Thought Crimes

Some say that Freedom of Expression means that one can say anything. That’s completely false.
Maybe it means one can say anything if it is clearly a work of fiction? Not really: a line has been drawn with evoking some types of crimes against minors. That line was drawn into legislation, worldwide.
(Even the USA, which violates the Conventions on the Rights of Children, applies said legislation, and countless websites have been closed and criminals prosecuted, just about that.)
Try to make death threats against the president of the USA. Rightly so, you will be prosecuted. Actually death threats will generally result in prosecution.

Respect The Faith Of Murderers, Says Pope Francis

Respect The Faith Of Murderers, Says Pope Francis

[Old “Blasphemous CH covers;  Left: 100 Lashes, if you are not dead from laughter; Right: Put a veil on Charlie Hebdo. Notice that it is the fanatics themselves who decide that their so-called “Prophet” talks that way, and is thereby represented! So they are the ones engaging in blasphemy!]

Threatening to kill children and other horrendous suggestions, are, by themselves, crimes. Why? Two reasons: first, they create a climate of terror. That, by itself, is not just an aggression, but an injury, and it can result in fighting, or even death (in diverse fashions).

Secondly, floating around horrible propositions is suggestive that to engage in them would be a good thing.

In physics, much progress was brought by considering “THOUGHT experiments”. Buridan may have been the first, when he explained the Heliocentric system around 1320 CE. Galileo repeated basically the same idea by pointing out that physics was left intact, deep in the dark recesses of a moving boat. Newton later illustrated that a projectile sent with great velocity parallel to the surface of the Earth would fall around (another dressing of Buridan’s idea).

So I want to introduce THOUGHT CRIMES.

They already exist, pointwise. In countries which suffered the most of Nazism, such as France and Germany, it is against the law to deny the facts of Nazism.

So now I see (on German TV) demonstrators in (some) “Muslim” countries carrying posters saying “Help our Kouachi Brothers”. The Kouachis were the two brothers who attacked Charlie Hebdo under order from the co-founder of Al Qaeda, Ayman Al Zawahiri (the USA has a 25 million dollar reward for him).

Al Zawahiri’s wife was below part of a house in Afghanistan demolished by an American bombing. She “refused to be excavated” because “men would see her face”. While the rescuers were arguing with her, her unhurt 4 year old daughter died from exposure in the very cold Afghan winter night. Zawahiri said that was good that the little girl died, because she won’t be an orphan.

You see, there is such a thing as absolute morality. It’s given by the ethology, the behavior, which enables the survival of the species. It comes straight from our Creator, tens of millions of years of evolution of our species. Contradicting this: immorality.

Human females had faces human males could see, for millions of years. By refusing this, and imposing that denial of reality to others, with lethal consequences, Muslim theoreticians of that fanatical persuasion make themselves lower than animals, in the sense that they do not allow, not just our survival, but even that of the species.

Bin Laden’s official biographer admitted that Zawahiri was the “real brains” behind Al Qaeda”. Zawahiri, an Egyptian, entered the “Muslim Brotherhood” at 14.
There we are. It ought to be a crime to expose young, 14 year old people to criminal thinking. Zawahiri is not stupid: he is a trained surgeon. But he was imprinted at such an early age into (violent) Islamist verses and commands. See the Hadith 41; 6985, one of many, explicitly about killing Jews.

One ought to criminalize criminal imprinting. And first of all that of youth.

One has the right to criticize an idea, a concept, a religion, the powers that be, a system of thought, an emotion, or a system of mood. But one does not have the right to attack people physically and to incite hate (so that others, in turn, will be inclined to attack the people who are hated, physically).

Have a look again at Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against the Jews and the Muslims would KILL them…”

The “last hour” is the Day of Judgment (as found already in the Bible). When …”Allah will admit those who believe and do righteous deeds to gardens beneath which rivers flow. They will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold and pearl, and their garments therein will be silk.” (Qur’an S22; v23)… others will meet a “painful punishment.”

Proposing that everybody good will be rewarded and the miscreants punished only after the Jews will be killed seems to me to be hate speech. From Allah’s Messenger, that is, Muhammad (supposing it was faithfully related by Sahih Al Muslim). It is to be feared that, left to be literally interpreted, this statement will bring many a Jihadist, to conclude it is a religious duty to kill the Jews.

Can the statement be mitigated? Sunni Islam has no professional priests (supposedly). Once I met a real blonde in New York City. A real blonde in several senses of the term. She told me she switched from fanatical Catholicism to fanatical Islam, not just because she fell in love with the local Imam, but because Islam had no priests (and she probably disliked their moral commands, and lack of balls, to put it as it was, between the lines; she is still at it, decades later, teaching Jihadism in the greater New York area).
The lack of professionalism in Islam teaching means that, if an Imam mitigates Hadith 41; 6985 (above), a terrorist can show up, and claim that the Imam is an apostate (he has “left Islam” and thus, ought to be killed).

Solution? Have agents of the Republic at the ready, supporting mitigating Islam teachers (official Imama, paid by the State; those already exist in Belgium).

Each time a fanatical Muslim shows up, loudly interpreting Muslim sacred texts such as Hadith 41;6985, literally, and making threats, have them arrested, and put in isolation in prison (so that they cannot engage in proselytism; Salafist proselytism connects with organized crime, and is extremely well financed by the oil propelled, feudal terrorist powers of the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia).

The notion of THOUGHT CRIME has proven useful against a resurgence of Nazism. Denying the facts of the Shoah is enough to send someone to prison in Franco-Germania.

As humanity depends ever more crucially upon truth regarding basic facts, criminal thought systems ought to be crushed. This is the most basic way in which Voltaire’s command to “crush infamy” has to be implemented.

Some are bound to say: ’Oh, you are just like the Jihadists. They kill because people don’t think right, and you want to jail people because they don’t think right.’

Not so: I am for all thinking, and feeling absolutely anything, as long as it does not result in severely adverse consequences to others, or the human species’, or intelligence’s prospects.

“In France, one can draw everything, including the prophet,” Justice Minister Christiane Taubira said, and she is right, and I approve.

We depend crucially of truth, and increasingly so, as we are becoming like gods, with ever increasing powers. But we don’t want to be like Darth Vader in Star Wars, and blow up planets, just because we can. Actually, Darth Vader is modelled after the god of the Bible and Qur’an, getting to order whatever atrocities, just because he can.
I advocated setting up a Ministry of Truth. Ministry of Outrageous Potentially Lethal Lies maybe a better concept. For example, when fossil fuel companies pay for disseminating lies about the gathering atrocity (I weight my word) they are contributing to, by some of their actions, they ought to be prosecuted.

Any human organization that is large enough (so I am deliberately excluding small public associations, including small and medium companies) has a fiduciary duty.

Example: the Pope just supported, in context, the attack against Charlie Hebdo, and against a Jewish supermarket. At this point, a week later, we are talking about two dozen people dead, and many grievously wounded. A plot against Belgian police and justice by Jihadists, related to the French attacks, has forced to protect police stations and courts with special forces and mobilize the army to help (for the first time).

The Pope said, that’s all right, “it’s normal, it’s human nature. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”

Even the Sidney Herald recognizes that: “The Pope Sides With Muslim Faithful in Charlie Hebdo Debate…” Faithful Muslim? It is more like fanatical Muslim. The Pope is an accomplice of murderous Jihadism, after the facts, in a horrendous context. That makes him the most famous fanatical propagandist at the head of the largest institution. He should be prosecuted, at least intellectually.
Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

35 Responses to “Thought Crimes”

  1. Chris Snuggs Says:

    ISLAM is just plain nasty. Wherever there is ISLAM, there is bigotry, repression, multiple infringements of basic commonsense and humanity, a lack of humour, of irony and of the human spirit in general. It should be banned for its TOTALLY NEGATIVE contribution to the progress and well-being of the human race. If Muslims can’t give up their obvious brainwashing then they should at least go to a country more in tune with their warped ideas. There is no shortage of choice, is there?

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      It should not be banned anymore than the Bible (it came from, Muhammad in law was a monk, taught him what he “saw”), or Hitler’s writing (I have them all!). I do own actually hard copies of the sacred books of Xtianity and Islam (full trad of suna and hadith only in French, does not exist in English).

      What’s needed is forceful reinterpretation. Teaching holocaust denial (thus Nazism) is, rightly, forbidden in some Euro countries (it ought to be made into a worldwide law). Similarly, teaching the Bible as if a fact, complete with calls to murder (OK, in theory impossible bcs of decisions around 400 CE), ought also to be unlawful…

      Since islam has been in command of the Middle East, that crucible of civilization has been crushed (Golden Age of Islam was just about Xtians, and Jews…)

    • hazxan Says:

      Replace ISLAM with the word CORPORATIONS: “Wherever there are CORPORATIONS, there is bigotry, repression, multiple infringements of basic commonsense and humanity, a lack of humour, of irony and of the human spirit in general.”

      And many, many people would instantly agree!

      However, I don’t really think the statement is true. That is business at its worse and what you say is true for fundamentalist islam only.

      I have known several muslims and they simply do not possess those traits you list. So it isn’t “wherever there is Islam”.

      Either a book can change peoples minds or it cant. If it really can, then logically everything should be carefully censored and vetted to ensure that bad ideas aren’t propogated. If it can’t then who cares? You can never accuse a book if inciting violence.

      Books don’t kill people, people kill people. Actually, I’m not even sure that ideologies actually kill people. To think so, implies that people themselves have no agency, which mirrors the snobbish attitude that the upper classes have to the unwashed masses.

      Holocaust denial shouldn’t be denied. Why not just present the facts from all sides and let the people decide for themselves? If you have faith in human nature, then the truth will win out.

      As for the totally negative contribution, Islamic civilisations were building glorious temples when the europeans could barely put one brick on another! In the early years, they had a flowering of science and arts. It did all go horribly wrong of course, but that’s the pattern of all civilisations, including our own.

      If you want to avoid brainwashing by the ruling elite…I have no idea where you can go on earth. The Gobi Desert or remotest Patagonia perhaps?

      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Lethal thought systems do kill people. Hitler himself said so, and mourned that Germany was not… Muslim.

        Islam contains obviously enough lethal statements, as it is, to qualify as a lethal thought system.

        The whole point is that you cannot say: Oh, god ordered me to kill all Jews, Hadith 41; 6985, and then: but let the people decide. I cannot say: oh, let’s kill the little children, but people can do what they want… Holocaust denial in public forums (fora) ought to be denied, because public voice ought to not be criminally insane.

        Faith in human nature does not work. Force works. This is what history shows.

  2. Aaron Greenbird Says:

    ahh yes, the pope…what’s his name again, innocent the III, or what’s his name, the pirate pope of the medici’s..??? gregory ? no matter really, no legitimacy . after every brick of that evil palace is torn down—artwork saved, gold returned to its rightful owners–then, i want to walk into that library, and see all what was taken from us……

  3. johsh Says:

    While I agree we need a thought-framework, which one’s society/culture is supposed to provide, I do not think a active enforcing institution, or even any kind of persecution, is a good idea. It will eventually become a device of plutocrats, and other unwanted actors.

    The way to do this is to educate the sheeple, increase the per-capita-wisdom. It will snowball into a mature culture/society, which automatically carries forth the wisdom.

    Let people make their own choice, freely, using their millions of years of evolutionarily grown device they have (brain), like the creator intended.

    I dont want nobody tell me how to live my existence, just like the creator intended.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      What I am thinking of is a debunking institution that would give advice about where the truth lays, weighted by significance and, especially, potential lethality.

      A sort of Senatus Consultum. “Advice of the Senate”. Until the Second Century BCE, the Senate was just supposed to stick to advice. The Plebian assembly then endowed the Senate with enforcement (under general plutocratic MOOD).

      The institution would not replace, but help Justice and the Political Processes. The explicit example I gave is the Pope Francis: his explicit and timely support for lethal Jihadism ought to be denounced for what it is. Frankly I don’t see much difference between his outburst and Dieudonne’. The latter is rightly prosecuted.

      My Truth Dpt would just point out that the Pope’s statement has no wiggle room outside of being Jihadism support. Free then for the French Justice ministry to start an examination of the Pope for incitation to terrorism… Philippe IV Le Bel did something similar with the Pope shortly after 1300 CE. Led to the breaking of the Templars. Now sounds all like old hat, but maybe we owe the Enlightenment and secular, laic states, from that… (Pope died in the process, of arrest…)
      PA

      • johsh Says:

        Its implementation and scope would be a challenge, but I guess we need to get started somewhere.

        Another approach, used with great efficiency by religions, is the indoctrination via schools, and childhood exposure. The madrasas are one example, its written in the book, you are supposed to take the Q book literally, as if its a word from god, there is no wiggle room, or reteaching.

        In US, you couldn’t even get to teach scientifically proven theories like evolution in some schools. Forget the truth dpt. 🙂 , for now(?).

  4. EugenR Says:

    Pattice, the idea of truth institution is wonderful idea. If i can be useful in such an institution, i ready to volunteer. All these conspiracy theories, urban legends have to be vanished. They legalise and explain the most violent acts. By the way, the most violent antisemitism in the last 200 years is not based on religious teachings but on “secular ” conspiracy theories.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes, all conspiracies theories, urban legends partake in the rise of unreason. It’s not just the rise of superstition such as unreconstructed Islam. Indeed.

      • hazxan Says:

        The thing is with conspiracy theories…much of what we now know to be true, started as a “conspiracy theory”. I was just reading about the UK and CIA involvement in the coup against Mossedegh in Iran, 1951. It is all out in the open now, in fact it is only the “right wing” conspiracy nuts who argue against it. But it was in the realms of conspiracy until well into the 1970’s

        The WMD’s and much of the interventions in the Middle East. Doubts about the official story appearing on conspiracy web sites. Now mostly accepted.

        At the moment, it’s taking about 5 years for conspiracy theory to become mainstream news. If you want to get 5 years ahead of mainstream in global politics, check the conspiracy web sites! Of course, I do mean to stick to “earthly” subjects, not lizard aliens, mind control rays and fake moon landings.

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          I have said history is all about conspiracies. Because to be effective, people have to breathe together.
          Last conspiracy unveiled by ME is what I call GEC. Grand Economic Conspiracy. I sent comments that way to the NYT, but don’t know if they censored them. They usually do.

  5. Olin Morchiba Says:

    Deep
    No one can force you to be civilized

    .

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Well it depends upon the definition of force one uses. There is actually only one definition of force, the one used in physics. It is independent of judgment about whether it’s nice or rough. Gentle persuasion with children is still force.

      Schooling is the exercise of force.

      • hazxan Says:

        Google “force definition” and you get:

        “coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence”

        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          The definitions I use are always straight from PHYSICS, because those are the most carefully studied and determined definitions. I do this a lot, if I can get away with it, and, or, I am NOT in poetic mode. POETRY is useful.

          To give a bad connotation to “force” is silly. But traditional. Humanity is ALL about force.

  6. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to RSN, Jan 18.]

    Christianism suggested Islamism. The professional Christian monk in law of the Prophet told him what he saw in the desert. Other Christian monks had influence.
    http://www.tellmeaboutislam.com/buhaira-the-monk.html

    Christ said he came with a sword. He became a prophet of Islam.
    https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/15/pope-francis-a-jihadist/

  7. Sladjana Josic Says:

    Sladjana Josic: In my opinion poverty is the main problem-lack of food, lack of education, lack of an organized society based on human values.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Patrice Ayme: That’s the PC thing to say: it feels good. But it does not explain Nazism, say. Germans were well fed, best read… OK, forget about human values… Sacred texts of Islam ask to kill unbelievers and Jews.

      Explicit quotes with links to official Muslim sites are on my site, essay after essay. This starts as early as the first Surah of the Qur’an, the Cow. Read S2, v191 (“slay unbelievers”). Another thing: the USA support Salafism, and refuse to have American companies pay tax in Europe. That creates the poverty you speak of. But then Obama accuses the Europeans to be racist…

  8. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to Cambridge University Blog Fifteeneightyfour, Jan 22, 2015, and censored so far!]

    The people killed were not just cartoonists. All of them were writers, with sometimes many published books, one of them was a very left wing, very important economist, member of the French Central Bank, and his advocated policies are starting to be adopted.

    All these people were dedicated leftist, or even communists, all of them anti-racist. Several “Muslims” worked at Charlie Hebdo. Several were killed, several survived.

    Satire has existed in France, for more than five centuries. Monarchs and Christian Church were first targets. They still are. Some of the cartoons were determined by Al Qaeda to be about Muhammad, but that was not mentioned in Charlie Hebdo. So the interpretation of blasphemy was entirely Al Qaeda’s.

    https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/je-suis-charlie/

  9. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to RSN, Jan 22.]

    Chomsky mixes everything up. Unfortunately, one has to recognize he is paid (very well) for that. His role? Fatally wounding serious critique of the plutocracy which oppresses us (while being part of it).

    Chomsky mixes progress and regress, innocence, and culpability, and so on. Not crying about what happened to the Nazis is not hypocrisy when one cries about the Shoah.

    Chomsky is a professional, career, MIT professor paid by CNN to confuse everybody, with made-up, outrageous statements to discredit all progressives, and the very idea of progress.

    The people killed were not just cartoonists. All of them were writers, one of them was very left wing, very important economist, member of the European Central Bank, and his advocated policies are starting to be adopted.

    All these people were dedicated leftists, or even communists, all of them anti-racist. They had been repeatedly threatened to be killed by Al Qaeda (which finally got them).

    Several “Muslims” worked at Charlie Hebdo. Several were killed, several survived.

    Satire has existed in France, for more than five centuries. Monarchs and Christian Church were first targets. They still are.

    Most of the “Muhammad” cartoons were not even nominally about Muhammad. It’s the fanatics of Al Qaeda, ironically enough, who decided they were about Muhammad… And several of the cartoons were actually PRO-Muhammad.

    https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/je-suis-charlie/

  10. Judaism’s Promised land | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] is complete madness, on the face of it. BHL wants us to become mad. Hamas has in its charter, Hadith 41;6985, which orders to kill all the Jews. Hamas rules Gaza, a city more than 2,000 years old… And Gaza is full of Semites. Bombed by […]

  11. Perspective: Islamophobia Is Not Racist | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] Look at Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against the Jews and the Muslims would KILL them…” […]

  12. David Cameron’s speech on “extremism” and segregation | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/thought-crime/ […]

  13. Patrice Ayme Says:

    [Sent to Scientia Salon, July 29, 2015.]

    Islamists are enemies of democracy, they want to be dictators, get all the milk, honey, virgins with “deep dark eyes”, that the Qur’an promised.

    “O YE WHO BELIEVE! Obey Allah, and obey the messenger and OBEY THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE IN POWER.” (Qur’an’s fascist principle, Shura 4; verse 59).

    In other words, obey authority as a matter of religion. This makes the Qur’an intrinsically hostile to democracy. Just as plutocracy is. Both are ideologies to justify the rule of a few.

    https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/tag/fascist-principle/

    @ Socrates Gadfly:
    Religion is clearly what binds people together again, etymology or not.

    The allusion that we criticize Islam because we are all pro-Israel, rest assured, not correct. I am neither a Jew, nor Israeli.

    You also claim that not all Muslims agree on what a Hadith is. However, the ones about killing all the Jews come from the greatest authorities, Al Bukhairi and Al Islam.

    I have studied Islam for decades, nota bene.

    Have a look again at Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against the Jews and the Muslims would KILL them…”

    The “last hour” is the Day of Judgment (as found already in the Bible). When …”Allah will admit those who believe and do righteous deeds to gardens beneath which rivers flow. They will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold and pearl, and their garments therein will be silk.” (Qur’an S22; v23)… others will meet a “painful punishment.”

    Proposing that everybody good will be rewarded and the miscreants punished only after the Jews will be killed seems to me to be hate speech. From Allah’s Messenger, that is, Muhammad (supposing it was faithfully related by Sahih Al Muslim). It is to be feared that, left to be literally interpreted, this statement will bring many a Jihadist, to conclude it is a religious duty to kill the Jews.

    Can the statement be mitigated? Sunni Islam has no professional priests (supposedly).

    This is not about racism. It’s not directed against people. It’s directed against an ideology which subjugates people. Murderous, self-destructive ideologies which subjugate people are legions in human history. Recently, Stalinism, Khmer Rouge, Nazism, come to mind. Even the Aztec religion is an example.

    When an ideology orders to kill some categories of people, as the Qur’an clearly does, it should be carefully examine to find out whether such lethal orders are justified. If not, maybe the ideology ought to be kept away from young people, at the very least. This is even worse when said ideology claims to be a religion, something which binds people, and deserve respect.

    Qur’an Sura 9, verse 5:

    “Then, when the sacred months have passed,
    slay the Pagans wherever you find them,
    and seize them, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.
    But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free.
    Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”

  14. Qur’an Has Everything To Do With it | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] as orders from God. (It gets even worse with the Hadith, which is much more explicit, even ordering to kill all Jews to have the final judgment: Hadith 41; 685 and the […]

  15. Islam: Basic Most Important Features | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] The Hadith goes further, and has the explicit order to kill all Jews so that God can proceed with the Last Judgment: https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/thought-crime/ […]

  16. picard578 Says:

    OK, few things:

    1) One should differentiate between morality and ethics. Morality is culture-specific, it is a set of norms widely accepted in a certain culture. There is Christian morals, Islamic morals etc. Morals change with time, with culture, with nation and even with individual. But ethical laws are eternal and unchanging. What is unethical now will always be unethical, even if it is accepted (sometime) as moral. For example, any form of murder is not ethical – be it abortion or beheading. Yet, in Muslim world, beheadings are perfectly moral.

    2) “The notion of THOUGHT CRIME has proven useful against a resurgence of Nazism.” But it has a darker side as well. Communists in Croatia are keeping darker facts of Communism hidden precisely through that mechanism. For example, concentration camp in Jasenovac. It was a concentration camp, complete with executions, deaths from sickness itd. However, many facts are ignored: based on official Ustashi records, a grand total of 18.600 people entered the camp until 1945, when it was taken over by Communists. Yet “official” lists of Ustashi casualties range from 60.000 (the lowest number accepted in official circles) to 1.700.000. That despite the fact that Jasenovac camp was opened in 1941, taken over by Communists in 1945, closed as a concentration camp in 1948 and stopped working alltogether in 1951. During the Ustashi management, there was a factory in the camp (utilizing prisoners for slave labor – Ustashi were criminal murderers but were not stupid); when Communists came in 1945, it was dismantled and moved to Serbia. Henceforth, Jasenovac was utilized exclusively as a death camp for opponents of the Communist regime. When forensics examined the area in 1961, they found 12 mass graves holding 481 victim – some of them showing remains of Ustashi uniforms. Seeing how it was estimated that there were 120-200 graves in total, number of victims for camp during its existence (both Ustashi and Communist) could be in 4.800 – 8.000 range. In 1998, a notebook was found which listed a total of 15.792 names of victims in Jasenovac, and I believe that is the correct number. But you will not find any of this in the official history precisely due to notion of thought crime – anyone who mentioned it was immediately branded Ustashi and shipped off to Goli Otok or other prison (situation is not much better today). So however it was useful in preventing a resurgence of Nazism, application of thought crime has also served to prevent open discussion of evils of Communism, Western capitalism and Islam alike.

    There is difference between hate and scepticism, but hate crime is often used to prevent any discussion at all. And without discussion there can be no cure. Problems have to be confronted, not ignored.

    3) “Faithful Muslim? It is more like fanatical Muslim.” Actually, those “fanatics” were entirely faithful to Islam. While the West has long accepted that ethics come before religion, that is not so in Muslim world. In Bosnia, any non-Muslims must take care that they are not found in Muslim areas after the sun sets, else there is a high probability that they will be found with slashed throat – or without the head – when morning comes.

    4) “He should be prosecuted, at least intellectually.” Agreed. Things like that made me abandon Christianity for Deism.

    What is needed now is not banning of anything – rather, it is teaching children ETHICS and CRITICAL THINKING, starting with Kindergarten, so that they can choose – themselves – what is right. Because, with Internet – and thousands if not millions of pre-school children using it – any notion of banning books is idiotical. And in any case, I oppose anything like “Index Librorum Prohibitorum” on principle. In fact, I believe that the entire educational system is bullshit – facts are avaliable everywhere. What we need now is schools which teach us not “what to think” but “how to think.

  17. Cracking Down On Literal Islam | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] Last Judgment will happen only after the last Jew has been killed.  (Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against […]

  18. Further Horror From Sick & Depraved Superstition | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] books of Islam join in ordering even more and more detailled horrors (a little known one is that all the Jews have to be killed, see Hadith 41… Before the Final Judgment can […]

  19. Orders To Kill Non Muslims Are Found Early In Qur’an | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] of this calling to cull all Jews? Hadith 41;685: …”Allah’s Messenger… : The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will FIGHT against […]

  20. Another Day, Another Islamist Attack: Outlaw The Preaching! | Patrice Ayme's Thoughts Says:

    […] https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/thought-crime/ […]

What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: