Spanked!

Kashmiri Nomad writes a juvenile post and then gets a few worthy comments.

So far the death toll from the Bush cartoon: Zero.

Comments

[Josh Scholar]

I think you'll like the comment I left on that thread.

[Josh Scholar]

However, after I posted that I looked at the main page.

It's pretty clear that "Kashmiri Nomad" had no principles in mind ever. He just wants to demonstrate that Infidels are evil to Muslims, just like the Koran says. He wants to play victim and to stir up resentment. There's no point arguing cases and principles with him because he doesn't think that deeply.

[Josh Scholar]

Perhaps I should give him more credit for the fact that he is trying to claim that Muslims are moderate.

That implies better intent than the alternative.

[Isaac Schrödinger]

"I think you'll like the comment I left on that thread."

Yes, I did.

Kashmiri Nomad thinks that he's being clever by showcasing the hypocrisy of the West. Shoddy arguments and incoherent sentences prove otherwise.

[Josh Scholar]

That style of specious writing he did in that thread, where he ignored every important principle and acted as if being steadfast in any principle makes one a complete monster is very common on European blogs. That degraded, cowardly discourse must be the norm for educated Europeans. It always makes me nauseous because it tries to raise absolute selfish irresponsability to the sainthood and implies that slanders everyone who cares enough to be responsible..

[Josh Scholar]

Oops there was a massive editting error. I should proofread. It should have said:

That style of specious writing he did in that thread, where he ignored every important principle and acted as if being steadfast in any principle makes one a complete monster is very common on European blogs. That degraded, cowardly discourse must be the norm for educated Europeans. It always makes me nauseous because it tries to raise absolute selfish irresponsability to sainthood and slanders everyone who cares enough to be responsible..

[Josh Scholar]

OT:

Jihadi attitude?

[Josh Scholar]

I added another comment that I think I'll copy here in case it gets deleted:

There is a problem here and that is this there are some scared cows in the west that cannot be slaughtered no matter how much one would like can you think of any ?

If you are capable of making a coherent statement in English, this would be a good time to exercize that skill, because the above sentence says absolutely nothing. I get the impression that you don't have to courage to say clearly what you mean. Spit it out.

I think maybe that nonsense sentence was a matter of you projecting your problem on the west. It is the Muslims that have "sacred cows that can't ever be slaughtered" by which you mean taboos that send thousands out to riot, burn embassies and kill nuns.

The west has nothing like that. Nothing at all.

But since you can't ever criticize Islam, when you can't hold your comment about the problem with taboos back, you slip out of sanity and say that it's someone else, not the Muslims who have a problem.

I've talked to so many Muslims that I'm learning how to interpret insane communication like this. You're not so rare in this kind of neurotic projection.

In any case, to answer your unconscious question, the problem in Islam isn't taboo.

Those people rioting did so, not because a taboo was broken. They rioted because they had been taught, for their entire lives, to hate.

In the Mosque, in the madrassa, they'd been taught to hate.

And hatred is the only thing that can make people and burn and kill innocents.

America does have taboos, but we don't act that way. That's because our best taboo is that we believe that it's entirely evil to teach an innocent child to hate. That it's evil to spread hatred, period.

Also we will fight to protect our freedom. Unlike the cynical Europeans you live with who seem to have taken the wrong lesson from their history and concluded that it's evil to care about anything, Americans do care very much about our freedom.

[Josh Scholar]

Oops I seem to have lost a word. One sentence was missing the word "riot" and should have read:

And hatred is the only thing that can make people riot and burn and kill innocents.

[RandallJones]

Josh Scholar,

If you will fight for your freedom, why did the United States recruit and train Muslims to fight its proxy war against the Russians? Why didn't you volunteer to fight the Russians?

The Afghan-Russian war helped to facilitate the collapse of the Soviet Union and this made the United States the number one super power in the world. In the meanhwhie, millions of Afghans had died and the countryside had been ravaged. The UNited States did not even try to help in reconstructing the country.

[RandallJones]

Isaac Schrodinger,

Have you been counting the number of deaths caused by military interventions of the United States in the countries of the MIddle East, Africa, Asia, and South AMerica, or is that none of your concern?

[Josh Scholar]

If you will fight for your freedom, why did the United States recruit and train Muslims to fight its proxy war against the Russians?

Uhm what does one thing have to do with the other?

Or with me, since I wouldn't have voted for Reagan if I had been old enough to vote.

[Josh Scholar]

My point about my own freedom has nothing to do with fighting in Afganistan or Iraq or anywhere but home.

My point was that I won't relinquish my right to free speech, period, and neither should anyone else in the civilized countries.

If there were a billion people rioting and telling me that I have no right to speak, they'd still be wrong and they'd still have a fight on their hands.

The usual Jihadi method is to use violence and intimidation to wrest control of society away from the people. And that will be a fight to the death when you try it here.