Why Oh Believers, So Little Faith?

I will expose the fundamental reason why some otherwise seemingly clever Muslims are so enraged: because they are clever enough to not believe in their own “faith”. Same story with the Pope and his angry eyes when saying that “provoking the faith” justified murder. It is a case of Bad Faith (Bad Faith as technically meant by Existentialism).

Provocative thinking drags those “faithful” fanatics out of their own minds, out of their own little ignorance, out of their little mental caves, it makes them less comfortable in their rage, thus it hurts.

A Pakistani lawyer in international lawyer garb, tie and suit said: ”One must pass an international law to prevent to hurt Muslims…” Muslims get hurt when a bearded man proposes that “All is forgiven”? Basically, “Muslims” get hurt when we talk? They believe so little in their own delirium, that the smallest idea hurts them so bad, that they absolutely have to kill somebody?

Mahomet Overtaken By Integrists. It’s Hard To Be Loved By Idiots

This is why, oh Believers, you are so mysteriously, and murderously, enraged. (Or, more exactly, it’s the proximal reason; the religious strings of the fanatical puppets and mobs, are pulled by their oil thirsty plutocratic masters in Arabia, themselves in the grip of their even richer masters.)

From Pakistan to Senegal (!), mobs are rising in fury against Charlie Hebdo for a cover with a bearded man holding a “Je Suis Charlie”. In Pakistan, hundreds of lawyers (!) did so. People died. It is curious that they see a drawing as an “insult” to their so-called “Prophet”. Nowhere it is said by Charlie Hebdo that the picture represented a prophet, or a rophet, or a pro-fête (pro-feast?). The French are very much profête…

Are those outraged fanatics really hurt, or playing one on TV? Or paid to play one on TV? I lived my childhood in Senegal, and French satirical magazines were for sale, and bought massively. How come so changed? In the meantime, gentle native Senegalese Sufi “Islam” (not really Islam), has been replaced by Salafist from Saudi Arabia. The feudal plutocrats from Arabia have spilled all over the world (with complicity of the USA).

Let’s say in passing that Obama said that American Muslims felt American first, that was the strength of the USA. It’s true that American patriotism is strong. When exposed to my theories on history, several American “friends” immediately stopped the relationship. American philosophy sites have censored me.

Obama even mentioned North African Muslims coming to France. What Obama does not seem to know is that there are 5 million of recent Muslim immigrants in France (8% of the population of metropolitan France). Scaled to the USA, that would be nearly 30 million people. But there are only two million Muslims in the USA. More exactly, 2.75 million. That’s .7%, that is, less than one percent of the population of the USA. Moreover, Muslims of the USA come from all over the world, not just a few countries: they don’t even meet. And finally one cannot compare a Muslim from Indonesia (say), and one from Hamas (say; with its kill-the-Jews Charter…)

But Obama is paid to say that the USA is on top, and all the others got it wrong. While heading the world’s top police state (as measured by percentage of incarceration and prosecution… except for an Islamist state or two).

In Paris a play telling the true story of a Dutch woman who married a Yemenite and ended up killed by stoning for disobedience, was stopped. It was scheduled for another 30 times. It was played only three days. Terror reigns: telling facts that really happened is now a potential death sentence.

There is infamy, and then there is ignominy.

Infamy: to beat, terrorize, and kill people because of a difference of opinion, a drawing. (Jesus, who was the first to order to kill unbelievers, see “Jesus Lethal Threats” is followed rigorously by Jihadists, and on a matter of principle, by the Pope.)

Ignominy: To keep on singing the praises of (literal) Islam after terrorist massacres and Islamists, supported by millions, killed people because they made a joke.

Not even a joke against someone living. No, a joke that could be interpreted as “slandering a Prophet” (the expression Ayatollah-in-chief Obama used at the UN, 2012). A prophet dead 13 centuries.

OK, the Prophet was vigorous and rigorous. He disposed of the treacherous on an industrial scale. An entire Jewish tribe “betrayed”, the Banu Qurayza. It was disposed of. As Wikipedia puts it:

“[A Jewish] tribe was charged with treason and besieged by the Muslims commanded by Muhammad. The Banu Qurayza were forced to surrender and the men were beheaded, while all the women and children were taken captive and enslaved.”    

So the great prophet personally exterminated an entire Jewish tribe. Great prophet, great exploits. Alleluia. Islam, Submission, Religion of (Eternal) Peace. Also most helpful to (slave) free market.

There are three levels of explanation for fanaticism:

1) The charitable explanation for fanatics is that all they know is their sacred texts, and that’s all they know. The Sacred Texts say to kill the enemy, and eat it (a Hummingbird god, in the case of the Aztecs). And that’s it. These texts are typically hyperviolent, as they exist to justify the existence of a hyperviolent reigning plutocracy. They also have to pay homage to goodness, as human beings need it, and would be suspicious if there was none to be have to justify the hyperviolence.

Vicious Islamists and their supporters always quote good passages (say in the Qur’an) and say that, from those few passages, the whole thing is good. Same for the Bible, Mein Kampf, or various other fundamental hate texts.

2) Thinking is hard. Brainwashing followed by mental reconstruction is even harder.

3) The fanatics have interest to hate their victims, as that allows them to steal them: this is what happened with the Nazis. The Nazis’ hatred of the Jews enabled them to steal them, and distribute the spoils to their supporters. The prescription in the Qur’an to “kill unbelievers” allowed the Arab Muslim army shortly after 632 CE to defeat both the Persian and Roman empires. In no small measure because the Jihadists used lethal methods so brutal that they took their adversary by surprises (the wounded were killed by Arab women on the battlefield, and soon all men of military age killed in Syria).

So now what about the present hatred of all too many followers of the Qur’an? Many of those who are pretty clever know full well that their superstition is not that believable: they just have to look around. So, to make it believable, those who have interest to push for it, decide to kill absolutely any of this looking around.

Another look at any of their ways is mortally dangerous for the collective hypnosis the “believers” foster. Unfortunately, European intellectuals, and especially French ones, have fed this for decades. The notion of “Islamophobia” has been identified to “racism”.

In 2005, the Council of Europe identified “Islamophobia” as “fear, or a vision tinged with prejudice of Islam, and Muslims, and related questions…” In other words individual persons are identified to a religion. That would be a bit like identifying Nazism and Germans. The Council of Europe is racist.

However, the Haut Conseil à l’intégration founded by Michel Rocard reminded us unanimously in 2003 that:

• “En République, la critique de la religion, comme de toutes les convictions, est libre

• Elle est constitutionnellement garantie et fait partie de la liberté d’opinion et d’expression.

• Elle ne saurait être assimilée au racisme et à la xénophobie.”

In other words, criticizing any religion is free, constitutionally guaranteed, is part of Freedom of Opinion and expression. And ought not to be assimilated to racism and xenophobia. In other words, exactly my position. It’s OK to have Islamophobia. It may even be safer. If Charlie Hebdo had been more Islamophobic, the terrorists would not have 12 at their headquarters.

(By the way, Le Mouvement des musulmans laïques de France (MMLF) agrees with me, pointing out that moderate Muslims get accused of « Islamophobia », and thus racism, especially in Africa. So the concept of “Islamophobia” feeds Salafism. This is why places such as Senegal are getting infected. That and Arabian money. The war starts with correct semantics!)

I have total superstition phobia, superstitiophobia, but that does not make me a racist. Respecting violent superstitions (such as ‘don’t draw bearded men’) would make me a proto-racist, though, because most of the definition of racism is unjustified hostility.

The essence of humanity is reason. Unreason is as inhuman as it gets. Against humanity, reason has never struggled in vain.

Those who believe in obviously idiotic legends of the vicious type know this very well, very deep down inside, and that is exactly why they have little faith in their own religious derangement. They are cornered, cornered by reason, the ultimate essence of man. That makes them even more vicious.

Bad Faith they have, and asking us to revere Bad Faith will serve only those who want to enslave us. To serve, you know, the guys in suits, the richest plotters in the world, the usual suspects… The very same ones who have interest to keep the Middle East in a subjugated mess.

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: Bad Faith, Believers, Faith, Islamophobia, Pope, Superstitiophobia, Unreason