Poor pigeon.

Discussion (71)¬

  1. Do most Muslims REALLY not speak out against extremism?

  2. eoinkenobi says:

    It’s pretty tricky for Muslims, because the Koran is supposed to be perfect, and direct from Allah, but it clearly states that the heads of unbelievers should be chopped off.

  3. Matt says:

    I think Stuart has a point. All the muslims I have known would undoubtedly express horror (and mostly with sincerity) at the latest mass murder by Islamists. But eoinkenobi also has a point. Muslims can’t bring themselves to question the bollocks in the Koran, so it does make intelligent contributions tricky.

    Survival of the fittest, innit? A creed that absolutely prohibits you from challenging it on pain of death is more likely to be a winner than, say, what my local vicar subscribes to.

  4. Rob M says:

    Typo in first frame – a duty TO take a stand.

  5. ase says:

    The fact is that the historical origins of Islam are precisely a story of slaughter and rapine, and our present day so-called “extremists” fit perfectly in the centre of this tale. The lovey-dovey bits that are constantly forced in our faces are a much later development, when the religion has become entrenched in stable society: you can’t have much stability if you’re yelling murder at every other turn can you?

    That’s why non-“extremist” Muslims are in constant cognitive dissonance; denying extremism really does mean denying the very core of their religion. Cue “metaphorical” interpretations of jihad and all that sorry stuff.

    This general development applies to all religions. Christianity also has its “bringing a sword” bit. Not exactly a Christmas potluck is it?

  6. Gary Kleppe says:

    Muslims destroyed a couple of buildings, killing a few thousand people. Christians destroyed a couple of countries, killing possibly millions. Meanwhile, Jews have been running a brutal apartheid state for decades.

    We shouldn’t hold religions responsible for extremist violence done in their names. But if we were to, then clearly Muslims are amateurs.

  7. Author says:

    Thanks, Rob M. Fixed now.

  8. David Amies says:

    Handful of lame cartoons published in Denmark lampooning the Prophet and thousands of the faithful out on the streets shouting blue murder. One hundred and forty odd people, mainly children, slaughtered in their school in Pakistan by devoted members of the faithful and hardly a peep from anyone.
    Makes you think.

    David Amies

  9. Dave - non-celebrity says:

    Pigeon got a strong Spoiing!

  10. Pezski says:

    I don’t think that it’s suggesting for a moment that “all muslims” DO refuse to condemn extremism, simply that there are some – often very high profile one – who do just that.

  11. plainsuch says:

    A test.
    Fill in the blank.

    Only by uniting against anti-_______ bigotry can we hope to defeat it.

    a. gay
    b. female
    c. infidel
    d. True Moslem
    e. people who claim to be Moslem, but have different opinions than me
    f. people practicing free speech that Mo doesn’t agree with

    there is only one correct answer

  12. plainsuch says:

    In case you missed it. Hotrats posted this last week and I think it’s worth moving forward.
    hotrats says:

    I enjoyed this, and I hope you do. Merry Christmas, one and all!


    Thank you hotrats

  13. Nassar+Ben+Houdja says:

    Islam, screaming and kicking
    Insists on cherry picking
    What it likely will tell ya
    Is defined by taqiyya
    In your neck, a knife they are sticking.

  14. DocAtheist says:

    @Gary Kleppe, two questions: How many Jews are there in the entire world vs. how many Muslims and how many Christians? And, how many Jews are permitted by the Palestinians to buy land and live in Gaza, the West Bank, and Muslim countries like Saudi Arabia, et al? I just want to better appreciate what you consider “apartheid” in application. You might also look at the entire land mass of Israel vs., say, Egypt, Jordan, Syria (along with their Jewish populations, of course).
    Fair is fair. Antisemitism is unfair.

  15. plainsuch says:


    quoth the Author
    “But surely you agree that” Jews “have a duty to take a stand against” Zionist “Extremism?”

  16. Well it’s hardly the case that there hasn’t been a peep about the children murdered in Peshawar. That’s not the case in Pakistan itself, for instance.

  17. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Gary Kleppe says:

    December 17, 2014 at 2:51 pm
    (emp. added)
    Muslims destroyed a couple of buildings, killing a few thousand people. Christians destroyed a couple of countries, killing possibly millions. Meanwhile, Jews have been running a brutal apartheid state for decades.

    We shouldn’t hold religions responsible for extremist violence done in their names. But if we were to, then clearly Muslims are amateurs.

    Sorry, Gary, but I think you’re wrong. From where do you think those doing the slaughtering get their inspiration? Whatever their individual motives for their actions they all feel justified in what they do because of their religions.

    We cannot hold individual believers responsible for the actions of their religions’ extremists – and sometimes not-so extremists – but we can and must blame the religions themselves.

    Ophelia, there has indeed been a lot said about the latest Koran-inspired massacre, lots of condemnation of the acts themselves and the people who carried them out, but as of yet I have not seen or heard a single Muslim accept that Islam itself is to blame – despite it being there, in black and white, every single time they open their holy books. Instead, as I predicted in the last thread, there has formed an orderly queue of denial.

  18. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Whoops, missed bold type on Jews in my post above. I’d hate for anybody to think I was giving them a pass.

  19. smee says:

    Surely its about ideas? Those who believe an ideology that advocates the execution of those who don’t believe it?

    An ideology incidentally that wants me dead, and everyone else who “lives in Sin” (I’ve been living happilly and morally with my partner for 20 years, so F**k you followers of islam) likes a drink, and occupies a space on the sexual spectrum that isn’t the bag of their prophet.

    Just because their prophet did, why do the followers of Islam have such a problem with those who don’t share the sexual preferences of Jimmy Saville?

  20. white squirrel says:

    ‘Real’ islam is that Sunni or Shia or Barbaric

  21. white+squirrel says:

    as for israel

    its neibhours had the opportunity to live peacefully with the new naton
    they CHOSE not to
    it is thus their own fault if israel slowly becomes a militaristic [inter alia] state due to constant attack

  22. plainsuch says:

    As I understand it, the Zionists believed that when Jerusalem was pure (Jewish) again, God would restore the ecology of Israel back to the forests and grasslands described in the Old Testament. The religious prediction did not magically occur. So they doubled down on the stupid and decided they had to run off every non-Jew before God would give them their wish. Trying to terrorize the Palestinians into leaving was a religious decision.

  23. NateHevens says:

    Just a point… if you think the Bible doesn’t want death to unbelievers, and that there aren’t extremist Christians and Jews who think that way, you are sorely mistaken.

    We seem to think that Islam is unique with this, but they aren’t. That they’re currently the loudest doesn’t change the fact that Christianity and Judaism agree that unbelievers should be killed.

    And I still say a religion that has learned to manipulate politics, like Christians have, is more dangerous *in the long-run* than a religion that has no understanding of politics and uses strictly violence, like Muslims, because while in the short-term Islam extremism causes more damage, violence can only work short-term. Politics, on the other hand, can, when used for extremist purposes, screw things up for centuries.

    Islam may be more more violent now, but I’d argue that no one’s topped the political dominance or violence of the Catholics’ Dark Ages… not yet, anyway… although Christian Dominionists in the US and elsewhere are certainly trying.

    I should stress that this in’t to excuse Islam extremism. It needs to be stopped, because its scary and has some very terrifying implications for the near future.

  24. plainsuch says:

    The Christian Dominionists, especially The Family, plan to take control of the US and have the US control the rest of the world, more or less covertly, by occupying all the positions of power.

    Dominionism: The theocratic idea that regardless of theological view or eschatological timetable, heterosexual Christian men are called by God to exercise dominion over secular society by taking control of political and cultural institutions.

    see also: http://www.theocracywatch.org/

  25. Shaughn says:

    white+squirrel re israel – Before that, its neighbours chose not to have it there in the first place and then it was forced upon them, another thing they did not choose for.

    The un resolution to put it there was not unanimous: those who chose for that state to be enforced there were states who merely saw an opportunity to get rid of their own jews: a ‘civilized’ endlösung. Especially those who happily took nazi-refugees. Those who foresaw trouble were against it or abstained from voting.

    This israel state is a result of antisemitism and ignorance and so the middle east became the pigsty it is.

  26. plainsuch says:

    Christian Dominionists (cont.)

    Anti-abortionists in the US have mostly stopped shooting doctors and bombing clinics because it’s more effective to be sneaky. There were 1,787 abortion providers in the US in 2008 and 724 remaining abortion clinics January of 2013. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/22/the-geography-of-abortion-access.html The result of laws and ordnances quietly restricting everything from extra building codes for clinics to preventing health insurance from covering it. In several states you must have a vaginal ultrasound before you can have an abortion. There is no medical significance in this procedure, but if you have an abortion you must be raped with a ultrasound probe first.

    I’ll stop here. This is one of my hot points. When someone decides God is on their side they will do anything, to anybody, and NEVER take responsibility for the damage they have inflicted.

    Religions rejection of the real world and their emphasis emotive arguments make them very problematic. You can never turn your back to someone who thinks God is on their side.

  27. Sandra'sGhost says:

    I would never dare suggest this in print but does it not seem obvious that the reason those needle-dicked, scrotum-less wonders attack schools and other soft targets is that they are never man enough to fight anyone who carries a weapon more lethal than a bag full of books and lunch?

    In short, those thugs are cowards and weaklings and terrified of every male over the age of twelve and every female.

    We should not be shocked or outraged at their tactics, we should be amused. We should be laughing at the perverted little freaks who are too small and insignificant to really matter.

    Without the guns that our sciences give them, without the millions of man-years put into the making of their rifles and bombs they would be gibbering, vapid little savages dancing about in the sands of the desserts they made. They would be trivial.

    So, in a sense we should actually be proud of them. That we are so brilliant, so strong, so adult and effective and mighty that we can make out of scum and filth and rubbish with only the leavings from our tables something that vaguely resembles a threat.
    We have made something almost dangerous from pathetic little prattling fools with all the masculinity of sponges.
    Truly, Science is so much better than religions ever could be.

    And those vermin are not dangerous. Not really, not long term. Real Men, more than half of whom are women though those fools can never see this, will always stride across the universe leaving those minuscule worms in their dust. We are ever so much more magical than them.

    And we always will be.

    We can taste the sunlight. We can love.

    All they have is hate.

    And tiny testes.

  28. Sandra'sGhost says:

    plainsuch, penetration with a probe is not rape when the victim patient consents, however reluctantly.

    It may be coerced penetration or penetration with menace or penetration under colour of authority but “rape” it is not. Consent is everything.

  29. Great strip, Author. Thanks again.
    And to all my mates at the Cock and Bull, have a very merry Christmas. Plainsuch, thanks for the carolling. Who says atheists ain’t got no songs, other than Steve Martin of course.

  30. Sandra'sGhost says:

    Clarification: why are the really naughty religious zealots not too terrified of little boys younger than about twelve years of age?

    Because they can forcibly sodomise those and their tiny, wormy pricks can just barely be felt by their victims. Anyone much older than that wouldn’t notice.

    And why are they terrified of even infant girls?

    They know they will be laughed at if they wave their tiny tools at them. Fear of being mocked for having a microscopic willy is a create motivator for the oppression of the ones who would point and giggle. It explains why they are so insistent on monogamy, too. If a girl has nothing to compare the present willy or the lack of skill of its owner to she is less likely to make hurtful comments.

    They shoot us with guns because shooting us with their other weapon would only invite ridicule.

    Perhaps we should prescribe testosterone treatments for the poor dears?

  31. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    A very merry Christmas to you too, Darwin.

    Sandra’sGhost says:

    December 18, 2014 at 12:51 am

    I would never dare suggest this in print but does it not seem obvious that the reason those needle-dicked, scrotum-less wonders attack schools and other soft targets is that they are never man enough to fight anyone who carries a weapon more lethal than a bag full of books and lunch?

    Sadly, you are about as far from the truth as possible. The cowards are the ones that give the orders. The poor, brainwashed saps that do the actual killing do so in the knowledge that they will die during the process, convinced by their leaders that they will die as martyrs with full afterlife benefits.
    This latest slaughter took place in a heavily guarded army-run school (begging the question how they got in. The news suggests an un-guarded door but a cynical bastard such as I might suspect inside help) so the killers knew that they would have to kill as many children and teachers as possible as quickly as possible before the soldiers arrived to send them to Paradise. At least one of them is reported to have blown himself up in the (female) head teacher’s office.

    They attacked that particular school specifically because it is an army school, and they knew the message it would send out and the amount of publicity it would create. A suicide bombing in a market place is so commonplace as to be a by-line in the news, whereas attacks such as this make global headlines.

    And that’s the sickening thing; to the parents and families and friends of the 140-odd innocent victims this was an obscene tragedy. To the Taliban leadership this was a fucking P.R. Stunt.

    The men who carried out this atrocity were far from heroes, but whatever they were they certainly were not cowards. The cowardly ones are those of the calibre of those who shot Malala Yousef. Climbing onto a school bus while armed to the eye-teeth and accompanied by a dozen of one’s fellow ‘fighters’, with no fear of resistance because there’s nobody to fight back is the act of a coward; knowingly going to one’s death, whatever the motivation behind the action, certainly is not.

    You also suggest “prescrib(ing) testosterone treatments for the poor dears“.

    Great idea. Take a load of already overly aggressive fanatics armed with guns, bombs, and the will to die for their cause, then pump them full of testosterone. Yep! That’ll calm them down.

    On a different note, Sandra’sGhost, you said “Sandra’sGhost says:

    December 18, 2014 at 12:57 am

    plainsuch, penetration with a probe is not rape when the victim patient consents, however reluctantly.
    It may be coerced penetration or penetration with menace or penetration under colour of authority but “rape” it is not. Consent is everything

    When anybody is penetrated against their will, even when consent is given, it is still rape, irrespective of whether the person doing the penetrating is a doctor who says ‘If you want the abortion you’ve first got to let me stick this probe up your vagina for no valid reason‘, or a stranger who says ‘If you want me to let you go, you’ve got to let me stick a dildo up your arse for no valid reason‘.

    To put it another way; I would rather my doctor not have stuck his fingers up my anus, but I wanted my prostate checking and the fingers were the only way to do it, so I willingly gave consent. There was a perfectly valid reason for the penetration, therefore it was not rape.
    However, it would be a different case if, for example, my doctor refused to prescribe me the painkillers that I rely on to enable me to function in severe pain rather than absolute agony, that is unless I let him stick his fingers up my bum first, I would not want to give consent because there would be no valid reason for the penetration, but if out of desperation I did consent, making it clear that I was doing so unwillingly, then that would be rape.

    ‘Tis the season to be jolly

  32. plainsuch says:

    Darwin Harmless
    Thank hotrats, I am but a humble messenger.

  33. plainsuch says:


    AIR Islam spread from Spain through Africa to the Indus River in Asia in about a hundred years after Mo died. They didn’t have rifles, tanks or bombs. In fact I believe the phrase was “conversion by the sword.”
    They are people too. They live and love and grieve like you. But their heads are full of religious garbage an ideology that if they pretend hard enough have faith then magical things will happen.

  34. machigai says:

    First frame is still

  35. plainsuch says:

    Consent is everything, if you know what you are consenting to and you actually have a choice. If you consent to sex at the point of a knife to save your life, it is still rape. Being coerced negates the consent. Submitting to be vicariously violated by the state legislature only in order to obtain medical care negates the consent.

    Out of all the non-essential medical procedures they could think of these smug a-holes went with inserting something in the vagina. In a completely antiseptic manner of course. It might just be a coincidence that it happens to mimic an act of traditional male dominance and power.
    If you are pregnant God is punishing you for sex. You are supposed to lie down and take it like a woman. One way or another.

  36. plainsuch says:

    I read that as
    …have a duty; TAKE A STAND…

    As if that was the single most important duty.

  37. plainsuch says:


    nice one

  38. milobear says:

    To answer your question, Stuart, we Sydneysiders *have* just seen Muslims speak out against the extremism of Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis, but then turn right around and do what Mo has done, and qualify it as “nothing to do with them”. On the day after the siege, I saw plenty of people claiming (with some truth no doubt) that he had mental issues. But all were adamant that his religion could not have contributed to his behaviour in any way.

  39. milobear says:

    But to be fair, we now have one of our (Christian?) pollies coming out with the crazy idea it’s our own fault (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-18/australia-a-nation-of-victims-says-pro-gun-senator-leyonhjelm/5974684) And that the siege would not have happened if Aussies were allowed to carry firearms. He wants to make Sydney as safe as Texas.

  40. AndrewM says:

    People are misunderstanding the point.

    It’s not that Muslims are or are not, condemning these attacks. It’s that when they do, they say it’s “nothing to do with Islam”.

    Islam, like all faiths isn’t a monolithic religion. It has a single text, that’s translated and interpreted differently by the numerous different religious groups that call themselves Islamic.

    These attacks have everything to do with Islam, for those Muslims that purpetated those acts.

  41. Acolyte, I’m afraid this latest atrocity was not just a fucking PR stunt. According to a spokesman for the Taliban, they targeted children because they wanted their enemies to feel the pain that they feel when their women and children are killed in bomb attacks by the Pakistani military. Suddenly it’s all understandable. It’s part of a long chain of attacking and revenging, a cycle of horror that has no end as long as both sides are committed to continue it. And both sides show no sign of walking away from the pain and the nightmare. Not saying this justifies the killing of children, of course. But to view it as fanatic bastards buying a ticket to paradise by killing innocents to get attention is far too simplistic.

    Sandra’sGhost, I don’t think you’ve thought much about what you are saying. Please do. The they’ve got tiny penises thing is trite and juvenile.

  42. Innocent Bystander says:

    @eoinkenobi’s point is inescapable. Al Quaeda, ISIL, et al., have scholarly authenticity in all regards except that ISIL takes upon itself to declare who is unislamic and hence in need having their head cut off. Hitherto all Muslims, regardless of sect, have tended to defer to scholars in declaring who is unislamic. So Shias and Sunnis have at least recognised each other as Muslims, even though they still murder each other. A disinterested bystander might therefore reasonably suppose that the jihadists of whatever flavour are actually representative of TRUE Islam, and everyone else, including the so-called moderate Muslims in Western countries are actually being unislamic by not supporting them. If we could reach a consensus that ISIL et al. is the true force of true Islam, we could refer bewildered non-ISIL “moslems” to the Council for Ex-Muslims so they could formally declare that they are ex-Muslims and embrace western values wholeheartedly. I imagine that many of the people running away from ISIL are aware that they won’t get their hand chopped off for stealing a loaf of bread in Europe, just a friendly probation officer – much nicer, but not really very Islamic.

  43. Innocent+Bystander says:

    The most courageous thing a so-called Muslim can do is to declare themselves an ex-Muslim. Such “apostasy” immediately incurs the death sentence though, fortunately, in the West no one is deputed to carry that sentence out. Those so-called Muslims who say that Islam-inspired atrocities are nothing to do with them may be right, but they are also implying that they have nothing to do with Islam, so they should join hands and decry their religion for what it is, a rather silly and inhumane sham, and completely disassociate themselves from it.

  44. philfinn7 says:

    machigai, the first frame has been fixed. Refresh your browser.

  45. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Darwin, you’re right, of course, that the massacre is but the latest in a long line of tit-for-tat attacks, just as it is in any long-running feud. My point about the publicity stunt aspect of it was inspired by something I heard on the news where a Taliban spokesman said that the school was chosen as a target not only for reciprocation but also to ensure the action received the maximum coverage.

    They could just as easily have picked off individual children or attacked a school bus, but the publicity value would have been far less than that received by going into the school. That way, not only did they acheive their aim regarding reciprocation, but they were also sending the message that they are able of striking right at the heart of the enemy – an army-run and army-defended school, no less – and this was the message that they wanted to be heard Worldwide.

    Innocent Bystander, just a point of order. Here in the Cock and Bull we don’t use the ‘@’ prefix when addressing somebody; we prefer to talk to rather than at our friends. 🙂

  46. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Darwin, just to further clarify my point, take a look at this from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/11300078/Taliban-burned-teachers-alive-in-Pakistan-school-attack.html

    The school, part of a network of elite schools for the sons and daughters of soldiers as well as some civilians, was a natural target.
    However, the Taliban have also destroyed schools across northern Pakistan as part of their campaign against modern education. More than 1,000, especially girls schools, have been attacked and in many cases burned.

    More than 1000 schools attacked, but very, very few have even warranted so much as a by-line in the news outside of Pakistan.
    What’s the point of sending out a message to the World if the World isn’t hearing it? I maintain that, historical reasons notwithstanding, this specific attack was calculated to bring the maximum publicity.

    The slaughter of innocents is not a rare thing over there (see the quote above), but whilst they were acheiving their idealistic goals they were largely ignored on a global scale, so they needed this massive headline grabber.
    For the Taliban, it isn’t enough to be the toughest kid in town if only the townspeople recognise the fact; they want the World to know it too.

    Also, I missed this bit of your post earlier;

    But to view it as fanatic bastards buying a ticket to paradise by killing innocents to get attention is far too simplistic.

    That wasn’t quite what I was suggesting. My thoughts were more on the line that the leading fanatical(-ally cynical?) bastards are – as ever – using the promise of Paradise to send other equally fanatical but less intelligent bastards to do the killings and die in the process on the leaders’ behalf. The actual killers aren’t after the publicity, all they want is the chance to serve Allah by despatching as many infidels as possible, it’s the leaders using the misguided saps’ beliefs in the most cynical way possible to acheive their own ends.

    However, all of this is just so much supposition; who knows what’s really going on in the heads of fanatics and fundamentalists? More to the point, does anybody really want to know? Would a peek inside their minds endanger our own sanity?

    Can we get back to being funny or merely irreverent now, please? I’m starting to feel very depressed.

  47. plainsuch says:

    I doubt if it matters much which side of a feud you are on. Imagine those you love most are suddenly dead. It doesn’t matter how, it may be by bombs from the sky, a military assault on children at school, a death squad kicking in your door at 3 AM or a suicide bomber in the market. There is no good reason why the were killed. But you do know who to blame.

    Then the recruiter with the AK-47 and the explosives on a vest approaches you. Wouldn’t you grab the opportunity to pay back the pain those evil bastards inflicted on you? At least to take up the rifle and fight against them?

  48. plainsuch says:

    And, on a lighter note.

    “Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part to us, do they?”
    ? George Carlin

  49. plainsuch says:

    After spending all day putting in a new cement walk, Mr. Sullivan was horrified to see his kids using sticks to write their names in it.

    After screaming viciously at the kids, he came back inside, only to find his wife scowling.

    “How could you do that?” she asked.

    “It’s just a walkway, and – don’t you love your kids?”

    Her husband said, “In the abstract, yes. But not in the concrete.”

  50. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    “In the abstract, yes. But not in the concrete.”

    Brilliant! 🙂

  51. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Now here’s a classic case of Christmas cognitive dissonance (nice alliteraton, huh?):

    Original source; http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/georgia-pastors-billboard-warns-that-santa-is-satan-and-hes-turning-your-kids-into-atheists/

    Sample quote; “Santa Claus is robbing Christ of his glory.” said Pastor Carothers, followed shortly after by “It’s amazing to me that people would get this upset over a fictitious creature.”

    Read the whole thing. It’s bloody hilarious.

  52. HaggisForBrains says:

    AoS – “It’s amazing to me that people would get this upset over a fictitious creature.”

    Plainsuch – “Concrete”; thanks for the first good laugh of the day! And the George Carlin quote is thought-provoking as well as funny.

  53. suffolk+blue says:

    Happy Christmas one and all. Hope you’ll be raising a few in the C&B. Does anyone know if they’ll be having extended opening hours over the festive period?

  54. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    SPOING indeed, HFB.

    That quote from Carlin reminded me of something similar that I thought of a few years ago;
    If Windolene is for cleaning windows, what’s a trampoline for?

  55. Welshman says:

    Acolyte of Sagan

    Just to clarify the rape technicalities a little further – in UK law, the penetration has to be by a penis. Anything else (finger, dildo, ultrasound probe) would still be a crime, but not specifically rape.

  56. plainsuch says:

    In the US the FBI definition is, “Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.” Minors are not able to legally give consent.
    Each of 50 different state legislatures uses it’s own language and sets the penalty for specific variations. Lawyers and news reporters refer to the crime as something like ‘sexual abuse, 3rd degree’ or ‘2nd degree sexual assault’ rather than rape. People not in the legal system use the word rape.

  57. CLINT says:

    @ Gary Kleppe

    Au contraire, you couldn’t be more wrong Gary. The death toll from 1400 years of Jihadic expansionism is anything but small; the fact is that it runs into the tens of millions worldwide and it’s accompanying slave trade is truly breathtaking in scale and utterly brutal in practise. Muslims never miss an opportunity to invoke the Crusades but are highly reticent to mention the growth of Islam amongst Kaffirs and there’s a very good reason for this – one which most westerners have unconsciously brought into – rather like the fear of being branded by the pseudo term ‘Islamophobic’.

    The Indian sub-continent has been particularly impacted with genocidal levels of slaughter perpetrated primarily against Buddhists and Hindus who are especially derided in Islam as idolators. So low are they regarded that they can’t even become Dhimmis, only Christians and Jews are marked out for that indignity. The sum total of Islamic slaughter may well be the world’s biggest, single issue death toll ever seen – but you are not supposed to know that because you are potential candidate yourself …… its a good job your cattle don’t foresee the abattoir until they arrive there!

    I’m often perplexed by the constant confusion, misunderstandings and downright ignorance spouted forth about Islam by your run of the mill Kaffir. Perplexed because all anyone really needs to do is put one weekend aside and plough through the Qur’an and the Hadiths to find out what all 1.6 billion Muslims have been taught since birth. Even an abridged summary will give you a great deal more than the usual ill informed speculation peddled by practically every Western journo and Politician.

    Whilst, rival sects may dispute with each other, the textual contents are universally accepted as utterly inviolate and the absolute truth; grasp that and everything falls into place – particularly when you hear what Muslims say to themselves about non believers. And Islam is nothing if not obsessed with unbelievers – in fact is that the vast bulk of their holy texts concern every aspect interactions with Kaffirs ….. and deception, manipulation and control (both physical and mental) are a major part of this.

    There are no doctrinal differences between the beliefs of ‘moderates’ and ‘extremists’ and no-one is being ‘radicalised’ in the western sense of the term. That some Muslims take offensive action whilst others don’t was all catered for 1400 years ago – and all Muslim know and understand this. Not everyone is or can be a ‘soldier’ but everyone is obliged to support the effort in any and all ways they can. There is nothing being perpetrated by Da’ish in Iraq or Syria was not divinely sanctioned, they are simply doing Allah’s work and all the better Muslims for it.

    The ‘brute’ facts of Islam are simple: it was set out from the very beginnings to be an inherently political religion that necessarily encompasses all aspects of the human experience; that’s what Sharia is all about and why you’re unlikely to find many Muslims prepared to speak out against it. Religious reform and innovation (Bid’ah) is expressly forbidden and conflicting interpretations were minimized from the outset by precise instructions. An Islamic reformation is highly unlikely to ever happen, even the merest suggestion is heresy.

    The ultimate goal of Islam is a global Ummah in which every human lives in total submission to Allah, and follows Mohammed’s teachings and examples to the absolute letter; no further inquiry or enterprise is to be tolerated. Then and only then will Islam become a religion of peace as there will be no dissenters left to take issue with. In the meantime, and in order to get there, any and all means of expansion, elimination, coercion and conversion are allowed be it overt violence or covert PR and financial manipulation. This is constantly preached in every Mosque on Earth.

    Saudi investments in western business and educational establishments are considered no less Jihadic than your brutal sword wielding desert beheader – its all to the same ends. indeed, Saudi interests are currently hoovering up media organisations Maxwell style right across the globe: rule one is always no criticism of Islam or the Saudis.

    Islam is dualistic to the core with all non-muslims regarded as dispensable and devoid of any rights, protection or dignity; particularly those who fall outside the Abrahamic tree. Hindus and Buddhists are on a par with animals and can be treated accordingly. Animals have no souls and so their suffering is irrelevant; Kaffirs are destined for eternal torture and, similarly, their condition and treatment is also ultimately irrelevant; after all what’s divinely sanctioned rape and torture to an eternity of Allah blessed hellfire purgatory?

    There can be no hypocrisy or immorality in any Muslim’s duplicity or outright lies directed at Kaffirs as this was authorised in advance by Mohammed himself; you need only say to Kaffirs what they need to believe if it, in any way, advances the cause of Muslims or Islam. The rule has always been the same: stay low key when in a minority but totally dominate when the majority – this is a core teaching.

    Heretics, blasphemers and apostates are all marked out for special treatment and Islam is nothing if not obsessed with insidious heretics: until the global Ummah they will be found everywhere and it is every good Muslim’s duty to expose them when ever they masquerade as the faithful. Once an accusation is made it effectively becomes true and is highly unlikely to ever be rescinded. It is this mindset that lies behind the marginalisation and brutality shown towards any opposing forces (be they other Muslims or otherwise) …… which is exactly how we arrive at the Pakistani school slaughter. In the eyes of Allah, the perpetrators can only ever be pious and heroic and cannot be guilty of any sin, quite the contrary in fact, and the will of Allah is all that matters.

    Its all a matter of perception and unless and until you see the world through Muslim glasses you will never grasp their ‘logic’ or ‘reality’ and sleep walk yourself into subjugation which has always been their avowed intention anyway!

    But don’t take my words for it, read it for yourself – because Islam was always intended to come your way whether you like it or not.

  58. plainsuch says:

    CLINT (ahem…. no @)
    As I understand it, the Koran is jumbled in time, and verses written later take precedence over conflicting verses written earlier in time. Is there an English version that is ordered by time?

  59. CLINT says:

    Plainsuch (re @, oops force of habit!)

    Yes, your assessment is right, the Suras are arranged in size order with the longest verses at the beginning scaling down to the shortest at the rear which is your first indication that the book isn’t a verbatim representation of the originals at all but an edited assemblage.

    Its easy enough to reference how that came about and to all but the devout, it’s your first starter for 10 that people other than the alleged author dabbled in the content – he was after all reputed to be illiterate but managed the task with divine intervention.

    There are numerous translations, some of which are chronological, mine was a straight AppStore download but I have no frame of reference as to it’s authenticity or of any other translation for that matter. I do know that most Muslims regard non Arabic Qur’ans as inherently inferior, incomplete and fundamentally inaccurate – you’d think it wouldn’t be beyond the wit of the Almighty to ensure that everyone had equal access to the contents – then again, wouldn’t he be more than capable of ensuring his message was hardwired into our brains?

    I’m not really in any position to make recommendations, you’d need to consult someone with a more scholarly perspective. Its not a easy read for an English speaking non believer, tedious is the word that most comes to mind, but its not so hard to pick up on the bold broad sweeps and oft repeated condemnations of all things non-muslim; I found it a pretty dogmatic theology largely devoid of tolerance and humour – overall, it wasn’t very nice.

  60. IanB says:

    A reasonable starter for what the Quran says is http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Myths-of-Islam.htm

  61. Robert,+not+Bob says:

    From my go-through of the Skeptic’s Annotated, the Koran goes like this:
    God is great
    Jews are bad
    Give Mohammad more money
    Women are bad
    Give Mohammad all the women he wants

    And round the circle again

  62. blackflag1961 says:

    @ AoS… “If Windolene is for cleaning windows, what’s a trampoline for?”
    If olive oil is made from olives and sunflower oil is made from sunflowers, then I’m seriously disturbed by baby oil.

  63. plainsuch says:

    Being a couple of websites and a few metaphors found rambling around the ‘net.

    How to discuss Islam with Muslims http://www.sillyallah.com/

    During a debate on HBO’s Real Time last October, host Bill Maher declared that Islam is “the only religion that acts like the mafia, that will f***ing kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture, or write the wrong book.”

    “When you’re asked to stay out of a bar you don’t just punch the owner–you come back with your army and tear the place down, destroy the whole edifice and everything it stands for. No compromise. If a man gets wise, mash his face. If a woman snubs you, rape her. This is the thinking, if not the reality, behind the whole Hell’s Angels act.”
    ? Hunter S. Thompson, Hell’s Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga

    The Hell’s Angels try not to do anything halfway, and anyone who deals in extremes is bound to cause trouble, whether he means to or not. This, along with a belief in total retaliation for any offense or insult, is what makes the Hell’s Angels unmanageable for the police and morbidly fascinating to the general public.
    Hunter S. Thompson

    The modus operandi found here is consistent.

    The worst characteristic which the Spaniards acquired was the parasitism of the Arabs and the nomad Africans: the custom of living off one’s neighbour’s territory, the raid raised to the level of an institution, marauding and brigandage recognized as the sole means of existence for the man-at-arms. In the same way they went to win their bread in Moorish territory, so the Spaniards later went to win gold and territory in Mexico and Peru.

    They were to introduce there, too, the barbarous, summary practices of the Arabs: putting everything to fire and sword, cutting down fruit-trees, razing crops, devastating whole districts to starve out the enemy and bring them to terms; making slaves everywhere, condemning the population of the conquered countries to forced labour. All these detestable ways the conquistadores learnt from the Arabs.
    Antony Garrard Newton Flew (1923 – 2010

    It is, thank heaven, difficult if not impossible for the modern European to fully appreciate the force which fanaticism exercises among an ignorant, warlike and Oriental population. Several generations have elapsed since the nations of the West have drawn the sword in religious controversy, and the evil memories of the gloomy past have soon faded in the strong, clear light of Rationalism and human sympathy. Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men’s passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis–as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.
    Winston Churchill

  64. smartalek says:

    By whatever guise (if any) you choose to couch your celebrations in — Christmas, Chanukah, Kwanzaa, Eid, Yule, Daygan, Saturnalia, etcetc — I wish everyone a wonderful Solstice, and the best of new years.

  65. Mary2 says:

    CLINT, I think it’s a little simplistic to suggest that one can know everything there is to know about Muslims from reading the holy book. One could say the same about Christians except we know that many Christians don’t ever hear all the twaddle about killing unbelievers that’s in their book, let alone actively believe it. You may as well say that all Christians are brought up to believe that stoning disobedient children part of God’s plan. Some may believe this and it is definitely expressed by God in the book but most Christians would be horrified if you suggested it.

    AOS, a slight quibble: I don’t think it’s brave to walk into a school knowing you are going to die – if you believe you will spend the rest of eternity being one of the favourites of a grateful god.

  66. plainsuch says:


    Yes. Whatever you happen to call it, there’s going to be a little more light every day now and, eventually, spring will come back to this half the planet. That’s reason for celebration. The other half the planet – I wish you a happy summer celebration too.

  67. Acolyte of Sagan says:

    Hello Mary, how are you?
    Now, a slight quibble about your slight quibble. I didn’t suggest that anybody involved in the killings were brave, just fanatical bastards pumped up on the ideology of a murderous sect (and if the truth were known, quite possibly on various drugs too. PCP and methamphetamine spring to mind).

  68. Robert,+not+Bob says:

    AOS, that would be very historically appropriate. Hashishim, you know.

  69. The number of Muslims murdered in the name of Christianity is probably larger then the reverse. Of course, that’s more to do with whose imperialism was more successful than with any moral difference.

  70. Robert+Andrews says:

    Mark Twain would agree with that cartoon. He said,”There was only one Christian, and they cruxified him…early”!

    I don’t know why it takes a full day for my comments to be posted.

  71. Uncle+Roger says:

    “its neibhours had the opportunity to live peacefully with the new naton
    they CHOSE not to
    it is thus their own fault if israel slowly becomes a militaristic [inter alia] state due to constant attack”

    So if I don’t lock up my bike and you steal it, it’s my fault that you took it?


NOTE: This comments section is provided as a friendly place for readers of J&M to talk, to exchange jokes and ideas, to engage in profound philosophical discussion, and to ridicule the sincerely held beliefs of millions. As such, comments of a racist, sexist or homophobic nature will not be tolerated.

If you are posting for the first time, or you change your username and/or email, your comment will be held in moderation until approval. When your first comment is approved, subsequent comments will be published automatically.