Philosophy Discussion Forums

Steve, you keep harping on about ONE post I submitted where I published some comments verbatim I wished to make that from an article by Sujit Dasa. I did so because I felt they were very neat summaries of points that would take me much longer to explicate in my own prose style. OK, my bad, I should have referenced this particular post of mine. By why do you continue banging on about it? I mean so what? The important point is that you provide no shred of a material objection - no reasonable deaters, no undercutters, not one atom of a credible rebuttal with respect to the key points that are put on the table for debate in that post. So please, with respect to the content of this post either respond with a reasonable counter-argument/s or shut up. Here is one of the points for you again in my own wording. After you re-read it, do us the favour of either responding with a solid objection or keeping your mouth shut.

You seem to be labouring under the delusion that there are many moderate Muslims living in the UK. I have already spelled out for you in the clearest of terms that in the discussion we are having about banning Muslim immigration into the West I am defining a Muslim as who is a bone fide believer and practitioner of the religion of Islam. I have also explained to you that given the primitive, barbaric, violent and downright evil content of Islam's sacred scripture in its holy texts like the Koran, the Sunnah and official legal articles of Sharia law, the term "moderate", peace-loving, benign Muslim is necessarily an OXYMORON. You, however, deny this , and remain a dupe of the the illusion that there is such a specimen as a moderate Muslim, and that if I that if I were to take your ignorant, Pollyanna advise and go about on a "meet and greet mission" to personally glad handle some local Muslims in my locality (Hertfordshire) I would , to my surprise find that they are actually very personable, civil, polite, decent, friendly, law-abiding,fundamentally peaceful and benign human beings just like good 'ol "Postman Pat".

I expect your understanding of Britain's moderate Muslims has been gleaned by intimate personal experiences like this...


Steve ( in a his local Chippy when his moderate Muslim neighbour Hadji walks in ) Good Morning, Hadji !

Hadji: Good Morning , Steve, how's things? How's the family!

Steve: All fine,thanks. Bit chilly what with all this snow about innit? Brrrrrrrrr !

Hadji: Yes, definitely feeling a bit of a cold snap, Steve - as the Bishop said to the actress ( H winks left eye).

Steve: Ha, yes, - very good; you ARE a card, Hadji ! Thought a nice piece hot cod and chips might be just the thing to warm me up.

Hadji: Same here old man, then it's off to "M and S" to collect the wife and hopefully home in time for"East Enders" and a nice cuppa char!

Steve: Terrible thing that bombing in Manchester on the tellie last night wannit?

Hadji shaking head slowly): Yes, terrible ,terrible thing, Steve - I don't know what this world's coming to sometimes, I must say (!)

(Mindless quotidian English banter continues in similar vein for 5 minutes, and Steve leaves chippy thinking what a jolly nice chap his Muslim pal Hadji is and how he can';t understand all the fuss about English Islamophobia he reads in the "Guardian").


You are quite correct to observe that Muslims living in the West today, in nations like, say, England or North America, are often (ostensibly) friendly, civil , polite and congenial in their personal dealings with White/European Christian ( or nominally Christian) non-believers. What you do NOT understand is that this display of peaceful civility and good will is in the majority of cases, merely a very cunning facade;- a coldly -calculated duplicitous charade. To explain... Muslims are permitted by the Islamic doctrine of "Taqiyya" to practice lying, deceit, disingenuity, deception and dissimulation in any circumstances where it is NOT in their best interests to be honest and forthright about their true beliefs. Such as the circumstance of being a minority group in the 91% White / racially Europid population of the United Kingdom. The doctrine of "Taqiyya" is grounded on many verses in: (1) the KORAN, ( eg: (16:106); (3:28);(9:3);(6:2); (40:28), (2:225) and (3:54) among others); (2) the Sunnah /Hadith and Sira (eg: Sahih Bukhari verses: (50:369); (52:269); (49:857); (84:645 and Sahih Muslim verse (32:6303) and (3) numerous articles of SHARIA LAW. I am sure you have the intelligence to locate these verses/articles for yourself on the internet and read them if you wish, I am not going to belabour their details here. (And) One does not , BTW need to be an experienced Islamic scholar to interpret their meanings - their meanings are are crystal clear and not vulnerable,m in my opinion, to any of the woolley machinations of postmodern hermaneutical distortion or obfuscation.

In addition to "Taqiyya" there are other forms of "permissible lying" and deception that are officially/legally sanctioned in Islam by the overwhelming manjority of its scholars and clerics, such as : KITMAN - lying by deliberate omission; TAWRIYA - intentionally creating a false impression; and MURUNA; - "blending in" by setting aside some practices of Islam or Sharia in order to advance the goals of the religion by fooling the enemy.

Taken collectively ,the Islamic doctrines of Taqiyya, Kitman, Tawriya and Muruna are interpreted to allow Muslims to lie whenever and wherever they feel they are "compelled" to do so in order to serve their best interests in line with striving to realise the greater purposes/goals of the Islamic religion, such as the ultimate defeat, annihilation or subjugation of the Western "infidel" ( or "Kafir") and the establishment of a barbaric, retrograde, global Islamic theocratic world order. For me Taqiyya and its associated doctrines represent the very worst kind of human treachery and hypocrisy. Needless to say, absolutely nothing like them exists in Christianity in the Old or New Testaments of the Bible.

Whenever you see a Muslim spokesperson on Western mainstream media condemning a terrorist atrocity perpetrated by ISIS, or declaring that Islam and Muslims respect the fundamental principles of Western liberal democracy, that Islam and Muslims endorse and support the Western Universal Human Rights discourse, that Islam is a religion of peace and 99% of Muslims are not violent extremists , my sincere advice to you is to remember that what you are hearing, my naive friend , is nothing more than an utter PACK OF LIES. Moreover, you would do well to be understand that EVERY person you meet who identifies as a genuine,bone fide Muslim is either an overt or latent violent extremist, precisely because ISLAM is incontrovertibly an innately EXTREME, VIOLENT and EVIL religion. Full Stop. If you do not believe this you are either ignorant of the content of Islam's sacred scripture and Sharia law, or you are simply a fool.

Regards,

Dachshund

Dachshund wrote: ↑December 13th, 2017, 9:46 pmYou are quite correct to observe that Muslims living in the West today, in nations like, say, England or North America, are often (ostensibly) friendly, civil , polite and congenial in their personal dealings with White/European Christian ( or nominally Christian) non-believers. What you do NOT understand is that this display of peaceful civility and good will is in the majority of cases, merely a very cunning facade;- a coldly -calculated duplicitous charade.

Really? Talk about a broad brush. Naive.

So none of them are simply pleasant people? The evidence is that Muslims cherry-pick their holy book as much as Christians do. Many Muslims are not Wahhabists and don't subsrcibe to the religion's extremes just as many Christians are not fundamentalists.

Belindi wrote:Has anyone noticed the uncanny similarity of the literary styles of Gustav Bjornstrand and Dachsund?

Steve3007 wrote:No, I can't say I have. But I don't know who Gustav Bjornstrand is. Dachshund, though, does have a record of block-quoting large tracts of other people's words without acknowledging having done so.

Dachshund wrote:Belindi?Steve,

I have no idea who Gustav Bjornstrand is and the post of mine above regarding racial culture was an original piece of work.

Dachshund wrote:Steve, you keep harping on about ONE post I submitted where I published some comments verbatim I wished to make that from an article by Sujit Dasa...why do you continue banging on about it?

I mentioned it once previously and again in the post quoted here in response to your explicit denial, shown in bold. I'm glad to hear that in future you will be making it clear when you are quoting someone else's words so I won't have to "bang on about it" again.

Dachshund wrote: I mean so what? The important point is that you provide no shred of a material objection - no reasonable deaters, no undercutters, not one atom of a credible rebuttal with respect to the key points that are put on the table for debate in that post.

I've provided many posts in reply to your previous comments. You've ignored most of them. I'll try again.

Dachshund wrote:So please, with respect to the content of this post either respond with a reasonable counter-argument/s or shut up.

My point is a simple one: If the 3 million Muslims living in the same country as me all want to murder me, why don't they do it? Why do they live like normal human beings like me? Your answer is that they secretly want to murder me but pretend not to want to do that. Obviously I could say the same of you. Perhaps you secretly want to murder me? Perhaps you should be stripped of your citizenship?

Dachshund wrote:You seem to be labouring under the delusion that there are many moderate Muslims living in the UK. I have already spelled out for you in the clearest of terms that in the discussion we are having about banning Muslim immigration into the West I am defining a Muslim as who is a bone fide believer and practitioner of the religion of Islam

Yes, you've already made it clear that your argument is a form of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. You define a Muslim as one who follows your understanding of the religion of Islam, not their own. And, according to your understanding, a Muslim cannot simply quietly go about their lives, because then they would not really be a Muslim, yes? And if they do appear to be quietly going about their lives, according to you, they're secretly plotting the overthrow of western civilisation. Again, if they're not secretly doing that then, according to you, they're not a true Muslim. Right?

Dachshund wrote: I have also explained to you that given the primitive, barbaric, violent and downright evil content of Islam's sacred scripture in its holy texts like the Koran, the Sunnah and official legal articles of Sharia law, the term "moderate", peace-loving, benign Muslim is necessarily an OXYMORON.

And yet here they all are. Normal law abiding people who claim to be Muslims. How to solve this riddle? Perhaps ask them why they're peaceful and law-abiding? I'll ask you again as I've asked you before: have you actually done that? Or is it, in your view, a pointless exercise because they'll just lie to you and hide their true intentions?

You mentioned in an eariler post that you have a streak of paranoia. I can see why you said that. The best cure for paranoia and xenophobia is communication. Try it.

Dachshund wrote:You, however, deny this , and remain a dupe of the the illusion that there is such a specimen as a moderate Muslim, and that if I that if I were to take your ignorant, Pollyanna advise and go about on a "meet and greet mission" to personally glad handle some local Muslims in my locality (Hertfordshire) I would , to my surprise find that they are actually very personable, civil, polite, decent, friendly, law-abiding,fundamentally peaceful and benign human beings just like good 'ol "Postman Pat".

I take if from this that you haven't actually done that?

Dachshund wrote:I expect your understanding of Britain's moderate Muslims has been gleaned by intimate personal experiences like this...

The lengthy imagined conversation that follows, along with your other posts, suggests that you're very fond of cultural stereotypes. Is that true?

OK. I'll leave it there for now and see if you respond to any of it.

Dachshund wrote: ↑December 13th, 2017, 9:46 pm Moreover, you would do well to be understand that EVERY person you meet who identifies as a genuine,bone fide Muslim is either an overt or latent violent extremist, precisely because ISLAM is incontrovertibly an innately EXTREME, VIOLENT and EVIL religion. Full Stop.

Full Stop? Surely not! Aren't you going to take your argument the obvious next step? Or are you too shy to say it?

Since we imprison or kill violent extremists, and since EVERY Muslim you meet is a violent extremist, we should imprison and exterminate EVERY Muslim.

Your diatribe suggests that you are the violent extremist. I think this is an example of existential psychology. At some level you know your own feelings about Muslims are not rational, so you react by re-configuring the world around you to make yourself fit in. You hate Muslims, but if Muslims must hate you that would make your own hatred 'normal'.

But the problem is within you. If every Muslim in the world disappeared tomorrow, you would just fixate on some other group.

P.S.

Dachshund,

You mentioned that you live in Hertfordshire. I had a quick google and found this article about a mosque in St Albans, Herts, UK, opening its doors to the public:

http://www.hertsad.co.uk/news/st-albans ... -1-3941061

The article is a couple of years old, but the open door policy might still be in place. Why not give it a try, since it's near you? The liklihood that they'll try to kill you immediately is probably quite small so you'll have an opportunity to confront them with the parts of their holy texts about which you're concerned.

You've stated how those holy texts endorse various things, like lying, in order to bring about the greater aim of killing the unbelievers and converting the host society to Islam at the point of a sword. Aren't you just a little bit curious to see how an actual Muslim (or at least someone who claims to be a Muslim and wears all the right headgear, and has an impressively bushy beard and everything) responds to these charges? Why not do a Louis Theroux routine and confront them?

The guy interviewed for the article says this:

"Only through getting to know one another on a personal level can people build bridges of true understanding and eliminate any confusion and mistrust that may appear."

Why not confront him and show him the part of his holy text which demonstrates that this is just a lie to lull us all into a false sense of security? See what he says?

Just a thought. A positive action that you might consider taking.

White superiority is winning in the USA as we can see by the rise to power of Trump. Historical reasons for white superiority are the European colonisation of West Africa, the slave trade, and Emancipation which is still taking place and still has a distance to go before descendants of slaves become emancipated.

Steve , what an uplifting news item. I hope that Dachshund will do it. Maybe Muslims and others are more integrated together in St Albans than here in the East Midlands.

Londoner wrote:Since we imprison or kill violent extremists, and since EVERY Muslim you meet is a violent extremist, we should imprison and exterminate EVERY Muslim.

The way he seems to work this is to say that if they're not a violent extremist then, according to his definition of the word "Muslim", by definition they're not a Muslim. i.e. No True Scotsman.

At some level you know your own feelings about Muslims are not rational, so you react by re-configuring the world around you to make yourself fit in. You hate Muslims, but if Muslims must hate you that would make your own hatred 'normal'.

But the problem is within you. If every Muslim in the world disappeared tomorrow, you would just fixate on some other group.

Hard to tell if this psychological evaluation is correct, but global history seems to suggest that this "find someone to hate and then rationalise the hatred" mentality is indeed extremely common.

Belindi wrote:Steve , what an uplifting news item. I hope that Dachshund will do it. Maybe Muslims and others are more integrated together in St Albans than here in the East Midlands.

That's funny. For some reason, I don't know why, I always had the impression that you lived in Scotland.

Anyway, interesting what you say about the East Midlands and the lack of integration there. Obviously Leicester traditionally has a very large Muslim population. Do you think the lack if integration stems from the fact that integration isn't deemed to be necessary?

I am Scottish, Steve, but have lived in the East Midlands for nearly twenty years and I like it here.

"Do you think the lack if integration stems from the fact that integration isn't deemed to be necessary?"

I was wondering about this. The town where I live now has always been commercial by tradition. Commerce was its historical raison d'etre. I believe that it still is . The uni is only a poly. Maybe St Albans is more of a traditional centre for religious learning .

Any chance of ignoring D and staying on topic? Talk of the US has now turned into comments about the UK??

This has turned into a pointless rant from one individual in order to derail the topic. I suggest this thread be split? Probably worth back tracking a couple of pages and cutting this away from the replies that were directed at the purpose of the OP?

I guess the drive of this thread lies in Steve's hands. Just a suggestion. Makes sense to keep the discussion relatable to the OP though, right?

Burning Ghost wrote:

"Talk of the US has now turned into comments about the UK?? "

Talk of white supremacy in the US is historically very relevant to past times British imperialism. Commerce is intrinsic to imperialism.

This process is maybe not as obvious in the US as it is in Caribbean islands where there were like one hundred times more African slaves working the sugar plantations. However the long- drawn- out process of emancipation in the US includes the slimy trail of white superiority.

Belindi:

Ah! ok. I think you've mentioned before that you're Scottish and that's probably why I thought I remembered you saying you lived in Scotland. I'm an expat too. I come from Suffolk but currently live in Kent, but with Yorkshire family roots. So I've always had the vague notion that the Eastern side of England is my home turf and anyone from west of, say, Oxford and north of, say, Durham (present company excepted) is strange and foreign with, no doubt, curious cultural customs.

I had a girlfriend years ago who came from Nuneaton. Completely different from Leicester with a completely different accent, but do seem to remember her mentioning some dodgy relatives who used to go to Leicester to play "Cowboys and Indians". I think that was some kind of attacking the locals thing.

Burning ghost wrote:Any chance of ignoring D and staying on topic? Talk of the US has now turned into comments about the UK??...

Nah, he's fun. Adds a bit of colour.

I don't mind keeping the conversation going on several strands at the same time. They're all pretty closely related.

Belindi wrote:Talk of white supremacy in the US is historically very relevant to past times British imperialism. Commerce is intrinsic to imperialism.

Yes, and the whole subject of the modern cultures, fears and tribalisms of various different countries is intimately tied to the histories of colonialism, commerce and exploration. Obviously the UK has seen influxes of numerous different peoples, resulting in a constantly changing culture, for literally thousands of years. The waves of people from places like the West Indies, and the Indian subcontinent as a legacy of colonialism is just one of the more recent examples. USA: different mixtures and problems but essentially the same kinds of reasons.

Australia: That's an interesting one. I don't know much about problems caused by modern cultural mixing there. Greta has mentioned previously the influx of people from China. I presume that's largely a matter of simple Geography. It would be interesting to explore more the problems that Australia faces.

In some ways, Australia seems like a two dimensional analogue of the Earth as a whole. Almost the entire population lives around the green and blue edges and there's a huge, red, hot interior.