religions. Same goes for Christianity, or Judaism (Abrahamism at all).
          Furthermore, racist elements of the right truly don’t pay much attention to religion, only race. Christianity is also mostly practiced by non-whites, but doesn’t get nearly the same attention among the right (if we presume it’s fitting to call the racially oriented politics ‘right’). Either way, this topic won’t be sealed for a long time.

        3. Christianity is a Semitic religion. The only reason you can call it a “white” religion is because (western) Europe spread it around the world.

        4. That is such an absolute load of bullshit I had to hold my nose while writing a reply. What an idiotic thing to say-anybody who has a modicum of intelligence would despise Islam irrespective of whomever practiced that vile belief system.

        5. And, of course, you provide no evidence for your claim. Nice try at bullying me though.

        6. It’s oftentimes hard to distinguish them. Case in points, Sikhs are often attacked and mislabeled as Muslims. That should prove my point.

        7. This is a serious question. What is it like not having a mind able to process critical thought?
          Keep on hating White people. We’re starting to wake up and the term racist no longer frightens us in the way it did.

        8. More or less having said is not having said. Simply showing how you excessively focus on the crimes of one group of people in order to demonize them as a whole is not hating white people.

        9. White men should not be afraid of words like racist or sexist. It’s the nonsense of the left to keep white men in check.
          Black people have been openly racist for a long time, now. Women have been openly sexist for a long time, now. Both of them have been getting a pass by society for being this way for a long time.
          Don’t let those words bother you any longer (if they have been). You’re white so you’re labeled it (anyways)…embrace it.

    2. Rome is the worst thing that could happen to Europeans, with its forced Christianisation and eradication of all natural shamanic European religions.
      Christianity (for the annihilation of borders and the big racial melting pot), Marxism, feminism, Islam, capitalism, gender theories, etc. are all against the laws of nature and are poisons to white people, who are princes and priests at the same time. The true European natural mystical religion is Wotanism

        1. Yes it is, and ignorance is how both religion and liberalism are spread to the idiot masses.

        2. Yeah but my comment was a response to the previous that was filled with lies and empty assertions.

        3. Yeah what’ s not to like a return to de facto matriarchy and worship of nature…just like heathen Africa…all under the guise of the “laws of nature”. What a bad joke.

        4. Matriarchy… Where did you see that in the 88 precepts and the 10’000 years old European Wotan (Odin) religion? Please explain…

        5. In 10.000 years your “nature ” worshiping religion couldn’t encourage that culture to achieve anything. No historical record, no monuments, no great conquests (unless taking out a deceased and decadent empire counts as something glorious). There is a reason the Greeks and Romans thought the peoples of the north were not only enemies but barbaric. My point was that whether you like it or not Christianity perfected the good points of the old Greek and Roman beliefs and brought to the fore the notion of a rational good and therefore a rational universe which could be explored, with laws and principles. It became the cornerstone of the west. Once the west abandoned this, the long descent started.
          And in it’s modern iteration your pagan principles don’t take us to the Classical era of the Romans, or even to the harsh pagan worship of the Ancient Norsemen, but directly to Africa, just look at the modern neopagans and its influence in the feminist movement to make that connection.

        6. Modern neopagans and feminism? Christianity (religious Marxism for the brown slaves wishing to annihilate the white people) made Europe great? You Sir are the greatest cuck of this thread… I am talking about WOTAN! I told you: keep your distance and learn…

        7. Cuck…yeah right whenever a term is so often misused it loses its term American, and you are the greatest idiot scum of the Thread. congratulations.

        8. Yes C.U.C.K. go kiss migrants’ feet and make Europe Christian again…
          Communism, cultural Marxism, mass immigration, miscegenation and white genocide are all direct fruits of this egalitarian, no border, anti-racial, anti-natural, semitic, slave religion that is Christianity.
          You are either a non white, a useful idiot or a traitor to your people.

        9. Your screed sounds as reasonable as the barking of a rabid dog. Just to finish this “discussion” stupid scum:
          1. The West is not Christian and hasn’t been since at least WWI. I don’t know from what stems your rage. You should be happy and dancing on one foot. Nowadays not even the “Pope” is Christian.
          2. The elite is as heathen as you are and are very public about it (Gotthard tunnel opening ceremony, every fucking event either in politics or in media has the same pagan/satanic stench). You should be happy and embrace your betters. After all they are your coreligionists…
          3. Marxism and its derivatives (feminism, cultural marxism, universalism) are the rejection of all Christian ideals. No wonder once Europe abandoned its faith, those ideologies rushed in to fill the void.
          4. Paganism seems to be reawakening in the West. You should be happy, soon all of us will be worshiping the trees and animals, like in the days of yore…when whore-priestesses were in a higher pedestal than today. Unfortunately for you all seems to suggest that the paganism that is reawakening is not the one of Cincinnatus, Scipio “Africanus” or that of Cicero but that of the Viking, the African Congolese, that of ancient Baal and other barbaric peoples. Moreover this is what the elites that rule our countries want.
          If anyone is a useful idiot is you. Bye.

        10. Christianity remains to this day the greatest misfortune of humanity.
          Friedrich Nietzsche, The Anti-Christ
          Life itself appears to me as an instinct for growth, for survival, for the accumulation of forces, for power: whenever the will to power fails there is disaster. My contention is that all the highest values of humanity have been emptied of this will—that the values of décadence, of nihilism, now prevail under the holiest names. 7. Christianity is called the religion of pity.—Pity stands in
          Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist
          things of the world, the foolish things of the world, the base things of the world, and things which are despised”: [23] this was the formula; in hoc signo the décadence triumphed.—God on the cross—is man always to miss the frightful inner significance of this symbol?—Everything that suffers, everything that hangs on the cross, is divine…. We all hang on the cross, consequently we are divine…. We alone are divine…. Christianity was thus a victory: a nobler attitude of mind was destroyed by it—Christianity remains to this day the greatest misfortune of humanity.—
          Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist
          far off we live. ‘Neither by land nor by sea will you find the way to the Hyperboreans’—Pindar already knew this about us. Beyond the north, ice, and death—our life, our happiness. We have discovered happiness, we know the way, we have found the exit out of the labyrinth of thousands of years. Who else has found it? Modern man perhaps? ‘I have got lost; I am everything that has got lost,’ sighs modern man. This modernity was our sickness: lazy peace, cowardly compromise, the whole virtuous uncleanliness of the modern Yes and No. … Rather live in the ice than among modern virtues and other south winds! We were intrepid enough, we spared neither ourselves nor others; but for a long time we did not know where to turn with our intrepidity. We became gloomy, we were called fatalists. Our fatum—abundance, tension, the damming of strength. We thirsted for lightning and deeds and were most remote from the happiness of the weakling, ‘resignation.’ In our atmosphere was a thunderstorm; the nature we are became dark—for we saw no way. Formula for our happiness: a Yes, a No, a straight line, a goal.
          Friedrich Nietzsche, The Anti-Christ

    1. First thing that jumped out at me. Gun to gun, Muslims wouldn’t stand a chance in a fight in the West. Plus China and the US have something that no Islamic country has: Nukes!
      Not to mention Islam is a fractured society, more interested in fighting themselves 75% of the time.

    2. And that’s the only takeaway you had? You failed ‘thinking 101’, here’s your grade paper.
      Now did you actually have something to bring to the discussion or are you just a useless wanker wasting oxygen? I’ve placed my bets already..

  4. What is ‘Western culture’? How I see it Western culture is not based on any norms or values. It’s a ‘culture’ where you can do what you want and be what you want. Of course, freedom is great, but look what happens when you give people too much freedom. Western societies are one big freakshow, because they want to tolerate everything.
    I also wouldn’t recommend an Islamic society, because it’s too oppressive. And you forget that in an Islamic society Arabs are on the top, followed by Muslims of other ethnicities, then other people from ‘The Book’ like Jews and Christians and finally the non-believers, who are probably slaves.

    1. “Western culture” in a broad sense is Greek and Roman philosophy; Westphalian sovereignty; the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, the science that followed, etc.
      The biggest threat to Western culture are “progressive” moral relativists who believe secularism, human rights and the concept that the individual is more important than the State are morally equivalent to the Islamic Culture of enslavement of women as young as 8, throwing gays off the top of buildings and the barbaric beheading of anyone, anywhere for speaking against the Islamic faith.

    1. Going to be the gadfly I promised to be.
      Is there a moderate ROK heterosexual, patriarchal, masculine man?
      Are we accepting and tolerant of the LGBT and feminist assault on man and masculinity? Are we willing to live side by side and let our wives and children be exposed to Rhianna/Miley/Gaga and the gay-i-fication of the entire western cultural landscape because hey, we heterosexuals have our space as well.
      There is no threat from LGBT, feminists, leftists. We are moderate because we believe we can all get along together.
      All you have to do is start to rephrase the “intellectual” arguments that pose Islam as the problem in a leftist/feminist context.
      The problem is not whether Islam is moderate or not.
      The problem is that MORALITY is not a moderate debate. This is the problem in the west that they refuse to see is Islam’s direct question to us.
      You are right. Islam is not moderate. Belief in God is absolute. Belief in God’s moral laws is absolute. Belief in family, in the heterosexual bond, in traditional gender roles, is absolute and, in The West, a radical religion in that regard.
      So, if I may politely ask you…. what are you moderate about as an ROK reader?

  5. A very important topic, definitely. I personally don’t see any threat in Islam, but rather in third-world immigration – especially from Africa. The population of Africa is projected to hit 3 billion in 2065 – if they flood into our societies and become citizens, it’s game over no matter ideology or religion.

  6. Islam is not a threat to western culture, not to a christian culture. Islam has repeatably failed to push christian culture aside. It is unable to do that as it is inferior to Christianity. But we have pushed Christianity aside in the west. Now Islam only needs to beat secularism and there it will win. Believing in something will always beat belief in nothing.

    1. I have to agree with you on the non threat point (hence this article), but I would ask you to reconsider if Christianity is superior to Islam.
      I mean… Christianity is clearly the loser here. The west was Christian, it is no longer. This is just plain fact no matter how many pockets of various Christian believers are left (and they increasingly being of the music/hand-in-the-air new age variety that appeals to very few men of intelligence and reason).
      Islam on the other hand, is clearly growing and attracting western converts despite the war on Islam that is the ISIS bogey man.
      I am not saying Islam is superior, but clearly, both religions existing side by side in the same cultural context of modernity, Islam is having a better fight in attracting people than it is in repelling them.
      Christianity on the other hand? When was the last time you brought up the message of Christ in social company and got a positive response in the West in ANY context? Is this due strictly and only to bad publicity and false, dishonest discreditation?
      Why does Christianity fall and fail so quickly under intellectual onslaught, but Islam seems to hold its own and gain followers?

      1. Islam is only growing by way of a higher birth rate. By conversion Christianity is kicking Islamic ass and is still the worlds fastest growing faith in numbers vs percentage of growth.
        The problem is that we only see the west and yes Christianity is having a problem in the west. As you said my defense of my faith at work has needed to become more vigorous, as there are more critics than ever. Though I never had a problem putting the fools in their place. Thank God I’m a tradesmen and we have no HR departments. Bottom line outside of prison, Islam is not growing by way of conversion. It is still byway of birth and the sword. IN the modern western world, having babies and killing anyone who leaves the faith is a more effective strategy in Europe than genital persuasion. But not in the rest of the world.
        I live in the West so I share your concern. But I lay the blame on a version of Christianity that has never existed before. One that is more interested in being seen as progressive, than seen as a follower of Christs teachings. My faith spread from 12 men to most of the world and did it with few exception without using conversion by way sword. My faith is stronger it is better. But if not followed it will fail

        1. Yes, thank God everyday for not having an HR department, but even the trades are becoming less safe to speak your mind.
          I can also agree with your premise that Islam is growing by birthrate. That said, does that not prove my point?
          Christianity may be gaining ground in areas of the world outside The West (I am assuming here, but I think this is the case), but fundamentally, it is losing the only war that matters.
          Demographics is politics. And Christianity, no matter where it is growing, is simply not producing the next generation of believers. And the believers it has are dying out and losing the intellectual war for man’s mind. The link you provided has a major caveat attached to its conclusion it does not highlight – that when Muslim lands reach western standards of living, birth rates will drop off. I highly doubt Muslims will stop having babies. What if Muslims attain better standards of living and then KEEP having children? Secondly, why are all those born Muslim NOT leaving Islam? Maybe there are some, but not nearly as many who are leaving Christianity. And what Christianity are people believing in? Despite the versions of Islam that are out there, there are 100s for a Christian to choose from? The Muslims may be at war with one another, but at least there seems to be only three really clear divisions (sunni, wahhbi and shia). How many various sects/churches of Christianity are there? Perhaps Christians are not at war with each other as they were during the Reformation, but the little I am exposed to Christianity in my family shows me that if you belong to this church and not OUR church, you have gone astray and are going to hell. Multiply this 100s of times, and the war of Muslims about doctrine seems irrelevant. They all believe in God, and the all believe in the judgement. They are unified in a way Christians never will be.
          I sympathize with your position and also agree the version of Christianity we have today is a completely false one. One only need read St. Augustine’s City Of God to recognize he sounds more like a Muslim than a Christian! (i.e. He refers to God, not Jesus, almost 95% of the time in his arguments.)
          This is where I think the return of Christ, just my belief, will not be a bodily return, but a return to the original teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church or even earlier. I am talking about going back to the debate about the divinity of Christ and the trinity. I don’t know if you would see this as controversial, but I see it as the only way forward for Christianity to gain intellectual heft and weight against Islam it currently does not have.
          And I do want to see Christianity revive, but it won’t unless it responds to the intellectual challenge Islam has issued.
          Lastly, I believe the site you linked to is one lacking in intellectual depth. It sadly seems to be of the very simplistic version of Islam and it’s myths/falsehoods.
          Case in point, the root of the site quotes the Quran 3:85 as saying: “If
          anyone desires a religion other than Islam, never will he be accepted of God; and
          in the next life, he will be in the ranks of those who have lost themselves and
          will burn in hell.”
          My translation has it:”And whoso seeketh as religion other than Surrender (to Allah), it will not be accepted from him, and he will be a loser in the Hereafter.”
          This is the problem with Christians without knowledge of Arabic. The Arabic language is very nuanced and many words have multiple contexts.
          Islam in this case does not mean surrender to the religion of the Muslims specifically, but surrender to God!
          Do not Christians also believe the same?
          This is what Islam means by Arabic definition… submission… to God’s will and teachings.
          It then goes on to state that whoever does not submit or takes a religion other than submission to God’s will and word is going to lose out on the REWARD of the hereafter, not just the punishment.
          This is why I wrote the article. I want Christians to stop reflexively seeing Islam as some satanic creed and begin to understand that Muslims and Christians are the single most devout and devoted believers and submitters to God’s will. The line between them is so thin, but it is also the very line that Christianity is losing the intellectual debate on and why The West is in decline – no one believes in the concept of a god-man anymore because it is a purely pagan concept. Of course, that is just my belief, but for Christianity to truly win back the hearts and minds of those who have left it, they are going to have come up with the better argument and right now, Islam has it from my perspective.

        2. Agreed with everything except “But if not followed it will fail”, God doesn’t need us to sustain his existence , we need God to sustain ours.

        3. But the possibility that there is no such thing as God should be considered. The West’s religion has morphed to secularism from Christianity. It is now morphing into “Be Nice”. That is why islam will succeed.
          Science must prove that the idea of God is a fantasy. Many people in the West believe this…..the resolve to defend the absurd is shrinking. Islam will not allow its followers to voice the non-existence of God – under threat of death.
          Islam did not spread until mohammed made it political.
          Bill Warner’s
          A reasoned approach to an unreasonable, non-critical thinking ideology. Allah and the angel Gabriel do not and never did exist. However, I cannot prove this any more than I can control a man’s thoughts.
          Prayer is simply a person thinking in his/her mind.There is no “being” listening on the other end.

        4. Sounds interesting. As a spftware engineer, I tend to believe in theories that work when put into practice, tell me, how effective has your atheist theory been in keeping your society healthy and strong?

        5. Then we agree 100% I certainly didn’t mean God fails I didn’t mean Christianity fails I meant our Western culture fails without Christianity. Not followed it’s useless God gave that to us for us not for him

        6. On the whole, not too badly thanks. I’m in Canada – relatively peaceful, prosperous, enough food to eat, low infant mortality rate, low violent crime rate (relative to most of the world), long life expectancy, quite a comfortable living. I’m pretty happy overall.
          I can spend my leisure time typing away at a computer instead of scrounging for scraps or worrying about being jailed or killed for offending the name of some pedophile warlord who hallucinated about talking to angels 1500 years ago and copied “religious” tenets from other superstitious primitives.
          Better than living in Pakistan, Iran or Syria, I guess.

        7. Your obsession with the material is going to destroy you my friend.
          The morale of your military is collapsing, Your men are regarded as expendable by your family courts, your women are filth, your borders are porous. You have grown fat and corrupt, your children are disconnected and miseducated into believing concepts that will ruin any chance they have at having long term relationships, those same children know almost nothing of your history or the classic texts of your culture, your family structure is broken, and you are simply not producing enough children to replace your people.
          What is most pathetic you are incapable of seeing and thus addressing the danger.
          You are going down the exact same path that every materially successful civilization has gone down before their destruction at the hands of a more primitive yet more focused civilization.
          The Carthagians were ruined by the Romans even tho they fought better, had better tactics, more wealth, far better technology, etc. The Persians were ass raped by the Greeks even tho they had such wealth that the Macedonians couldn’t believe what they were seeing.
          You are confusing material and technological success with spiritual and philosophical health. Material and technological success are signs of spiritual health, but are not the same. A body can seem quite healthy, but a trained doctor can realize from a few signs that there is a dangerous cancer growing throughout the system.
          You my friend are blind, but what is terrifying is that you are not aware that you are blind.

        8. Should I become a monk? And I didn’t realize that my woman was filth. Should I throw acid in her face?

      2. “Why does Christianity fall and fail so quickly under intellectual onslaught, but Islam seems to hold its own and gain followers?”
        Because in the Middle east, in some muslim countries, if you simply reject islam, you die, that’s a good enough reason for most people to remain as followers/converts. Do you really want to support that ideology, and bring it to the west? The west is failing, because it is rejecting Christianity, the western nations that embraced Christianity in history have advanced society, and accomplished marvels because they worshipped the one true Christian God, it’s why all the nations who don’t worship Christ are still lacking in Tech, and need financial aid from the christian west, and why the west now as the youth rebel against god, is starting to become strange, with SJW ideologies, feminism , LGBT, abortion, ect ect. Still though, the middle east Land of Islam, Is dangerous and barbaric (disagree with Islam and you die) and the customs are messed up, Men can have sex with boys, and men can have sex with each other , a buddy of mine in the military returned from the middle east, and said the middle eastern dudes were screwing each other all the time. No thanks, in comparison western christian nations are still lightyears ahead of muslim nations .Islam deserves the reputation it has.

        1. I have to agree. The only reason Islam is spreading is mostly through fear, strength and violence.
          Western nations have been willing to accept people who embrace Islam but the same could not be said the other way around (you only need to look to the Middle East to see an example). I would have to say that yes, Christianity is superior to Islam in this way.
          Many want to excuse “moderate Muslims” but we don’t hear or see these moderates rallying to condemn what’s going on with the “radical Muslims”….that should be a cause for concern. If you’re not speaking out against it, then you are for it (or at least accept it as a way of life).

        2. “Many want to excuse “moderate Muslims” but we don’t hear or see these
          moderates rallying to condemn what’s going on with the “radical
          Muslims”….that should be a cause for concern”
          I agree with you !
          those moderates do nothing except, verbally condemn those terrorists (and by condeming, i mean : quickly come to explain that islam is a religion of peace blablabla and killing people and shouting alla akbar has nothing to do with religion) and sometimes, pray for victims. praying doesn’t cost much for those people who do this many times a day. That’s fucking hypocrisy.

        3. Is that the ONLY reason it’s spreading? You don’t think that mere reaction to the degeneracy of the west is a reason? I consider it parallel with Trump. I think Trump is a pretty awful guy, and would make for a scary leader. But he is spreading like wildfire and extremely popular, and has a good chance of winning. Is the ONLY reason he is winning because of his message? Or is it because Hillary is so horrible?
          I liken Hillary to the western corrupt degenerate society and Trump to Islam.

      3. “Why does Christianity fall and fail so quickly under intellectual onslaught, but Islam seems to hold its own and gain followers?”
        I have thought about this a considerable amount. I believe the answer simply has to do with chronology. When “Enlightenment Ideals” began to take hold in Christendom, the Christians were not able to see the downsides associated with this mentality (unbridled sexual degeneracy, moral laxity etc…) and thus were more taken by storm.
        The leaders of the Muslim community can tell their followers “Look what various non-Muslim ideas will get you! Just like the Babylon our Qu’ran described!”. Christendom did not have this luxury.

        1. We say it fell quickly, but in truth it’s taken centuries.
          The reason Islam won’t die is because the religious authorities consider the Gates of Ishtihad closed – no further interpretations are needed or possible. Anyone who questions a long-held tenet is a heretic whose head and body will not long be connected. If they did as some moderates claim to wish, and opened again the Gates, they would fall faster than Japan in the post-war period.
          Christianity has slept long in the West, but many Christians are waking up. We see it here, in the works of bloggers like Vox Day or Dalrock, and everywhere else. When one reads the Scriptures and listens to pastors, one either rejects the Scriptures or rejects the pastors (because they do not preach the same thing). I anxiously await the coming reformation – one cannot worship both Christ and pussy.

      4. I agree that in the current zeitgeist, Islam is superior to Christianity simply for the fact that it is winning the demographic game.
        Looking at the situation objectively, the inverted moral system of Christianity is what gave birth to modern liberalism, progressivism and veneration of the weak and useless.
        Missionary Christianity is responsible for the third world population boom which will end ultimately in those millions and millions of people they “saved” dying horribly from starvation when the economic system fails and we are no longer able to give them our technology which they are now dependent on and unable to produce themselves.
        Of course now we see that the problems they caused by initiating this population boom are now becoming a noose around our necks within our own lands as hordes and hordes of foreign peoples flood to our degenerate shores and we must roll out the red carpet for them of course. All while our own cancer of the mind kills us.
        This is symptomatic of a perverted universalist moral system which is ultimately self annihilating.
        Christianity may not be the root cause of the Indo European’s suicidal altruism but it certainly has been a vehicle to give it catastrophic power.
        When you break the laws of Nature for ignorant, naive idealism we shall see an armageddon like scenario of suffering and death. Almost seems like a self fulfilling prophecy doesn’t it?
        Islam succeeds because it has virile males who will fight for it, die for it and kill for it. Christianity had this in the medieval era but that form of religion is completely different than the modern iterations.

        1. Missionary Christianity is responsible for the third world population
          boom which will end ultimately in those millions and millions of people
          they “saved” dying horribly from starvation when the economic system
          fails and we are no longer able to give them our technology which they
          are now dependent on and unable to produce themselves.

          How? Most (>95%) of donations in food and shelter that go to Africa and other benighted places are from secular charities (Bill Gates et al). Moreover modern missionaries have been largely unable to really convert those people (medieval methods would have been more effective but faith and strength are necessary for that)

        2. Are you saying that evangelical christianity has been completely ineffective at converting people in Africa? Also that they have had zero role in vaccinating children, building them free shit(which they can’t seem to do themselves) and otherwise offering free medications, food and shelter?
          The continent of Africa used to have an infant mortality rate that was supported by their indigenous populations. They were in a state of homeostasis without our help. Now that is changed with what we have given them and the negative effects we are going to feel across the entire world.
          That is what happens ignorant fools and females just simply can’t leave people to their own devices. They simply CAN”T let any brown babies die.
          When I was going to these churches I remember several of the young girls always talk about how they “have a heart for Africa”. Meanwhile their own families and countrymen wallow in various problems which they are completely blind or unwilling to do a fucking thing about.

        3. Are you saying that evangelical christianity has been completely ineffective at converting people in Africa?

          Yes and a thousand times yes. One can’t give what one lacks. Those ridiculous people you mention wouldn’t recognize true Christian doctrine even if it falls from heaven and knocks them on the head; hence they are unfit to transmit anything. My personal experiences with those people of African descent (in the Americas as well as those coming from Africa) is that most that bother to go through the motions (baptism et al) go to the services at day and at night they consult with their shamans; hence headlines like these are common in that benighted land

          Snatched on their way to school then castrated or decapitated: Horrifying rise in child human sacrifice in Uganda at the hands of witch doctors

          The only sincere converts you will find are those that have made their research about what Christian doctrine is about and then decided to convert, in the absence of this approach:

          The West lacks faith and has been lacking faith since the 19th century at least, hence Africa’s colonization didn’t include Christianization of Africans as a priority, something that happened in the Americas partially with the Spanish conquest. The girls that you reference are as lost as those savages, the only difference in this is that she doesn’t know its lost…and lives off the accumulated wealth(knowledge, infrastructure, culture) created by her ancestors under the aegis of religion foreign to her and her contemporaries.
          Moreover I doubt those “churches” have the scope of the UN programmes or the private “charities” conspicuously interested in the “welfare” of the continent…hahahaha

      5. Well, such pressure is what always made and makes Christianity strong.
        Just look at china and their estimated 100 million Christians.
        There Christians are still killed for their beliefs and get disadvantages by the government.
        Yet it keeps growing.
        The problem here doesn’t seem to be Christianity but the circumstantial fact that civilizations that succeeded always start to fall.

      6. So I take it you’d rather live in a society where if you criticize the belief system, you’d be tortured or executed? That’s one of the reasons Islam doesn’t falter under ‘intellectual pressure’… because they don’t allow intellectual pressure. Islam is standing a better fight in attracting people now because people need something new and shiny. Why not point out the fact that Islamists are migrating to Christian countries much faster than the other way around? If Islam produced superior fruit, they’d have no need to migrate.

      7. I’m starting to question your intelligence. Christianity failed under the onslaught because it had white people with IQs about 100 examining it, obviously. Darwin was questioning it in the 1800s. Now think to yourself, what is the profile if a typical Muslim? That’s right, uneducated with an IQ hovering around 80.
        Religion can be directly correlated to the followers’ socioeconomic status.

  7. Excellent article. Thank you ROK and Maximus for writing such an insightful article. I am a Muslim from Bangladesh. Been reading this site for a year now. I love all the articles regarding relationships with girls, friends and family as I find them very relatable with my Muslim ideology. The western overlords are master manipulators, at home they are pissing the decent white folks with their ‘tolerance, equality, hey we all love Muslims’ crap while the government has created is and AL qaeda, funding them, giving them weapons which helps destroying once moderate countries like Syria, while already destroying Afghanistan, Iraq and so on. This hypocrisy absolutely sickens me.
    As a Muslim let me tell you, we got lot of problems, most of us in Asia don’t like the Arabs much, they oppress Muslims from poor Muslim countries whenever our workers visit there for work, they are filled with power hungry corrupted rulers, and guess who is all of their best friend? The US government of course, they don’t give two craps about democracy if it means the Arab rulers are obeying them. As most readers of this site are knowledgeable enough, I ask you all not to consider us Muslims as your best friend or anything, just don’t believe everything your government says, research about it and then make your own mind, like any decent man would do.

    1. Can’t agree more. Having a Pakistani girlfriend, I was surprised to hear that many Pakistani’s agree with much of our criticism on the refugee crisis, due to their issues with Afghani refugees bringing in Taliban.

      1. You know what baffles me? When I see liberal trash like Huffington post something good about Islam, do these liberal idiots not know that Islam doesnt support any of their degenerate ideas yet they defend it on their publications? Of course they do, they aren’t actually idiots, they do a very good job of riling people up while maintaining the facade of being tolerante and whatever else the flavor of the week is.

        1. I find it amazing how progressives hate Christianity but continue to twist themselves into pretzels to defend the most violent religion/ideology ever known to mankind.

        2. Muslims and Christians have killed each other, either via crusade or holy wars for centuries. Neither Christianity or Islam is to blame solely, rather the people who make up their own version of ideology and don’t hesitate to butcher people in the name of it even when it’s forbidden.

        3. The Crusades were defensive wars, a direct response to Muslim aggression and an attempt to turn back and defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands. Palestine, Syria and Egypt were once the most heavily Christian areas in the world until those areas were conquered by Islam; By 8th century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the 11th century, the Turks conquered Asia Minor (i.e. Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. You need to educate yourself.

        4. Exactly.
          And to answer on one of your other comments: being a practicing Christian myself, it is sad to see how mentally castrated many westerners have become. They are so afraid to have an ‘unpopular’ opinion, they are willing to sell out everything they believe in… or claimed to believe in.

        5. I have a lot of interests in history. Especially Islamic History. Was researching about one of the greatest heroes and leaders of Islam , Salahuddin Al Ayubi. The greatest leader said to tread the earth after the Khulafah I Rashidoon. The greatest military tactician after the great Khaleed ibn Waleed. He was the man who forgave the crusaders after they’ve killed 70000 Muslims inside Jerusalem when they marched in.
          When 600000 crusaders behind king Richard laid siege on the holy city he wrote letters to other kings of Muslim cities. but nobody came to his aid. none.
          Still , he managed to get a truce from king Richard who said as long as Salahuddin is alive nobody will defeat the Muslims.

        6. “do these liberal idiots not know that Islam doesnt support any of their
          degenerate ideas yet they defend it on their publications?”
          That’s because the progressives see Islam as a useful tool to destroy Christianity and Western Civilization so they can build the New World Order.

        7. Correct me if I’m wrong but Islamic scholarship divides the world in two:
          1) The House of Islam (dar al-Islam), i.e. Nations submitted to Islamic rule.
          2) The House of War (dar al-harb), i.e. Nations that have not submitted to Islam but must be submitted according to Islamic doctrine.
          Thus, Muslims (dar al-Islam) believe they must make war upon non-Muslims (dar al-harb) until all nations submit to the will of Allah and accept Sharia law. Am I correct?

        8. That’s the thing, there’s so many iterations. You are basically explaining the wahabbi doctrine pushed by the Saudis which divides the world into us vs them. Then there’s the doctrine of shiites who vehemently opposes the salafists. Unfortunately for Muslims, there had been so many interpretations of so many sects, the wild ones like these are widely circulated among the rather ignorant Muslims who start going on this path.

        9. The notions of “houses” or “divisions” of the world in Islam such as Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb does not appear in the Quran or the Hadith, the only authoritative sources of Islam.According to Abou El Fadl, the only dar the Qur’an speaks of is “the abode of the Hereafter and the above of the earthly life, with the former described as clearly superior to the latter”. Early Islamic jurists devised these terms to denote legal rulings for ongoing Muslim conquests almost a century after Muhammad. The first use of the terms was in Iraq by Abu Hanifa and his disciples Abu Yusuf and Al-Shaybani. Among those in the Levant, Al-Awza’i was leading in this discipline and later Shafi’i.
          That’s the funny thing about Islam and all religions really, the interpretation are always more dangerous than the original message which is rather vague and left to you, however you want to see it. That’s how I see it anyway, the radicalized bastards who kills innocents in the name of religion, they see it how they want to see.

        10. It’s because at the core, they are both death cults. They share the same modus operandi: they both aim to subvert societies, they both promote and glorify violence against dissenters, and they both can’t stand any criticism whatsoever.

        11. This is very true, but at the end of the day, you can strip both Islam and Christianity out as a religion and simply see this as one empire encroaching on anothers.
          The trouble today as then is that Islam is the more patriarchal religion. As one author on Islam wrote “Muslims take God seriously.” Hence, they are more reactionary (and yes, even violent), to what they see as threats to their way of life.
          Perhaps the Muslims did get out of hand in the 8th century and go beyond God’s calling for them then. This is why when Genghis Khan came rolling through (who Saddam Hussein still blamed for the devastation of present day Iraq) and learned of Islam and the all powerful true One God, he said something to the effect.”
          “Well then, if your God is all powerful, He clearly sent me as punishment.”
          Today, it is the reverse. This time it is secular/western nations having invaded Muslim lands in clear violation of any God or secular will and we are now reaping the blowback.
          In the end, it is looking like God is going to sort this whole thing out eventually. Unfortunately, it is looking like it will take a mushroom cloud or two in order to do so.

        12. Sadly, I do believe you are correct. I need to do more research on this specific topic, but for the majority Muslim view, I do believe this is the accepted understanding of the division of peoples with respect to acceptance/non-acceptance of Islam
          That said… today there is a HUGE gulf in intellectual, philosophical and moral understanding of the House Of Islam and the House Of War.
          I am going off the top of my head, but I do believe it was traditionally understood in more enlightened Islam that these two houses were primarily intellectual and internal spiritual wars.
          There is no compulsion in religion, but if you stir up trouble in the state by declaring you are not only a non-believer, but an opponent (we must remember Islam is both a religion and political entity), then yes, there is going to be a war against unbelievers.
          Which… as harsh a phrase as war with unbelievers is… flip your perspective and look at the war ROK is waging on the left, SJWs and LGBT.
          What are we saying? We believe these ways are wrong, but just don’t force it on us and we won’t force our views on you?
          We believe that left/feminist/SJW/LGBT is MORALLY corrupting and degrading society. And if left unchallenged and allowed to not just continue, but expand, it poses a very threat to the way of life of every heterosexual man and woman.
          So… does ROK have a House of Islam and a House of War?
          Makes one think does it not?

        13. I do think that God sent the muslims to punish the west.
          It is no coincidence that France, the epicenter of The Enlightenment has suffered the worst attacks from radical Islam, ISIS even singled-out France to be the main victims of their terror.
          The 2015 Paris attacks at the theater? The victims killed were listening to a satanic band, “Eagles of Death Metal” playing “Kiss the Devil.”
          85 People crushed by a truck? The were celebrating Bastille Day……
          As for the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, that needs no explanation….

        14. The fourth crusade threw the notion that the crusades were a defensive war against Islamic encroachment right out of the window. Mighty Catholics marched in defense of Christianity only to obliterate the last stronghold of Byzantine and ironically in turn facilitate its eventual conquest by Muslims.

        15. Those terminologies do not appear in the Quran or the Hadith, the two sources that make up what constitutes what is considered Sharia Law.

        16. Your response is, word for word, from wikipedia:

          The notions of “houses” or “divisions” of the world in Islam such as Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb does not appear in the Quran or the Hadith, the only authoritative sources of Islam.According to Abou El Fadl, the only dar the Qur’an speaks of is “the abode of the Hereafter and the above of the earthly life, with the former described as clearly superior to the latter”. Early Islamic jurists devised these terms to denote legal rulings for ongoing Muslim conquests almost a century after Muhammad. The first use of the terms was in Iraq by Abu Hanifa and his disciples Abu Yusuf and Al-Shaybani. Among those in the Levant, Al-Awza’i was leading in this discipline and later Shafi’i.

        17. All schools of Islam agree that Apostates must be killed and Non-Muslims must be subjugated or killed. 1.6 billion Muslims are Muslims because they are either a) ignorant of the Quran and hadiths or b) fully agree with them.

        18. This. The purpose of demonizing Christianity is to erode faith. When that is done, it is hoped by totalitarians that people will turn to the State as their savior.

        19. Fair enough. Contrary to my previous posts, I admire and respect the faith and see the good for which it essentially stands. However, something must be said about the dangerous nihilistic trend that is growing within Islam.

        20. False equivalency right there-your point is nonsensical because I don’t see ROK actively promoting that people hunt down SJWS and subjugate them and kill them or commit any other violent acts upon Feminists.
          As regards your compulsion argument-taken from
          The word “let” is not in the Arabic, so the verse is not an imperative. What it actually says is “there is no compulsion in religion…” It is a statement that true belief can’t be forced. However, this is not to say that others can’t be forced into an outward manifestation of faith, such as the pillars of Islam:
          Allah’s Apostle (Muhammad) 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.” Bukhari 8:387
          Even within the same sura (chapter) of the Quran that verse 256 appears, Muslims are instructed to “fight with them (non-Muslims) until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah. (v. 2:193)” Apologists will claim that this applied to the people of Mecca. They forget to add that the Meccans were later forcibly converted.
          Sura 2 is from the early Medinan period. It was “revealed” at a time when the Muslims had just arrived in Medina after being chased out of Mecca. They needed to stay in the good graces of the stronger tribes around them, many of which were Jewish. It was around this time, for example, that Muhammad decided to have his followers change the direction of their prayer from Mecca to Jerusalem.
          But Muslims today pray toward Mecca. The reason for this is that Muhammad issued a later command that abrogated (or nullified) the first. In fact, abrogation is a very important principle to keep in mind when interpreting the Quran – and verse 2:256 in particular – because later verses (in chronological terms) are said to abrogate any earlier ones that may be in contradiction (Quran 2:106, 16:101).
          Muhammad’s message was far closer to peace and tolerance during his early years, when he didn’t have an army and was trying to pattern his new religion after Christianity. This changed dramatically after he attained the power to conquer, which he eventually used with impunity to bring other tribes into the Muslim fold. Contrast verse 2:256 with Suras 9 and 5, which were the last “revealed,” and it is easy to see why Islam has been anything but a religion of peace from the time of Muhammad to the present day.
          Though most Muslims today reject the practice of outright forcing others into changing their religion, forced conversion has been a part of Islamic history since Muhammad first picked up a sword. As he is recorded in many places as saying, “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah…” (See Bukhari 2:25)
          Muhammad put his words into practice. When he marched into Mecca with an army, one of his very first tasks was to destroy idols at the Kaaba, which had been devoutly worshipped by the Arabs for centuries. By eliminating these objects of worship, he destroyed the religion of the people and supplanted it with his own. Those who would not convert were killed or evicted. Later, he ordered that Jews and Christians be expelled from Arabia. Does forcing others to choose between their homes or their faith sound like “no compulsion in religion?”
          According to Muslim historians, Muhammad eventually ordered people to attend prayers at the mosque to the point of burning alive those who didn’t comply. He also ordered that children who reached a certain age be beaten if they refused to pray.
          Interestingly, even the same contemporary Muslims who quote 2:256 usually believe in Islamic teachings that sound very much like religious compulsion. These would be the laws punishing apostasy by death (or imprisonment, for females), and the institutionalized discrimination against religious minorities under Islamic rule that is sometimes referred to as “dhimmiitude.”
          Islamic law explicitly prohibits non-Muslims from sharing their faith and even includes the extortion of money from them in the form of a tax called the jizya. Those who refuse to pay this arbitrary amount are put to death. If this isn’t compulsion, then what is?

        21. Maybe if Byzantines weren’t such backstabbing bastards you might have a point. The Crusaders in that instance while no saints themselves their attack was not unprovoked.

        22. Precisely why I wrote this article – to highlight the very deep influence of Saudi Arabia, and thus American and thus… on this current and completely unhistorical interpretation of Islam.

        23. How about the Northern crusades against Eastern Orthodox Russians and Pagans? Also justified, I suppose. The fact is the crusades were a power play on the part of Kings and/or Lords who sought fame and fortune, first in the Holy lands then in Europe proper.

        24. I bet you cannot even name ALL the schools of Islam, let alone defend such a blanket statement that ALL schools are in agreement.

        25. I want to thank you for this long reply. It is far too long for me to go into specifically, but what I can say is that the hadiths are given far more weight today than they were before. They were important yes, but earlier Islam was more about the spirit, not the letter, of Quran and Hadith interpretation and application. I think the same can be said when all religions reach a critical point of age, especially when they are under threat (as is Christianity).
          With respect to the “religion of peace”, I would say this is again a matter of perspective. That is, historical.
          Islam was not just a religion anymore than Christianity was. It was a political system and thus a means of state organization and unification. Was not the Inquisition the same thing as compulsion by the sword? The seeking out of heretics who disbelieved and were seen as threats to the church (i.e. the state).
          I guess what I have tried to do with this article is focus on the positives that Islam has as a religious system and what it can teach The West about its past greatness. This does not absolve Islam of past transgressions and misdeeds, but it should not be framed in ONLY the light of evil and tyranny any more than Christian Europe was during it’s crusading and colonial errors.
          Islam is not going to come through this crucible intact. Everything is up for re-interpretation and re-visioning, Christianity and Islam.
          What I hope this article achieves is the start of a dialogue between Christians in The West and Muslims who are living with them. Good, true and pious Muslims may very well cite as problems all the very things you have listed above with their religion. Keeping the anger and hate for Islam is a black and white, us vs them, tactic and it only serves one purpose – to keep the people divided so those that rule can increase their control and enslavement of all humanity.

        26. This may be what is driving the ideology of those that are committing the attacks, but the ideology has been created in order to destabilize Europe for the purpose of divide and rule. Make no mistake, ANY European nation now that even hints at talking with Russia (as France did in openly calling for stopping the sanctions) is going to be “attacked” by radical Islamic terrorists.
          The flip side of that coin is that France, being ground zero of radical leftist/socialist/atheist thought, is also reaping what it has sown. I think someone commented on here somewhere that after the French priest was killed, the French police stormed a barricaded church that was scheduled for demolition to be turned into a parking lot.
          The French, of all Europe, are the people that have most arrogantly and brazenly abandoned and denied God.
          When you reap both divine judgement and temporal conspiracy, you reap one hell of a punishment.

        27. You know what baffles me? This guy just said he has a Pakistani girlfriend and you’re not off preaching about there’s no dating in Islam, lmao.

        28. As well-intentioned as your article is the truth of the matter is this ‘moderate’ vs ‘radical’ Moslem matter is a false dichotomy.
          The Koran, so they say, was descended, word for word, from the creator Allah, through Muhammad. This is accepted throughout the entirety of the Islamic word. If we take this speculation as accurate information of Islam, then every Moslem is supposed to follow Allah’s verses exactly in order to be a good Moslem and to be considered a representative of the real ideology and religion of Islam. Muhammad himself repeatedly said that two things a Moslem should follow are the Koran (words of Allah) and the Hadith (Muhammad’s teachings).
          Considering this information and based on these standards, a true Moslem, who represent the real Islam, should be the one who follows and obeys Allah’s words (from the Qur’an) completely. As a result, anyone who ignores some of the rules is not, and cannot be, considered a reflection of Islam, a good Moslem, or even a Moslem. Accordingly, Allah’s words and rules are not a menu at a Chinese restaurant where you can pick and choose from, meaning that one cannot obey some orders and disregard others.

        29. As well-intentioned as your article is the truth of the matter is this ‘moderate’ vs ‘radical’ Moslem matter is a false dichotomy.
          The Koran, so they say, was descended, word for word, from the creator Allah, through Muhammad. This is accepted throughout the entirety of the Islamic word. If we take this speculation as accurate information of Islam, then every Muslim is supposed to follow Allah’s verses exactly in order to be a good Moslem and to be considered a representative of the real ideology and religion of Islam. Muhammad himself repeatedly said that two things a Moslem should follow are the Qur’an (words of Allah) and the Hadith (Muhammad’s teachings).
          Considering this information and based on these standards, a true Moslem, who represents the real Islam, should be the one who follows and obeys Allah’s words (from the Koran) completely. As a result, anyone who ignores some of the rules is not, and cannot be, considered a reflection of Islam, a good Moslem, or even a Moslem. Accordingly, Allah’s words and rules are not a menu at a Chinese restaurant where you can pick and choose from, meaning that one cannot obey some orders and disregard others.

        30. When you have an army full of drunk degenerates, who are essentially stuck in Byzantine, and have been working themselves up for bloodlust, what’d anyone expect?

        31. I have been wondering why there is such an ongoing demonisation of Russia coming from the west. Latest theory is that it’s just that it’s a system completely outside US control. Even if many of their values are similar, they are a powerful country, but all their banking, surveillance etc is their own system, whereas all kinds of countries around the world are already under a US umbrella as such, if they want to see inside they can.. So yeah, that could be a driver..

    2. Who would have an issue with Muslims who want to be left alone in their own nations? Not I. I am well aware of the way oil rich Arabs treat their supposed Muslims bothers and sisters, who come out of Indonesia and Pakistan. They treat them like slaves. And a lot of us know that US politicians are in the back pockets of Arab oil. In my eyes I see this as due to the rejection of the faith of our fathers. We no longer behave as Christians

      1. That’s the thing I don’t get about Christians in USA or rather in all of West really, why have they become such a shell of their former self? I mean there are churches that conducts gay weddings, how the hell that makes sense! Christianity, like Islam, doesn’t support homo sexuality yet I see Christians bending over backwards for anything liberal while the true conservative ones are labeled as ‘insert word’ phobe. West is in a decline cos Christians no longer stand up for themselves.

        1. Your words are true. But Jesus told us this would happen.
          “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many
          will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your
          name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your
          name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

        2. Most of us Muslims revere Jesus, whom we call Isaa, a lot. We believe he will return before end times to finally end all degeneracy and evil. It’s nothing short of baffling how his followers have become so ignorant of their identity.

        3. Jesus also addressed our acceptance of degeneracy
          “Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad; for a tree is known by its fruit.”
          If your works produce evil, then you are not good. If our acceptance produces degeneracy, then we are degenerate

        4. You know most people in West have this view ‘I don’t care what they do in their personal life /Bed room as long as it doesn’t affect me’. In my opinion this has helped ushered all the degeneracy that we see today. Because people didn’t care, the liberals build it slow, took their time and now they are dominating. I used to love American TV shows and movies, I learnt most of my English speaking from watching movies, I can’t stand any modern TV show and movies anymore. What’s with their forced feminazi, lgbtquwtf message and what not, it’s sad to see it becoming like this.

        5. You’re right while it isn’t any of my business what anyone does to themselves and themselves alone. If it affects anyone else, if it can pervert a child, it is my business.

        6. Quote: “I don’t care what they do in their personal life /Bed room as long as it doesn’t affect me.”
          Morality. Somehow, to be “western” today means you must NOT have a moral stance/opinion/belief on anything.
          If you really want to boil down the left/secular right/conservative divide, that is all you need.
          Are you asking a moral question or making a moral judgement?
          You are evil and a Nazi.

        7. It’s always sounds good to say whatever an adult does is their own business. but when somebody makes a business out of preying on human weakness. that person is a blight on society and needs to be taken care of much like taking care of a Predator. you don’t want an alligator eating your children so you kill it. A man who encourages addiction and manipulates minds a man who destroys other human beings. Evwn if they are weak ones. That’s a man who needs to be hung from a telephone pole with a sign around him saying this is what we do to scum.

        8. I’m just to opposed to all the child worship in the west. Adults are more developed, more valuable creatures than children, and while children should be protected, I see so many who are making all these sacrifices “living for their children”, children who will lazily squander the earnings of the father who went without vacations, a decent car, or a comfortable mattress because he “lived for his kids”. Kids are nothing but adults in training.

        9. In other words kids are nothing but our future. and as they are children they are unable to fend for themselves they require help.
          I’m rather certain you don’t have kids and your line has no future. Think about it. Yes ” do it for the children” is an overused excuse for the control freaks in this world to control us all. But yes children are more important than most anything else we do. If you don’t think so you’re perfectly free to let your line go extinct

        10. If kids are the future then adults are the present. I may die tomorrow, so I live in the present. Carlin puts it succinctly as only he could:

          Your children are not more important than me, sorry. If you want to elevate YOUR children as more important than YOU, then go ahead, but I’m not jumping on that ship.
          (It has nothing to do with extinction or whether or not Carlin or I have children.)

        11. You see I really don’t care what your opinion is. my children are more important than you are and more important Nathan I am. Our culture agrees with us so at this present time you’re out of luck. you disagree that’s fine go be a genetic dead-end. The day that your point of view becomes the majority. That is the last generation for this culture. your philosophy is a death wish.

        12. “I don’t really care what your opinion is…”
          Proceeds to address me personally and talk in the first person.
          Back to square one.

        13. You see what you don’t get is that on this subject what you’re promoting is the exact opposite of the average human’s Instinct regarding their children. you’re not going to get a lot of respect on this one. And if your point-of-view ever spread to any great degree it’s the death of that society.
          I’ve seen enough of your opinions to know that me and you agree on a lot of things. but that you’re quite a believe that our society is pretty much doomed. You are a enjoy the decline sort of fellow. while I’m far more optimistic. I’m a let’s avoid the decline and fix the problems as best we can guy. I’m going to guess that’s due to me having several children and several grandchildren and you not. I have an investment in the future and a bias towards getting it right. In this area we are fundamental opposites

    3. The Arab aristocracy cares little about Islam and always uses it as a way of oppressing their people and coating themselves in a veneer of authentic, sincere faith that’s as real as a slut’s love.
      Don’t believe me? Look up Tag The Sponsor, where wealthy Emirati noblemen and businessmen hire Instagram whores to do the most depraved sex acts imaginable. This isn’t as much a fault for the girl as it is for that hypocrite who claims to follow an incredibly puritanical religion and then does the exact opposite. Correct me if I’m wrong, but hypocrisy is the second greatest sin in Islam is it not? Punished by drowning in ice water in Hell if I’m not mistaken.
      Syria was one of the only secular states omit Lebanon in the region, with the Al-Assads protecting the rights of the Christian minorities. He also housed many Jews, so long as they disavowed Israel. Iran does the same, so much so they built a monument to fallen Jewish soldiers of the Iranian Armed Forces during the war with the western pawn Saddam Hussein (who they discarded when they wanted his precious oil).
      The goal of the US is to split the triad of Anti-Zionism, namely Iran, Iraq and Syria, in order to satisfy the vicious kikes running their government.
      It is a falsehood to believe someone is against someone because they are attacking them. There is such a thing as lying. Example: During one of my many games of Crusader Kings II multiplayer, I had my son join the side of the rebels against me. As I couldn’t kill him, he served as tempting bait. After I won, due in no small part to my “son” (another player playing a nobleman of my family) giving me information about their battle plans. I then squashed it, took their lands and when my son came to the throne, he was all the more powerful.
      I have a great respect for true Muslims, Arab or Asian, though my investigation into the factuality of Islam is ongoing and I won’t commit to any religion until I have objective facts on my side. Given I couldn’t care less about Europe and care everything for my family, I have no quarrel with Islam … until it touches my family.

      1. I absolutely hate the Saudis, they call us Asian workers as ‘Miskin’ which is the Arabic for beggar. They beat the shit outta our workers, both male and female. They take the passports of the works so that they can’t leave the country until the contract is over. Saudi royal family is home to some of the worst degenerates out there. They say they care about Islam while drinking alcohol in private and fucking around with any girl they can find. Some brotherhood we are part of Hah.

        1. One of the many fallacies of the cuckservatives (neo-“conservatives”, who in reality are imperialist pawns of the Jewish lobbies) is to believe that Islam is a united front. Iraq was invaded for many reasons, one of them being Saddam’s newfound hatred of the West and the great devil, Israel.

      2. Syria is such a devastating story, breaks my heart. It used to be one of the most liberal and secular places with a Muslim majority, and now look at them. We get so panicked after one attack, while they are living like that and worse every single day.

        1. Quote: “It used to be one of the most liberal and secular places with a Muslim majority, and now look at them.”
          This is precisely WHY “they” had to not just remove Assad, but completely destroy Syria as a nation state. A secular, pious, tolerant, multi-faith Muslim nation and people does not dove tail with the “evil” Muslims meme.

        2. Ignoring the fact Hillary caused a false flag attack in order to invade it, breaking the third and final part in the Anti-Zionist triad.

    4. South Asian muslims absolutely WORSHIP Arabs and wish to be one of them. I have never met one Pakistani that didn’t claim to be Middle Eastern/Arab and had some weird fascination with them. Muslims in South Asia aren’t protesting the way their own people are being in treated in the Gulf because they’re too pussy to defend themselves. Instead they’ll bandwagon on the ‘Free Palestine’ movement which has absolutely nothing to do with them. KSA would rather build mosques to push Wahhabism in South Asia than provide actual help. It’s shame that the US accepts so many students from there who bring their sexual depravity here.
      As someone who has been dealing with Muslims from the Middle East and South Asia even before 9/11- I couldn’t stand them then and I still don’t now.

      1. Really, South Asians worship Arabs? Tell it to all these countless poor Bangladeshi workers who were abused like slaves by the Saudis, tell it to those housemaids who went to work in Kuwait and Jordan and would be regularly beaten everytime they want to eat. You are basing your whole opinions of South Asian Muslims by how some pakis behave. Bangladesh used to be part of Pakistan, but we broke off of them because we couldn’t stand the oppression and hypocricy all under the name of Islam. As far as I have seen, common people don’t give two shits about Arab because the way they treat us.

        1. South Asian MUSLIMS are obsessed with Arabs and Middle Easterners; come to America and you will see exactly what I’m talking about. The self hatred of being South Asian and wanting to be Arab. Here’s what I don’t understand about South Asians and I want you to explain this to me. Why do you guys all hate each other? Pakistanis vs Indians vs Bangladeshis. Can’t tell you how much racist shit I’ve heard over the years (especially towards dark skinned people) when there’s supposedly no racism in Islam. No wonder why Winston Churchill thought you guys were idiots. South Asians would rather fight each other than fight the ones who actually oppress you (the Arabs), refuse to give you citizenship, and fight their Palestine battle. It’s pathetic.

        2. Yes, that’s how stupid South Asians are- they keep going back there when they know they’re going to be treated like shit. The Muslim community (in the West at least) it’s a greater compliment to be told “you look Arab” than it is to be told “you look Desi” due to the immense of amount of self hatred you guys have.
          Rather than Pakis, Indians, and Bangladeshis joining forces to stop the Arabs from treating you like shit you guys would rather fight each other with the Pakis and Bangladeshis desperately trying to convince Arabs they’re like them. You hate each other for no real reason, let the Arabs oppress you, stand up for Palestine and not for your own rights, work in Arab countries that will never give you citizenship. South Asians are fucking fools. No wonder why Winston Churchill hated you guys.

  8. The West and Islamic soceities are like two sides of the same coin.
    It sounds like you falled for the Muslim propeganda. Blame everything on America and the Jews. That is giving to much power to America and what they build ISIS on is not just nothing. It is the real Islam. It is also not American who join IS, it is Muslims.
    I am also a member in a group on facebook for Muslims, it is ordaniry people joining it, some old friends I know and so. You talk with so much respect, but we should not tolerate intolerance and oppression. Let me say they call you unbelievers Kuffar, many support one Ummah and see it as a war between the west and Islam, many support different holy warriors in Syria and think it is sweet when 6-year old girls wear the headscarf.
    Of course most are good people who dont know the quran good and doesnt practice the religion.
    But some like boko haram and isis know exactly what their religion says and their prophet did. The Quran call jews and christians pigs and apes and tell you to not take them for friends, it allows slavery, tell you to kill the kuffar, tell you to kill people critizing the quran, makes pedophilia legal, to fill the hearts of the unbelievers with terror. And see how well all the myslim countries are doing. You are undemining the fight of many muslims who want freedom. Go read a quran and sahih bukhari.
    most muslims are good and many muslims in islamic countries suffer under islam. and other knows exactly what the quran says. so lets spread the truth about all these sick religions. millions have died under islamic genocides.

    1. you say
      >The Quran call jews and christians pigs and apes
      do you know where exactly in the Quran?

      1. Of course. 🙂 Qursn 5:60.
        3:151 alsp talk about unbelievers and so does 2:161. Sahih Bukhari(the hadith collection most authentic that you cant’t pray without)also encourage to kill apostated in Bukhari(52:260): The prophet said, ‘if somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.
        Slavery is allowed in 4:24 and in many places in hadith where you also can read abouy sex with war captives. Sahih Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
        Narrated by Abu Said Al-Khudri:
        We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.”
        and clearly a pedophile:
        Sahih Volume 7, book 62, number 65:
        Narrated by Aisha:
        That the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
        Quran tells you to fight unbelievers in 8:39.

        1. Let’s take a look at Quran 5:60
          “Shall I tell thee of a worse (case) than theirs for retribution with Allah? Worse (is the case for him) whom Allah hath cursed, him on whom His wrath hath fallen! Worse is he of whose sort Allah hath turned some into apes and swine, and who serveth idols. Such are worse in plight and further from the plain road.”
          Are you an expert in Arabic? I am not. Is it hard to imagine that someone like the CIA might not seed English versions of the Quran with completely distorted interpretations that say all Jews and Christians are apes and pigs to inspire belief in radical Islam?
          I say this because I have seen comments posted of the most vile, disgusting and violent quotations of the Quran… only to open my English copy and find a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and usually sane, translation.
          You also take this quote out of context. “Theirs” is referring to People of The Scripture, but the language in EVERY English translation I have read (four now) makes it clear this reference to apes and swine are to ALL of mankind, those people who do not believe the word of God. Who stray from God. Who become disbelievers (atheists).
          Quran 5:59
          “Say, O People of The Scripture! Do ye blame us for aught else than that we believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed aforetime, and because most of you are evil-livers?”
          Notice this ayat IS A QUESTION? To which 5:60 is the answer.
          This is clearly asking of those who CLAIM to believe in God, who decry what Islam is proclaiming despite its call being THE VERY SAME as in their scriptures, and that those doing the denouncing of Islam are themselves “evil-livers”, i.e. people who do not live according to what their own scriptures teach and in fact live the opposite.
          5:60 is a warning call to what happens to those people who leave God and the call to truth.
          Does not The West now resemble a barn yard? Are we not living like apes, tattooed, drugged, fornicating like animals for the camera and distribution around the entire world in the porn industry?
          Is this not the truth of our times in those two Quranic ayats?

        2. Sufi Muslim here. I highly reccomend getting a copy of “The Message of the Quran” which is a translation banned by Saudis and supported by Sufis. It has footnotes and explains verses as well. The translator has some other very good works. I’d like to give rebuttals to the other points but it would devolve into mindless fallacies thrown about.

        3. Saudis have banned any sane interpretation, even if said translations precede their boy Wahabb and his psycho friends by hundreds of years.

      2. Also in quran 2:65 and 7:166, all these ayats together with 5:60 talks about how Allah turned Jews into Apes and Swines because they are transgressers.

    2. > Go read a quran and sahih bukhari.
      The entire thing, or just verses cherry-picked by the self-proclaimed sociopath David Wood?

        1. Have you read the entire thing, not just the verses some Islamophobe presented to you?

        1. He utilizes a similar line of reasoning as you do, i.e “go read the Qu’ran if you want to be convinced of how bloodthirsty Islam is” and when asked to prove his point, he cites some cherry-picked verses, ignoring the myriad other verses that command the opposite.

    3. I have read the Quran and a lot of Hadith, traditionally, was seen as only the
      sayings of the Prophet and not as God’s word (modern context). Your typical ignorant quotations of “true Islam” are an insult to anyone who has actually studied the religion’s history.
      I have not fallen for the propaganda because I have to agree with you. There is no ISIS without Islam. That said, their is no ISIS without the CIA/NATO and Putin proved that with three months of bombing in Syria last October.
      It is ALL a show, that is my point. We should not be demonizing a religion when it is PEOPLE who are acting in its name. No one blames Christians today for the Crusades of the past OR the present.
      Belgium providing most ISIS recruits per capita in Europe – UN
      Follow the money my friend.
      What we have is a lot of purposely and deliberately misguided people with ZERO intellectual knowledge or their faith’s intellectual or philosophical history being PAID to wage war on THEIR OWN PEOPLE for cold hard cash.
      That is the truth. ISIS and radical Islam is a paid mercenary army against The West and Russia/Iran/China and ANYONE who does not fall into the left/atheist/feminist line.

      1. Nonsense.
        The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after the capital of the Christian world, Rome itself, was attacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.
        By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world.
        Europe had been harassed by Muslims since the first few years following Muhammad’s death. As early as 652, Muhammad’s followers launched raids on the island of Sicily, waging a full-scale occupation 200 years later that lasted almost a century and was punctuated by massacres, such as that at the town of Castrogiovanni, in which 8,000 Christians were put to death. In 1084, ten years before the first crusade, Muslims staged another devastating Sicilian raid, burning churches in Reggio, enslaving monks and raping an abbey of nuns before carrying them into captivity.
        In 1095, Byzantine Emperor, Alexius I Comneus began begging the pope in Rome for help in turning back the Muslim armies which were overrunning what is now Turkey, grabbing property as they went and turning churches into mosques. Several hundred thousand Christians had been killed in Anatolia alone in the decades following 1050 by Seljuk invaders interested in ‘converting’ the survivors to Islam.
        Not only were Christians losing their lives in their own lands to the Muslim advance, but pilgrims to the Holy Land from other parts of Europe were being harassed, kidnapped, molested, forcibly converted to Islam and occasionally murdered. (Compare this to the Quran’s justification for slaughter simply on the basis that Muslims were denied access to the Meccan pilgrimage).
        Renowned scholar Bernard Lewis points out that the Crusades, though “often compared with the Muslim jihad, was a delayed and limited response to the jihad and in part also an imitation…. Forgiveness for sins to those who fought in defence of the holy Church of God and the Christian religion and polity, and eternal life for those fighting the infidel: these ideas… clearly reflect the Muslim notion of jihad.”
        Lewis goes on to state that, “unlike the jihad, it [the Crusade] was concerned primarily with the defense or reconquest of threatened or lost Christian territory… The Muslim jihad, in contrast, was perceived as unlimited, as a religious obligation that would continue until all the world had either adopted the Muslim faith or submitted to Muslim rule… The object of jihad is to bring the whole world under Islamic law.”
        If someone takes your wallet and you take it back, who is the thief?
        The Crusaders only invaded lands that were Christian. They did not attack Saudi Arabia (other than a half-hearted expedition by a minor figure) or sack Mecca, as the Muslims had done (and continued doing) to Italy and Constantinople. Their primary goal was the recapture of Jerusalem and the security of safe passage for pilgrims. The toppling of the Muslim empire was not on the agenda.
        The period of Crusader “occupation” (of its own former land) was stretched tenuously over about 170 years, which is less than the Muslim occupation of Sicily and southern Italy alone – to say nothing of Spain and other lands that had never been Islamic before falling victim to Jihad. In fact, the Arab occupation of North Africa and Middle Eastern lands outside of Arabia is almost 1400 years old.
        Despite popular depiction, the Crusades were not a titanic battle between Christianity and Islam. Although originally dispatched by papal decree, the “occupiers” quickly became part of the political and economic fabric of the Middle East without much regard for religious differences. Their arrival was largely accepted by the local population as simply another change in authority. Islamic radicals even lamented the fact that many of their co-religionists preferred to live under Frankish (Christian) rule than migrate to Muslim lands.
        The Muslim world was also split into warring factions, many of which allied themselves with the Frankish princes against each other at one time or another. This even included Saladin, the Kurdish warrior who is credited with eventually ousting the “Crusaders.” Contrary to recent propaganda, however, Saladin had little interest in holy war until a rogue Frankish prince began disrupting his trade routes. Both before and after the taking of Jerusalem, his armies spent far more time and resources battling fellow Muslims.
        For its part, the Byzantine (Eastern Christian) Empire preferred to have little to do with the Crusader kingdoms and went so far as to sign treaties with their Muslim rivals on occasion.
        Another misconception is that the Crusader era was a time of constant war. In fact, very little of this overall period included significant hostilities. In response to Muslim expansion or aggression, there were only about 20 years of actual military campaigning, much of which was spent on organization and travel. (They were from 1098-1099, 1146-1148, 1188-1192, 1201-1204, 1218-1221, 1228-1229, and 1248-1250). By comparison, the Muslim Jihad against the island of Sicily alone lasted 75 grinding years.
        Ironically, the Crusades can be justified from the Quran itself, which encourages Holy War in order to “drive them out of the places from whence they drove you out” (2:191). In this case, the objective wasn’t to expel Muslims from the Middle East, but to bring an end to the molestation of pilgrims. Holy war is not justified by New Testament teachings, which is why the Crusades are an anomaly, the brief interruption of centuries of relentless Jihad against Christianity that began long before and continued well after that event.
        The greatest crime of the Crusaders was the sacking of Jerusalem, in which at least 3,000 people were said to have been massacred. This number is dwarfed by the number of Jihad victims, from India to Constantinople, Africa and Narbonne, but Muslims have never apologized for their crimes and never will.
        What is called ‘sin and excess’ by other religions, is what Islam refers to as duty willed by Allah.

      2. It is people but Islam makes them think they go to paradise for it, gives them something to fight for. There are far more terrorist of Islam. I am also against Christianity and judaism by the way.

      3. the church also had a reformation since the crusades, but islam is still left in tge medival times.

  9. Actually, now you put it that way, I prefer Islam to the feminazis. Maybe it will wake up the Europeans and lead to a Christian revival.
    I prefer Islam to secularism. That is, in the West. Let us keep them out of Eastern Europe though. They still have a Christian culture worth keeping.

  10. A far bigger threat to the West is the end of easy to get at oil. Oil is going to get a lot more expensive and this will have a massively negative effect. By comparison ISIS really have killed very few people – I’d say more people are killed in car crashes in the US than ISIS have killed in all of the West.

    1. The recent dip in oil prices was a political swing. Fracking was allowed just as Eastern Europe was heating up. Price dipped like the Costa Concordia. Guess who couldn’t risk a land war? That’s right, Russia.

  11. No such thing as moderate or secular Islam.
    The “radicals” take heat off of Muslims living in non Islamic countries, if not
    Islamic State it would be some other Jihad group taking responsibility for any
    type of attack from machete to attacks with guns committed by Muslims.
    This is a good example of ending the whole moderate and secular Islam.
    If the shooters were successful it would of been blamed on radical Islam.

    1. The moderate Muslim holds your feet down while the radical saws your head off. That’s the only difference between them.

  12. Do you know about the conflict between the North Africans who were followers of the Apostolic Christianity and the Constantinean church in Rome?
    Augustine was appointed bishop in Hippo Regius from 395 to 430 to destroy the North African Christians!! But he failed. Every trick in the Roman arsenal was used to make the Christians conform but most of the them remained steadfast adherents of Apostolic Christianity.
    Pope Gregory I sought Emperor Mauricius’ help against the North African Christians. Despite all the efforts of Augustine, the Christian faith continued to grow and Pope Gregory I was alarmed at its increase.
    Old Rome saw the Christians of North Africa as a greater threat than the Eastern Empire in Constantinople.
    Is it a coincidence that around the year 630 Muhammad began his bloody career of conquest. Beginning around 660, his successors conquered Egypt and later invaded North Africa.
    After conquering all of North Africa, the Arabs crossed into Spain in 711. Their main target in Spain was the Goths, who baptized by triune immersion, and refused to join the church of Rome.
    North Africa—comprising over 600 cities—was the richest part of the Roman Empire. The city of Rome itself was dependent on North Africa for her daily bread. With the rise of Islam, Europe became permanently separated from the Continent of Africa.
    Islam today is used again as a secret weapon – BEWARE OF ISLAM and ESPECIALLY OF the puppeteers behind it!

    1. spot on ! as a north african, Islam destroyed in the long run my land by making it’s people backward mentaly, and slave to the black box(kaaba) and it’s owners the camel fucking arabs.
      even though the arabs umeyyad failed in the beginning to deeply islamize the north africans (the armies that conquered spain were composed mainly from none arab speaking berbers who embraced Islam superficially, many of them were pagans and christians), we had to wait until the hilalian invasion to have a large chunk of north africa arabised for once.
      the same shit is happening know throughout Europe with the migrant crisis.

        1. actually there is an underground zeitgeist in north africa especially morocco and algeria, there is a lot of former muslims like me whom by reading the true sources of Islam and by re-reading our history from pre Islamic era to know start seeing how Islam undermined our culture and how it’s used to subjugate none arabs. by making them feel inferior as the ones who did not receive the “revelation”.
          in all lights Islam is a racial religion, it starts by selling you the religion of peace by piece and ends up glorifying the arab bringers of such backwardness.
          they can go to hell with their religion and their culture.

        2. I had no idea there was such movements in N. Africa. I always seemed to notice the difference between religion and local culture. Religions, as a whole, is a method of “converting” other to your way of life rather than spreading “the good word”. We were lucky in Europe to have religion shaped after our culture (Even Islam in Bosnia and Albania) and not the other way around. Good luck in your endeavours.

        1. as for banu hilal and arabisation of north africa google is your friend there is enough resources and evidences.
          if you understand french there is also the works of Bernard Lugan (histoire des berbers), there is also a documentary easily found on youtube about the matter.
          an article about the berber revolt against the arab ummeyads :

      1. What they did to civilisations like Egypt was sickening-a culture and society which was highly sophisticated in so many ways reduced to a bunch of camel-fucking inbreds. Disgusting.

        1. Egypt, Roman North africa, Berber Kingdoms, north african Christianity and civilization ….. well it all went to void at the hand of the sand people.

    2. so you’re saying the papacy was ‘behind’ the birth of islam or just the attacks on North Africa (or both)? I’m not familiar with any such theory – is there any kind of evidence to support it, beyond timing

    3. Unless you provide sources, credible ones at that, your argument is full of shit. Sorry but that’s the true. Protestants are tireless in making up their own history in order to support their biases and provide a base to their baseless religion. Your father is Luther (and by extension the devil), accept it and get over it.

      1. You can check all the facts yourself, don’t be lazy and don’t use profanities if you want to be taken seriously.

        1. You are the one with the burden of proof in this case. In the 4th century the Church didn’t have the power to destroy regions of the world as you claim that Augustine tried to do, commanded by the “arch-villains” in the Vatican. No serious historian claims that.

        2. You haven’t read it properly. Augustine did not try to destroy them he tried to convert them to the Church of Rome but he failed. Then they created a new religion to motivate the Arabs to destroy North Africa by force as it was clear the soft method would not work.
          Christianity stems from Judaism, Muslim stem from Christianity – all three are Abrahamic religions, you think that’s a coincidence?

  13. Because of the concept of taquiyya, I will never ever trust anyone who is a muslim.
    That said, I don’t consider them our worst enemy because we know what they’re all about. It’s the feminists, leftists, and manginas who claim to oppose them in the name of “human right” or “liberal democracy”.
    I’d say just stay out of this one and let both of those factions have at each other, while preventing both from spreading further.

    1. Given the fact Jews turned Christian and then became Jews again after their persecution ended in Spain, I will never ever trust any Christian either.

      1. Bringing up the inquisition (which happened in the late 15th Century) is a pathetic leftist argument used to create moral equivalency between Christianity and Islam. If you’re gonna make that argument and pretend it’s legit, go post on Buzzfeed or Gawker.
        But before you leave consider that, even if your argument did have merit, there’s one thing that separates Christianity and Islam.
        If someone kills someone else in the name of Christianity, other Christians condemn them immediately and differentiate themselves from that person. (example, when someone blows up an abortion clinic in the name of christianity, the rest of christianity repudiates them)
        If someone kills in the name of Islam, CAIR and other pressure groups will give a lukewarm condemnation of “violence” and then pretend they didn’t see anything (example, every terrorist attack committed in the name of Allah in the US and Europe since 9/11)
        The latter is also notoriously bad at policing their own:

        1. If you read my comment more carefully, you’d realize I wasn’t chastising the Inquisition in the slightest, I was referencing that people who claim to be Christians and act on behalf of Christianity aren’t necessarily Christians. You’d also realize I wasn’t making an apology for Islam either.
          It is worth noting that just because someone says something does not mean they do not believe it or acquiesce to it. There is a large movement of theonomists (Christians not acknowledging the abolition of OT laws) in the US who would gladly agree with the Westboro Baptist Church or even the Orlando shooter if it wasn’t in their benefit to do so.

        1. He’s referring to Jewish conversos after 1492 when the jews were expelled from Spain or were required to convert

        2. Because evolution isn’t an all or nothing process. Not all Pikachus are Raichus, but all Raichus were once Pikachus.

        3. For you older fellows in the comment thread, that’s a Pokemon reference. Timely, but in the long run unnecessary to your daily lives.

    2. All our enemies lie to us. The Muslims call it taquiyya; the feminists and other SJWs call it “correcting a historic system of oppression.
      The conflict of ideas is warfare, and all war is deception. Conservatives always failed because they failed to embrace that truth. Christians had it pretty well figured in each era of persecution – conceal the truth until caught, then admit the truth and become a martyr.

  14. I’m probably alone on this but, I really could care less, I just don’t go around all worked up about terrorist attacks or being a victim of one. Most of the wests problems with it is 1. Getting involved in things we shouldn’t be getting into to begin with such as involving ourselves in Syria and Iraq.
    2. Throwing open the doors and letting in Muslims by the millions who aren’t interested in assimilating.

    1. Agreed. I don’t really directly care about the camekfucking ragheads or what they get up to.
      But I do object to all the assholes who support this, and I think we need to sooner or later step up and get rid of them. And then the muzzies they brought in. And it will happen. We had this before and we beat em back at the gates of Vienna, it will happen again but it will be a much more destructive thing.
      If it were up to me, I’d nuke Raqqa just to show them what that’s like. And I’d watch and clap my hands at every Syrian baby washed up dead on European shores. Fuck them and their allah and their children. We don’t need their sub level IQ motherfuckers for anything.
      Out of a million plus who came to Germany about 50 got jobs. Useless fucking parasites.

      1. I don’t give a damn about them and it wouldn’t be much of an issue if we didn’t let those assholes in to start with. Terrorism is just used to expand the surveillance state to watch EVERYBODY, I see new banking laws/regulations coming in order to “help stop terrorism” by watching EVERYBODY. ( can’t have profiling cause dats rayciss)
        As for eleminating IS the U.S. has the capability to make them extinct in a matter of weeks either go do it and get it over with or quit worrying about it but that will never happen.
        As far as I’m concerned leftism is a bigger threat to the west in genèral than a bunch of uptight camel jockeys.

        1. Exactly, the thing to fear is not a few people worshipping a different invisible being but the police state, aggressive agencies like the TSA and IRS and a police corporate state that follows and tracks everything you do and destroys your privacy.

      2. You do realize Syria is the cradle of Christianity and there are still many conservative Christians, many would say some of the most pure and strong believers, in Syria today?

        1. So what? Why should I care about them? If there are so many, then why is Daesh and the al nusra front holding a third of the country?
          To me it seems the only sane thing to do there, if we have to meddle at all, is to support Assad, that by the way would be the only way to help any Syrians, Christian or otherwise.
          Regarding Raqqa I doubt there are many if any at all left. Nuking it would put a swift end to the insanity going on there.

        2. You don’t have to care about them (although Christianity teaches that you *should*) but wanting to murder them all seems pretty sick to me.

      1. Why not number one? Sadam was an asshole but, what business was it of ours to remove him? Same thing with Assad. It ain’t our fight.
        I did t have a problem with the first Gulf War,it was in our best interest not to let Saddam invade and occupy all his oil rich neighbors, we had a clear cut objective, stop him from invading Saudi Arabia and kick him out of Kuwait, all Iraqis back across the border by 1/15 or else. Invading Iraq to depose Saddam and bring democracy to Iraq because of WMDs or whatever was a mistake from the get go. The whole thing wound up backfiring and causing more trouble than it solved same as Syria,let them work it out on their own. Anyway with that being said we should have blown Afganistan to hell on 9/12 that way the rest of them would have known we would not take that kind of shit from anyone.

        1. I don’t even call them assholes. Both Saddam and Assad are the best leaders those countries have had in the last 50 years. If anything, they are something to be emulated and respected, not criticized and destroyed.
          As for Afghan, the Sept plane exploders were not Afghanis but Saudis. If you believe the official story, the mastermind was living in Afghanistan at the time. So what you are advocating is collective punishment, which is a war crime. By that rationale, Wisconsin should have been destroyed when the serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer was living there.

        2. The highjacker a were from the Kingdom of Saud along with Osama but, the planning and financing was done through Afghanistan and the Taliban government refused to turn them over and sheltered them so. They thought nothing would happen because Anericans are fat and don’t want to fight. They thought wrong.

        3. And what happened there? Democracy was established by the west, so they elect radical Islamist leaders (the Taliban were actually allies of the conservative Reagan administration and were comparatively not religious as what has come after). Was he even in charge of the operation? His first statement was stating that he did not participate but he was glad someone did it or something to that effect. There is a process for requesting the extradition of someone accused of a crime; the US did not follow this process, and did not show any evidence, but merely demanded at the threat of a gun that the country surrender its sovereignty. It did not, and 16 years later the two nations are still fighting this out.

    2. “2. Throwing open the doors and letting in Muslims by the millions who aren’t interested in ”
      The political elites are doing this – they are specifically destroying the West on purpose via allowing in all these lower primates who want Sharia Law.

  15. It’s important to note that Rome and its Empire were pagan until Constantine the Great accepted Christianity as the State religion in 330 AD. Rome and the roots of our traditions, like Democracy, in the west go back the pagan values of Greece. This is when we were at our strongest and most vibrant, namely before any of the monotheistic faiths appeared and essentially weakened and undermined the traditional masculine values of those earlier pagan times.
    I disagree with the central premise of this article which is fundamentally flawed. How can Islam take us back to the golden pagan times of early Greece, and, Rome before it made that unfortunate pact with Christianity. Historically Gibbons and others have shown that it was from this point onwards, that the Roman Empire began its slow, long decline.
    Islam is lunge back in the simplified absolutism of the God above- the God of self satisfied power and dominion over one’s liberty and freedom of thought. I’ve no wish or ambition to be shackled to such a belief system and the Author seems to think that the western mind’s ability to question such credos, to allow curiosity of thought and an understanding and respect for the individual are somehow a weakness. I think, these concessions have made the western mind the greatest and most intelligent we’re ever likely to create on this planet. The road to Allah is to negate these finer intuitions and instincts of our culture in the West.

    1. Before you attack the whole you ought to make a difference between the Apostolic Christianity and the Church of Rome (Vatican and later Constantinople).

      1. I’m still inclined regardless of the variation of Christianity to say that once it became the “State” religion things went south. At least in the States you’ve separated these two aspects which were based upon the experiences and insights of men who knew how disastrous this had been back in the lands they left behind.

    2. Islam is not here to return man to any golden age of paganism. It is a direct COUNTER to the current move BACK to paganism that is the Western cultural model of secular/liberal/atheist feminism and LGBTism.
      A very large part of my reading both past and recently has been on that golden age of pagan Greece (and soon Rome).
      Yes, we had some fine things come out of Greece, the emergence of true patriarchy around the model of the father as paternity became an absolute, not an acknowledgement of the divine goddess.
      Have you not asked yourself WHY women are being raised and men (especially heterosexual men, i.e. fathers) put down? Why women are being worshiped in every sphere of western culture and life?
      We are returning to the goddess. To pagan life. To rule by monarchs (i.e. elites) who have the tribe slave for their way of life and their brood.
      Do not gloss over what pagan Greece was with a modern lens.
      It was brutal. Ignorance was rampant. Superstition in gods and goddesses led man to sacrifice not just animals, but even human beings to stave off the wrath and anger of the gods.
      If you have not read St. Augustine’s City Of God, I highly recommend you do. It is THE book, the argument par excellence, that finally for me highlighted and bolded WHY Christianity, for its time and place, exploded onto the world stage and supplanted paganism.
      Christianity… was simply… a loving and better way of living life. Rome collapsed BECAUSE it lost its patriarchal roots (tradition, family, morality) and returned to…. drum roll… goddess worship (specifically Dionysus, who was the greatest threat to Christianity at the time and why Christianity incorporated so many pagan aspects that I believe is now leading to its downfall). Christiainty was more in accordance with truth (one god) and common sense (a life after death with consequences for how you lived ).
      But it sound to me, if I am correct, that you don’t like someone telling you there are rules, right and wrong, or anyone telling you how to live.
      Your simplified absolutism… can also be rephrased as proof of truth.
      Either something is true… absolutely… or it is not. You can’t be kinda-sorta-right or maybe-if-I-guess-so true.
      Either something is right and true and ABSOLUTELY always is (rape is morally wrong and always will be)… or it is not.
      This is the failure in the west. Christianity came along and, compared to pagan beliefs, said there is an ABSOLUTE criterion of truth, of right and wrong. It made life monumentally better in the long run.
      Now, with the west abandoning truth/morality (i.e. their Christian roots), we have a return to… do as thou wilt/non of my business what others do. If you do not have a moral society, you don’t have a society at all. If you don’t have a belief that there are absolute truths that are clear and provable, then you have a belief that anything goes which is a belief in nothing.
      Islam stands for an absolute. The West stands for nothing.
      Christianity stood for an absolute. Paganism stood for just about anything.
      Notice which two intellectual/religious histories have stood the test of time and which ones have past and are now passing away again.

    3. Normally your comments are spot on but saying that Greece and Rome were the peak of western advancement….is just delusional. By the “terrible” Middle Ages Europeans had outdone most if not all the advancement of the classical era. Moreover it was the Christian dogma which introduced the concept of a rational deity and hence a rational universe thus encouraging scientific advancement. The world didn’t start with Rousseau and the bastards of the “enlightenment”

      1. “The world didn’t start with Rousseau and the bastards of the “enlightenment” Maybe, I’m misunderstanding you, but, this is why I was pointing back to Athens. You could hardly say that Socrates, Plato, Pythagoras et al were not rationalists.

        1. Sorry but I was writing from my cellphone. My point was that the peak of the West wasn’t in the Classical era. In the classical era only Rome and Athens (and subsidiary regions) were the centers of any learning in the west. The rest of Europe couldn’t be bothered with complex transmission of knowledge to the future generations (writing and things like that) let alone analysis and discover beyond concrete things (does this iron make my sword better?). Moreover in spite of their advances, they lacked the instruments to develop science as we know it (Plato notwithstanding). For the common man and most of the educated elites, the universe was a mystery and if you think medieval or early modern people were superstitious, you ain’t seen nothing when compared to the ancients.
          I said what I said about Rousseau because normally whoever claims the Classical era was so unlike the “backwards” Middle Ages, will also say that the best things to happen in the West were the Renaissance and the Enlightenment. And they will say that even though most of the intellectual malaise we have to endure nowadays comes from the ideas of the latter and the former (Renaissance) was just a cheap attempt at imitating the Classical era, despite the fact that by the 12th Century Europe had surpassed that era in most disciplines, in spite of the harsh circumstances (absence of a single empire, trade disrupted due to barbarians and Muslims etc.)

  16. I would not say the West is lacking values nowdays. Maybe europeans are no longer a christian, God believing people any more, but they fiercely value hedonism, equality, freedom and welfare for everyone. I think that when push comes to shove, they will fight to defend these principles.

    1. Let’s go back to the good old days when everyone, including the poorest had to pay their tithes to the princes of the Church who ate their pheasant in splendid isolation off their off gold plated dishes.
      There were a host of very good historical reasons why the common populace of Europe shock off the yoke of Christianity. However, their embrace of communism after this messy divorce was completely understandable. Does anyone seriously think that generations of downtrodden factory workers in Britain for example were going to vote for the conservatives (their lords and masters) when they eventually got the vote? People, talk a lot of humbug about decline etc, but, you’ve got to realize across the broad canvass of history, most ordinary people have probably never had it so good as it is now.

        1. Better get learning fast cos that the only alphabet I’ll be using.
          Maybe I’ll write it in Germanised English for the lolz.
          ‘Ze historien ov ze vorldz vas alveiz complecaten. Zah historien alvaez repeaten itselfen and many historienens reiched the samen opinionen.Ze menchen are ze very stupiden.’
          Ze end.

      1. Indeed, welfare might be the strongest of all values West defends now and it would be folly to understimate it. Claiming that “we no longer have a cohesive value system that anyone wants to rally around and defend” is simply not true, as universal welfare for everyone is the banner under which we will rally in times of crisis. Tovarisches, I’ll see you all in the trenches, fighting for our right to give our hard earned money to the State so it can distribute it among those that need it the most.

        1. “fighting for our right to give our hard earned money to the State so it can distribute it among those that need it the most” Irony apart, this is surely what practical Christianity was meant to do as preached by Jesus. Help the poor?

  17. The last thing we can defend is the white race. Cultures can be rebuilt, and governments can be changed, but genetics are forever. So long as our European race survives, we can rebuild. Its not about western culture, its about western genes. Islam is the enemy because its followers are non-whites hellbent on breeding with and out reproducing Europeans.

    1. Bullshit, we have to defend fucking correct and logical thinking, I’d bet money on you having mixed blood.
      None of this shit matters if we don’t defend logic and reason above all, that’s where they fucking lose clearly. I’ve beat the shit out of tens of these fucking muzzie subhuman shitheads, what the fuck have you done?

      1. That’s the conundrum isn’t it. We in the west use logical and reason and allow a plurality of thoughts and opinions and so we are kind of conditioned, unlike Muslims, to give them a hearing, while they’re not so inclined to us, because their faith is not open to logic and reason.

        1. Logic is using inferences about reality that can be proven to be true or false.

        2. Throw your computer out your apartment window. What’s the velocity? Use the below formula
          V = d/t.
          In order words you use your logic to work out d or t or v by arranging it for whatever value you want.

        3. Well, alright. But does logic also tell me whether I should throw my computer out of my window, without somehow referring to subjective values?

        4. You can throw it or not? Why you throw it out the window can be for any reason or none at all. People, I’m sure thought Galileo was crazy in his time for throwing melons or maybe it was oranges from the top of the town tower, but, he was doing it in the spirit of the utmost rational inquiry into the nature of reality.

        5. I never said it was “important”, but, the obvious case is that it allows for the principle whereby a logic set of ideas can be attested with reality thereby allowing accurate predictions to be made.
          It takes you out of the irrational and subjective ideas which would describe the laws as gravity or the action of the sun rising each day in superstitious and literal minded ways.

        6. Outlaw mosques and pro Islamic groups of every kind. Done.
          I don’t know about you but I will take these useless shits on, any day, any time. There has never been a muzzie who’d make me have even a tinge of fear and I’d fuck saladins corpse to prove it, any European afraid of them is not worth the air he’s breathing. Cowardly maggots is what they are.
          If you’re European your blood if nothing else will remember the crusades and all that followed up to the battle of the siege of Vienna by the ottoman.
          We need to ban Islam and every form it takes and deport every last motherfucker following that shit.

        7. Sure. But many people use “science” and “rationality” to make normative statements. It’s very pervasive. Nobody seems to realize what a ridiculous endeavor it is.

        8. Yes, I’m European, although I live in a very isolated and culturally homogeneous part in the North. We never had Muslims until recently in the country, so I’d rarely come across them, although I’ve traveled much and met them elsewhere and they seem to rarely interact with the host countries (from what I’ve seen).
          Are you American?

        9. Why ridiculous. If you need a scan on your arm in the morning, you’ll be thankful about the knowledge which led to the development of the X-ray in your local hospital.
          I suppose in some part I understand that self-righteous scientific mentality that preaches and hides rather smugly behind “rational” theories that explain everything. I’m thinking about the Theory of Evolution for example or some of the more absurd “rational” theorizing, like in sociobiology, that attempts to describe human consciousness as an “add on” blip in the our being, which is simply ridiculous.

        10. See. “Thankful” is not rational. It is a personal value. Bam. X-rays are not great “because science”, but because we like what they can do for us.
          Yeah. Theory of evolution is really the best example. Classical material for the “is ought” fallacy.

        11. Of course thankful is! It’s rational to be thankful to those whom help and protect us from danger and make us better.

        12. Objectivity we all exist, so mutual thankfulness among our own kind gives benefits to the singular and plural. You can’t have one without the other.

        13. Why do you need benefits for anyone, if not out of emotional value?
          If you create a robot, it does not care whether it lives or dies. It just is. It has no concept of thankfulness and no concept of purpose. Unless we program the robot with survival instincts.
          You may say: Well, it is rational for the robot to be programmed with survival skills, because then it will survive longer.
          That may seem rational at first sight, but as you can clearly see on second sight, it is circular reasoning. The robot did not care about surviving long in the first place. We just “felt” that it was important for the robot to survive long, so we gave it survival skills. To the robot, it does not matter.

        14. Nope, never even been to the US, I am Finnish but borne in Sweden.
          I grew up fighting these immigrant faggots in school and on the streets, I’m officially labeled a right wing extremist in Sweden lol, so every time I enter the country they search my luggage in case I have some anti Muslim thing.

        15. “Why do you need benefits for anyone, if not out of emotional value?” You seem to use subjective and emotional in a completely interchangeable way- as if they’re the same quantity and value- but they’re quite different.
          I don’t know for example what you mean by emotional value? Do you mean that people only give benefits to others based on some type of emotional idea, like guilt or shame. I don’t really buy this as often the State will give payments and benefits to unemployed people, because economically and from a law and order perspective it’s objectively the correct approach to take. Having a large element of people in society who’ve no money or supports at all would cause social strife and crime problems and that’s why Governments often do this.
          The point is that their response is not emotional (paying the benefits) but rational and based upon objective evidence
          that supports their thinking.
          I’m not sure what the analogy of the robot means as clearly we differ radically from them as they don’t even have a sense of self awareness which even nematodes posses. You can’t extrapolate a set of conditions onto a theoretical robot like you did and say “there I told you so” as you’re not comparing like with like and it really makes no sense at all.

        16. I once dated a Finnish girl who was the daughter of a Lutheran pastor! She was always talking about all the lakes of Finland and how wonderful the short lived summers are.
          She was nice, quite serious, but we were just too different. But, I didn’t think there were many Muslims in your country? I’m told you’ve quite a nationalist government there.

        17. In Finland it’s not so bad yet, but in Sweden 1/9 is now a muzzie fucking immigrant dirt bag, when I went to school in Sweden 20yrs ago there were six natives in a class of 28. Now it would be zero or one.
          People outside have no idea how bad it is, I speak to swedes who escaped all the time… Most new jobs are taking care of “underage” migrants who are mostly in their thirties… It’s beyond pathetic and retarded, it’s the end of Sweden and by the looks of it, Scandinavia.

        18. Again, you fail to see that the government incentive to support the poor can be traced back to emotional stuff. And with emotions, I don’t just mean “guilt and shame”. I mean, even your basic need to eat – hunger – is an emotion. It is not rational to eat something when you are hungry. It is simply what you feel you need to do. What you WANT to do.
          Why does the government do that? Because it does not want strife. Why does it not want strife? Because … and in the end, it is: Because the people in the government value safety / peace / whatever. Which is emotional. Rationally, there is no reason why people could not just die in a nuclear war.
          And I am not saying that to invalidate these notions, mind you. I am not saying “we should not want to live”. I am simply stating that this wish to live is not rational. It is simply what we are and what we want. And that is completely okay.
          The robot analogy is there to show you that you can create a hypothetical being that does not care. Or let’s imagine a human born without the ability to feel pain of any form, or any emotion for that matter. Would such a person care about not getting hurt? Nope. See psychopaths.

        19. But, you seem to under the impression that rationality and reason are completely divorced and detached from emotions?
          You can have reasonable and lofty gaols that are not self-serving and tied into some basic, let’s called it instinctual (rather than emotional) imperative. If you create and design something like a new building for example you are using your reason, but. also your reason is being informed (hopefully) by an aesthetic sensibility that creates a work that far exceeds the basic functionality of what the building is designed for.
          Similarly some guy sitting down and writing a love song on his guitar is using both his emotions and reason to create a song that has worth. Without reason it would be bathetic mush and toss.
          I don’t believe that all emotions can be reduced back to narrow self-serving basic drives that underpin ever rational choice we make. I think you’re wrong if you believe this to be the case.

        20. I did not call them narrow, though. I just said they are emotional.
          An artists and architects expression is emotional. He uses reason merely to enable him to realize his vision.
          You are basically saying the same thing as me. That emotions do have value. And I fully agree.
          The artists does not do art out of rational reasons. He does it to fulfill a desire to create something that – in our human eyes – gives us great pleasure and delight. And that’s awesome.
          But “awesome” is not rational. It is a personal judgment. His desire to create it is not rational either.
          Rationality and emotions can be used in conjunction. Yet they are separate. One deals with the “what do I do” and the other deals with the “how do I get there”.
          You may say “I want peace”. That is emotional. Then you ask “how do I achieve it”. That is rational.
          But without the emotional component, you can not determine the “what do I do”.
          If it appears to you I am bashing emotions, you must have misunderstood. I am praising them! I am saying: Rationality in itself does not have the answers to what we want. We need more than reason.

        21. We agree, I think! (but often people use emotions when they’re thinking more about instincts, which are not just emotional gut feelings, as instincts can save one’s life in a way reason mightn’t be able to do)

        22. Hm. I kinda think emotions are anything that is … well … a sensuous perception or drive. GOJ also disagrees with me when I call the wish for reason an instinct. I think it is true nonetheless. Instinct does not have to imply “lowliness”. An instinct can be noble and spiritual as well.

        23. There are instincts which seem to defy the rational parts that make it possible in the first place. We can of course apply a rational explanation to the instinctual action in question, but, I’m not too sure if I’d call this will or wish to understand an actual instinct in and of itself?

        24. Heh. I would. If it wasn’t, why would we aspire to do that? What inherent point is there in needing a rational explanation? Does a duck need one? Does an ant need one? A horse? No. It’s just a higher form of instinct that has evolved for humans. Why? Because evolutionary, it has given us benefits. I think that’s all there is to it. Glorifying our analytical skills to differentiate ourselves from animals is petty and idiotic in my eyes. That’s like a dog saying “Look at those alligators. They are animals! We are better than them, for we know the value of bonding and social relations!”

    2. You don’t defend your white woman, no you slay her. We cannot defend their western ‘princess’ status. We must bludgeon down their pedestals first. The slaying must commence white man. With balls in hand, swing ye dick like the mighty sword. It is bestowed ye. White men, BEAT your white women stupid with your big white dicks. Subdue ye woman. The first front of battle is to conquer ye woman WITH YOUR DICK!! The numerous rogue and vagabond white women running wild in the west is like a big honey trap for invaders. Cap the white women and put them in their place at once. We’re dealing with a force whose women are kept in check whereas our women are busy ankle biting us and dividing the ranks of men amongst us. Stuffed and camped our women need to be.

  18. Any person with a belief system that justifies killing others is a threat to other people. It’s nothing exclusively Islamic.

    1. This is also bullshit, I will fucking kill them and justifiably so if they so much as get near my family.
      I know you’re German but this kind of ideas make me puke. We should be in the streets with bats and pitchforks rounding up and burning these motherfuckers. Fuck them, fuck their children and fuck their supposed human rights, human rights are for humans not for camel fucking ragheads.
      Kill em all and let fucking allah sort them out..

      1. Well, I was using hyperbole.
        Of course I would likely kill to defend myself. As would anyone. The point is: Some people are ideologically conditioned to see people as threat to their safety – even when they are not.
        By seeing threat where there is none, unnecessary killings become justifiable.
        I don’t really identify as German, btw. Our government-cock sucking culture sucks shit.

        1. Not sure what you’re saying really… To me it would be fine if we toast a couple of muzzies who are not terrorists, they all support the same shit after all.
          Going after them is fucking justified, they protect their own all the time so they are all complicit in the shit we see happening.
          It doesn’t matter that killing people isn’t a uniquely Islamic thing, but it seems killers these days all have their own Islamic thing going on. Not every Islamist motherfucker is a terrorist, but every terrorist is an Islamist motherfucker, that’s enough for me. Deport them all, and clap your hands when bombs are dropping in Iraq and Syria. Fuck them and their children, I hope they get cluster bombed the fuck out of this world.

        2. You know pseudo Muslims living in a free society. You think they are really going to voice their true opinions around you? They are just like Mohammad, live in the city under the guise of peace until you have the numbers to overthrow them. That is exactly what Mohammad did when he was starting out his delusion. Hell, lying is even prescribed in Islamic teaching in order to advance the domination of Islam.

        3. As for your article, I am not sure I can trust that source. It seems to go back to some Jewish Press thing and also, apparently, the numbers don’t really add up.

        4. I knew I was of the dark side since I was a child watching the first movies, darth Vader was my hero. I did try to understand the other side but I never could.
          And for me it doesn’t matter, I want to see strength and resolve prevail over this weak pussy tolerance bullshit.

        5. Their teachings, it’s all there, but I am sure you know that already. Also, never let an infected person in your home, it is not smart. Tolerance of things that are obviously not normal or good is asking for trouble. You let one of these sand monkeys in, and one day when they have enough numbers, you will see just how much they really did not like you all along.

        6. To turn this around, you are OK with a terrorist attack eve week killing defenseless civilians as a price for your tolerance?
          That’s what it’s getting down to. And don’t try to deflect it, this is what it is.

        7. Yeah, I hear ya. Dark side is not bad per se.
          Anger is not bad. But I think it is reasonable to make informed decisions about whom to direct the anger at. You seem to be very keen on having somebody to attack. Maybe you ought to go sparring with somebody every now and then?

        8. I really don’t see how intolerance can stop that.
          I live in Munich and went looking for the shooter when it happened. Man, you know what? There were 3000 cops in that area and it was still fucking easy to get past them through side streets etc. If I can do it, a terrorist can do it, too.
          Total safety would require total surveillance. Which is not only a horrible vision, but also unrealistic.
          And besides, if you compare the number of people who died through terrorist attacks to, say, people who died of preventable medical diseases, the number is tiny.
          I just think one ought to see it in proportion. Media blows it up. That handful of dead people is not really that dramatical, although, of course, I would prefer it if it hadn’t happened.
          I think that gun rights could have prevented that much damage from happening. If people were just reasonably trained to defend themselves, fuckers like that would have less room.

        9. You have got to be shitting me, no Muslim you know? Are you fucking seriously trying to say that is a valid point??
          Ok let me explain some shit to you – Muslims don’t ever tell you the truth about this kind of thing because you’re a Kuffar and lying I you is part of Muslim life. How do I know? Beyond the text Muslim friends of mine have told me directly when I caught them on lies.

        10. Something being written in a book does not mean everyone subscribes to it. I am sure there is nasty stuff in the bible as well.
          As I said, I think it is hard to quantify. Maybe the way to go would be to do a research where you pose as a fake terrorist trying to recruit Muslims on the internet. Then see how much actually buy into it.

        11. So you are willing to have a terrorist attack every week in order to appease Muslim goatfucking female genital mutilating camel lovers in your country.
          That’s the only thing I get from your response really, other than more guns for people is good, which every thinking person would agree to.

        12. Not to appease. I couldn’t care less about appeasing some dudes. I just don’t:
          1. Want a police state.
          2. Direct my anger at people who did nothing to me personally.
          A terrorist attack once a week, spread over Europe, is not very significant.

        13. So your answer is yes.
          I don’t want a police state either. If we kick the camelfuckers out I don’t think we need one.
          Am I willing to penalize a large group of people for what a small group does? If they are in Europe where they don’t belong to begin with yes I am. Ship the fuckers back to some desert with camels.
          I clap my hands every time the rapefugee boats capsize and they drown.
          I would never hire a fucking muzzie even if it meant not getting someone for that position. Fuck them, I hope their children starve.

        14. I’ve been of more or less the same opinion for more than 20yrs lol.
          I am proud that I’m flagged as a right wing extremist in Scandinavia, it is a badge of honor to me. I don’t go to Germany much because they can hit me harder than Sweden can, and I find the country for me most part despicable, even worse than Sweden.
          But I stay in NL where freedom of speech still is existing. And just for that I did a proper nazi salute which is also illegal in DE.
          I don’t have much love for nazis but they sure as shit would be better than the garbage or today.

        15. Well, I agree with you that Germans are stupid fascists. They will attack you for so much as saying something they dislike. They raided some homes for right-wing commentary and the people had to pay thousands of Euros. The German commentators on the web applaud that. I find it disgusting. I am leaving this country as soon as I can. Small-minded hypocrites they are.
          Now, mind you, I don’t agree with your views. But I absolutely don’t mind you voicing them. Suppressing ideas is the best way to create a resentful group of people who feel excluded and like something is wrong with them for thinking shit. If it makes you angry to be attacked for being right-wing, I can absolutely understand that.
          Fact is, I insulted a couple cops last year. Now I am supposed to pay 5940 EUR for that. It’s ridiculous.

        16. No thanks, I do not want the FBI on my ass. If a person claims to be Muslim and disagrees with what Mohammad prescribed, he is no Muslim at all.

        17. You are welcome here just past the border :-). You can get work and get by with German fine for the most part. If you need a job let me know, I’ll fix you up.
          The only interaction I’ve had with police here was them giving me a ride home and a fine for drunkenness in public which was 36euro. They are mostly nice people actually here.
          As for the being attacked for being right wing, I used to get very angry about it, but not really anymore now. I won at the end of the day hehe, I’m married to a right wing extremist girl and we are expecting out first child in December. And we will call him Adolf – just joking hihi

        18. Haha. You would be setting up that kid for a lifetime of mobbing!
          Thanks, I’ll keep it in the back of my head. I like the Nordic language.
          But I think South America is more the kind of thing I’d be interested in. Better climate.

        19. Actually all the girls I meet who give off signals of wanting a family are all kind of right wingers, the German girl of a friend, my wife, and my side hobby.
          My wife obviously knows and interestingly so maybe does my unborn son, he pays very close attention to what I say and kicks when I stop speaking…
          He’s going to grow up well I think hehe. We have a little right winger extremist in the making hehehehe.
          Do you notice this trend at all? I mean family oriented bitches being right wingers?

        20. I’m not really in the game, so no, I don’t. But it makes sense to me. Girls crave the guys with balls. Those guys, I would say, tend to have right-wing views.

        21. Then get into it boy! 🙂 but what you said makes sense and I’ve seen it in person, hehe this lefty guy was uber social at work and after work parties and at the end of every evening I’d ask him if he scored, he’d look at me and say no, and I’d be he asshole and ask him to smell my fingers lol

        22. I will get into it. Just got some more meditation to do to heal all my mommy and daddy issues and that kind of shit. Just not up for it right now.

        23. So… what you are saying is 20% (2 out of 10) and 26% (almost 3 in 10) Muslims support ISIS and radical Islam.
          That leaves 74% TO 80% of Muslims who want NOTHING to do with this radical Islam that the CIA created.
          I have been noticing this lately. These same stats – LOW percentages – being trotted out and then painting the ENTIRE Muslim community and the whole of Islam with “we can’t trust them, they all lie.”
          Really? Do you want to stack up the Muslim lies against the lies the US government, NATO and the feminist/SJW/LGBT overlords are spewing out on a daily basis for the past 50 years?
          Your hate ain’t going to abate, I am not changing your mind. No one will. You are perfect fodder for the coming nuclear war in Muslim lands.
          Have you gone down to your local recruitment station? Army or marines? Marines I would suspect. You are to bad ass for just the army. Semper Fi!

        24. Haha wrong guess, I’m army not marines, although I respect the fuck out of them.
          Regarding your other opinions I fail to see the problem, I didn’t want fucking Muslims in my backyard to begin with, but apparently the political class did. For whatever reason most likely for voting for their bullcrap.
          So the starting point is not where we have a shit ton of these camelfucking retards around, but when we don’t have them.
          Ask yourself honestly is it worth having suicide attacks all over to have a kebab shop close by?
          To me it isn’t. They don’t belong in Europe, don’t want to integrate, and just in case you missed it, remember when the moors were at the gates of Vienna? Probably not but you might want to look that up.

        25. I respect where you are coming from, but i just refuse to see the world in such black and white terms.
          The West has been utterly fucking the Middle East for decades. The last decade especially. Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya… we… we… have completely destroyed. In some cases (Egypt), we supported dictators until they were no longer useful (or simply to free to act independently).
          I will simply pass on two observations. I have been to a mosque and talked with Muslims. One Algerian or Morrocan man said something to me that stood out.
          “Do you think we would be in your country, doing the jobs you don’t want to do, if we could live in peace and security in our own country back home?”
          Think about that for a moment. They guy running the kebab shop is just trying to freaking survive, maybe feed his family, but he has had to LEAVE everything that is familiar and that he loves in order to do so BECAUSE The West has made it IMPOSSIBLE for him to live back home.
          Trust me. Muslims don’t want to be here either. They hate it here.
          In fact, that was the quote of an Afghan refugee in Sweden I believe. He as quoted as saying (and I am pulling from pure memory but the sentiment is clear)…
          “I HATE Sweden. I am just here to fuck Swedish girls.”
          When you look at what we have done to Afghanistan going on centuries now, their behaviour makes perfect sense.
          I am NOT condoning, justifying or even remotely apologizing for Muslims rapes and violence.
          I simply want you to UNDERSTAND.
          We in The West lead such an insular and completely ignorant life as to how the majority of humanity has to live.
          I am never going to convince you not to hate. You also have valid reasons. Perhaps it is too late. Perhaps there is only one way to solve this and if that is the case, God have mercy on us.

        26. If I meet someone like that afghan shithead you quoted, I’ll be the last thing that fucking maggot sees as I strangle his ass.
          I don’t and never did give a fuck why Ahmed the rapist is here.
          There is nothing to understand.
          Those fucking shits never cared about their family or their culture or anything else for that matter, if they did they’d be back there fighting to protect them, not camping out here trying to get every free thing they can get.
          I don’t have even a grain of respect for these subhuman cowardly shits masquerading as people.
          And one day, me or someone like me, will take a long piss on their fucking graves.

  19. Yes.
    islam is arguable the worst system developed by human beings ever. islam lacks the Golden Rule, there is one rule for muslims, and one rule for kafirs.
    Living under Pagan Rome was better than living under islam.

    1. Says someone who has never lived under a pagan/goddess system. Well, we are almost there. Hillary will throw the US and The West back to grass huts and stone axes so fast you are going to wish for the old days of “Remember when we used to argue about Islam and the violence/chaos it was bringing to the West? Boy, sure wish we had those days back!”

      1. “Says someone who has never lived under a pagan/goddess system” Don’t you think you’re using a tad too much hyperbole here. I’m not a fan, but, the Donald isn’t fit for high Office. Imagine, all the capable people in the States and you’re left with these two candidates for President ! Christ, talk about a busted flush of a system,

        1. Was George Bush fit for high office?
          ‘Fitness’ here has a lot less to do with ability or temperament than readiness to kowtow to the needs of the usual big donors that the Clinton’s effectively work for etc. Trump is a danger to the vested interests in the US. Much the same is true of Corbyn in the UK – sure he’s a scummy marxist, but that’s not the issue – it’s the fact that’s he pissed off the Israeli lobby by being sympathetic to palestianian causes and hanging out with dodgy hamas sympathisers or whatever.

        2. Trump is and was always a part of the vested interests in the States. To believe otherwise is to be seriously mistaken and besides he was great friends with Clinton’s during Bill’s time as President.
          GB was not fit to be President either. He was an imbecile.

        3. I’m aware of that, but he’s still making noises that the vested interests – the other elites – don’t seem to like. He is indicating – for what it’s worth – that he’s not taking anybody’s money. What he would do if he got elected is another thing, but here you have two candidates on either side of the pond saying ‘no’ (in very different ways). They’re both flawed – especially Corbyn – but that’s not the point. The point is they are not very obedient, and seem to care more about the voters than the lobbyists.
          And Corbyn is all for bring Blair to account for his bloody deeds. That can’t be a bad thing

        4. I stumbled over articles today claiming that Trump has a few thousand outstanding lawsuits by contractors he did not pay. Heard of that? Not sure what to think of it.

        5. lol – I guess he’ll have to take down the legal establishment too while he’s at it.

        6. Yeah, but seriously. If that is actually true, that casts quite a bad light on him. I would not vote for someone who builds his business on the backs of people he doesn’t even pay.

        7. I wish I was. I have simply done too much research into pre-history and the lead up to Classical Greece and only hints at the emergence of Rome.
          When you look at the religious system back then, the conflict between a goddess/pagan way of life and a patriarchal/truth way of life is crystal clear.
          Have you ever wondered why the push for trannies now?
          Dionysus WAS a transvestite gay God. He came into both Greece and Rome and undermined the state completely. He was against the paternal/traditional formulations of society and believed in “going back to nature”… i.e. to the ways of the goddess.
          The Bacchae is not a play by Euripides, it is the feminst/SJW playbook against patriarchy. This fight goes SO FAR BACK it is amazing.
          I also agree I wish there was someone other than Trump, but he is who America has for the alternative to Hillary.
          The last election was about black vs white and Obama has done his utmost to stoke that flame.
          Know it is the return of the goddess, and her rule will bring back the matriarchy and the final destruction of the west.

        8. he fights every point, of the game, set and the match. That’s exactly who you should be voting for

        9. Hold up. The media are digging up questionable issues to attack Trump on?? Say ain’t so.. They’ve been honest and fair so far.

        10. No offense meant but, if you’re still at the point where you actually may believe ANYTHING the media states, I’m not sure I could produce enough facts to illuminate you.

        11. I don’t believe anything the media writes. But neither do I believe anything the alternative media writes. I don’t know these people. I don’t know whom to trust. I don’t really want to be trusting anybody, actually. I just want to see for myself. But that’s a hard thing when the internet is your ownly source.

        12. I have my hopes for Trump, but I have also read enough to suspect he could be the single biggest con job on the hopes of the American people in its entire history, even AFTER you acknowledge what Obama has done.
          Yet… there are powerful (Soros) forces at work against him. The ENTIRE system – media, political, economic, social, cultural, educational, institutional – I mean EVERYTHING is being thrown at him to stop him.
          If they are REALLY that afraid of him, is it reverse psychology to get him elected, or are the elite really scared that the script is about to go so disastrously of course that they will do ANYTHING to keep Trump from winning?
          Holding my breath.

        13. I think we’re all in the same boat on that aspect. However, at this point there is enough of a track record with the main stream media that we know that they shape stories to suit their narrative. Thus, I believe nothing they write.
          And regarding Trump, as someone else said it’s not about him it’s about the other candidate. A frog is a better candidate than Clinton.

        14. Why would Trump be a con job?
          If he isn’t what he says he is, then he’s just “male Hillary Clinton”, just as the other 16 GOP candidates were, so what would be the motive?

        15. The George Bush you have been presented with is an act, furthered by a prejudiced media. GW wasn’t nearly as dumb as folks might have you believe.

        16. So you’re saying you would vote for Hillary then? Because not voting for Trump (on trumped up charges — no pun intended) is at least a half-vote for Hillary.
          And if that’s ok with you, then I’m pretty sure you’re a troll. Hillary by comparison of misdeeds far outweighs anything that the media has on Trump.
          These two are it. These are the options. Pick your poison. If it’s not Tump, it’s Hilary — and that’s just sick!

        17. I’m luckily not an American, so I won’t have to face such a stupid decision.
          Maybe you have a point.
          Then again, Hillary may be a piece of turd, but I think she is, in the greater picture, rather harmless. She is a moron, but a moron who likely won’t change that much. Trump on the other hand has balls and stamina. And if he should manage the country as he manages his business (if the allegations should be true), that’s pretty bad.
          One other thing I hate about Trump: He is fully intending to reintroduce torture. And not just waterboarding. In fact, he openly stated in an interview that he is not going to reveal the methods of torture he would employ.
          That’s fucking scary, man.

        18. Oh, then you’re definitely a troll, and I’m glad to have exposed you as such. You should mind your own business bub!
          Nothing worse than some troll SJW trying to weigh in on another country’s election. Go F yourself!

        19. You call me a troll? Dude, I have not even seen you comment on here before. Who the fuck are you? Go back to the hole you came from.

        20. It has to do with it that I have been on here commenting for a long time and was part of some very interesting discussions. To call me a troll is just nonsensical. Me not sharing your opinion does not make me a troll. Besides, I am open to your opinion, if you can reason it. You prefer to name-call instead. So who’s the troll?

        21. You’re trying to stir the shit on a U.S. election issue, and you’re not even an American. Plus you’re hedging for the candidate that goes totally against the values that this site purports to advance. Seems pretty trollie to me.

        22. Mate, I haven’t seen an article on this site advocating fraud and scamming. If Trump is who he claims to be: Fucking awesome. But if he is not, let’s face it: Then he’s just a fucking fraud.
          Also, I am not trying to stir anything. I trust that the people on here are self-reliant enough to have their own opinions. All I am doing is bouncing what I read off of the audience here, in the hope that someone has better information.

        23. Again.. strawman much? You must really watch a lot of CNN if you think Trump is a fraud — especially in comparison to Hillary.

        24. Absolutely terrifying. He is saying some stuff that Hitler did not say (though was surely thinking) in his speeches, so I wonder how bad he would actually be if in office. I do think that a lot of it is bluster, but I also don’t think he gives a shit if someone is tortured, and he has no morality.
          He also just announced that he’s doing away with financial regulations and ending the estate tax on ~$5 million+ estates. The recent recession was caused by the banks acting up, and then getting bailed out, so this would be a huge recipe for disaster. Oh and as a bribe to anyone with children “all child care expenses” will be tax deductible. Talk about potential for enormous fraud…
          That said, he seems better than Hillary, which is perhaps the saddest part.

        25. The more I really, deeply think of the American election process (and it’s pretty much the same everywhere else), all I can see is kindergarden. I am amazed that civilization prevailed as long as it did with such a stupid system.

        26. The truth might be much simpler. Perhaps he’s not mentally stable. I don’t admire Hillary much, but, at least she’s more predictable and pragmatic then him.

        27. “Know it is the return of the goddess, and her rule will bring back the matriarchy and the final destruction of the west” Don’t you think that’s a bit extreme. We had Thatcher in Britain and now we’ve another strong female leader in Theresa May. I don’t think in one’s wildest imaginings you could describe either of them as archetypes for the goddess, in fact, I would suggest that both are nearly more masculine and resolute than many male politicians.

      2. We must implent chhaupadi (menstrual isolation and quarantine) in the west asap. The great pussy goddess worship behemoth steams foreward in the west like a supervolcano, like a thousand mile wide giant douche pail that blows its lid off and explodes, releasing its noxious death upon our sweet atmosphere.
        Chhaupadi is a simple booby trap against the coming rolling bitchcunt spiritual thunderstorm. It acts as a sneaky trip wire to lay flat the fat baby gobbling demonic army of souls that have always threatened to incinerate civilization whenever they become loosed and uncontained. The solution is simple. Chhaupadi, the strict quarantine of mensing women and the containment of the associated asphyxiating funky smelling vapors. It’s a ‘smart key’ solution that will click off the raging contagious bitch frenzy amongst our women and will also invigorate and re energize our males once they breathe fresh air that is completely free of the noxious douche pail vapors.
        Breathe clean men. Grab your mighty dicks and RIIISE UUUP!!
        These Nepalese Hindus keep feminism ”IN THE BOX” where it belongs.
        The chhaupadi hut is the perscribed ‘pandoras box’ solution for containment of feminism. The women live simple and never complain. It’s all kept ‘IN THE BOX’. Chhaupadi is an extreme measure by comparison, but in the cold rocky steppe, humans would surely perish but these asiatic hybrid aboriginals hold the thread to their dna chain season after season. Entitled western femicunts would die within two years if they attempted to survive the mountains alongside their western men. The western women’s only hope would be to completely shed their western bitch entitlements and give themselves body and soul unto their masters, their white men.
        Still when the 17th rolls around, it’s time to get lost bitch. Kindly provide her with jugs of water, bible, crackers and a harmonica when her ‘unclean’ time rears its ugly head.
        Isolation means ISOLATION, capiche?

  20. Maximus once again makes an excellent post that gets to the bottom of the matter, and cuts through the false dichotomy of west vs east, white vs non-white.
    What many here and on the alt-right and nationalist movements defend as “western values” is simply the decadent anti-christian ideals of The Renaissance/Enlightenment, yet with their blinding irrational hatred and rage towards the external force of Islam, and without any grounding in tradition and faith, they simply default to “defend everything that is the opposite of Islam. Islam=Evil! Every opposite of Islam=Good! This leads people to defend the very degeneracy that has gotten the West into such a nihilistic malaise!
    Since muslims places females in subordinate positions, (which ALL religions do), people support feminism just to spite Islam!
    Since muslims are anti-homosexual and kill gays, people support homosexuality just to spite Islam!
    Since Islam believes in a government oriented around God, people fight for secular governments just to spite Islam!
    Muslims forbid and hate porn, so people champion porn just to spite Islam!
    The typical insults that Muslims rape children, have sex with animals, and are uncivilized savages is a bit silly. Bestiality, homosexuality, pornography, and adultery is legal in most Western nations and are very profitable, so we are both equally degenerate.
    If Nihilism is what western values are, then it would be good if it were burned to the ground.

      1. Are you familiar with the Frenchman Alain Soral? He is attempting to fight feminism and degeneracy by joining together the far right, far left, and mainstread muslims in France against the current political order.

  21. i’ve jjust recently moved back to the US from asia (i am asian american, and lived in asia for 4+ years). i am now back in an eastern metropolis in the US. i started reading ROK in asia, and did a total 180 transformation from lefty to righty. i expected coming back home to be a fucking nightmare bc of how i’ve perceived the US to be from ROK and from other manosphere sites like it.
    surprisingly, i have been wrong.
    the SJWs that we rail on time and time again dont exist outside of college campuses, and if they do they are few and far between. the avg person might be moderate/ left leaning, but theyre not hardcore extreme SJW commies that want to shoot every white cis male in the face. its been a happy realization and relief that SJWs are for the most part, contained.
    that being said, we are living in a total orwellian realm. he predicted in his book that the NWO would consist of 3 groups- inner party, outer party, and proles. more and more i am seeing this to be true in our universe. inner party- politicians and the youth, outer party- metropolises, and proles- the midwest and all the states nobody gives a fuck about. the closer u are to big brother, the more ur thought has to align w the lefty commies. the farther out u are, ur up to ur own devices and nobody gives ashit. we are somewhere in the middle and so long as we go thru the motions we can get by, for the time being.

    1. The problem as expected in the west is retarded growth rate and women working cubicles. Western man SUPERCHARGE your dick and begin slaying. Most of the native slow growth in the west is predicated by henpecking female relatives and associates who act as deputy agent enforcers for global policy and don’t even know it, and also intelligent working women who resist fertilization like a feather ruffled squalking hen in a chicken processing plant. For the record ”Sweetie cupcakes out there, NO you aren’t going to be butchered. Calm down Bessie. Spread ’em and do your motherfucking part to repopulate the west” . . capiche?

      1. yea i was in a rush so i dunno if i drove the pt home like i really wanted to. what i was trying to get at was that the midwest (kentucky, kansas) and the shit states nobody cares about have pretty much been left to their own devices, exactly like the proles in 1984. thats why even tho theyre much less tolerant of gays and of leftism in general, feminists and SJWS dont really seem to give a shit. rather, what they care to police is how we in the metropolis (outer party) think, and that is why we may not be so open to expressing how we really feel about a certain group of ppl (thought crime/thought policing).
        where it really gets bad is in the indoctrination of the youth, similar to the youth league portrayed in the book. its self evident that u need to start them out young so that requires no explanation. they are effectively using the youth and politicians and big corporations to endorse killing the following 4 pillars of western society:
        1) race – race wars, anti-white, diversity laws, affirmative action, etc.
        2) religion – secularism is the new norm
        3) family – rise of non”binary” genders and endorsing abortion/anti-pro creation
        4) nationality – american self-hatred, opening borders, etc.
        and this eventually leads back to ur point.. that we dont believe in or stand for anything anymore. and its bc these 4 pillars have been broken down that is the reason why.

        1. Yup… ordering 1984 right now. Were the 1 to 4 points you made just your juxstaposition of the novels themes using contemporary language, or is that actually called for/stated in the novel?

        2. i wish i could take credit for those 4 points but i cant. i originally read it here:
          “The central banking families and their allies used their unfair advantage to gain a monopoly on the world’s wealth and a stranglehold on culture and politics. To make us accept their “New World Order,” (a.k.a. globalization) they need to divide and degrade humanity by destroying the four pillars of our personal identity and social cohesion: nation, race, religion and family.”
          whether or not the banking conspiracy is true, the 4 pillars part is spot on. anyone who reads ROK can see immediately on a macro level how the 4 pillars have been dismantled time and again by the elites and their useful idiots (SJWs). the only thing we seem to stand for anymore is championing mediocrity and freaks like trannies

    2. You’re right. The next big city around the village I live is Mainz (where printing was invented and the printing revolution started).
      There are 200.000 people in Mainz of these 40.000 are students.
      If you move through Mainz you see hijabs everywhere and on the buildings you can see ‘Nie wieder Deutschland’ graffitis (‘Germany never again’ – a famous slogan from the antifascists). So it’s clearly a left-leaning city while the smaller cities are a bit more conservative (cities in western germany are in general way more lefty than in the east because there are way more muslims).
      So 2 days ago I thought ‘Hey, let’s use OKCupid here in Mainz, that must be hilarious.’
      And I was right.
      Nearly 50 % of the girls identified either as ‘bisexual’ or ‘pansexual’ and as a ‘feminist’.
      My advice: Stay away from the biggest cities and from cities that are dominated by students.
      There are some exceptions, for example Passau, where 80 % of students are females – that’s pretty much pussy paradise.

  22. There arent billions of muslims living in europe and the usa. There is only 1.5 billion i believe in the world and most are in the middle east and asia.
    I will also acknowledge that most wont kill us infidels however as ben shapiro pointed out the majority of them support sharia and believe that suicide bombings are sometimes justified.

  23. You think we dont know this? We realize that the jews are setting the west up to kick the crap out of the muslims. The place where your analysis fails is that you dont realize that this is a good thing. The modern world cannot tolerate the existence of a vile social system in its midst anymore than it could tolerate nazism or communism. The fa t that so ialism is still polluting the west jus shows us where the next enemy lies after isla. is destroyed.
    If I were a muslim I would be looking for a place to hide. You have pissed off the jews and they wont rest until every last one of you has accepted Christ or been put to the sword.

      1. I found that puzzling too, but when you think about it I doubt jews would want them to convert to judaism

    1. “You have pissed off the jews and they wont rest until every last one of you has accepted Christ or been put to the sword”
      so muslims will convert to christianity and make it a militant religion once more, moderate christians will turn to messianic judaism to get away from them and jews disliking Christians can convert to Islam insincerely like they’ve done in the past. There you have it. The problem of religion solved through universal insincerity

      1. You know… I enjoy these discussions because I think there is truth in them, but the more I do so with others, the more I am inclined to just keep my mouth shut and let God sort it out. LOL
        “Islam is a totalitarian and barbaric religion that will enslave all of humanity. It must be eradicated by the sword of Christ and all the world turned to Jesus and his loving message.”
        Where is the nearest Buddhist monastery?

        1. I’m sure the buddhists will turn nasty just as soon as the other religions are out of the picture. They’re just waiting in the wings

  24. The Khizr Khan thing puzzles me. Do the U.S. Armed Forces need to import sepoys like Khan’s son now to fill their ranks?

    1. Only fourteen muslim americans have died in the wars. we dont need them

    2. Not to mention that it was Monica Lewinsky’s ex-boyfriend’s wife, not Trump, who voted to send Khan’s son to fight and die.

  25. So basically the muslims that migrate to our western cultures disapprove of what we’ve become and have rallied against our way of life — albeit a confused, perhaps even lost, way of life — and we should appreciate their feedback that often comes in the form of driving a truck over children and parents who are enjoying a night out on the town?

    1. this could all have been avoided if we’d just sent out some satisfaction surveys

    2. They will hate us no matter what, that is why this article comes off as somewhat naive. Their teaching states all the world is for Allah, kill them or pummel them into submission until it is so.

      1. I don’t think its naive. Muslims could each and every one of them be hell-bent on the destruction of the west, and the western elites could still be confident that they could both exploit that fact (to maintain an anti-terror narrative and keep the domestic population in check) and if needs be bomb them to smithereens in their own countries. Progressive values and a new world order of total control, surveillance and centrally controlled banks are what the elites care about, and the caliphate loving jihadis are the ones who going to persuade the terrified and traumatised peoples of the west to beg our governments to take away our freedoms in exchange for greater security. Topping up western countries with misogynist and homophobic muslims is also a very effective way of keeping the anti-hate progressive agenda alive when otherwise there would be little if anything to complain about
        The fact the entire thing is a scam doesn’t in any way detract from the fact that jihadis are psychopaths who need to be put down like rabid dogs

        1. Ah, I understand what you are saying, maybe I did not catch that on the article.

      2. I’t not just naive, it panders to the leftist propaganda that most muslims are good and that it’s our (the white man’s) own fault that extremists are killing innocent civilians. This article is trash.

  26. If it wasn’t radical Islam it’d be some other backwards ideology.
    The real threat is the suicidal leftists who allow for these savage ideologies to gain root in our country. It is much like how it isn’t AIDS that kills someone directly, but rather all the diseases that one gets because AIDS destroys the immune system.

  27. The feminists, SJWs, and left assume they can cuckold Muslims as easily as Christians, browbeat the men and liberate the women. It won’t work and annoys the Muslims (old joke – never try to teach a pig to sing).
    Note I perhaps should use the term Churchian since between the acceptance if not outright celebrating contraception and divorce beginning seriously in the 1960s, they have destroyed the Christian family.
    Note men at the time didn’t object because they assumed Divorce would truly be no-fault or fair, and contraception meant more sex. But it unleashed the hypergamic monster and white-knight family courts.

  28. Islam does not belong in Europe any more than our degenerate elites do. They are both enemies.

    1. I think it was Voltaire who said: To find out who owns you, first figure out who you can’t criticise….it’s obviously not the Muslims, think about it.

      1. “I think it was Voltaire who said: To find out who owns you, first figure out who you can’t criticise….it’s obviously not the Muslims, think
        about it.”
        Obviously, it is the Muslims, among other groups that it is considered unlawful hate speech and mental illness (phobia) to criticize.

        1. that’s liberal politics. you don’t hear that non-sense coming from alternative media (as much). what about the zionists?

    2. Islam is totally incompatible with Western society. That’s the bottom line. Unless Islam undergoes serious reform which isn’t going to happen.

        1. And Christianity. All monotheism is incompatible with a mature, rational society.

        2. No jackass,,,,,,,this is what SJW peddle to negate islamic threat,,,,,,the central fig of Christianity was a hippie like figure,,,,,,,,the actions performed in old testament was from divine power,,,,,,,but guess what the central figure of islam was a warlord who PERFORMED ACTIONS HIMSELF who now has become the example of a divine human being

        3. LOL Jesus wasn’t religion. Religion was created by men who used fear to control people. What greater control than making people do as they’re told or fear ever lasting torture?
          Religion gave us the child raping religions we have now such as Christian Church organisations. They also gave us people hurt others for being gay and for being black due to plastic white Jesus.
          Oh wait, we also have Christian movements demanding that the Bible be the law of the land. These groups all hate non-Christians, those who are gay, those who have a working brain they can think for themselves and they ‘never ever’ criticise and call out Christian Churches who continue to hide rapists.
          Smells like religion.

        4. By today’s standards, Jesus would be classified as a Middle Eastern terrorist and a socialist commie.

        5. Feminism does not equate atheism. From which nonsense did you draw such a strange conclusion.

        6. You either haven’t read your Bible, or you know nothing about socialism.
          Jesus would be considered racist, and since he was of the tribe of Judah, an Israelite, he was probably white. He would be “Middle Eastern” the same way a white South African is an African.

        7. Feminists ARE atheists. That is what I said. It is a fact that feminists are also always atheists. Or at least have never actually looked into Christianity or taken it seriously.
          Christianity is the ultimate patriarchy. It makes sense that feminists would reject it.
          The only feminists that pretend to be Christian have likely never red the bible.

        8. Jesus would be painted as socialist as he offered free healing of health complaints and told the wealthy to give away their wealth. And Jesus was as white as fecal matter but white nationalists say to tell themselves that they are better but in reality, they’re just foolish foolish people.

        9. Many ‘feminists’ are also pagans. There are also feminists who believe in Jesus. Muslim women who go to war to fight, who believe in and fight for education and careers for women are following the principles of feminism.

        10. The truth of Jesus is that his parents had sex out of wedlock which was punishable by death, so they made up a story about a magical cloud man injecting himself insider her womb without sexual intercourse. His Jewish mum called him a God and the uneducated poor followed him around everywhere.
          Or, he was a mentally ill man who like was schizophrenic suffering from delusions and narcissism who attracted the uneducated poor who were struggling to survive. Something which, historically valued as the poor following the next charismatic rebel who promises the world at the downfall of the current political system. aka terrorism.

        11. There are no long-lasting, powerful atheist civilizations that atheists can pull up as evidence of their claims that an atheist society is what we need.
          Atheists are quick to tell people about how they have the cure for modern society and yet the more secular we come, the more degenerate a society becomes. We’ve already had examples of atheist societies in modern times, which were the communist societies, and nobody is begging to return to that.

        12. So rejecting pedophile rings who moralise is the wrong step? Nah, I reject pedo networks known as monotheism.

        13. That’s the enlightenment rationalist illuminati position. The reason we’ve had two centuries of bloody revolution and mass murder in the name of progress. Trying to eradicate religion has killed more people than any other cause in recent times, although the jihadis would be happy to beat that record

        14. The analogies you use and the general incoherence of your writing reveal deep seated self loathing and consequent sexual perversions within you. You need to get those debilitating issues taken care of before trying to engage in any debate girlie, Good Luck

        15. The analogies you use and the general incoherence of your writing reveal deep seated self loathing & consequent sexual perversions within you. You need to get those debilitating issues taken care of before trying to engage in any debate girlie, Good Luck

        16. How would Jesus be considered racist?
          “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations.” Matthew 28:19
          And don’t start this “Jesus was white” horseshit. Jesus was a Semite, which is Caucasian, but not what we would consider “white.”

        17. Troll? Maybe you should study religion and all it has done such as child slavery, pedophilia, genocide, etc.

        18. Read: mature and rational? Mature enough to ignore cuts on the throat of your society initiated by your own leaders? Rational enough to be only running after $$$ and consumerism as a replacement for religion? Please go back, get a calm minute and think about your real god! Everyone got one. It is only necessary to know him.

        19. I love how religious people always respond with personal attacks. It must be their religious values they talk about so much.

        20. Why do you assume that it’s only achieved by violence when have been peacefully leaving religion, instead of violently forcing people to join a religion?

        21. Islam is a common disease, like the Flu. Alone, it is not lethal.
          Globalism is HIV. By itself, it can’t kill you.
          But if you contract HIV, all those common diseases – which were once minor irritants – suddenly become more lethal to you than ebola.
          A country with a healthy immune system would never have imported millions of disease-ridden third worlders.

        22. I’m conflicted on this one. I do believe in the Noble Lie theory, but modern science and rationality makes it difficult to believe in many of these old superstitions. Is the answer a new belief system? A new religion? Or a return to the old?

        23. Funny how post modern Christianity is about big business profits and you’re attacking atheism.

        24. I’m actually pagan myself and it’s good to see people either returning to the old belief systems which are null of overbearing patriachs or they’re just turning their back on religion.

        25. I don’t really care if people believe in Jesus or whoever. I care when people continue seeking to enforce their views on everyone else as the only way to live, then attack other belief systems as evil when theirs also has a checkered history.

        26. I would challenge you to think rationally and logically about the purpose for the INSTITUTION of religion–why did it exist in society? It had little to do with saving souls. The institution of religion, while certainly not without flaws, has served a purpose of instituting sexual rules (virginity, monogamy, etc.), of the importance of family, of a sense of duty and obligation to others, of the need for sacrifice, and importantly, a moral imperative against criminal behavior.

        27. people can believe and do what they want. But those hideously violent revolutions of the last two centuries or so tended to target religion specifically as a form of backwardness or superstition, especially Christianity. They weren’t interested in debate or any kind of peaceful resolution of the issue. So the question arises whether the decline of religion was peaceful or violent in the main. Certainly it was both to varying degrees, but how does the one relate to the other, particularly if you acknowledge that part of the violence may have involved destroying institutions, buildings, congregations, personnel etc. Religion could well be backward and superstititious, but if violent or even more subtle subversive attacks on such institutions are directed against it, then it’s no good saying ‘oh, people have just evolved’ when it would be truer to say ‘they have been evolved’

        28. Because the Christian zealot is very Islamic in how they approach who gets the love and forgiveness, who gets the damnable hate.
          All religious zealots are that way..even pagans as you demonstrate yourself:
          “How’s your white Jesus nationalist meetings going? Do you enjoy them?”

        29. “Nations” is in the original text the same word as “gentile”. Ethnos. Anyway: In Matthew 15, 21-28 (The Canaanite woman), he says he has not come for anyone but Israel. He even calls other groups “dogs”.
          Also in His prayer before they captured Him, he makes clear He did NOT come for everybody: John 17, 9: I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
          You believe what you want about the horse shit. I’m not in the mood for that discussion.

        30. -You seem to forget that in the end, the Canaanite woman’s faith is acknowledged by Jesus and her daughter is healed.
          -“I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they all may be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.” John 17: 20-21

        31. No they’re not, you drooling moron. Muslim women despise everything about Feminism because they see what it produces: Women like you.
          A spiteful, creepy. back stabbing, amoral, atheistic, flaky, STD infested wh*re who is completely unaccountable, aborts all of your babies and abandons her family all so she can go to work making $10 an hour as a receptionist.
          No.1 job more women are in than any other today? Secretary.
          The only ones who can’t see the women of the West are nothing but stupid, goofy trash and losers are yourselves.

        32. I’m going to take the time to explain to you a few things, and I hope you listen.
          Discussing religion in the internet is the most futile and counterproductive act of all. It brings nothing more than division byzantine discussions about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin; and that’s why I called you a troll.
          What you were saying about pedophiles and fags technically is true. But it is also true that if more people were religious, this world would not be in the situation of today, with all the decadence, perversion, etc, etc.
          I’m talking from a pragmatic point of view, I’m an atheist but I consider that religion is an useful tool for cohesion and morality within a people. I don’t care if a fellow man or woman worships Odin, Christ or the Great Pumpkin as long as they share certain eternal truths.

        33. Jesus heals her daughter only when she recognizes her place as a dog compared to the Israelites. Sinners, whores and publicans (is this the correct English word?); no problem. Humble people not of Israel recognizing Him as Lord; not so much.
          The whole Bible is written for and about Israel. I really don’t mind people of all races turning to Christ, but His people Israel ought to know the truth about who He is and their place in the World.

        34. (I don’t know if publican is a word at all.)
          And I’m assuming you’re one of those people who believe the Europeans are the Israelites, right?

        35. False, Israelis that you know of today are EUROPEAN. Netanyahu is from POLAND. True Israelites are people if Brown to dark

        36. People living in the state of Israel today are for the most part not the Israelis from the Bible. This is true.

        37. In other words you are part of the problem with the West. The west is going back to “its roots” and is unraveling as we speak.

        38. That isn’t an argument. It’s not funny and only showcases your little grasp of the argument.

        39. Do you believe that people just like to contradict themselves with their ideology?
          I have this covered here: “Or at least have never actually looked into Christianity or taken it seriously.”
          You can replace the word Christianity here. As is obvious the act of not looking into the religion or taking it seriously is one of little or no belief in it. That aside people don’t just follow two openly opposing ideologies with the same passion. If both are taken seriously a decision is to be made.
          As such it can also be argued that the more religious a person gets the less feminist she can be.
          That being said I am unaware of a modern day religion that tells women they are equal or superior to men. So this stands firmly too. Even if that would be the case it wouldn’t change that feminists are mostly atheistic and all unchristian.

        40. Ancient religions. They’re ancient religions experiencing a rebirthing. They have an equality about them which monotheism cannot have unless they unshackle their oppressive dogmas.

        41. Part of the problem? We’re not raping children behind a cloak of religion.

        42. Fags? What does a cigarette have to do with this? *sarcasm*
          Pedophilia and homosexuality are not connected yet I doubt your self loathing and ignorance will help you mature any.

        43. Yes, they were happier when men owned them like property and could force them to have sex(rape) and also could hit their wives as they please.

          Aren’t you curious why “50 shades of grey” was such a success?
          Technically it crushes feminism and equality.
          Another logical thought that likely never arose in your head.
          Do you think that all men across the earth in all civilizations and during all time periods just hate women for no reason?
          Does this really seem logical to you? That men that are biologically made to love women hate them unequivocally? That it’s just fun for us to “oppress” you?
          Or do you think that we did it out of necessity? Because women cannot bear being equal to men? Because they need to be protected?

          Study Shows Young Women Are Twice As Likely As Young Men To Be Mentally Ill

          Have you also ever wondered why all successful civilizations were patriarchal?
          I get that you are a woman. You think emotionally not rationally.
          So, I give you this chance to just disappear now.

        45. OMG, you took fantasy and translated fantasy as reality.
          50 Shakes of Grey was also rejected and ridiculed by many women for not holding true to what BDSM is about. 50 Shades of Grey is a story that spring boarded as fan fiction based on the Twilight series where the author portrayed stalking as natural and something to be wanted by a young teenage woman who was obsessive over the young teenage man with control issues.
          You need to learn the difference between fiction and non-fiction.

        46. You are just troll and you aren’t even trying anymore.
          Fact is women love to be dominated. Such media and it’s success proves this.

        47. Sweetie, watching fiction isn’t research. Try researching something that is real.

        48. Something you should look into is the ratio of men/women who pay to be dominated by a Dom/Domme. The majority of clients are men paying to be dominated by a woman. Women are mostly betrayed as submissive to men because of the patriach and the fetishes of men who long controlled the workforce.

        49. Not a new religion, but an adaptation to modern knowledge. Many have tried, Jung for example, and become victims of yet more knowledge — and a special kind of ignorance that comes with negativity and self-hate.

        50. The reason I ask is because all the religions that have tried to adapt and reflect modernity seem to be weak and meaningless, while at least in my view, the most primitive / orthodox faiths are the ones that have the most positive traits. Can you elaborate on Jungianism and ignorance?

        51. One thing I think he was trying to do was restore vitality to religion by combining it with psychology as a way of personal growth. That is, trying to free it from having to defy the laws of physics in order to be seen as useful; during his time (before pathogens evolved to their current situation) prayer might or might not cure an infection but antibiotics would whatever your religion.
          He seemed to have been trying to show religion was a way of expressing what he saw psychology as providing, but largely in terms of social cohesion as well as individual improvement. He definitely tried to tie modern psychology in with religion, suggesting they simply used different terminology. This could allow people to remain religious, not fight over religion, and not have to be anti-science.
          Interestingly, this is also what the New Age Movement of a few decades back was trying to do. Many of their writings were full of modern descriptions of traditional matters, as in prayer being a way to focus thoughts. At that time I hoped the effort to do so would succeed but instead it seems to have fragmented.
          While Jung had studied other religions he emphasized that Christianity and Western paganism were appropriate to Western culture and that it didn’t do much good to simply imitate, say, Hindu customs as what amounted to an escape. He thought the religions of other cultures were integral to them.
          I’m not sure how this will turn out, but I want to defend Western culture, which has brought the most general benefits to the world.

        52. Warsie: And the story of Chinese history is about things falling apart and degenerating into war until someone comes along to capture “the mandate of heaven.”

        53. Please educate yourself then further contemplate on your new found knowledge before speaking on such matters. Superficiality in regards to theology and philosphy is common practice these days.

        54. The fairy tale of Jesus saw him rebel against the powers that be along with a large following, with a strong base on the concept of being the King and religious leader. That is today viewed as terrorism.

        55. I do believe that the population rate of paedophilia is not significantly different from the population rate, and the castigation of priests that are without blame is a mighty stretch to hang a religion that has children’s and women’s rights as one of its most signal achievements.
          In any case, ROK’s question still stands… What/who for are you fighting for? What are you protecting that you believe is worth your life? Because the ummah demands your life or your fealty, and what are you going to do? And most importantly, what is worth your life vs. appearing to comply and moving on? Accommodating?

        56. No, the Church never fought for women’s rights, women fought for them. The Church fought to keep women in their place and still to this day, we have Christian clerics argue that women cause domestic abuse by saying “no”.
          The problem with Christian Churches is not that all Priests are pedophiles, because they’re not. The problem is that if they’re not molesting children, they’re covering for those who do.

        57. Yet under religious societies man has achieved and also paved the way for some of the greatest accomplishments to date. Todays definition of terrorism has little to do with religion.

        58. Child rape for fun was the norm in many pagan societies. The worst semites got to was fucking 12 year old girls. Pagans used 4 year old boys as masturbation devices. You have to go all the way to afghanistan to find degeneracy of this sort, and it’s not the hardcore muslims (taliban) doing most of the child rape, it’s the tribals and customs left over from pre-islamic times.

        59. Jesus WAS racist, you simply don’t understand what “racist” means. You don’t have to believe in racial supremacy or abuse other races to be racist, you just have to believe they have inherent differences. Jesus’s interaction with the Samaritan woman and His telling her that it’s not good to feed the children’s bread to the dogs is classic racism.

        60. The israelites betrayed Him and lost their special place. Christ came for them but they reject Him so Christ opens up the franchise to everybody.

        61. A fine quote by C. S. Lewis:
          “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. … Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.”

    3. take it from an ex-Kurdish muslim,,,,,,,,I’m never accepting a religion that was forced onto my ancestors through slavery and rape,…….

      1. <<n:u. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::::!!bz564a:….,..

    4. Along with pedophile Christian networks known as Catholic, Anglican, Salvation Army, JW’s, etc.

      1. Pedophilia is as common among “pagans” as anywhere else. You’d see that if you’d take the time to get down from your high horse and interact with the rest of humanity as a normal person.

        1. I wasn’t taking a high horse position but knocking the Christian Right off theirs, considering the child abuse they are plagued with.

        2. considering it was a normal practice in arab lands which already had this in place before islam came up, i’d say that’d be your first example.

        3. You mean how European Christians forced girls into marriage and sex from their first period?
          How about you try something real?

        4. you have anything apart from whataboutery. i answered your question you stupid harridan.

        5. Historically speaking, children were breeding much younger a long time as a social norm. Over the last one hundred years, pagans have matured while child abuse continues to be rampant among monotheist organisations, along with other social crises including domestic abuse.

        6. ‘pagans have matured while child abuse continues to be rampant among monotheist organisations’
          that’s pretty unsubstantiated.

        7. What is? Rampant child abuse among the institutions of monotheist organisations? There is a lot of evidence out there already showing that it is and Pope Francis I isn’t helping by telling his Priests that they’re forgiven if they pray.

        8. that’s hardly an argument. you don’t even have case since this happens despite religious institutions. let me guess, you’ve had issues didn’t you?

        9. The issue is that religious violence doesn’t stop but we keep ignoring it to protect the most extreme corruption our societies are beholden to for the phobia of what’s beyond death. Rich organisations where men and women such as Priests(Pastors/etc), Nuns and Brothers long abused children. Not just sexually but physically through slavery, physical beltings, emotional tricks and encouraging societies to condemn to increase their own powers. And they become wealthier in monetary means as their power increases.
          If you look at the Philippines as one example, you find the financially rich Catholic Church guilt tripping those with barely any money at all, into handing over money to them. One can imagine how much child abuse is happening there.
          To point this at me is to ignore and ridicule the very important fact that religion is a scam run by men who take money as they rape. I will be happy the day people mature out of this supernatural nonsense leave it where it should be. History.

        10. ain’t you disillusioned sweetheart. as if all this will stop when you wipe out religion from the world (which i doubt you’d be able to)

        11. When people no longer feel the need to worship the non-existent to appease their oppressors, it will fall.

        12. I can see that your level of empathy or care for children especially being abused is of no consequence by your direct barbs against my character. It’s not about me or you, darling. It’s nothing personal. It’s about taking these criminals and putting them where they belong in prison until they die.

        13. rather i find it sickening that you use the abuse of kids to fuel your own stupid dogma.

    5. I do not disagree. However, Ali ask you, who does belong in Europe?

    6. This article and the author are in a state of cognitive dissonance. On one hand, he argues that the West has become a degenerate society as the belief in God, patriarchal systems, relationships between a man and a woman, and religion has declined drastically. Then he goes on to bash Islam and Muslims who happen to still keep the moral values of religion (belief in a God, patriarchy, and marriage between a man and a woman). This site goes on to bash our degenerate society, the cuckold men, and the filthy women on the cock carousel, yet has an issue when Islam spreads to the West and wants to bring back those ideologies than can fix the degenerate society we live in. Really interesting to see the hypocrisy. Look, if you have a problem with ISIS and terrorists, that’s understandable. But when you are asking for us to resort to the good old days where we were conservative, and then go out to bash Islam that is trying to bring us back to “those days”, then I ask, “wtf do you want?”

      1. I don’t bash Islam or Muslims. I am clearly stating they have the GOOD answers The West used to have to the problems of degeneracy and decay we are experiencing.
        If by bashing you mean I am highlighting the evil that is RADICAL ISlam and its roots, that is not bashing Islam but exposing the truth of the situation and trying to get people to STOP bashing Islam ON THE WHOLE and take a closer look at it.
        As for ROK and the hypocrisy of crying degeneracy and then other authors/commenters bashing Islam that has the answers to it, I do agree.
        But I don’t see cognitive dissonance nor hypocrisy per se. What I see is people looking at an extremely fucked up situation and trying to figure out what the fuck is going on.
        The West clearly left God and let the women take over. The West is not completely fucked up.
        Islam is clearly taking over demographically BECAUSE it holds the values and beliefs The West once had when it was grounded in God and Christianity.
        Islam is also seriously fucked up. Radical, dogmatic, literal interpretations that have zero philosophical support in Islam’s own early intellectual history are now increasingly being seen as “true” Islam when it is not. Why is this?
        This is why I wrote the article. I am able to hold these contradictory points of view BECAUSE I am trying to understand the situation and figure out what is going on. I am trying to make clearly contradictory thoughts and ideas CLEAR by sourcing why things are as they are.
        What do I want?
        I want a reformed Christianity AND Islam that goes back to the intellectual and philosophical ROOTS of the TRUTH of both faiths and rejects the literal dogmas and regressive attitudes of a minority of literalists/purists who have ZERO intellectual understanding of their faith and use FORCE AND THREAT to get me or anyone else to fall into line.
        Ditto… for The West and the dream that was Rome.
        Does that make what I want more clear?

      2. “On one hand, he argues that the West has become a degenerate society as the belief in God ( … )has declined drastically. Then he goes on to bash Islam and Muslims who happen to still keep the moral values of religion (belief in a God, patriarchy, and marriage between a man and a woman”
        A total libtard you are.

        1. Instead of showing me nonsensical and out of the context retarded videos, and calling me names, why don’t you refute my argument with logic trailer trash?

      1. It’s just over one billion. 742.5 million people live in Europe, plus 320 million in the US, comes out to 1.06 billion.

  29. I ordinarily laud the quality of articles on this site but this is by far the most idiotic, nonsensical, braindead and insulting one I have ever read here. I am reminded of the useful idiots Khrushchev spoke of having read this drivel.

    1. I tried to read it but nah, so I skipped to comments ;-).
      My answer to the original question is deport or kill them. Most have houses in their home countries anyway.

      1. And while we’re at it close the borders on them permanently.

    2. I upvoted you because I enjoy push back. I welcome it.
      I looked up the useful idiot reference. Did you miss out on my three points:
      1) Radical islam is a real threat and danger to The West.
      2) Blaming Islam is as childish as blaming guns for killing people.
      3) ISIS and radical Islam, Wahhabi/Salifis, are 100% proven to be a creation of western powers for the purpose of serving as a mercenary proxy army against not just the Middle East and fellow Muslims, but Europe and Russia.
      How am I being useful in helping the enemy?
      If the article is nonsensical (i.e. not based on facts or solid reasoning), braindead (I am illiterate, stupid and grossly uniformed) and insulting (just plain stupid, that’s what you want to say)… please demonstrate where and specifically point out what makes these claims of yours valid points.
      I welcome it. If I am a useful idiot, prove it to everyone here.

      1. 1) There is no such thing as radical Islam; Islam is Islam. It is a religion of absolutes where there is no moderation.
        The word ‘Islam’ means submission which alone is a good starting point to demonstrate that there is no such thing as ‘radical’ or ‘moderate’.
        1.Islam means “submission” and a Muslim is one who submits to Allah, the God of Islam. Therefore, every Muslim without exception has submitted to the will of Allah. What is the primary will of Allah? That unbelief ceases to exist until the world belongs solely to Allah as commanded in Chapter 8 verse 39 of the Quran. Allah also commands unbelievers to be either killed or subjugated in many other verses of the Quran with the most important verse for unbelievers to be aware of being Chapter 9 verse 29, “the verse of tribute.” I could list many more similar verses but you can see that such violent commands prove Allah is most definitely not a moderate, peaceful God. In fact Allah is a God of War. This begs the question: How can people who worship him be moderate?
        2.The Islamic prophet Muhammad is revered by all Muslims as “the ideal man, the perfect example for all time” and God’s last prophet. So what example did he set for Muslims to emulate? Muhammad was a warlord who obeyed the commands of Allah and spread his faith by the sword. He murdered infidels and he ordered his men to rape captured infidel women. Muhammad also tortured camel thieves and then left them to die in the oppressive heat of the desert. The gory details are described here in the most authoritative accounts of Muhammad’s life, the hadith of Sahih Bukhari volume 4, book 52, number 261.
        Such brutality is equivalent to atrocities carried out by the Socialist dictators Stalin, Mao and Hitler. Can people who revere Stalin, Mao or Hitler as “perfect examples” ever be described as moderate? And why does no one ask: Why do mujahideen behead their victims? As you’ve seen, it’s commanded by Allah in the Quran. But that isn’t enough. Muhammad also beheaded infidels so the mujahideen of ISIS and Al Qaeda are merely devout Muslims following his perfect example. Just as Allah is not a moderate God, Muhammad was not a moderate prophet.
        3.Muslims have been waging jihad against unbelievers from all non-Islamic faiths since Muhammad started it in 622. Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, Zoroastrians and even Buddhists have all faced Islamic jihad and still are. If Islam really is a peaceful religion and most Muslims are moderate, how on earth can Islam have such a long, violent history?
        The recent history of Islam also casts doubt on the “most Muslims are moderate” narrative. Since the terrible day of 9/11, Muslims have committed more than 27,600 murderous acts of Islamic jihad. No matter what atrocity is committed it will be met with indifference from the Islamic world. There has never been millions of Muslims protesting against any of these atrocities. A few brave Muslims have protested but contrast with the millions who protested – and killed people – over the cartoons mocking Muhammad in 2006 and who supported the attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris in 2015.
        Moderate Muslims are doing nothing to solve “extremism” but conversely, are all too ready to cry Islamophobia should anyone dare to criticize Islam. They will also accuse people who link these murderous acts of jihad to Islam of Islamophobia and will attempt to portray Muslims as the real victims by warning of a “backlash” which never materializes.
        Such a difference is revealing and proves the vast majority of Muslims do not regard violent jihad as extreme. It’s difficult to believe the “majority of Muslims oppose extremists” when so few Muslims protest against it. And when Muslims around the world protest about Palestine or cartoons, they will burn the Union Jack, the Stars and stripes, the flag of Israel, Danish and Swedish flags, and the French tricolor. When have you ever seen thousands of outraged, moderate Muslims burn Hamas, Hezbollah or ISIS flags?
        You won’t because millions of Muslims in the Islamic world don’t protest against these Islamic terror groups. Inactions as well as actions speak louder than words.
        4.With Islam comes the sharia, the legal system. Under sharia, women have no rights at all. A man can divorce his wife just by saying “I divorce you” three times, called “talaq.” The value of the life of a woman is half that of a man. Raped women are judged to be criminals if they can’t find four male witnesses to their violation. Human rights organisation Sisters In Islam revealed that 75% of female prisoners in Pakistan are rape victims. Then there are strict proximity laws. Women aren’t allowed to be alone with a male who is not a relative.
        Life is equally hard for children. In Islamic sharia, there is no minimum age for marriage. Under sharia, the punishment for apostasy is death, same applies to homosexuality. Both Muslims and Non-Muslims living under sharia must not criticize Islam, Muhammad or Muslims or face imprisonment, flogging or even death.
        Once again, one can quite reasonably ask: How on earth can anyone say the Islamic sharia legal code is moderate? How can Muslims who abide by sharia be moderate? How can the brutal treatment of women under sharia be moderate? Yet the majority of Muslims say they want to live under sharia.
        Here’s another question: Can Islamic countries who implement sharia – Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia and so on – be considered moderate?
        5.Every Friday, Muslims around the world go to their local mosque to give worship. What is the first prayer said in every mosque around the world? It’s for Muslims to defeat the infidels.
        Furthermore, Muslims curse Jews and Christians SEVENTEEN times a day in their daily prayers. How many other faiths ask this from believers and can this be considered moderate?
        These are just five core aspects of Islam that clash with the narrative that it is a moderate, peaceful religion. I could include many more but I believe the ones I have outlined here clearly prove there is no such thing as moderate Islam. Therefore, it logically follows that there cannot be such a thing as a moderate Muslim and such a Muslim would be regarded as an apostate in Islamic states.
        2) Then kindly explain the motivations for all the incidents in the last few weeks in Germany, Belgium, France and other countries. It shouldn’t take you much to deduce what the common thread is.
        3) Whilst ISIS/Wahhabis may be useful idiots also, the Islamic belief system is inherently a military political ideology intent on a worldwide caliphate as I stated above.
        Your article is incredibly naive as to the true nature of Islam-if you want the truth about it just speak to those who suffered under it and have become ‘Apostates’ such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali et. al or those from backgrounds who were subjugated by the Ottomans etc. in Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians and so on-there you’ll get a better grip on what you are promoting.

        1. Wow. Great reply. Perhaps even some good points. I still think your version of Islam is heavily biased, but then that is your claim of me.
          That is the problem with the truth. The search for it is long and hard and I see you have done a lot of searching, but how much truth have you actually found?
          Quote: ” Since the terrible day of 9/11,”
          Right there, you lost me completely.
          If you are someone who STILL believes that Muslim terrorists hijacked two commercial airliners and crashed them into the Twin Towers because “they hate our way of life” and THAT is why they collapsed, ALL the above written is rendered suspect. Your judgement is simply not fit to find truth.
          By point/
          1) You cherry pick Quranic quotations and take them completely out of context of the whole narrative. The call to find the unbelievers was issued at a time of oppression for the Muslims by the Quraish. It’s meaning CAN be interpreted literally (as both old and new testament can wrongly be), but the MEANING of the revelation is to fight those that fight you, NOT to take the offensive. That is the traditional understanding of the text and is accepted by the majority of Muslims.
          2) On moderate Islam. I think I have to agree with you, it is not moderate. In the sense, it knows, not believes, it has the truth. You don’t sound very moderate yourself, almost extreme in your belief that Islam is the most vile and evil religion on earth. If you wish me to believe there is no moderate Islam, than you have to agree your views are as far from moderate as Islam’s is. Your proofs… are your proof of intolerance toward Islam. The Quran… is proof of intolerance against those who fight against truth. So, in a way, you are a Muslim of your own variety!!!
          3) Violent Mohammed. Look, this is pagan Arabia in the seventh century. The whole world was violent! I am not surprised at these claims of yours (but would have to confirm them myself), but it is no less violent than the crimes committed by Christians in the Crusades. They committed even worse in many cases and the Muslims were the only ones to show mercy at the time when the tide turned against them. So you can cherry pick history to your death bed, you are not getting to the truth.
          4) Islam’s long violent history. Any more than others? And WHAT history are we talking about? Ancient history, as in no longer relevant, or current history that is CLEARLY ORGANIZED BY WESTERN POWERS AND FUNDED WITH MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND TONNES OF WEAPONS BY THEM?
          Or did you completely ignore the link I gave you to review on the origins of Wahhibism, the “radical” Islam that is scaring the whole world into submitting to a planetary police state for “our safety”.
          5) Cultural Islam. These are facts I can’t refute. A lot of barbaric practices are still maintained in Muslim worlds on marriage, etc. This is wrong. But so too were the witch hunts and the Inquisition. So too was colonialism to bring the heathens to modernity. What you are talking about is IGNORANCE, not religion. If there was more medical, social, and scientific knowledge in poor, impoverished and oppressed Muslim lands, these cultural practices would disappear. You don’t see these practices (in my understanding) in the Muslims of the West. That is a benefit of exposure to western ways. But does that then mean that the WHOLE of Islam is thus degenerate and so too there followers? This logic does not compute.
          6) Muslim prayers to defeat the infidels and curse Jews and Christians. Have you read some of the same idiotic, stupid, and unintelligent comments on here about Muslims? Come on man. This is not Islam, it is HUMAN NATURE. We are ALL guilty of hating that which we do not understand. It is why I wrote this article, for you to understand WHY they want you to hate Islam.
          7) Explain the attacks in Belgium, France, Germany etc.
          Ok, I will.
          9/11 was the start of the take over of the planet by the political/financial elite of the corrupt and depraved west (whose people are held hostage as well).
          You can’t have a secular, anti-radical Islam Muslim middle East (Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, Mubarak). So, using your satanic allies in Saudi Arabia, you have them use billions in US petro dollars to create THE single most EXTREME interpretation of Islam to date in the whole of Islamic history with ZERO basis intellectual or philosophical argument of the religion.
          Bang. Afghanistan. Iraq. Let it simmer. Chaos only increases and the time between wars allows you to build up a good intelligence and fighter network to take out the rest (cause you can’t do it openly, as much as you would like to).
          2011. Gaddafi is now out. Assad is next. Oh… and have Turkey, a NATO member, hold all the “refugees” and then release them all into Europe at the right moment to create MAXIMUM tension going into the most important election in US history.
          Russia, almost forgot about those guys. They need to be held in check to. Kick out Yankuvich, install a Nazi regime of the Banderra-ites, and let that simmer on the side.
          Ok… back to Syria… not going well. We need more and bigger Islam enemies. Announce a “caliphate” in Iraq, let them enter without dropping a single bomb on them and then pretend to “fight ISIS” for over a year, only to have the Russians come in and ACTUALLY fight them and route them in only three months.
          Which brings us back to Europe. The sanctions on “evil” Russia are hurting Europe, not Russia, and Germany, and France, are musing about making amends and maybe throwing off the yoke of US control.
          Cue terror in Paris. Cue terror in Brusslles. Cue terror in Germany. All this is designed to break the nation states and impose a POLTICAL union on the EU, not just a monetary one.
          Oh shit. Brexit! God damn brints and their pen and paper ballots!!! But they are one of us and already completely overrun with Muslims. It is Europe that needs to be kept in line and the Americans to be stricken with abject fear of terrorist attacks by showing them what is happening in Europe, which is all funded and coordinated by George Sorros and his Open Society.
          But… that would be to much “conspiracy” for you I am sure.
          Let’s just blame evil Islam and those pedophile Muslims.

        2. You are conflating a lot of issues together and making a lot of leaps of logic. Whether we like it or not 9/11 was terrible and the observation was in light of how we are now in a post 9/11 world.
          One does not simply cherry-pick quotations; the first verses in the Koran were ‘peaceful’ as they hadn’t gained a foothold and then are abrogated when they gain control thereafter. It’s one of the stages of Islamic conquest which builds up from Infiltration (where they are weak and claim to be oppressed and call for appeasement and dialogue) to consolidation of power (Moslem immigrants and host country converts continue demands for accommodation in employment, education, social services, financing and courts etc.)., open war with leadership (Open violence to impose Sharia law and associated cultural restrictions; rejection of host government, subjugation of other religions and customs.) and then Shariah law and totalitarianism.
          Your relativism of the Crusades is also laughably inaccurate-they were launched as a defensive response 400 years after the first Islamic attacks against Europe; they didn’t go around butchering Moslems in order to conquer.
          There are no question certain machinations in place but at the end of the day the Brexit was a positive and one can hope other nations states wake up and throw their elites and their Muslim stooges out.

        3. You’re full of shit. Take your apologetics for Islam and shove them where the sun don’t shine.

        4. Did your homework. Great comment.
          Currently living as a non Muslim in Muslim part of Asia I can verify a number of your points to be spot on.

        5. Much obliged. I can only imagine what it’d be like being in such an environment as a non-native or unbeliever.

      2. Maybe not a useful idiot but disingenuous if you are not mentioning the effect of the one Abrahamic faith that’s playing both sides for fools, and has for a long time.
        To write that whole article and not mention the Neocons or Israel/Mossad/Netanyahu as side by side with the CIA in the last 15 years of bloodshed against Muslims…dodgy.
        To put the crusades in the same sentence as the outright annihilation of European culture that led to the dark ages by Islam and continued until the early 20th century by Islam….pretty green.
        Literally cut all shipping lanes/commerce for centuries with Piracy and constant attacks, that’s why Europeans built fortresses.
        You might still think it was the Germanic “barbarians” that did that or the Vikings.
        Wahhabism goes back centuries, and there’s a whole lot of dodgy crap going on in the formation of the myth of mohamed and islam, to the point where there might not have actually been a guy called mohamed but just a composite of a few guys and a myth built by the very early wahhabist in saudi arabia.
        You might believe it was all those muslim scholars that rode in on horseback and after a bit of murder, rape and pillage did all the translations of Aristotle from ancient Greek.
        I put it to you respectfully that you are WAY under researched for the topic you tried to tackle.
        The history of Christendom and Europe is suppressed.
        What’s to defend for the west?
        If you ask yourself what’s a civilisational model,
        how many are there,
        why are they different,
        which one you would prefer to live in?
        Then you will get your answer.
        In china they harvest organs of their political opponents,
        in saudi arabia they still sell slaves,
        in Germany if you offend a muslim killer in the middle of a killing spree you get charged with a hate crime..
        It makes you useful but not an idiot

        1. I have done my research and admit I need to do more. There clearly was an Islam (i.e. the caliphate and empire) that was in conflict with Europe and Christians because THAT is what empires do!
          That does not take away from the FACTS of the 21st century.
          Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Syria were SECULAR Muslim states actively SUPPRESSING radical Islam (what little there was, and as I have written is CLEARLY not native to the Islam of today).
          Now look at those countries. All destroyed except for Egypt (where the army took back control from the radical Muslim Brotherhood) and replaced with chaos where ISIS and radical Islam are now free to GROW AND SPREAD like a cancer.
          If radical Wahhabi Islam is SO dangerous and SO historical, WHERE WAS IT in the 20th century? Prior to 9/11, aside from sporadic bombings (basement of world trade centre that was ALSO an inside job), there is simply nothing. Even after 9/11, the big one… WHERE WAS THE TERRORISM?
          All this radical Islam shit and the terror we see now is a DIRECT result of the plan to destabilize and destroy the secular Muslim states (Iraq, Libya, Syria) that is now on full force, but it IS only the past 5 or so years (the killing of Gadafi and Hillary’s “We came, we saw, he died. HA ha ha ha ha!!!”
          I have rarely suggested to others to do more research until the accusation was labeled at me. I know I have more to learn, but so do we all.

  30. The problem with Islam is it only takes a few terrorist attacks and your rights will be taken. More than anything; an armed camp you will live in. That is no freedom nor the american way of life. My thinking is all of Islam needs to leave America- Let them behead their own kind and live religious crazy. Thinking about 911- a few planes and now everyone is standing in the airport going through security checkpoints- this is the result of ISLAM -not christians nor any other religion. I don’t have to think of Peaceful Muslims when MY rights are being taken away because of their insanity.

    1. I agree with this, but trust me, if there were zero Mooslims in America, there would still be an attack which was used to take your rights. I don’t know what the next enemy will be, but we will live to see who the next scapegoat is. First the Commies, then the Mooslims, who will be next? Doesn’t really matter. The end goal is what matters.

  31. I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately. After Nice, after the news of the Bataclan cover up and what those pig fuckers really did…We’re at war. Shit like that can’t go unanswered.
    Our politicians and ‘leaders’ are people who’ve never been in a real fight and they don’t understand this concept. They’ve been coddled from the earliest age and fed with a silver spoon. When you are dealing with a bully, any bully, you have to teach them a lesson, one they wont forget. And even if you lose and they win, they’ll know that if they mess with you that you again that you are willing and able to take a piece out of them. To date, no one has been willing to take the gloves off with Islam. They need to pay a price.
    Eastwood was right when he said that we are in a pussy generation. People these days are weak and the muslims and imams know it. All this bullshit about acceptance is from people who’ve never been in a real fight. We’re being driven off a cliff by bat-shit-crazy rabid feminist SJWs at the wheel, who say that we’re the problem. They’ll talk about the pay gap and man-spreading but they wont even name the enemy that has declared war on all of us long ago.
    I took the red-pill quite a while back. Found MGTOW, then game. And I ask myself, why I as a man should I care? Why should I concern myself with a society that has thrown men like myself under the bus? One that says that I am a potential rapist, a potential pedophile, and yet ‘privileged’ to be a male… (And I’m not white but I don’t buy this white privilege thing either)
    The the horror and brutality of Islam came to light and I can’t ignore it anymore. I will be damned if I let these fuckers shit in my backyard and that alone is principle enough for me to fight them. What they do to people, men, women and children, in general is enough for me to fight them. For anyone who’s grown up in the 90’s or prior, you know that our state of affairs isn’t normal. Fuck Sharia. Fuck Islam. I won’t accept it. I wont submit. I’ll die before I ever do and I’ll take as many of them with me if it ever comes to that.
    So I’m done university fairly soon. Then I’m off to become an infantry officer in her majesty’s armed forces. And if war is never declared, if we never ‘name’ the enemy, well then I will take what I’ve learned and wage my own war wherever and however I can.
    In doing so, I’ll ‘share’ my culture with Islam like this…

  32. Another religious propaganda article.
    We have two thousand years of christianity alone to prove that religion is the problem, not the answer.
    The easiest way to prove christianity is false is to observe it’s followers.

    1. And yet we have no evidence of a long-standing atheist civilization, and as we see the west continue to secularize, we start to see it decline. We’ve had ‘rational science-based societies’ in the communist nations, and yet those were utter abominations. The oft-repeated ‘religion is the opiate of the masses’ comes from Karl Marx himself.

  33. Jesus was the way, the truth, and the life.
    Islam is a functional imitation – strong families, faith in god, demands to be holy, etc. – but still a counterfeit like a suit that looks fine for the first wearing. Or like the trans-fat margarine pretends to be butter.
    Only the real can defeat the imitation. But the real has been rejected. People wish to go their own way or create their own even worse caricature of traditional Christianity. Not the deep Catholic or Orthodox or even Coptic. Not the thinking bibilical Lutheran, Calvinistic, or Wesleyan churches. No, some kind of feel good meeting resembling nothing so much as an episode of Barney, the purple dinosaur. Not merely a parody, but a bad one, not unlike the current Ghostbusters crash (the reboot failed) is to the original. Or to the vandalism being done to the icons of DC and Marvel Comics from our youth.
    The song we sang isn’t heard anymore, we’ve forgotten its name, but the melody still lingers in our hearts
    The damage is deep. We see Swedish women raped, but they seem not to have parents. If anyone did that to my daughter, they would end up with their testicles in a place they don’t occur naturally. We have “Mothers Against Drunk Driving”, but they don’t have Mothers objecting to rape. So the one or two children aren’t even cherished (the way the half-dozen were by the previous generation). They’ve nuked the nuclear family even to the point where the offspring are ignored. (I know, Millennials, but this is pushing it, or perhaps we need the push).
    Christians can discuss (divine) forgiveness and justice, love, charity, and mercy, but will still execute justice. More importantly, they consider it a sin to not insist on just deserts.

    1. You make some excellent points here… yet… I have to ask a question. It is one I have been asking myself but I won’t give my answer. I would be curious as to yours.
      As you said… no one wants the deep intellectual/philosophical Christianity anymore, but WHY is that? Can it simply be ignorance? Or, is there something about the way Christianity came about that planted the seeds for its future dissolution and vapidity.
      Make no mistake, the Islam you decry as being less than the real deal I also agree with. It has also undergone a similar degeneration. But… then you have to ask why it, even if it only appears to be, is stronger?
      I have done a lot of reading on Islam. It was only with St. Augustine’s City Of God that I began to see the beauty and powerful argument, intellectually and philosophically, that was the birth of Christianity.
      Yet… history has born the fruit. Christianity is near extinct. Islam, while struggling and at war with itself, is vital and alive.
      These are just my observations and thoughts. What would yours be?

      1. Islam is the Cross without Christ. It demands obedience, sacrifice, prayer, and organizes ones entire life around it. It’s simplicity which derives from its being a facade can more easily demand it in that deviations are more easily detected and punished.
        Christianity demands righteousness and obedience, but is softer or more general about it. You don’t have to pray 5 times daily. There are hundreds of devotions, prayers, etc. and you can read the bible, but it is up to you, your station in life, and your piety – you have complete freedom and be right with Christ if you do none or become an actual or virtual Monk.
        It is not ignorance, it is Sloth (which is a cardinal sin) or something related. There is no unity, no revival, no great awakening because we (collectively) don’t really want it. We want Christ without the Cross. The benefits of Christianity without Christians – in deed and heart.
        If you really love Jesus, you will ascend any mountain, including the intellectual and philosophical mountain, fast, pray, give alms and sacrifice to get as close as possible. His kingdom is not of this earth, but a country of citizens of his kingdom (no king but Jesus) will pull Heaven to Earth and be as close to the City of God as is temporally feasible.
        Jesus demands Love. Islam demands obedience. Love implies obedience, but it is a natural outgrowth. The Pharisees obeyed the law perfectly, but without love or mercy. Love – agape – is from the will. You decide to love Jesus, love your wife, love your pastor, etc. no matter what. It is strangely selfish. The other can be unlovable – Jesus loves us though we are unlovable. (This doesn’t imply imprudence or a lesser love that indulges sin – it is the hard, terrible tough love that will drag someone to Heaven).
        Christianity is neither easy nor hard. It is GRACE. But grace that needs to be accepted and cooperated with. The “non-serviam” is often soft, or worse, I’ll do what I want, because I want to, but it is what Jesus wants too. That doesn’t work. You can help the poor, but in the spirit of Hell. Jesus said we can even cast out Demons. Without love it is all in vain.
        Jesus is the first thing. It is not ignorance or desire for evil or something else, only that Jesus and Grace is not the First Thing. Social Justice, helping the poor or sick, or something else becomes first and Jesus second.
        The real items, Gucci handbags, Euro or FR Notes, and the rest are complex creations. Fakes are much simple having the superficial appearance but not the substance. Islam is simple. It is superficial. It requires far less spiritually and intellectually and can use force.

        1. Very good reply. An excellent rendition of very cogent Christian faith arguments.
          I understand praying 5 times a day is a lot, but I have given it a try and had amazing insights into why this is an important part of your life.
          I grew up Christian and like you said, you can practice (especially in the Protestant varieties) any way you like. But that also allows the option to simply NOT practice at all (sloth as you say).
          By making prayer mandatory, and still up to you to choose to do or not, Islam is asking you to actually practice what you believe.
          When I pray, it takes you out of this world into the one to come. I am not praying as often as I should nor 5 times a day, but when I do, I notice this popping out of fantasy and back to reality. There really is nothing like it in Christianity unless you impose (submit, obey) your own order to pray to God as you see fit.
          The reason for 5 was simple, as you say Islam is.
          Morning – remind yourself who your maker is and why you are here before the day even starts.
          Noon – At the height of your engrossment in the material world of work and living, you stop, and remember WHY you are working and what real work you are doing, spiritual, not material.
          Midday – Stop once again before the work day is over and before you retire to the other material distraction, your family and social life.
          Sunset – To give thanks for all that you have been blessed with that day and reflect on this world vs the world to come.
          Night – To remember, in the quiet of the night (as also in the morning) that silence, peace, and tranquility await all who believe.
          Can you imagine if, in the Christian world of history, we had a Biblical injunction to pray 5 times a day? To remember God 5 times a day, not just once a week.
          Islam is not as simple as it first sounds. I have come to appreciate Christianities complex intellectual and philosophical history with City Of God, but to say Islam is simple because it declares God to be one and has more outer observance that is mandatory is to miss the greater argument as to why that simplicity might be just as good an argument as Christian love leading to obedience.
          In the end, Christian or Muslim, obedience is what God wants. Love may be the heart of obedience, but observance is the test. This is the unifying perspective I have gained in studying both Islam and Christianity with an eye toward them both being revealed from the same source – God.

        2. Allah is MASTER not FATHER. The overseer. God the Father is the head of the Patriarchy. This is no small matter.
          Catholics have the spirituality – Ignatius of Loyola and the Spiritual exercises, or Theresa of Avila or John of the Cross – the seven way path to unity. I pray for hours – between when I go to bed and when I begin my day.
          Contemplative prayer. Becoming one with God.
          Also see Peter Kreeft. We need more saints.
          And God doesn’t want hateful or prideful (pharisees) obedience, he wants love. Read. Obedience without love will invoke natural laws leading to success. But loving God and from that obeying him is power beyond imagination.
          It is hard to explain but I’m in a situation where only dying and going to heaven can improve my situation. There is no other location on earth. I didn’t even think about it years ago. Nor could I have predicted or chosen it. Yet I cannot move a mile lest I get worse, other than dying and go to heaven. It is shocking but a MIRACLE of providence.

        3. Thank you for sharing your situation. Without revealing much, you have revealed life may not be all that good for you right now.
          I can understand now how important terms are. Master is not Father. They do imply a very different relationship. At the same time, Islam did have a reaction to this and it was the love of the Sufis, hated over must of the Wahhabi world I do believe.
          I also like your observation about obedience without love, but with love it is so much more.
          At the end of the day, every man is searching for peace.
          I don’t know if you or anyone will care to watch this, but I think it
          will help you see where I am coming from from an Islamic viewpoint.

        4. Have you heard of the Liturgy of the Hours? Mainly for religious but the laity can go through the same prayers and readings.

        5. No I have not, but I think (and please don’t laugh) I have come to learn just how observant Christianity used to be by playing Assassin’s Creed. I also watched a good documentary on the monasteries that are still running in Europe. Early am rise for song and prayers, labour, more song and prayer. It pulls at my heart to know what Christianity once was and is now lost.

        6. The Liturgy of the Hours is what Monks pray at the various times during the day.
          Worse, the Black Robe Regiment (the pastors in the 13 colonies) as well as nearly all the founding fathers were biblical Christians and prayed often, attended services, would quote or paraphrase from the Bible – St Paul is quoted like John Locke. The high intellectual Christianity – philosophy, the classics, the Bible – is what make the USA.
          And this is the difficulty. We cannot restore western civilization without restoring Christendom. We can sew a bunch of dead body parts together but it won’t be alive. And Christendom – and I’m not sure if it is the nonconformist english strain, or just having all denominations aligning on most things but having to respect others (to end wars) which is the vital component. But Christendom can reestablish western civilization – it is the only thing.
          As Amazing Grace notes, what once was lost can now be found.

        7. While I do have much respect and more belief in Islam, I think I have to agree with you as far as Christianity being what The West may need to return to. I just think that Christianity is not able (and I believe Islam is also unable) to change enough to get others like me to return to it on an intellectual level that will lead to the heart falling in love with it again.
          To speak positively of Christianity is much the same for Islam.
          Christianity, for its time and place, had a TRUTH that was so intellectually compelling (even to the lay person), that to stay a pagan not only made no sense, it made no emotional sense.
          There was so much more clear LOVE and COMPASSION in the message of Christ compared to the pagan offerings of the time… and in many ways at its root STILL has this message… people took to Christ in droves.
          When you speak of restoring western civilization with Christendom, you could also be saying simply a return to God and truth. This can be through Christ, it could also be through Islam but harder and less likely for westerners. The important matter is a return to the belief in a greater power than man and that truth matters.
          That… when I read City of God… was St. Augustine’s main argument through over 800 pages.
          God… was truth… and Christ… was the bringer of that truth.
          And The West was born.

        8. Yes. But truth doesn’t change. Islam obeys the commandments (the truth to make a society) better than the west – especially the left.
          There is a difficulty discussing this. There is “Mere Christianity” as CS Lewis would put it. For that matter it would be better to be raised on Lewis works than almost any other in the 20th century.
          Then there’s what people who call themselves “Christians” across a broad spectrum of heresies and heterodoxy say “Christianity” is.
          I did mention “Natural Law” which is the knowledge of morality through reason – Truth. Or studying nature.
          But either Christ is risen or not. Either he is true god and true man or not. He is either the way, the TRUTH, and the life, or he is not.
          One cannot have a firm foundation where one entire corner is ignored or rejected even if its cornerstone must be the scandalon.
          In times generally before I was born, the goal was to find truth. Now it is to find a way to dismiss, obfuscate, or relativize it.

      2. Christianity is far from ‘nearly extinct’. Nobody wants ‘real Christianity’ because it requires a ton of sacrifice, and that sacrifice isn’t easy to engage in in an extremely wealthy society where the ability to indulge in whatever vice suits your fancy is only minutes away. Ask yourself why Islamists are constantly moving to Christian nations in droves and not the other way around. We also used to have compulsory prayer and things of such nature until secularists wanted them removed.

  34. I just want to be able to go to a festival or whatnot and not worry about being blown up.

  35. Why don’t European skinheads give them a taste of their own medicine and gang rape bitches in hijabs en masse? During Ramadan or something.

  36. Not a bad article, but it’s becoming a pet peeve of mine the way people feel the need to incessantly point out that we “created” ISIS. No we did not. We did not create their religion, or the backwards, fucked up social systems that have merged with it. That is the root problem, and it rests squarely on their flip-flopped feet.
    I read the link, and I have read that very article before. To say it makes logical leaps in reaching this conclusion is a stretch, more like logical Evil Knievel jumps over the Grand Canyon.
    Yes, we provided arms to some fanatics who later turned against us. That does not lay all of their future sins at our feet. This would be like saying that we are responsible for all the millions of people Mao Tse Tung starved to death during the Great Leap Forward just because we armed and supported Mao during WWII to help fight the Japs. This is just lazy reasoning. It looks for an easy shortcut to lay blame when there isn’t an easy one, and finding the correct one forces us to face some uncomfortable truths – not all cultures are created equal, some of them are threats, and nonetheless, we sometimes have to work with the bad guys to achieve bigger strategic objectives, and then try to minimize the fallout. This is no different than anything any other country has ever done. You can surely debate whether it is wise to engage in this type of gamesmanship, but it is dishonest to imply that the bad results are intended at the get go.
    Our government is not capable of keeping a whacked out tranny from downloading its biggest war secrets onto a disk and giving it to Wikileaks. It is foolish to think they are capable of the kind of all knowing foresight ascribed by these types of long game theories. Moreover, Muslims are not pawns, they are people with their own agency, their own goals, and they are making their own choices trying to reach their own end state. The blame for ISIS rests with ISIS. Even if we gave them the weapons, they still have to choose to use them.

    1. Quote: “The blame for ISIS rests with ISIS.”
      And ISIS… is not a creation of Islam, but a CIA/Saudi Arabian/billion dollar and weaponized mercenary army of OUR creation, not Muslims, not Islam.
      We gave them not just weapons. We gave them money, LOTS of money. We gave them protection (Saudis) for decades. We encouraged the single most extreme and intolerant version of Islam that, while not innocent, has NEVER had this kind of militancy or barbaric history (in modern context) and all of it from that pivotal day of 9/11 where “the world changed forever.”
      If bad results have been the result, and the evidence shows clearly bad results was the goal, then yes, we CAN blame The West for this nightmare that is ISIS and radical Islam out of Saudi Arabia.
      Go back… not to 9/11, but to Soviet Afghanistan. Remove American POLICY to get Russia involved in a war of attrition that would cause its collapse (Brzezinski) that SEEDED the beginning of radical Islam (again, by us)… and where is your “radical” Islam?
      It does not exist. Period. Full stop.
      Saddam, Assad, Gaddafi… all bad men, but ALL of them fought these US Wahhabi creations and they are now all DEAD… by our hands.
      Iran and Russia… and to a degree China… are the last pieces on the chessboard left standing against the coming global police state.
      But no… the US had good intentions, some of the “rebels” got out of hand, it was all just bad luck and poor policy execution.
      And the West wonders why Putin and Russia are just shaking their heads in disbelief at how stupid we are as to the real state of affairs on the global stage.

      1. “Go back… not to 9/11, but to Soviet Afghanistan. Remove American
        POLICY to get Russia involved in a war of attrition that would cause its
        collapse (Brzezinski) that SEEDED the beginning of radical Islam
        (again, by us)… and where is your “radical” Islam?
        It does not exist. Period. Full stop.”
        Fundamentalist Islam stretches back to the 7th century Kharijites. The modern Whhabi movement stretches back to the 18th century.
        Again, I do not claim that arming and funding them in the past was necessarily wise, but what would your solution have been? And regardless of what we have done in the past, we cannot go back to change it, so the question is what to do now. Are you under the impression that ISIS would just go away if we stopped bombing them?

        1. Ah ha! Yes, the ROK comments are not for the foolish or the sly.
          I agree. I only recently learned that Wahhbi is based on a very old interpretation.
          That said… look at your dates… 7th century and it went nowhere (i.e. it was completely rejected) until the 18th century and, without a doubt, The West was already in deep in its “plan” for the future.
          Yes, the plan does go back that far.
          And no, I am not saying that radical, Wahhabi Islam is thus still a creation out of thin air. It clearly has roots in Islamic history… but those roots are SMALL and it took The West’s 20th century collusion with Saudi Arabia and billions of dollars in weapons and covert intelligence support to actually create “radical” Islam and ISIS.
          Reflect on this. There is 1100 YEARS bewteen the Kharijites and the first seeds of Wahhibi nuttiness. Clearly, this version of Islam held little to no weight for over a 1000 years and still does not with the vast majority of Muslims today.
          You want ISIS to go away? So do I. What do you do? You do as the Russians did and CUT THE MONEY SUPPLY (i.e. the sale of stolen oil through Turkey with NATO’s help). No money? No fighters. It’s a very simple, and very Russian, answer to a what so many people in The West seem to think is a “complex” and “multifaced” “problem.”
          Why do you think the mad on for Russia is so intense right now? Putin SERIOUSLY screwed up their plans in Syria. And the failed coup in Turkey by the US (as it is looking to be) that Russia ALSO had a hand in by warning Erdogan (And having Russian SAMS radar painting the F-16s that had him in their sights but “mysteriously” did not shoot to kill).
          Turkey… THE lynch pin of geopolitical control of the ME… is now LOST to NATO and the western powers.
          The “plan”… is being ROYALLY fucked up by the Russians.
          ISIS.. will go away the second, the very SECOND a) people know the truth of who created it and b) Americans hopefully vote in a president that will STOP this madness (if he is true, and if they don’t kill him before he gets the chance).

        2. “7th century and it went nowhere” …except across the ME and huge swaths of Europe until the Crusades finally pushed it back.
          You say that the West’s plan goes back to the 18th century. Realize that the U.S. was not in existence until well into the last quarter of the 18th century, and did not engage in its first overseas war – the Barbary Pirates War until the first part of the 19th century. (Of note, this war was fought against Muslims who were hijacking our ships and enslaving our sailors and citizens.) So you are conflating the West with the US.
          But all of this aside, I agree with you that we should stop funding these whack jobs. I am also of the mind that we should seriously curtail, if not stop entirely, our foreign interventions. However, where I disagree is that these actions alone would stop ISIS entirely.
          Fundamentally, ISIS, and the fanaticism that drives it is rooted in Islam itself. The only cure to fundamentalism is for the vast majority of followers to reject it. But even then, there will always be terror. As seen in Nice, all it takes is one nutcase and a truck to kill a lot of people.

    2. Well put; that’s almost always the standard leftist (and occasional ultra-right) cop-out excuse being that those sides (but mostly the left) live in some alternate reality where the rampant problems of Islam, the most backwards religion on earth, is somehow the fault of the west.

    3. Perhaps one is playing semantics; however, it is completely conclusive that if the western powers didn’t intervene in the Mideast over the last 15 years, then Al Q and Is-is would not exist. Would something better exist? Something worse? One can never know. But the world would most likely be a far better place today. Whether one calls that “creation” or not doesn’t matter in this context.

      1. “One can never know. But the world would most likely be a far better place today.”
        Perhaps. But perhaps not. That’s the problem – it’s impossible to know.
        Was the ME “better” when it was ruled by dictators who exported terror occasionally? “Better” for whom? These are admittedly difficult questions, but it is easy to look back at decisions we regret and imagine that it would have been better if we had simply done something else. We don’t know that.
        We always make decisions based on what we know at the time. We have no way to know what would have happened if we had acted differently. Maybe it would have worked out, maybe not. That’s the problem with these hypotheticals – we just can’t know.

        1. It’s impossible to know anything but one can reasonably assume that, for example, if Iraq was never invaded, Iraq would be a far safer place. Sure, aliens could have invaded it the following day and turned everyone into rape slaves, but an analysis of history and the circumstances in the country immediately before and after the invasion leads logic to dictate that this was a colossal failure, and contributed greatly to the problems we are experiencing today.
          The ME was *quantifiably* better pre-invasion. I have explained this before numerically but just look at the number of deaths attributed to Saddam’s regime and the number of deaths attributed to the US invasion and you’ll find that the invasion was far more bloody and dangerous than life before. Not to mention that today the roads, schools, libraries, bridges, CHURCHES, hospitals, and universities are all bombed to shit and the quality of life today is horrible, not to mention you are now living under extreme theocracy instead of a secular modern nation.
          What we “knew” at the time was complete bullshit. Defending an action based on opinion instead of fact is highly erroneous, illogical, and immoral. I guess we could always just nuke the rest of the world except the US because we don’t know what they could possibly do in the future and there’s the chance they could harm our way of life. And even if that’s proven wrong, we thought it at the time and that’s what matters, right?

        2. Ahh, but be careful, there is a very difficult line between fact and opinion, and even when dealing with something universally acknowledged as fact, the interpretation can still vary widely.
          Iraq, to me, is an interesting example. You mention a comparison of deaths under Saddam versus the invasion. The number vary widely depending on the source, and are basically impossible to verify. How many Iraqi’s disappeared under Saddam? I don’t know, but I do know that for the entire time I patrolled Baghdad after the initial invasion, there was a never ending stream of people asking us for help locating their relatives who had supposedly been taken off by Saddam.
          I agree that you can make reasonable assumptions, but remember that Iraq did not have to turn out the way it did. by 2008, AQI was basically so decimated that they were irrelevant. Instead of taking a long view, we opted to pull out ASAP. Fine, but this squanders your gains. Compare our approach to another completely foreign culture – Japan after WWII. We kept them under tight martial law for years until we knew they would adopt our system our way. Hell, we still have troops there today! In Iraq, we discussed an exit strategy before we even went in.
          Now of course, there is no guarantee that had we kept lots of boots on the ground in Iraq it would have prevented ISIS, but based on our experiences in Germany, Japan, and South Korea, we can make reasonable assumptions.

        3. I could dig up the numbers, and have before, but honestly that is so much water under the bridge, and I’m so far past considering the idea that Saddam was in any way worse than anything that came after him, that I won’t spend the time to do it again. Others may investigate it on their own if they are interested. Just know that the result is that the invasion caused far greater deaths in a far shorter period than Saddam’s rule, and that life under Saddam was very peaceful and stable as long as one abided by his rules. Sure, if you criticized him, you might be abducted and killed. But most knew not to do that, and Iraq was a peaceful, secular, modern nation with a high literacy rate, improving technology, and shunning of fundamentalist religion. And while Saddam was no baby killer, over a hundred thousand babies or more died from the western intervention, if one is of the type that values young lives over older ones.
          Compare that to today where one can be randomly killed with no warning, just by walking through the streets, and it’s a far different kind of fear. Of course all this ignores the fact that even if the data on deaths were similar, Iraq in the 1990s had modern universities, hospitals, roads, scholars, schools, etc. whereas today it has heaps of burning rubble.
          The argument that.. oh yes.. the reason for invasion was invalid, but IF we had violently imposed our military might we could have somehow changed the nation into a better one is absurd to me. Even if it were theoretically possible, there are all sorts of real problems more important than “giving Iraqis a superior system of governance” that could be solved using the same amount of resources and force, including revamping our transportation system, providing medical care to all Americans, providing university education to everyone, improving new energy technologies, etc. It’s simply unreasonable to assert that these enormous resources should be spent gambling on possibly giving Iraq a better leader than the above average one it already had, which by the way, is neither the USA’s duty or obligation, and one it lacks the sovereignty to impose.

        4. Fair enough, but I think you’re conflating things. I’m not arguing that it was wise to invade Iraq. We started this conversation by talking about the rise of ISIS. I mentioned Iraq only to point out that ISIS could likely have been prevented by us staying to see through what we started. Alternatively, as you point out, ISIS may have been prevented by us not going in the first place. But, once you make decisions, there are no take-backs. You have to try to make the best of it going forward. Once you’re in Iraq, regardless of whether you should have been there, the question is no longer “should we have come here?” To me, it’s “how do we make this better and not make it worse?” I agree that this likely requires you to sacrifice infrastructure, medical care, education etc…(I’m not of the opinion that all of these things should be guaranteed by the government, and so don’t agree that all are sacrifices per se, but that’s a separate conversation), but everything is a trade off. You may save money for bridges, but create a power vacuum that allows ISIS to form.

        5. I do agree that perhaps leaving the country in the shrapnel-laden condition it is currently in may not be the best move. It’s hard to believe America could do anything to salvage Iraq, and our leaders have a fundamental misunderstanding of the entire region, but we do need someone to step up and say OK We fucked up, now what?

        6. And commenters here are aghast and raging as to why Iraqis, Syrians, Afghanis and others from the ME are coming to Europe to live when they could “live at home.”
          There is NO home, anywhere, in the ME to live in.
          But, that is what you get for living in The West where we are 100% insulated AND ignorant of life for 99% of the rest of the world that is not The West (especially if they are not our slave).

        7. Quote: ” I mentioned Iraq only to point out that ISIS could likely have been prevented by us staying to see through what we started.”
          Please, I do not mean to offend but… are you really that delusional?
          Do you still believe the plan when the USA invaded Iraq was to liberate them and bring democracy, freedom and a western standard of living that the evil dictator Saddam (our man up to the point he was the wrong man) was preventing and keeping from ordinary Iraqis?
          The “plan”… from the BEGINNING… is EXACTLY the result we have now. The invasion and DESTRUCTION of Iraq was a COMPLETE SUCCESS!!!
          How can you still not see this?

        8. Americans are incredibly ignorant of the rest of the world, probably more so than anywhere I’ve been with the exception of Africa, who know little of non-African affairs. And yet they are the first to raise their voice loudly and exclaim what other people elsewhere should be doing. For a Christian nation, America is a pro at ignoring the log in their own eye while aggressively ranting about the speck in everyone else’s like a rabid dog.
          There was a Showtime series a few years back based on the radio show This American Life. One of the most memorable episodes was Talk To An Iraqi, about an Iraqi guy who came to America and set up a booth saying “Ask An Iraqi Anything”. Instead of asking “What is your most famous national food” or “Just how hot is it there” or even something more controversial/boring like “What religion are you” or “What do you think about your current government,” it was astounding to see American after American line up to *TELL* this man mistruths about his own country. There was one little girl at the end that said “Hey sorry we invaded your country and killed a bunch of peeps” but other than that everyone was a raging ignorant asshole.

          But yeah, they hate us for are freedums.

        9. I cannot see that because it is not true. I participated in the initial invasion of Iraq as a combat arms officer in the Marines. If that was our mission, it was not what we were told, and we went out of our way to avoid needless destruction.
          That said, what does that have to do with whether ISIS could have been prevented had we stayed? Perhaps not entirely if the current administration had still decided to embark on its own misadventures in Syria and Libya. But in Iraq, it absolutely could have been prevented. Of course, if it could not have been stopped, that seems to me to be a tell that ISIS is not actually a creation of the U.S.

        10. Thought I would mention that at the 3 min mark, he talks to to military regulars (army and marines) and the army guy (who has been to Iraq) COMPLETELY AGREES with the sentiment of my article – The Iraqis (Muslims) are not our enemy. The Marine has not been (but was scheduled to ship out) and was looking forward to it. The army guy with experience schooled the Marine and said “Why… why do you want to go. He (the Iraqis) are NOT our enemy.” So yes… some stupid people… but the men and women who have been there KNOW THE TRUTH of this entire “war” on terror.

  37. About a couple of years ago or so, someone asked me if the Pope (then Benedict XVI) could call upon a new crusade against Islam, and I about laughed out of my chair and almost laughed the poor kid out of the room for asking the question. After about five minutes of hysterical laughter, I calmed down and explained why this was absurd.
    For one, this is not 1095, and the papacy not only doesn’t have the kind of influence that Pope Urban II had back then, it doesn’t even have the kind of influence it ought to have over the Church itself. When you have errant bishops out there who are doing everything they can to conceal homosexual acts against children in the church, who are trying to change Church teaching on giving communion to unrepentant sinners, and who do not follow Vatican II documents at all (not to mention come out with nonsense and blasphemies like the Winnepeg Statement), it’s clear that nobody would listen to the Pope if he were ever to call for a new crusade.
    The West has lost its way 500 years ago, and we’re now reaping what was sown since that time. We are often so damn smug in our own self-assuredness that we don’t consider what we believe and why, And, you know what? We like this attitude. America’s real motto has never been In God We Trust, but Conduct Over Creed, in that it doesn’t matter what you believe so long as you’re a nice person. Because of this, we have consigned religion to private opinion, keeping God in the closet and only breaking Him out for times of turmoil and tragedy, then promptly put Him back in once the tears have abated. We like this because it lets Christians, especially, off the hook, or at least we think it does, the hook being to Baptize All Nations. Why should I evangelize my neighbor when I can merely co-exist with him?
    The reason why is that our civilization was built on Christianity, which took the Greek reason and Roman law to create something never before seen; a civilization based on Truth itself, bringing hope for a better world than the one we’re born into. The Paideia that Plato wrote and talked about, but could not figure out how it could work. As such it would only last so long as men remained humble, not expecting anymore out of life than to work for one another’s salvation, and for a brief moment of time the Paideia of Christendom existed.
    It is this civilization that brought us science, the university, a sense of common human dignity, that would give us some of the greatest art and beauty the world would ever know, and a better quality of life than most people in the world would come to know. But we always wanted more, and we’ve come to believe that we’re entitled to the best of what life has to offer, instead of being the best of what life has to offer. As such, we’ve cheapened life to the pursuit of pleasure and gain as if they were sacraments in and of themselves. First, in order to do that, we had to force Truth to conform to us, rather than the other way around. Moral relativism gives us complete autonomy to be our own authority of what is right and wrong, to rationalize any pursuit and any misdeed in any way we like, to be our own moral authority without God; the first Sin committed by Man reared its ugly head.
    To correct this will, indeed, take a miracle, but God’s in the business of miracles. It will probably take extreme pain and suffering for us to ask and answer serious questions. Until then, we will never defeat Islam.

  38. There are two problems. One is Islam, the other is the death of the Christian West culturally. These are not mutually exclusive.
    Christianity is the cultural underpinning of Western thought. Both Calvinism and the free will tendencies. The death of Christian value systems and its replacement with moral relativism has created a cultural and practical weakness that allows for the insertion and continuation of Islam.
    Islam is NOT, and never has been a religion of “peace”; despite what the apologists say. It is now and always has been both a religion and a political system. If given the chance it will utterly destroy the remnants of Western Civilization and replace it with submission to Islam.
    The idiots who believe that this theocratic political system or its adherents can be reasoned with are deluding themselves. Had we any brains at all, we would bomb Mecca and Medina to dust, cut off the Saudis, and wage the same kind of unmitigated war on Islam that it is waging on us.

      1. You said, ” If Islam poses any threat to the West, it is fundamentally a religious, philosophical and metaphysical one.”
        I disagree with that one statement. And yes, I did read your article. Well written I might add. I also might add that I was not calling you an idiot.
        My disagreement with what you said is that Islam is more than a religion, or even a religious philosophy. The threat of Islam is Islam itself and how it views the Kafir (us). As a religious philosophy, Islam is weak. As someone else pointed out, Muhammad failed to recreate the Golden Rule. Theologically, Islam is “believe in Allah and his prophet or else.” Not much there. No atonement, no grace, even the concept of the Trinity was too much for the “prophet”. Buddhism and Christianity, and even Judaism run circles around the religious philosophy of Islam.
        I do agree that there isn’t much left philosophically (moral relativism is nothing to build a civilization on), theologically, or culturally. The West is dying on its own without Islam. The danger of Islam is political and how it will deal with us. Left to our own devices, we could see a cultural, spiritual, something revival. If Islam has its way, in the political sense of Islam, all hope is lost.
        It was a good article. Again, I disagree on that one point.

        1. I see. That makes things more clear.
          Quote: “Theologically, Islam is “believe in Allah and his prophet or else.””
          Why is this simplistic to you? Is that not the VERY question The West is faced with?
          What do we believe? Do you believe in God? Or do you not?
          There is grace in Islam, in the sense that if you find God and practice piety, truthfulness, justice and mercy, you have a very good chance of making it to the next life in a good state. But that then goes into the difference that Islam believes God is the only and final judge, but Christians believe Christ already judged and has saved us with his sacrifice. Won’t go into further debate on that point as it can derail the whole discussion, but I wish it was possible to simply sit down and list the arguments of Christianity and Islam on paper, and then really look at what makes the most logical sense. Right now, Islam just makes more logical sense to me, but it is not without its faults (it too believes in the virgin birth of Christ).
          I have studied Buddhism extensively as well (for a layman that is) and while it is impressive, it falls flat on that simple question.
          Do you believe in God, a greater power, or not?
          Or rephrased another way…
          Do you believe in the truth, of clear and absolute truth, or not?
          It is a very simply message, but it is a message that is now completely lost on The West.
          I think the whole of philosophy has done discredit to simple truth.
          Is God one or three? You could ramble on forever on this topic, but at the end of the day, the bottom line is… do you believe in God or not?
          This is the fundamental challenge Islam poses to The West and while simple on the surface, it is not once you start to dig deeper into what that simplicity means.

        2. I would disagree somewhat again.
          First, there is a religious aspect to Islam, but it applies only to those who already believe in Islam as the truth. The danger of Islam to the West is not the religious aspect of Islam, it is the political.
          In Christianity, there is no “or else” in this world. Despite how Catholic and then Protestant expressions of Christianity have been portrayed in recent times, the argument could always be made from a theological standpoint that God’s grace extends to all, whether they believe or not. The grace is there, politics aside. Stated differently, the argument for the Kingdom of Heaven Christ preached specifically not being of this earth nor concerned with temporal power could be made from the Christian Scriptures, regardless of who perverted it as an excuse to kill for political reasons.
          For Islam, it is different. It started with the same temporal tolerance as Christianity in Mecca. No one listened to Mohammed’s message there and he was eventually kicked out of Mecca. In Medina, Mohammed’s message altered radically and it became the Islam we know today. There is no such thing as a “radical, jihadist Muslim”, not if they are following the Quran, the Sura, and the Hadith. If one is actually practicing the Islam of Mohammed, as outlined in those writings, then they are all radical, jihadist Muslims. The Islam of Mecca was spiritual, the Islam of Medina, is political – and vicious – and totally intolerant.
          I see the death of the West culturally and spiritually and the danger of Islam as coincidental. The adherence to patriarchal (if I may) Western Christianity left the Islamic world too weak to do much of anything for the last few hundred years. The Armenian genocide was the last major jihad if one understand jihad in the context of Islam and not talking heads on T.V. After that the West defeated it.
          It is not until now, with the vacuum left by the death of the West, that Islam is able to make a political comeback. The sad part is that the idiots who pretend to be in charge did not see this one coming. Had they realized all those Epistle’s of Paul written to places like Ephesus in Asia minor are now in Islamic Turkey, and had they asked the right questions, they might have not been so keen to destroy what they could not replace.
          I do not disagree with the spirit of your article, merely an assertion that centers on my understanding of Islam.

        3. After addressing my earlier point, and not wishing to confuse the two, I would like to answer your questions.
          I believe that Christianity is more than “does one believe in God?” The central question of Christianity is what one believes about Jesus of Nazareth. In direct response, yes, I do believe in God. I do believe in Truth, absolute truth to boot. I also believe that Jesus is the Christ. The rest, i.e. questions about the Trinity, free will vs. Calvinism, Catholic doctrine vs Protestant doctrine are incidental to the one and ultimate question of Christianity. Islam is a religion of works, i.e. do good work sand you will be ok, go to Heaven, miss Hell. Christianity rejects this outright. Christianity’s assertion is that all men are sinners and no one can possibly do enough good work to overcome the deficit, ergo the sacrifice of Christ and the requirement for faith.
          Islam requires belief in two things, 1) there is one God – Allah. 2) Mohammed is his prophet. The rest of it is how good you live your life and how well one emulates the alleged final prophet. Is it easy? Sure. Especially when the alternative is having one’s head chopped off or becoming a dhimmi.
          You are absolutely correct in your assertion that the West, now adrift from absolute truth on the chaotic sea of relativism, is in serious, serious trouble. Islam is not the cause of this as you well explained. It is rather an opportunistic carrion feeder.

        4. With respect, I do not believe you have studied Islam sufficiently to understand its true message. Yes, God is one and yes, Muhammed is His Messenger, but it is not just this declaration and then good works. The Quran repeatedly warns of hypocrites, those who do good works not for God but for their own ego, to be seen as pious but who are not.
          And then we come to the dividing line – the concept of Jesus Christ. I will try my best here, but please do not take offense. It is simply the Islamic perspective as best as I have come to understand it in my studies.
          Muslims accept Jesus as born from the virgin Mary, something which I do have an issue with in the light of science, but that is the only contention I have with Islam on the matter of Jesus.
          That said, they do not ascribe divinity to Christ. This is a very pagan concept going back to Greeks and Romans. In fact, I have recently read that if there was any model for Jesus (as wrongly understood by the Catholic Church that made him divine), it was that of Dionysus. Too much to go into here but all the parallels are there, right down to “The Son Of God.”
          Muslims believe that the immaterial cannot become the material, the infinite the finite. It makes no rational, intellectual sense. God does not need to become man to understand his suffering, because God created man and already knows he suffers. To say otherwise is to say God is less than all knowing, which he is not.
          Original sin is rejected by Islam. We are born in the spirit of God, pure and good. It is man’s choices that lead him away from God and the Truth. Thus, there is no requirement for a saviour because God is the final judge and granter of Grace, to any and all, who believe.
          It is in the heart, of all men, that God looks. This is repeated in the Quran numerous times. It is not a matter of choosing a faith (the Quran acknowledges past prophets, even those outside the Abrahamic tradition), it is a matter of LIVING it.
          If you are loving, compassionate, merciful, slow to anger, quick to forgive, generous with the poor, honest in your dealings, true in your intentions and think of God much, YOU are going to heaven. You are, by definition a “Muslim”, someone who has submitted to God.
          The concept of Christ’s sacrifice being required is textbook pagan understanding at the time. But to rational logic, it does not make sense.
          You are asking someone, yes a god-man but a third party none the less, to take on the suffering and pains of another in order to free them. That is like someone requesting to go to jail for another’s crimes. At the level of justice, it does not make any sense. No one is going to step up and say they will take the death sentence for a murderer because they wish to save them after committing such a horrific crime. It is a nice gesture, but a delusional one. Justice won’t be served by another taking the punishment for someone else’s crimes. Justice can only be rendered by each being held to account for the crimes they choose to commit, no one else.
          This is why the Quran states each man will be held to account. From God alone will mercy be forthcoming. Because God alone knows what is in your heart, declared believer or not, and why you did it and whether or not it is deserving of punishment or mercy.
          If you are TRUE to God, He will be true to you and grant you mercy and grace.
          If you are FALSE to God, or actively work against him and lead others astray, you will be punished and no saviour can rescue you.
          That is the problem of Christ. If Jesus is the redeemer, what power is left to God? If Christ is God, then there is no need for his sacrifice because God can readily give grace and mercy by his omnipotent will alone.
          For these reasons, I believe The West lost its way from God. The underlying logic supporting a god-man/sacrifice/trinity falls apart once you see its pagan roots of ignorance and understanding of God.
          No amount of faith, no amount of good works, Christian or Muslim, is going to help you on the day of judgement. God alone will decide your fate and his mercy, while infinite, does have limits, as would be expected and logical in accordance to He also being absolute justice.

        5. My tit for tat response ended up being 8 pages. Here is my part. It is late, and I wrote in a hurry – probably didn’t get it as right as I wish. Bed and work tomorrow are calling.
          With respect, I do not believe that you understand Islam in the context of Islam, historic Islam. If Muhammed were alive and you were standing in front of him right now, you would be given a choice – submit or die. If you were wealthy you could become a dhimmi – a slave who paid half his income to Islam. If you were standing in front of the historic Jesus or any of His disciples, you would be asked to believe. If you make that choice, mercy and grace would be extended immediately. If not, nothing would happen to you in the here and now. Nothing.
          “Yes, God is one and yes, Muhammed is His Messenger, but it is not just this declaration and then good works. The Quran repeatedly warns of hypocrites, those who do good works not for God but for their own ego, to be seen as pious but who are not.”
          If I may, this seems to be a bit of sleight of hand on your part. What is hypocrisy but a work – a negative work – a sin. Jesus blasted the Pharisees of His day with the same condemnation. At the end of the day, no one knows the heart, but God. That of course is not the point of atoning for sin.
          “And then we come to the dividing line – the concept of Jesus Christ. I will try my best here, but please do not take offense. It is simply the Islamic perspective as best as I have come to understand it in my studies.”
          No worries, this is a friendly discussion. Plus, one would be hard pressed to offend me. I am 50 plus, a pile of kids, degrees in Theology and History and specialization in a field unrelated to either of those, and twenty plus years in the Army. Not that I think you would be a slouch in offending, but I have been offended by some pretty heavy hitters. Over time, when one realizes the truth is the truth, and we are all just “here”, being offended at a stranger on the internet becomes – meaningless.
          “Muslims accept Jesus as born from the virgin Mary, something which I do have an issue with in the light of science, but that is the only contention I have with Islam on the matter of Jesus.”
          Science is science, faith is faith. Science deals exclusively with the physical world, and has no claim to the metaphysical. A discussion for another time perhaps, but maybe the only difference is in human perception. As the Apostle Paul said, “We see through a glass darkly.” If one chooses to believe in a God that exists outside of space and time, a God powerful enough to create the universe, then any act He performs inside the universe is permissible. God can do what He wants, one of the perks of being God.
          “That said, they do not ascribe divinity to Christ. This is a very pagan concept going back to Greeks and Romans. In fact, I have recently read that if there was any model for Jesus (as wrongly understood by the Catholic Church that made him divine), it was that of Dionysus. Too much to go into here but all the parallels are there, right down to “The Son Of God.””
          I have read all of that – the Zeitgeist stuff. None of it passes the test of real scholarship – provided that is what you are referring to. I forget where, and can go find it, but there are a few very good Youtube videos and websites debunking the whole Pagan Christ thing. It was essentially started by Paine and a few others and for some reason has taken root. The concept of the Son of God as known in the Bible is evident and clear in the Old Testament. No need for “borrowing” from the pagans. Granted, the Catholic Church did in fact borrow from the pagans, but not that particular concept.
          “Muslims believe that the immaterial cannot become the material, the infinite the finite. It makes no rational, intellectual sense.”
          Why would one assume that God needs to make “rational, intellectual sense” to humans? To say that God “cannot” do something other than what He chooses to do is to violate the Omnipotence of God.
          ‘God does not need to become man to understand his suffering, because God created man and already knows he suffers. To say otherwise is to say God is less than all knowing, which he is not.”
          God did not become man to understand humanity’s suffering. Did the incarnate Christ suffer as a man? Yes, but that is a condition of what He became and not the purpose of becoming. The purpose of his coming was that as a man he became our near kinsman redeemer. He came to pay for our sin as one of us. His suffering, according to Scripture was both for us in the sense of an atonement, and for us as an example of how to live in the midst of suffering.
          Could God wipe the slate clean and just “poof” forgive our sin? Certainly. But, for whatever reason, God requires faith. I read the 9th chapter of the Gospel of John to my children this morning. The blind man was healed – he was an active participant in and the beneficiary of, a miracle. But that was not enough. Once free from the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, he was still required to believe on the Son of God.
          God is not all knowing if He chooses not to be. There things God cannot do because He either chooses not to, or it is not in His nature as the one who is Truth, and goodness, and mercy and justice and etc. God cannot lie, either because He chooses not to, or because it is literally not possible because of who He is as a being.
          “Original sin is rejected by Islam. We are born in the spirit of God, pure and good. It is man’s choices that lead him away from God and the Truth.”
          Islam in this point rejects the clear teaching of the God of the Scripture it claims to speak for. Do our choices have a part in making us a worse sinner than we otherwise would be? Yes, but man is born into sin – Paul made this clear in his Epistle to the Romans. The choice is rejecting or accepting the finished work of Christ. This is Christianity 101. Islam can reject what it likes, but it cannot claim to be a continuation of the Abrahamic tradition and do so. The Jews offered sacrifices and Jesus became the final sacrifice for sin. Can a man make choices and choose to be either more or less righteous? Yes. But, at the end of the day, the Gospel hinges on faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ.
          “Thus, there is no requirement for a saviour because God is the final judge and granter of Grace, to any and all, who believe.
          It is in the heart, of all men, that God looks. This is repeated in the Quran numerous times. It is not a matter of choosing a faith (the Quran acknowledges past prophets, even those outside the Abrahamic tradition), it is a matter of LIVING it.”
          Right, like I said, good works. That is what living it is. Good works. It is a works based religion. The same kind of religion Jesus tore into the Pharisees for in His day.
          “If you are loving, compassionate, merciful, slow to anger, quick to forgive, generous with the poor, honest in your dealings, true in your intentions and think of God much, YOU are going to heaven. You are, by definition a “Muslim”, someone who has submitted to God.”
          I will humbly submit that it is you who have failed to grasp Islam. One is NOT a Muslim until they acknowledge that Allah is God and Mohammed is his messenger. The things you list might be a part of living a Muslim life, but that is clearly not what makes one a Muslim, according to the Quran, the Sura, and the Hadith. If your assertion was true, Islam would have ended with Mohammed’s death and his only garnering a hundred or so followers in Mecca. It wasn’t until he was run out of Mecca, to Medina, that his theology changed to one of submit or die. It was at that point that Islam spread like wildfire. Free will – as we mean it theologically and philosophically in the West – was simply not allowed in Islam after Medina.
          “The concept of Christ’s sacrifice being required is textbook pagan understanding at the time. But to rational logic, it does not make sense.”
          It makes perfect sense. Even without the alleged pagan underpinnings, it is absolutely rational.
          “You are asking someone, yes a god-man but a third party none the less, to take on the suffering and pains of another in order to free them. That is like someone requesting to go to jail for another’s crimes. At the level of justice, it does not make any sense. No one is going to step up and say they will take the death sentence for a murderer because they wish to save them after committing such a horrific crime. It is a nice gesture, but a delusional one. Justice won’t be served by another taking the punishment for someone else’s crimes. Justice can only be rendered by each being held to account for the crimes they choose to commit, no one else.”
          At this point you are sounding like a Muslim/Islamist apologist and not a man of the West. It seems you have crossed the line into what you believe as opposed to what Muslims believe. It is also worthy of note that you have not mentioned once the love and mercy of God in your argument. But back to the argument:
          Why is man considered a sinner, even laying aside the argument for original sin and sticking with the Muslim conception of sin? By what standard is man held to account? The standard of God’s righteousness and holiness. If man was the measure of all things, then yes, good works should be enough. But man’s righteousness is not the measure. God’s is.
          Man’s justice might not be served by an atonement, but that does not preclude God’s justice. God, for whatever reason, demands a blood sacrifice for the atonement of sin. This concept is at least as old as Genesis chapter 3 and coats of skin (blood spilled to make the coats and cover the nakedness). I often wonder how Islam can claim to be a continuation of the Abrahamic tradition and ignore some pretty fundamental things. And of course I can pay the debt of another. Sin requires a payment, a reckoning. I can pay a debt and forgive the one for whom the debt is paid. In short, they can owe me nothing after I make the payment if that is what I choose.
          As I said, advanced theological concepts are lacking in Islam and it becomes a shadow of Judaism and Christianity. A lot of talk, no real substance that couldn’t be thought out using human reason.
          “This is why the Quran states each man will be held to account. From God alone will mercy be forthcoming. Because God alone knows what is in your heart, declared believer or not, and why you did it and whether or not it is deserving of punishment or mercy.”
          Well yes, each man and woman will be held to account for what they have done. First those who reject Christ will be held to account for that. Then Christians will be held to account for what they have done, or failed to do.
          “If you are TRUE to God, He will be true to you and grant you mercy and grace. If you are FALSE to God, or actively work against him and lead others astray, you will be punished and no saviour can rescue you. That is the problem of Christ. If Jesus is the redeemer, what power is left to God? If Christ is God, then there is no need for his sacrifice because God can readily give grace and mercy by his omnipotent will alone.”
          If God sent Jesus, then the power and credit for the atonement goes to God. You write as if Jesus is somehow separate from God. This is not the story of the Old Testament or the New. Why did the Jews offer blood sacrifices if God could just snap His fingers and forgive and forget?
          There are no more pagan roots than a religion that says convert or die. Islam excludes God from the picture. Humans hand out judgement, not God. Why murder 240 million or so people in the last 1400 years for rejecting Islam and enslaving millions more? If Islam is this “logical and rational” system of religious thought, why murder those who reject it? Why not give them some time? Are you actually saying you are ok with this? Are you saying it is rational to fly planes into buildings and blow up women and children in the name of Allah? It seems the leap between the here and now and the hereafter is a bloody long leap for Islam. Why murder and enslave and force submission, why not let God sort it out on judgement day? Does God need Islam’s help to hurry people along? Islam is clearly by this logic a man made religion pretending to an Abrahamic ancestry it does not have. This is the same religion of Communism and the Left in America. Our way or the highway, no mercy. A substitutionary atonement for sin, offered in love, is a more spiritually logical answer in my opinion and in the 2000 year tradition of the West.
          Islam requires more fear of death at the hands of men than faith. And, without faith it is impossible to please God…..

        6. Wow… I must give you much respect. While I could again attempt a rebuttal of many points, I to have a life outside of the internet and ROK comments. LOL
          I must also say thank you for having this comment be the strongest defense of Christianity so far for others to read and consider.
          I will take out one quote though: “Why would one assume that God needs to make “rational, intellectual sense” to humans?”
          This is why Islam, for me, proves that truth, and faith, must be in line with intelligence and reason.
          For a Muslim, man’s intelligence is the clearest sign of God’s existence. God gave us this aspect as a reflection of Him and asks us to use to come to know Him.
          To reflect. To think. To understand.
          Now… why would God, who gave us intelligence as the #1 sign of His existence, then ask us to THROW AWAY the VERY gift He gave us to come to know him and believe by faith alone?
          As one former Christian preacher was told by a Muslim he was trying to convert and, when he thought he had him when he asked if the preacher could PROVE Christianity was the truth he would accept Christ then and there, the preacher responded…
          “Proof? No proof. FAITH!!!”
          To which the Muslim replied… “You see, we Muslim don’t have just faith, we have that AND proof.”
          The preacher inquired “Do you mean to tell me you can PROVE your faith is true?”
          The Muslim humbly answered… “Are you telling me that you can’t?”
          This is why Christianity, for me, is failing. The proofs are not there and the pagan arguments (more than Zeitgeist, I have done my own research in the library, Dionysus was just the latest that Zeitgeist did not even address and is THE most direct model for Christ than any of the others they addressed, including Mithras).
          We will probably never meet, but we would have a wonderful discussion I believe. Open, no ego, no need to prove the other is wrong or that one is right, just “Here, these are my facts and beliefs on the matter.” and “Hmm, interesting, here are mine.” “Oh, never considered that, have you thought of?” “I have not, but now that you mention it..”

        7. I appreciate the compliment. I thought the same thing last night, we would have a good conversation. I wrote a total of eight pages in response to you (to include your quotes) I think we would have a good conversation because we both tend to the verbose.
          I will respond to your one excerpt. Admittedly, perhaps I was trying to say so much last night that I didn’t say enough.
          I do not think God doesn’t want us to understand. Nor do I think that God’s plans and purpose are unintelligible to humanity, even the deeper points of Christianity. Perhaps it is better understood by way of comparison. I cannot know all that God knows. The lie of Satan, the nachash, was that humanity could “be like God”. In short to know what God knows. It was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
          Stated differently, The Bible, and by extension Judaism and Christianity, isn’t about what God knows, it is about what He wants us to know. I for one do not buy the faith replaces reason argument. But I will maintain that the reason is limited to man’s faculties, not God’s. I, like the Apostle Paul, will maintain that there are some “mysteries”. Heck, according to Scripture there are some things the Angels do not understand that we do.
          I believe that I can make a reasoned case for Christianity – at least the Protestant version of it. As you pointed out last night, there are going to be some presuppositions. Take the Islamic denial of original sin for example. If that fails, a good part of the theological reasoning presented in your previous argument fails. Likewise, if one starts with the concept of original sin (although I would not take it as far as Calvin did) then the need for a redeemer makes sense, especially in light of Old Testament sacrifice. Unless one’s assumptions are correct, then any argument, no matter how logical it appears, will ultimately fail.
          All that said, I still have a huge problem with Islam’s tendency to violent conquest. If their system of theology is as logical as you make the case for, given some preconditioned assumptions, then why force it on anyone? Islam has a 1400 year history of conquest, not by reason, but by the sword and slavery.
          Even if I rejected Christianity in favor of Buddhism or Judaism, Islam would still hold no attraction for me for that very reason. Assuming as you do that faith (In the sense of having one) should be reasonable, then Islam as it is practiced makes no sense. If the starting point of the argument is reason and logic, then killing those who reject Islam makes no sense, since violence on the level perpetrated by the founder of Islam and his disciples is unreasonable.
          I do agree that Christianity has failed in the West. Part of me thinks that is supposed to happen given my Eschatological viewpoint, part of me is certain that it is because Christianity has forgotten how to practice the faith. The Disciples (all men – a big clue there) came to Jesus with a problem in Matthew the 16th chapter:
          14 And when they were come to the multitude, there came to him a certain man, kneeling down to him, and saying,
          15 Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.
          16 And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.
          17 Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.
          18 And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.
          19 Then came the disciples to Jesus apart, and said, Why could not we cast him out?
          20 And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.
          21 Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
          Verse 21 is the key. Spiritual warfare is just that, warfare. Christianity has failed to produce well disciplined men who know how to fast and pray. In the Old Testament, Jacob wrestled with God (Jesus, i.e. “the angel of the Lord”) and would not let him go until God touched the hollow of his thigh and crippled him.
          Christianity is dying, not because of a flaw in the theology, but because the men who claim Christ have forgotten how to fast, pray, and wrestle with God. The NFL, internet porn, and pizza delivered to the door are easier I guess.
          So, I go back to my original argument or objection to your article (as good as it is) – namely, Islam cannot compete theologically with Christianity. The West is dying, not because Christianity has been supplanted by rationalism and materialism, but because the inherited principles, born of Christian influence, have been rejected. One could practice those inherited principles – the belief in absolute truth for example – and I think still have a pretty decent nation. What it cannot do is expect to defeat Islam – or any other threat- without those principles.
          And, in keeping with ROK’s locus – I believe that modern Christianity has become feminized. I can barely stand to go to most churches because of it. If Islam defeats the West, on a practical level it will be because Islam has men and the West has murdered her’s in the womb.
          There I go, being verbose again. Life goes on.

        8. Bill… I encourage you to contact Roosh and write for ROK. You would be a much welcome addition to the authors here.
          Again, I as well REALLY have to go to bed tonight (last night was far too late) but I will try to respond in brief to a few key points raised.
          1) Islam’s spread by the sword.
          If this is your only reason to reject Islam outright without any further thought or consideration, it is also the very reason so many now reject Christianity and IT’S violent spread via colonization. Pretty sure there is a few centuries to add up in that regard so I find the Islam-by-the-sword ALONE argument fails completely for me. For that matter, no religion (not even Buddhism!) has no war or conquest in its name. For me, that is the politics of MAN, not of God or religion.
          Malaysia is a key example – from Wikipedia.
          “Islam in Malaysia is represented by the Shafi’i version of Sunni theology and jurisprudence.[3][4] Islam was introduced by traders arriving from Arabia, China and India. It became firmly established in the 15th century. ”
          Perhaps someone will prove this to be wrong (and I know ROK commenters are capable of it so please do so), but Malaysia is the single CLEAREST example of Islam succeeding by trade and intellectual argument alone.
          No Muslim caliph and his war caravans ventured anywhere near the Malaysian mainland as far as I can tell. It was strictly trade and CULTURAL contact and exchange that brought Islam to the region and is now practiced in the majority by over 60% of Malaysians. Along with many other faiths.
          The intolerance of Islam is simply not historical… NOT for the reason there are examples of it taking place, but for the fact that there are more examples of tolerance than not of those who do not take Islam and are free to practice whatever faith the wish.
          2) ANY religion that killed unbelievers en masse would NOT survive.
          Again, in PRACTICE, the actual killing of unbelievers or apostates was not as wide spread as many Christians believe. Did it happen? Yes. Did the Spanish Inquisition string up a few heretics (unbelievers) as well? Damn straight!!!
          Yet Christianity, like Islam, flourished and spread BECAUSE the central message of truth, peace and love was the CORE message of both faiths and THAT is why both had success.
          3) On the following Biblical quote.
          17 Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation,
          how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him
          hither to me.
          18 And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.
          This is interesting because it is (I believe) and example of the mystery and miracles that God can work when one has faith (true faith fortified by disciplined prayer and fasting, for which Muslims MUST do five times a day, every day, all year and fast for an entire month from sun up to sun down).
          My read on this passage is as follows.
          Satan.. while a real force/entity… is not a possesion, per se.
          What Christ is speaking of here (and he gets mighty upset) is those who STILL CANNOT see truth when it is clear from error.
          I have had personal experience of what happens to the mind/soul when a person denies the truth. We are seeing it in the west. The psychological state of man is distorted, twisted and becomes “demonic.” I.e. Man is simply not in a right state of mind.
          When Jesus rebukes the Devil, what he is rebuking is not the Devil as a literal force/entity (while he does exist), but more a STATE OF DENIAL OF THE TRUTH.
          When a person awakens to truth, all matter of mental and emotional well being is instantly, nay miraculously, healed.
          Just look to any therapy session of those you know. Those who DENY the truth of their lives live lives of mental pain, depression and even disability.
          But… when they FINALLY see and acknowledge the TRUTH (i.e. their power of choice to not be a victim, that blame solves nothing, that forgiveness and moving on is the best and to live wiser now KNOWING better)… their whole life turns around.
          To sum up… the mysteries that were required of a man of pagan history, are simply not required to a man of modern science. They only mystery that matters now is the truth that God is real and there is a life after death. That…. in the grand scheme of things… is the only mystery EVERY man can agree to be true. Everything else, is a simpler state of the mind of man trying to work out the MYSTERY OF GOD and man’s place in a universe not of his making or choice.
          Time for bed. Do think about writing for ROK.