If Magnanimity Does Not Work, Extermination Will

Against Christianity, all too long, magnanimity was extended. All too long, Christianism was viewed as a force for good. After the disaster of the First Crusade, Saint Bernard, a still all too revered monster, tried his best to launch the Second Crusade. He was opposed fiercely by the university (“Cathedra”) professor, philosopher (and pop star!) Abelard and his many students, followers and appreciative colleagues… In the Church (many were bishops, cardinals).

The party of Abelard lost, short term. But just as the defeat of France and Britain in May 1940 led to the extermination of the Nazis five years later, Abelard’s defeat led to the demolition of Christianism seven centuries later.

"Charb", Communist Editor In Chief Of Charlie Hebdo With Ms. Bougrab His Partner Of Muslim Culture

“Charb”, Communist Editor In Chief Of Charlie Hebdo With Ms. Bougrab His Partner Of Muslim Culture

[Fascists, especially in the Anglo-American anti-French, anti-intellectual propaganda sphere, have disingenuously claimed that Charlie Hebdo was anti-Muslim racist. Here is another proof to the contrary. Let alone the fact two assassinated at Charlie Hebdo were Muslims. Charlie Hebdo, the martyr French satirical magazine made around 100 covers poking fun at the Catholic Church, but only 5 poking fun at Islam…]

The first Crusade had launched massacres of Jews in Alsace and further east, as the crazed Christian fanatics progressed, the way Christianism at its most excited, progresses. Roasting native children when hungry was part of the First Crusade. So was the siege and massacre of Jerusalem, with equal opportunity to go to heavens extended to Muslims, Jews and Middle Eastern and Coptic Christians.

According to the Gesta Francorum (of the Acts of the Franks), speaking only of the Temple Mount area, “…[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles…” According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, “…in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins.” 10,000, including women and children, died there.

This sort of Christian behavior was discouraged later, thanks to no less than six centuries of religious wars wrecking Europe back and forth. The grand conclusion was that priests were required by the French Revolution to take an oath to the Republic. Those who did not were punished in various ways.

Fast forward to the Twentieth-First Century:

Murderous Child Killing Islamist Fanatic Condemned to Death:

Tsarnaev, the Boston Bomber, 21 year old, was convicted of all 30 charges against him, 17 of which carry the death penalty. Unsurprisingly, he was unanimously condemned to death, by the seven women, five men jury (death requires unanimity). A crime that could, and did, bring the assassination of a child, falls under specially tough laws. calling for execution

Some philosophers were quick to call this “vengeance”. However, can a law designed to discourage the assassination of children be considered a “vengeance”?

Some Europeans are bound to come, and whine. However they do not understand that the law, in the USA, is a very strong glue. With the accent on “strong”. Differently from, say, the French, all the ancestors of Americans cannot be claimed to be Gauls. (Wait…)

***

Cool It; Not Drawing Muslims Is Not About You, It’s All About Killing Muslims:

There are 100 variants of Islam. Most of them compatible with secularism, and the Republic. However, Salafism, especially Wahhabism, propped by huge plutocratic money and the USA’s somber machinations, has come to dominate.

They are the one with the drawing-is-murder insanity.

When Salafists say we should not draw prophets, human beings, animals and other alleged creations of “God”, what they truly say, in practice, is that they want an excuse for killing 200 million Shias (Shias have very beautiful paintings of prophets for sale in the Bazaar; I was there).

So they want a pretext to kill 200 million Shias, to start with. Meanwhile reigning over Europe and America through unabashed terror will do. Next they will ask us to wear a yellow star as they did to Jews and Christians in the Muslim Middle-Ages.

***

Editor Of Charlie Was Muslim Lover:

Charlie Hebdo, the martyr French satirical magazine made around 100 covers poking fun at the Catholic Church, but only 5 poking fun at Islam. It turns out that the editor in chief, Charb, lived with Ms. Bougrab, a French “Muslim” of renown. So much for Charb’s alleged racism against Muslims.

Ms. Bougrab just published a book “Maudites” (“The Damned and Cursed”) exposing the mistreatment of women under Islam. Including a whole panoply of little girls being married to big, bad, old, nasty dirty old Muslim men. “Is it blasphemy to say we should move away from the archaic practices of seventh century Arabia?,” she asked, referring to the PBUH Prophet Mohammed’s marriage to [SIX YEARS OLD] Aisha, adding that she has no intention to stop fighting for secularism and women’s rights.

OK, sorry for my seemingly virulent anti-Muhammedism, apparently implicitly implying that Muhammed, the revered prophet and friend of Archangel Gabriel, had sex with Aisha at age six. This is simply not true, and I beg forgiveness to any Muslim I may have so offended.

Muhammed, Peace Be Upon Him, He Needs It, patiently waited, what a great man, to have sex with Aisha, until she was nine (9). Educating children, especially little girls, is very important in Islam, as Islam fanatics often point out, indeed. From these sort of little details, we can realize what a great man Muhammed was. PBUH.

On paper, Christianism is nowhere as bad as Islamism. It does not have as many strident, gross, repetitive calls to kill “unbelievers”, and “heretics”. Islam to boot targets explicitly “apostates”, “Jews” and whatnot.

However, Christianism killed millions before getting definitively defanged when the French republic, having freed Rome, stripped the Pope of most of his worldly possessions (1801). For the Franks, in the Seventh Century, Islamists were simply the latest Christian sect. They got ready for domesticating them as they had done with the Pope. As it turned out being ready was not enough, three whole extermination of three successive Muslim invasions in 30 years were necessary.

At this point, Islamists are in the suburbs of Palmyra, one of the world’s most important archeological sites. Palmyra was not just Greco-Roman, it was also its own civilization, and was led by a queen at the apex of its splendor. Destroying humanity’s inheritance is a casus belli, as far as I am concerned.

So what do we want exterminated? Palmyra? Or the Islamists? This is not a choice we chose. This is the choice we are presented with.

Patrice Ayme’

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

19 Responses to “If Magnanimity Does Not Work, Extermination Will”

  1. pshakkottai Says:

    What a nice picture of civilization! Why can’t Muslims learn to get along ?
    Partha.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Ever since Islam has been invented in its initial, hard-core, literal sense, a book written under the order of a dictator (Uthman), by a committee of generals, it has proven most useful to individuals who went to use military force to grab power. That’s why, a few years after the Turkish army converted to Islam, they had over-run lost of Anatolia, and, in particular, the Kurds and greater Armenia (a very old, and vast state). It had put the Eastern Roman empire on the ropes, and the empire called the Franks to the rescue (hence the First Crusade).

      The military boost Islam fanaticism gives to militarism is in plain sight in Iraq and Syria right now.

      This said, many civilizations, although Muslim, did not feel like, or were not able to, live on a permanent war footing. So nicer, less stupid versions of Islam were invented: there are around 100.

      Persia, a very old civilization, has a particular neurotic relationship with the original Islam (or with the Arabs in general), the important variant known as Shia. For example it allows drawings.

      So, even if most Muslims learn to get along, military minded, piratically minded men, will always view hard core (Salafism, Wahhabism) as the best moral justification they can get…

  2. Laurent Coq Says:

    The OP forgets to mention that Charb was homosexual, as well as that his close friends were saying after his death that he was with Bougrab for her money, also that Charb’s family had never accepted Bougrab…
    Sorry for overshadowing your world 🙂
    And by the way I am not a racist, I am 100% expat since 1990, spent 5 years in x2 Muslims countries, lived three years with a French-Polish Jew, 2 years with a Mauritanian, 7 years with an Asian …

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Whether Charb was labelled this or that by whoever is besides the point, as Charb had obviously a loving relationship with a lady of “Muslim” descent and culture, in contradiction with the view of those who, in the Anglo-American culture have decided that satire and critique is racism. The latter then claimed he had got to be a racist full of hatred for Muslims.

      The truth is the exact opposite.

      It did not help that the Anglo-Americans extended lots of tolerance to Nazism in the 1930s: it made a bad problem worse. Ultimately France was right about Hitler: tolerance zero was the correct position.

      There are similar situations now with hard core Islamism, Putinism, and the Assad family: too much tolerance encourages those regimes.

      Once again I will not dig into the Charb-Bougrab relationship, and how people react to it. It’s pretty obvious that, as she is a celebrity and past minister of the right (Sarkozy, etc.), and Charb an official “Communist”, his family would find hard the temptation of hating her… I find their attitude pretty lamentable, this being said.

      Last point: lots of “homosexual” are also “heterosexual” (whatever the labels mean)… I did not know the “friends” claim Charb was after her money (she has “money” because she is a lawyer?)

      Seems you are going around. Yeah, some (ephemeral) commenters, and people I talked 5 minutes with, have called me racist, anti-Jew, anti-Arab, anti-German, anti-American, and dozens of other unflattering labels. I can talk of these things precisely because I am not racist. At all. I am a double expat of sorts too. Expat from Africa, ex-pat from Europe…

  3. Kevin Berger Says:

    Re Bougrab & Charb, it seems to be “complicated” indeed, as facebook would put it… BUT, that said, painting him/CH as “racist”, “isalmophobic”, “sexist”,.., as a good part of the US left now holds as a self-evident truth is just wrong it’s funny. It’s not even different cultural standards, really (btw, when I read that France is “culturally arrogant”, I cannot help to understand it as “France is arrogant, because it refuses to (fully) comply with Anglo norms”, be it coming from the usual suspects, or from “progressives”), it’s ideology showing.

    Not that Charlie Hebdo was a parangon of anything, in its worst, it was a decaying, obnoxious left-over from the holier-than-you, libérale-libertaire gauche soixante-huitarde, but, come on… what’s coming out of those “well-meaning”, judgemental progressives in regard to the weekly and what it embodies (embodied?) is just as loony in its own way than the output of their right-wingnuts frennemies.

    Incidentally, I’m kinda wondering what’s your view, from your rather hors-sol (not really meant negatively, that’s why you’re interesting IMHO) vintage point, about the current Franco-français brouhaha about the meaning and consequences of the “11 Janvier”? Meaning Emmanuel Todd, and part of the “anti-system” left as seen from various online ressources, not quite being in agreement, to put it mildly.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Agreed about the Charlie Hebdo point of view. I could not figure out what Todd was exactly talking about. Apparently he claims only the France d’en haut (so to speak) is pro-Charlie, a point of view that is obviously absurd.

      Main cause of “11 Janvier’ is bad treatement of the “have nots” in particular bad education for them from racist authorities (who saved money by refusing to educate the poor and immigrant). As an African, I always viewed the Sartre type holier than thou left as crypto-racist. Their reward may turn to be marine le Pen…

      OK, got to totally run, my family is getting angry with me, hahahaha…

  4. Kevin Berger Says:

    “in practice, is that they want an excuse for killing 200 million Shias”

    Well, Alawites in this case, but it still cracks me up – and it is in its own way more shocking than the gorefest of the snuff movies one can now finds all over the web :

    Unrelated, I hope that between the new commentators popping up with some “surprising” content and my own attempts at being noticed, there won’t be an eventual exodus of the old guard and its often interesting inputs.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes, hopefully. I hope Dominique recovers from his hospital stay(s). His comments like yours, and Eugen, Partha, John, etc. are much appreciated.

      There are not just Alawites in Syria, and the “Islamist State” gore is about Iraq, where there is a Shia majority… So the drawing interdiction gives an excuse to kill Christians, Zoroastrians, general “Unbelievers” (Hazaris) etc…

      Hopefully the over-excited Nazis have calmed down a bit (not all they said was completely insane all the time). Fortunately for us, and them, I know Nazism better than they do, hahahaha…

  5. Matt Howe Says:

    I think a any religious group should be mature enough to embrace their flaws or take some ribbing. That said, why is it necessary to make light of what people believe is sacred? That’s just disrespectful. But the violence enacted because of such a perceived offense is even worse, much worse.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      @ Matt: Of course it is necessary to make light of what people believe is sacred, especially when it is sacred for them to be injurious to others, and when they try to impose their bloody sacred on us. The worst offenders are always asking for “respect” exactly like the Godfather in the opening scenes of the “Godfather”. It’s a Mafia thing. Always is, always has been. Oh, you have to respect us, so you cannot ask any questions, or say anything about our abusive, even murderous ways.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      When Salafists say we should not draw prophets, human beings, animals and other alleged creations of “God”, what they truly say, in practice, is that they want an excuse for killing 200 million Shias. To start with. Meanwhile reigning over Europe and America through unabashed terror will do. Next they will ask us to wear a yellow star as they did to Jews and Christians in the Muslim Middle-Ages.

  6. Chris Snuggs Says:

    If Islam had only 100 followers it would be treated with the contempt it deserves like the Moonies.

  7. Chris Snuggs Says:

    Chris Snuggs on Matt Howe’s “any religious group should be mature enough to embrace their flaws ”

    Patrice – ISLAM HAS no flaws as it all emanates from the perfect Mohammed. These people are totally incapable of self-criticism. In the Indian sub-continent and elsewhere you can be whipped, beaten and/or stoned to death for criticising anything in the Koran. ISIS is the perfect embodiment of core ISLAM.

  8. Paul Pieter Kruijmer Says:

    Fuck les muzz!

  9. itsnobody Says:

    The author of this blog site is a real nasty hate-filled person…I thought you were against me criticizing atheists for being racist, Nazi, and White Nationalist as “hate speech” but your rants against Muslims encouraging people to kill Muslims is “free speech”….how nasty and hate-filled.

    I notice you don’t make it a big deal for other civilizations to practice pedophilia (as in age 18 is an adult)…like for instance in modern times in Japan the age of consent is 13…in the Norse European religion people married at age 12 and earlier…in the majority of civilizations people married under the age of 18…in some civilizations age 7-8 was an adult.

    According to modern biology the definition of a sexual adult is the start of puberty, which is age 10-11 for most females, and age 11-12 for most males.

    The Greeks and Romans, as well as the majority of civilizations around the world viewed women as lower, and treated women as inferior much worse than the Muslims…you never say anything bad about any other civilization viewing women as lower.

    You keep celebrating India as a “tolerant” society but in reality Indians treat women much worse than the Muslims do.

    Almost every civilization in the world viewed women as lower, and inferior.

    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I absolutely condemn pedophilia and never said anything else. India is a country which is a democracy, Muslimia does not exist, as country, so comparing “Muslims” and “India” is what philosophers call a category error.
      You did not just “criticize” atheist, you called them “subhumans”. I am happy to see you progressed. But you were is still long my son, and any passage violating French law will be deleted (French law is the clearest for hate speech, so far).

      There was NEVER any civilization where 7-8 years old was adult, except the one in your mind, apparently. I’m glad to meet such a conversant zero…

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: