Now and again I actually find myself in debates with the odd brainwashed religious nut who claims that Koran contains early revelations which science proved much later. This video shows that Koran in fact contains nothing more or less than a bad plagiarism of Greek knowledge of several centuries earlier as well as various local creation mythology commonly held of Mohamed’s time. This is decent ammo for anyone who finds themselves in such pointless debates. It is interesting though as to where much of Greek thought was five hundred to a thousand years before Mohamed. The author also missed the plagiarism by Islam of the Meccan people. However plagiarism isn’t the point of this video, its more about debunking the claims to early scientific knowledge.
Category Archives: Debate
Stratfor analyses Sarkozy’s burka ban. We analyze that.
Stratfor, the premiere geopolitical think tank rapidly growing in esteem and influence throughout the western world has done something interesting in terms of the ‘anti jihad’.
Typically, Stratfor looks at Islamic immigration into the western world as fundamentally no different than any other historical wave of immigration. They feel that negative reaction to Islam and the west is a consequence of shrinking economies and that there is no real difference in terms of effects on the west by Islam as there was by any other wave of immigration which ultimately integrates while perhaps changing the flavour of the host countries a little bit.
However even Stratfor has to admit that a cartoon published in Denmark can have massive geopolitical consequences across the world and recently Stratfor noticed that a mere rumor of handling a Muslim holy book in a way immigrants don’t like in Greece was the cause of week long riots.
Today, Stratfor released an analysis of Sarkozy’s statement on mandatory Muslim dress for women saying that there is no place in a secular France for signs of submission to men as the Burka shows.
While I disagree fundamentally with the stance Sarkozy chose first lets look at the Stratfor analysis to the best of my ability while still sticking to the two paragraph quote limit the copyright allows. First, it is noteworthy that this is a party line crosser. That is to say, one can easily cross party lines when talking about this dress code without necessarily being a cross dresser. Communists and left wing feminists are right with conservatives on the issue of the burka in France. A six month study has been commissioned by the French government to determine if a ban is to be implemented.
Ultimately, Stratfor’s concern is what sort of backlash will be felt from Muslim groups and nations as a consequence of Sarkozy’s speech to the joint sessions of Parliament in France. From Stratfor:
Indeed, reports are already surfacing of foreign criticism of Sarkozy’s speech. These have included a statement from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), an organization representing the interests of more than 500 Muslim groups across the United Kingdom (but not as linked to the British government as the French Council is to the French government). The MCB said Sarkozy’s comments that women are forced to wear the burka were offensive and that governments should not determine what individuals wear. The MCB also said that France should take the lead in enhancing cooperation among Muslims and non-Muslims rather than increasing the rift.
Outside Europe, Sarkozy’s statements have met with opposition from Muslim countries, particularly those with conservative Muslim populations. The Saudi press has openly expressed its distaste with Sarkozy’s policy. Meanwhile, The Times of India has reported on Indian women speaking out against the idea of the ban. While only a small percentage of Muslim women wear the burka, which moderate Muslims consider a repressive garment, Sarkozy’s tone could make Muslims see the step as the beginning of more anti-Muslim moves.
Stratfor then goes on to try and link anti immigration parties as being overall ignored continent wide in Europe and discrediting any anti Islamic sentiments as essentially parochial and not different than any other anti immigration feeling typical of economic down times. Continue Reading →
“Western “even-handedness” on Bosnia was the biggest single factor in the radicalization of European Muslims.” – Mark Steyn
Another precient and brilliant column by Steyn:
Neutrality Isn’t an Option
You always have a dog in the fight, whether you know it or not.
By Mark Steyn
The polite explanation for Barack Obama’s diffidence on Iran is that he doesn’t want to give the mullahs the excuse to say the Great Satan is meddling in Tehran’s affairs. So the president’s official position is that he’s modestly encouraged by the regime’s supposed interest in investigating some of the allegations of fraud. Also, he’s heartened to hear that OJ is looking for the real killers. “You’ve seen in Iran,” explained President Obama, “some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election . . . ”
“Supreme Leader”? I thought that was official house style for Barack Obama at Newsweek and MSNBC. But no. It’s also the title held by Ayatollah Khamenei for the last couple of decades. If it sounds odd from the lips of an American president, that’s because none has ever been as deferential in observing the Islamic republic’s dictatorial protocol. Like President Obama’s deep, ostentatious bow to the king of Saudi Arabia, it signals a fresh start in our relations with the Muslim world, “mutually respectful” and unilaterally fawning.
And how did it go down? At Friday prayers in Tehran, Ayotollah Khamenei attacked “dirty Zionists” and “bad British radio” (presumably a reference to the BBC’s Farsi news service rather than the non-stop Herman’s Hermits marathon on Supergold Oldies FM). “The most evil of them all is the British government,” added the supreme leader, warming to his theme. The crowd, including President Ahmadinelandslide and his cabinet, chanted, “Death to the U.K.” Continue Reading →
Rather pithy video showing Galloway’s true colors.
Loath as I am to give George Galloway any more publicity than he already has, I feel its important for the sake of turning even one useful idiot against him. When Galloway gave his teleconference in Ottawa Canada he had many useful idiot supporters, some of whom where wealthy over sixty Jewish women in fact, reveling in their rebelliousness. People who had become so consumed with hatred of Bush and all things American they blindly joined forces with all things against it. With elderly Jewish people, there is also the sense that because they appear to be acting against their own interests in an identity politics sort of way, there is a kind of sanctimony in it.
Specifically, if a Jewish person defends Israel’s existence he or she will likely be dismissed by the left, that is any one who has graduated from a western university in the past five years, as simply doing so out of self interest. So Jews who side with illiberal forces such as Galloway get to feel that they are intellectually superior.
They need to know one thing:
Defense of Israel should be done because it is right and just to do it. Because Israel has the best human rights record for all people, women, blacks whites and all religions in the middle east certainly and perhaps in the world. Because Israel has the same right to exist as any other nation on earth and perhaps much more depending on your criteria. It should not matter if you are Jewish or not when you argue the case if indeed you are interested in truth and justice.
In any case Galloway attracts a lot of these types. Perhaps if they all watched this video, one of them may come to understand that it takes more courage to stand up for the truth even when others will accuse you of defending your own interests when really, you are setting yourself up for hatred scorn and derision and very possibly personal danger.
One may notice, this is a common theme of history itself. The truth has always been unfashionable. More often a lethal liability.
Eeyore for Vlad: (I can’t find the email from whoever sent me these excellent videos but thank you)
The Crusades, Spain and the Moors, truth and fiction.
ControlGFK thank you very much for sending me these videos. Your emails are much appreciated.
Jdamn thank you for making the vids into one play list.
I am a huge fan of Robert Spencer, an intelectual and a scholar who is meticulous and unimpeachable. Spencer and Christopher Hitchens are perhaps the two great intelectual giants of our day.
There are several good articles here on Vlad about the much misunderstood facts of the Crusades. Please use the search feature on the sidebar to check them. I believe they are well researched and worth reading and understanding. Its a true pleasure to have Spencer in video form adding to this cannon of information.
Please enjoy these videos detailing important facts of history which play heavily into modern policies.
Dutch divided over Geert Wilders as radical MP eyes premiership
Until last week, the Bernard family had the normal concerns of any middle-class Dutch family – putting their teenage children through university, living a greener life, and paying the mortgage.
By Nick Meo in Rotterdam
Published: 7:00AM BST 14 Jun 2009
Geert Wilders began to see a rise in his popularity after an Amsterdam appeals court decided to try him for anti-Muslim comments in January Photo: EPA
But that has all changed since the European election – and the triumph by Geert Wilders, the right-wing populist and outspoken critic of Islam who in February was banned from entering Britain as a threat to “community harmony”.
To many abroad Mr Wilders, a Dutch MP, appears an old-fashioned racist whose views put him on a par with other far-Right politicians elsewhere in Europe.
Yet in its first ever test of national electoral support among the normally tolerant Dutch, his anti-immigration Party for Freedom which he founded in 2006 won 17 per cent of the votes – making it the second biggest party. That has shaken the country to its core – opening up the real possibility that, through the Dutch coalition system, Mr Wilders could win power at the next general election.
Now, like many others in the Netherlands, the Bernards are desperately worried. “This has the feeling of what happened to Germany in the 1930s,” said Alfred Bernard, 52, a lawyer. “Wilders blames foreigners for everything. People are disoriented because of the economic crisis. Everywhere there is dissatisfaction with mainstream politicians.
“After this I really believe that Wilders could become prime minister in the 2011 parliamentary elections, or at least set the political agenda.”
In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Wilders, 45, was frank about that ambition. Asked about the prospect of taking power in two years’ time, he said: “That is our biggest job. We had an enormous success last week and our biggest task is to keep up momentum. I am very confident that we will have an excellent result.
“If my party becomes the biggest party, I would be honoured to be prime minister.”
Sitting in his office in the Dutch parliament building in The Hague, protected from the threat of assassination by 10 armed secret service bodyguards, he summed up his antipathy to the religion of many immigrants to the Netherlands.
“Islam wants to dominate our society,” he said in fluent and only slightly accented English. “It’s in opposition to freedom.
“If people are offended, that’s not my aim. I don’t talk about Muslims but about Islam. Everything I say is against the fascist Islamic ideology.”
To the charge that to many his views appeared to be racist, he responded: “If that was true, we would never have been the second biggest party in the European elections.”
Why, then, did Moroccans and Turks living in the Netherlands so fear him? “As long as they don’t commit crimes, it’s a baseless fear,” he said. “If you adhere to our laws, if you act according to our values, you are free to stay. We will help you to integrate.
“But if you cross the red line, if you start committing crimes, if you want to do jihad or impose sharia, we want you to be sent out of the Netherlands and we will get rid of your permits to stay.”
An admirer of Churchill and Lady Thatcher, he is charismatic as well as combative. Holland’s conventional politicians – mostly dull men in suits – have no idea how to counter his politically incorrect taunts, which outrage the parliamentary chamber but delight his supporters.
He has come a long way since the days when he could be lightly dismissed as an eccentric fringe politician with an extraordinary blond quiff, known mainly for baiting Muslims.
“Half of Holland loves me and half of Holland hates me. There is no in-between,” Mr Wilders said. “This is a new politics, and I think it would have a great chance of success in other European countries. We are democrats. On economic and social issues we are centrist. We want tougher laws on crime and we want to stop Holland paying so much money to the European Union.
“We would stop immigration from Muslim countries and close Islamic schools. We want to be more proud of our identity.”
He admitted that he is frustrated at his image abroad, especially in Britain, a country which he admires. He claimed to believe in freedom above all else and pointed out that he is despised by Holland’s Neo-Nazis, who dubbed him the “blond Zionist” because of his links to Israel – a country which he has often visited and where he counts politicians among his friends.
He is still angered at being banned from entering Britain, where he had been invited to show his controversial 17-minute film linking the Koran with the September 11 terror attacks. Muslim groups were among those who campaigned against his admission, and he dismissed the Home Office ruling as an attempt at “appeasement” of Islam.
Dutch liberals groaned when the British Government refused entry, because they knew Mr Wilders would milk the decision to generate massive publicity at home. He is also being prosecuted in Holland for promoting hate crimes, a case which is thought unlikely to succeed but which has allowed him to pose as a martyr.
In the European Parliament his four MEPs will not ally with the British National party, he said, claiming he had never met a BNP Member. “I understand they talk a lot about blacks and whites. This is disgusting,” he sai Continue Reading →
Ludwig light my fire
Muslim Outrage
[kaltura-widget wid=”6h27xsep7k” width=”410″ height=”364″ addpermission=”3″ editpermission=”3″ /]
FOX NEWS Muslim and FBI discuss the use of informants in mosques
BBC shows real if subtle bias against BNP
[kaltura-widget wid=”7idkm80zbc” width=”410″ height=”364″ addpermission=”3″ editpermission=”3″ /]Please watch this video clip from the BBC showing an egg attack from one of Europes so called ‘anti fascist’ groups against Nick Griffin, head of the BNP. Notice how he attempts to refer to Mr. Grifins security men as thugs. I am certain he would not have used the same terms refering to the security detail of any other party leader.
As I have already stated, I do not know what to make of the BNP nor do I endorse them. I merely know that they have not attempted to silence others. They have not used force or violent intimidation against other parties. They have been the victims of violence and threats and violent intimidation by other parties as well as the so called anti fascists. Therefore, I know that the anti fascists are in fact fascists by any rational definition. As for the BNP we shall see. Many people I respect seem not to trust them. However they offer no evidence for their suspicions. When I listen to what the BNP actually says and does publicly I tend to agree with them. Typically genuine tyrants and fascists are quite up front of their fascist agendas as they are proud of them. In any case, watch this reporting and decide who the fascists are. The ones giving a speech or the ones attacking them and preventing a speech.
[kaltura-widget wid=”vfn51asn2g” width=”410″ height=”364″ addpermission=”3″ editpermission=”3″ /]
Stained: Mr Griffin, with egg clearly visible on his suit, is rushed to his car Sharp exit: A burly minder struggles to drag Mr Griffin to safety
Target: A smashed egg can be seen flying behind Mr Griffin's head
Rough: A woman is barged aside for the BNP leader and MEP Andrew Brons
'Be honest with me, Sarge - did you vote BNP?'
MSNBC Muslim debates Christian on religion. Muslim uses solid argument to win
MSNBC Muslim debates Christian on religion. Muslim uses solid argument to win:
Found on The Religion Of Peace:
On way to debate club meeting with campus Christians
What started as an argument over religion at a bar escalated when one man shot another five times overnight, as the victim’s sister watched in horror.
Toni Simpson says she was waiting for her brother, Ernest McCullough, 29, in the 3800 block of Van Dyke Avenue at about 4:30 a.m. after a night of drinking at Nancy’s Pub. She was listening to the pair argue over religion but never thought it would lead to what happened next.
“He pulled up his shirt and it looked like a knife and it was a gun. He pulled it out and shot him,” she said.
Simpson says she was so shocked that she blacked out after the first two rounds were fired. When she came around she saw her brother covered in blood.
“I said ‘he shot you?’ And he said ‘yeah, he shot me’ and then he fell to the ground,” Simpson said.
The victim, who is Christian, was taken to Scripps Mercy Hospital in serious condition but is expected to be okay.
The suspect, who Simpson says was of Muslim faith, remains at large.
UK to publish book on religion and women despite fear of Muslims
It is sort of interesting I suppose that the publisher even considered not printing this book. A sign of the times indeed. It is perhaps also surprising that contrary to most headlines these days the publisher decided to go ahead and publish despite the fact that they know for an absolute certainty that some Muslims will use this book as an excuse to be violently offended. Is the worm turning? We shall know soon.
From The Times Online UK:
An academic book about religious attitudes to women is to be published this week despite concerns it could cause a backlash among Muslims because it criticises the prophet Muhammad for taking a nine-year-old girl as his third wife.
The book, entitled Does God Hate Women?, suggests that Muhammad’s marriage to a child called Aisha is “not entirely compatible with the idea that he had the best interests of women at heart”.
It also says that Cherie Blair, wife of the former prime minister, was “incorrect” when she defended Islam in a lecture by claiming “it is not laid down in the Koran that women can be beaten by their husbands and their evidence should be devalued as it is in some Islamic courts”.
This weekend, the publisher, Continuum, said it had received “outside opinion” on the book’s cultural and religious content following suggestions that it might cause offence. “We sought some advice and paused for thought before deciding to go ahead with publication,” said Oliver Gadsby, the firm’s chief executive. The book will be released on Thursday.
A recent novel that also dealt with Muhammad’s relationship with Aisha provoked an outcry. The Jewel of Medina caused such anger that a Muslim extremist was convicted earlier this month of trying to firebomb the office of its publisher. Continue Reading →
A challenge to artists world wide.
I have written on this many times in the past year on Vlad but now I am making a direct challenge to artists who think they are ‘risque’ and so dangerously counter culture. You know who you are. You did the ‘Piss Christ’ and made millions for something as banal as putting a crucifix in what looks like a jar of urine. You must feel so very brave when you insult millions of people you know won’t ever actually do anything beyond write an angry letter to the gallery, galleries which we know will benefit massively by the publicity.
It’s about as brave as lampooning the Dalai Lama. Reminds me of when I see a brave soul at a bar with a T shirt that has a picture of Jesus on the cross and it reads “Jesus. He did it for the chicks”. That isn’t even funny which is the only actual crime here. Before 9-11 an ex girlfriend of mine had the idea to do a T shirt with a Jesus on the cross wearing nike’s. The top would read,
Nike
And the bottom would say ‘The Original Cross Trainer’
I don’t know if she ever made that shirt but at least it’s funny. Would still be gutless in the cold and fading light of the age of reason but at least its funny.
But on to my challenge.
Hey artists out there who have enough track record that a gallery will actually take you seriously. Yes I know how it works in the art world, it has sweet fuck all to do with how good you are but how much street cred you have because you offended the ‘right’ people. Yes by that I mean offended the ones who won’t do anything to harm you and represent anyone who has actually accomplished something on this earth. So long as you have offended them while promoting the most base and counter civilized impulses you probably can get tons of government money from various art galleries.
So let’s see if you have any real balls.
Let’s see if you will make something like this:
Art work by Tundratabloids.
The Bacon Cheese Burka. Why not actually do an art piece offensive to the one religion which really does subjugate women to second class status? more accurately to non person status altogether actually.
Why not show us how brave and counterculture you are by making a sculpture of a twice life size women in full Bacon cover with a cheese veil demonstrating the utter horror that is life in the Islamic world.
Think of it as a cross between the Piss Christ and the Meat dress. You can’t go wrong! You may even be as famous as that Canadian asshole who does the blood X. I say asshole because he actually sprayed blood from a squeeze vial from his rectum to make an X on real works of art which require actual talent and skill, something anathema to the post modernists.
Artists show some real balls and in the process, actually do what artists are supposed to do.
Social commentary to achieve greater freedom for all humanity.
Special thanks to the artist who actually did do this artwork for me over at Tundra Tabloids
Glenn Beck Brian Jennings on ‘the ”fairness” doctrine’
As usual, when the government speaks of diversity it means uniformity and when it speaks of fairness it means fascism.
EGYPT: CONVERT’S RELIGIOUS RIGHTS CASE THREATENS ISLAMISTS
Muslims said to fear that freedom to legally change religion would wreak societal havoc. Compass Direct:
CAIRO, Egypt, May 12 (Compass Direct News) – In the dilapidated office here of three lawyers representing one of Egypt’s “most wanted” Christian converts, the mood was hopeful in spite of a barrage of death threats against them and their client. At a court hearing on May 2, a judge agreed to a request by the convert from Islam to join the two cases he has opened to change his ID card to reflect his new faith. The court set June 13 as the date to rule on Maher Ahmad El-Mo’otahssem Bellah El-Gohary’s case, and lawyer Nabil Ghobreyal said he was hopeful that progress thus far will lead to a favorable ruling. At the same time, El-Gohary’s lawyers termed potentially “catastrophic” for Egyptian human rights a report sent to the judge by the State Council, a consultative body of Egypt’s Administrative Court. Expressing outrage at El-Gohary’s “audacity” to request a change in the religious designation on his ID, the report claims the case is a threat to societal order and violates sharia (Islamic law). “This [report] is bombarding freedom of religion in Egypt,” said lawyer Said Faiz. “They are insisting that the path to Islam is a one-way street. The entire report is based on sharia.”