To Preserve Civilization, Exterminate Fanaticism

Fanatic comes from the Roman “fanum”, the temple. Thus, a fanatic is one from the temple. I let fanatics comment on my site: it’s important to know how the minds of the deranged work. So one of those who thinks that they should fight for that weakling, god, claimed that: “… you said in your other articles you wanted to exterminate Muslims…”

I, of course, never said such a thing, be it only because this would be extremely against the law in many countries. This lie is an example of the old method of aggression known as “who wants to drown his dog accuses it of the rabies.”

I, of course, never said that I wanted to exterminate all Muslims, be it only because this would be extremely against the law in many countries. Saudi Arabia has decapitated people for much less than that. And Pakistan condemned individuals to death for just telling truths about the so-called “Prophet“. Moreover, I do not think such a thing: I had very close friends, and even teachers, who were Muslims, and so on. Somewhat observant Muslim friends watch over my little daughter (I don’t mind she can’t eat pork when they feed her…)

Thousands Of Mosques Are Among World’s Most Beautiful Art. Blue Mosque, Istanbul

Thousands Of Mosques Are Among World’s Most Beautiful Art. Blue Mosque, Istanbul

This is simpler than the distinction between “state” and “particle” which has confused physicists. Islam is a system of thought. (Or, rather: various versions of Islam are systems of thought.) “Muslims” are individuals, and millions of them believe in god roughly as much as I do, that is, not at all.

Wanting to exterminate literal interpretations of “Islam” is, not just allowed, but honorable: that is what “Christians” did to hard core “Christianism”.

When fanatics claim others profer rabidly hateful, unlawful statements, they are actually trying to motivate, and justify, their own rabid rage.


The problem with Islam is simple:

the Qur’an has around 83,000 words. However, in the following post, the author has isolated hundreds of verses of the Qur’an, for a total of around 10,000 words, calling for violent acts, many of them most gruesome:

I have quoted some of the verses in the Qur’an before, complete with all references, and the magazine “The Economist” then censored the posts, as it claimed they “violated guidelines“. That “The Economist” considers that the Qur’an ought to be censored, speaks volumes. Now “The Economist” pretends to have something to say on the subject: “First, Do No Harm” (it’s better than their old Politically Correct, insipid, anti-civilizational and despicable positions).

Similar calls to violence exists in the Bible, which inspired the Qur’an. However, around 400 CE, the so-called “Fathers of the Church” decided that such statements were allegorical, and metaphorical (still the question was debated for another 13 centuries, and many were burned alive, when the Church insisted that “scripture” had to be taken seriously!)

So what to do? Certainly shut down all religious establishments and preachers who do not present the material in the Qur’an as allegorical and metaphorical.

Tunisia took such measures today, closing scores of mosques where a literal interpretation of the Qur’an was made.

Another important point to be made is that it is the West itself, or more exactly its dark operators, all the way to the president of the USA in 1945, which encouraged violent, literal interpretations of the Qur’an, in the apparent hope of dividing Muslims, and manipulating them.

An example is that the CIA and its colleagues pushed, financed and armed Khomeini and his Shias to revolt against the Iranian Parliament in 1953. The bloody coup enabled to institute there Reza Pahlavi ‘s absolute and torturous monarchy. No wonder Khomeini viewed the USA as the “Great Satan”.

Hence, if the (supposedly secular) West stopped flattering Islam obsequiously (as Obama did) to just then bomb its strictest adherents (as Obama does), that would constitute a measure of progress.

Secularism is the religion of doing our best now, according to the science, technology, and understanding we have. It is millions of year old. It is the attitude which propelled human evolution. It is the natural religion of man.

Islamism, like Christianism and Judaism which inspired it, is a fascist religion. It is focused on the myth of a (quasi) omnipotent, jealous and furious god in the sky, who is a murdeorous maniac. According to the Bible, in the so-called “Ancient Testament”, god is furious against King David of Israel, because the latter refused to exterminate an entire people. God had told David to exterminate that People, and David refused. So what does “god” do? God tortures to death David’s son, for a week, just to punish King David.

With a god like that, who needs rabid dogs?

Of course that ideology, Abrahamism, justifies all and any fascist method: if the Great Leader orders you to kill your child, you must immediately obey, and all Muslims are supposed to celebrate Abraham’s abject and murderous superstition, every year.

Justifying fascism of the worst type is the bottom line of Abrahamism. Abrahamism is an embarrassingly primitive religion. Make no mistake: sometimes, it’s optimal. It’s thanks to that crazed ideology, perfect for making armies of fanatics, that, in a few years, Muhammad and his followers, were able to carve the world’s largest empire. Neither the Romans, nor the Persians, were ready for seeing the wounded being exterminated on the battlefield (Arab women did this, accompanying the initial 40,000 men Islamist army). Rome and Persia were caught by complete surprise by the ferocity of Arab Muslim warriors, and that allowed the latter to succeed.

So today’s ferocity is nothing new. When three massive Islamist invasions of Francia happened between 712 CE and 745 CE, the Franks reciprocated in kind: after the battle of Poitier (732 CE), they let all their slain enemies, thousands of Muslims, rot in the sun, refusing them burial.

Ferocity can only be defeated by a greater ferocity: just ask the Nazis. Earth is now a village, and it has no place for maniacal fascism. Ignoring this fact all too long, will only make the situation worse.

Two days ago, a solitary student walking on the beach with a sun umbrella, revealed his weapons, and proceeded to kill and wound 80 people in seven minutes. (Videos showed he had been trained by the Islamist State.) The next day, the Tunisian government closed down 80 mosques teaching literal Islam.

In the Eight Century, the Franks, who, by then, called themselves the “Europeans”, responding to the Islamist invasions, nationalized the Catholic church, and then forced all and any religious establishment to teach secular knowledge; thus the West rests on secular intervention by the government. And that does not mean to put ; nice to see Tunisia emulating that example.

Literal interpretations of Islam ought to be made unlawful. As the Christian ones already, de facto, are.

As simple as that.

Patrice Ayme’

Tags: , , , ,

77 Responses to “To Preserve Civilization, Exterminate Fanaticism”

  1. brodix Says:


    While I see the logic of your point, I suspect it safe to say that you personally lack the means to accomplish physically banishing too many fanatics.
    Wouldn’t a more effective battle to fight, when your sword is the proverbial pen, be to contest the logic of an absolute deity as an ideal, as all three monotheisms assume, rather than elemental?
    If a spiritual absolute could only be that essence of being running through all of life and not the particulars of any one culture, it would eventually seep into the general consciousness and those fanatics would be exposed as the civil arsonists they are.

    The apocalypse is supposed to happen for religious reasons around Israel. Yet if God isn’t some father figure, but the elemental spirit, than would it be more poetically appropriate to start in Greece for economic reasons?


    • brodix Says:

      Keeping in mind your ultimate interest is in deflating them, not attacking them. Armies have only spread the infestation.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I could ban fanatics from the site, as Massimo the pseudo does, with anyone he does not like on the moment, but that would prevent us from studying how their minds work.


      • brodix Says:

        Why is extremism a mystery? I would think it is, by definition, the least mysterious. Isn’t that the appeal to those who are confused and lost, that it presumes to clarify, by leaving no doubt? Like an open flame, it attracts the lost like moths.

        Massimo seems to be spinning his wheels.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Massimo has wheels? He seemed rather stranded to me.

          I did not say (I hope!) that extremism was a mystery. What’s often mysterious, but interesting, are the often arcane reasons to justify their extremism which extremists find. To demolish extremism, one needs to find the reasons. Young people have plenty of reasons to be very angry, to start with…


          • brodix Says:

            The biological energy pushing up, as the cultural, civil and economic forms push down.
            Our minds comprehend form and so there is a natural inclination to create ever more dense, structured and rigid forms, relies, physical, economic, cultural, then expect the social and biological energies to cooperatively fill them out and animate them. Eventually tension builds and the form is broken and shed, like an old skin or shell and the energy grows another.
            Energy goes past to future, as form goes future to past.
            Society just has to learn to incorporate this process, as biology does through mortality and the cycles won’t be so extreme.


      • brodix Says:

        You are probably thinking of the minds of the moths, those who consider themselves found.


  2. EugenR Says:

    Just a small correction, God was furious with Shaul the first king of Israel about not killing the animal flock of Amalecs. Shaul had no problem at all with annihilating the People of Amalec, who were kind of unsettled tribes living on the edge of the desert.Yes the all mighty omnipotent God can be extremely fussy in his cruelty.
    You wrote “Ferocity can only be defeated by a greater ferocity: just ask the Nazis.”. I do agree with this statement. This is why the CIA committed so many crimes in the early fifties, like overtoppling the democratically elected Muzadek, when their major problem was how to stop the murderer, fascist, Stalin
    No time now for more comments.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Stalin’s situation was different as the USA bent over backwards for him under FDR, before the CIA was created. BTW, Mossadegh is the spelling I generally use for the Iranian PM who was overthrown by the CIA arming and exciting the Shiah…

      As far as the Bible is concerned, I may have mixed up stories (this surprises me). Anyway I found this, in 12 Samuel 2; it does not modify the misbehavior of “god” the dog:

      So why did you ignore the Lord’s command? Why did you do what he says is wrong? You killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword of the Ammonites and took his wife to be your wife! 10 Now there will always be people in your family who will die by a sword, because you did not respect me; you took the wife of Uriah the Hittite for yourself!’

      11 “This is what the Lord says: ‘I am bringing trouble to you from your own family. While you watch, I will take your wives from you and give them to someone who is very close to you. He will have sexual relations with your wives, and everyone will know it. 12 You had sexual relations with Bathsheba in secret, but I will do this so all the people of Israel can see it.’”

      13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord.”

      Nathan answered, “The Lord has taken away your sin. You will not die. 14 But what you did caused the Lord’s enemies to lose all respect for him. For this reason the son who was born to you will die.”

      15 Then Nathan went home. And the Lord caused the son of David and Bathsheba, Uriah’s widow, to be very sick. 16 David prayed to God for the baby. David fasted and went into his house and stayed there, lying on the ground all night. 17 The elders of David’s family came to him and tried to pull him up from the ground, but he refused to get up or to eat food with them.

      18 On the seventh day the baby died. David’s servants were afraid to tell him that the baby was dead. They said, “Look, we tried to talk to David while the baby was alive, but he refused to listen to us. If we tell him the baby is dead, he may do something awful.”


  3. EugenR Says:

    Yes, David was a big sinner not only in the eyes of God but also according to modern perspective. What I find nice in this story, that in this particular issue of killing a man, and in such a treacherous way as David has done, while copulating his wife was sin then 3000 years ago exactly as it would be now. On the other hand David has committed crime of abusing his political power, which is widely spread among the Plutocracy of today too. So as then, so now.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      But the consequences are worse now. David personally knew many of the people he was vicious with. One could assume he had reason to be unhappy with them. Now what we have is god-like officials exerting cruelty just from indifference. We are critters to them.


  4. EugenR Says:

    As to the Abrahamic religions, and to religious faith of any kind, the main problem is, that they teach truth, that is self-evidently a lie, or at least there is no evidence to support it. It could be all right to have religious faith, when nothing else was around, when there were less than 1 billion people on the earth and had only local effect on the environment. It became damaging with the beginning of modern era, when the European politics became global. Then in 19 century it seemed that the religion is in retreat. Until the social problems caused by rapid urbanization, a modern phenomena, that squeezed masses into an alienated environment, brought to the world the modern religions, fascism and communism, and the catastrophic consequences of these new faiths were even more horrendous than the previous ones.

    The renewed Islam phenomena is a surprising regression in human thought. Yet if again you put it in the right context of overpopulated uneducated masses, in countries with dictators looking for political legitimacy in every hidden corner, it is not surprising that some kind of faith will pump up. And if, then when we are speaking of mostly illiterate population, why not the ancient belief system? The European supporters of ISIS you can meet every Sunday in London Hide park corner. Unfortunately this “Islam occupy the Hide park” movement is more persistent and present than the occupy Wall Street movement. If i could, i would send you a picture of one of their preachers i made few years ago.


  5. Kevin Berger Says:

    “than would it be more poetically appropriate to start in Greece for economic reasons?”

    Le moment de ressortir Jacques Sapir?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Not all what Sapir says is completely stupid, but he is symptomatic of the march of marine Le pen towards the presidency (even Marine is crafty, and does not ask to get out of the Euro outright). All these people are paid by the USA’s worst operators.

      Remark: who talks about the fact California went bankrupt a few years ago? Forgotten? Forgiven?


  6. Kevin Berger Says:

    Et puisque nous sommes entre nous, deux-trois trucs en vrac, concernant le dernier incident en date en France :

    – Les deux derniers apprentis terros étaient des tocards, entre celui qui se tire une balle dans la jambe et celui qui se croit dans un film américain avec des explosions colorées en chaine et des usines sans normes de sécurité industrielles. Sans la prof de danse abattue et sans le patron décapité, nous serions dans la comédie, pas le drame.
    Question, que va-t-il se passer lorsque le petit personnel sera juste un peu moins con, ou un peu plus chanceux? Type, une attaque de plage façon Sousse, mais cette fois en France ou en Italie?
    Voire, que se serait-il passé si un massacre dans une église de Villejuif avait bien eu lieu? Charlie-Hebdo a été je crois un changement massif de perception dans la population, malgré les récupérations “pro” et “anti”, mais surtout dans une certaine classe politico-médiatique.
    Tant que les bombes sont dans le métro ou le RER, on s’en fout, au fond, exactement comme l’injonction au “vivre-ensemble” est au final un “vivez entre-vous”; tout ce qui fait tâche, les frictions, depuis les “incivilités” jusqu’aux crimes de sang, terrorisme y compris, ça passe sous le tapis avec plus ou moins d’effort.
    MAIS, quand les gens importants sont ciblés, ou quand le truc est simplement trop énorme (Villejuif, pas tenté par un branquignol), hé bien, “here be dragons”…

    – Apparemment, il y a (aurait, en tous cas) une inquiétude sécuritaire chez nos Elites, à savoir, un potentiel d’attaques type Bombay, avec un groupe armé directement infiltré depuis la Libye. Et, à plus long terme, la possibilité d’une déstabilisation réelle et durable de l’Afrique du Nord, une sorte de guerre civile Algérienne des années 90, mais généralisée, qui serait alors un cauchemardesque à gérer pour la rive Européenne, ne serait-ce que pour des raisons de populations (risque interne + réfugiés).

    – Une idée, lu au hasard du ouèb, non fondée, mais intéressante à ruminer : le plan vigipirate est désastreux pour les forces armées et de police, ruineux et incapacitant, sans effets concrets avérés, voire expose des personnels (exemple amusant, le fils militaire d’un collègue, qui se fait insulter lors de patrouille protégeant une synagogue, et se fait insulter lors de patrouille protégeant une mosquée, par les mêmes personnes).
    S’il est poursuivi, en dehors de l’effet “cliquet” en politique, une cause inavouable possible serait non pas de “lutter contre le terrorisme”, mais bel et bien d’assurer une présence publique visible pour éviter un risque de “heurts communautaires”.
    Autre possibilité : le risque d’attaque Bombay (hommes armés visant la population au hasard) est pris plus au sérieux que ce qui est annoncé publiquement, et avoir des “pions tactiques” disponibles plus rapidement peut faire sens.
    Dans les deux cas, bonjour l’ambiance.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Vigipirate is, indeed, perfectly stupid. It exhausts the military. Just a matter of time before a terrorist comes up and shoots, and kills, three soldiers in six seconds (should be easy to do, with modest training). Then what?

      The main axes of attack ought to be:
      1) Against the Qur’an and the like. not make it honorable to believe in that, in its integrality, anymore (contrarily to the main axis of pseudo-intellectuals in the last 60 years…)
      2) Much harder, against plutocracy (which drives many young people nuts, worldwide)
      3) Create and impose civilized Islam. Islam de France in France, but then the same in Tunisia, etc.

      Algeria is a powder keg, so is Morocco, etc. The EU should have invested there, but anti-colonialist propaganda excusing local Plutos came in the way. So all the investment went towards Turkey…


      • Kevin Berger Says:

        Sinon, discussion intéressante :{%22tn%22%3A%22O%22}&pnref=story

        Là, ce sont plus les a priori de l’auteur qui se révèlent, AMHA et sans connaitre les tenants et aboutissants de l’affaire, le couteau à beurre d’Occam indiquerait davantage la piste du grand banditisme ou des barbus, la deuxième pouvant croiser la première à terme.
        S’il s’agit effectivement d’un acte malveillant, plutôt qu'”alimentaire”, les feux d’artifices du 14 Juillet pourraient s’avérer fort bruyants cette année (fin du ramadan le 17 je crois, défilé du GIGN et du RAID).


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Interesting. But large explosives thefts have happened before. With officially 5,000 Jihadists to track in France alone, it’s pretty obvious that military/security means are limited, too limited, without philosophical support. By the latter I mean starting to forcefully impose with 100% efficiency, “Islam de France”, something which ought to have been done by 1865…


  7. Kevin Berger Says:

    De toute façon, tout cela, c’est de l’écume (sauf pour les victimes, bien entendu), ce qui compte, c’est la vague.


    • gmax Says:

      Well the general terror causes paranoia which causes police and spying activities on all, the Big Brother state we enjoy now. So it’s a big brother wave, just look at W, his mad invasion of Iraq


  8. itsnobody Says:

    LOL, this article is a joke.

    This article is about me, but the question I posed was why you label me viewing atheists as subhuman beings as hate speech but your rants against Muslims as free speech?

    It’s because you DON’T SUPPORT FREE SPEECH, you support only speech that you personally agree with.

    It’s the same nasty attitude your and your atheist kind have.

    Your type and your kind always want to force and impose their way and their beliefs onto the world.

    I view atheists as subhuman beings and hope that they die, so what’s wrong with it?

    Come come view an atheist as subhuman!

    What’s wrong with it? It’s free speech.

    If everything you said about Muslims was said about atheists you would breakdown and cry and interpret it as “hate speech”.

    It’s free speech.

    The reason why you interpret your rants against Muslims as “free speech” but what I say against atheists as hate speech is because you’re a nasty person with a nasty attitude, you want to force only speech that you personally agree with onto society.

    Racist speech, holocaust hoax people, and others are protected by free speech…that’s not hate speech.

    For every other group you’re allowed to insult, ridicule, and criticize them except for atheists who get a special pass for everything, they’re protected and special.

    It’s the same type and same kind all around the world.

    I view atheists as subhuman beings, when atheists talk to me or insult me I don’t feel anything, it’s just like a dog, a cat, or some other domestic animal talking to me…so what’s wrong with it?

    If it was up to atheists we’d be the same as North Korea, an official atheist state with a 0% Muslim population that kills people for being religious, they had killed 80 people for possessing Bibles, which I KNOW atheists strongly agree with.

    Basically every atheist agrees with Communism-atheism and thinks it would be great to exterminate religious people.

    You keep cherry-picking incidences where Muslims have killed but ignore every other non-Muslim killing like it doesn’t matter…like for instance the European countries with the highest percentage of Muslims have the lowest murder rates in the entire world, lower than all 50 US states, and almost everything country’s murder rate in the WORLD…so where’s the violence?

    The US has a murder rate of 4.7 per 100,000
    The US state with the lowest murder rate 1.1 per 100,000
    Sweden (in 2012) had a murder rate of 0.7 per 100,000

    LOL, so where’s the violence?

    Those incidences must be happening super-rarely for the murder rate to be that low.

    The European countries with the highest murder rates Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia have the lowest percentage of Muslims in the world (0.1% or lower according to the 2010 Muslim Pew Report) and the purest European stock, ROFL!

    I had a friend from Estonia, his parents were murdered there when he was 5-years-old.

    I think all violence is bad, including both Muslim and non-Muslim violence.

    The world has a population of more than 7 billion, if there were only 70,000 homicides in the world the world murder rate would be around 1.0 per 100,000 (very low), but instead the world’s murder rate is 6.2 with more than 437,000 homicides every year.

    You’re just cherry-picking incidences that occur out of the entire world.

    I know how your type and your kind thinks and operates claiming to be merely anti-Islam as opposed to White Nationalistic or Nazi-ish.

    What we have to do to ruin everything for the atheist/Nazi/White Nationalist movement is – encourage them to gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population.

    Since they claim to be merely only anti-Islam as opposed White Nationalist or Nazi they should have no issue with a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population.

    I’d love to see myself proven wrong on this issue, all they have to do to prove me wrong is gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population and have no issue with it and then I’d be proven wrong, wrong wrong wrong!

    I’d love to be proven wrong!

    People have to realize that the atheist population directly causes White Nationalism and Nazism to rise!

    It’s the free market, free speech, free society!
    Support socialism, support a Whites-only type of society!

    Think Progressive!
    Think a Whites-only a type of society!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      You fail to understand I am NOT “ranting” against Muslim. Instead I criticize some parts of some books some people view as sacred. On the other hand, you view people who do not “believe” (whatever that means to you) in god, dog, whatever, as “subhuman”… The latter word being exact NAZI semantics.

      So you are truly engaging in hate speech against human beings just because of their beliefs (in this case not believing in your dog, god, whatever). I am just engaging in literary criticism. And analysis of systems of thoughts and mood (in your case, hatred against individuals).


      • itsnobody Says:

        You fail to realize that YOU ARE RANTING AGAINST MUSLIMS.

        You label it as criticism, so I label my speech against atheists as also criticism.

        You don’t support free speech, you want speech only that you personally agree with, lol.

        On my blog site full-fledged free speech is allowed and no one gets banned, this is because I support criticism and scrutiny, knowing my ways to be true.

        If something really is true it will stand up to any amount of criticism, so what issue do you fools (atheists) have with criticism? It’s because you know that you’re wrong and your ways are false?

        If you think that what I said is hate speech you should also interpret your rants against Muslims as hate speech.

        On the other hand if you think what you said against Muslims is free speech then you should interpret what I said against atheists as also free speech.

        The only way you can disagree with this reasoning is if you are biased and don’t support free speech, you support only free speech.

        You think it’s hateful to hate atheists in North Korea that kill and execute thousands of people for being Christian.

        North Korea executed 1,200 Christians in 2013, 2400 in 2014.

        Since the media is intent on protecting atheists they aren’t going to make atheists look bad and say anything bad about atheists.

        Atheists get a free pass for everything.


    • EugenR Says:

      Mr. Isnobady, thank you for sharing your thoughts with us. It is important for us people who base their understandings on reason, logical induction or deduction and observed evidence, to understand how actually think people of your kind. People of your kind base their perception of world through a filter of an imaginary ancient book, which they probably never read properly. I understand that your kind of people feel (this is the right world, you never think you just feel), that people who don’t have the same believe in “eternal truth” as you, should be treated like dogs and cats, because they are not better than dogs and cats. I wonder, since your kind of people tend to be so easily annoyed, by a joke or an insignificant cartoon, don’t you think that there can be some people out of your world, who can be annoyed by being called a dog, cat or pig?
      Thank you again remaining us, that the only reasoning you are capable of is calling names those, who are not enchanted by the poetic lines in your “holly book”.


      • itsnobody Says:

        That’s the problem with you people.

        You keep using straw man arguments.

        I explained on my blog site why I viewed atheists as subhuman beings –

        Why don’t you fools (atheists) interpret any other speech as hateful for?

        Like for instance Alex Linder the owner operator of the popular White Nationalist Nazi forum VNN is an atheist….so why don’t you fools go post there saying it’s so hateful for instead of interpreting me criticizing atheists for being racist and Nazi-ish as hateful?

        It’s the same nasty attitude you and your atheist kind have.

        Dumb and stupid as usual.

        Atheists always get a free pass for everything.

        You’re allowed to hate EVERY other group except for atheists.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Eugen does not hate you. He astutely noticed that you certainly engage in what you allege (erroneously) that other people engage in. Claiming that other people hate, who do not hate, is itself hate speech, and a vile aggression, as it justifies aggression.


          • itsnobody Says:

            I don’t really care what Eugen thinks, he’s subhuman.

            If you fools have anything constructive to say then say it.

            I don’t have any hatred towards anyone, I just view atheists as subhuman.

            That’s not hateful.

            Just like how you know when you look at a dog, a cat, or some other domestic animal and you know it’s less than a human, it’s the same thing when I look at Nazis and White Nationalists/atheists (it’s the same thing).

            As I explained on my blog site the reason why the atheist/agnostic/non-religious population directly causes White Nationalism and Nazism to rise is because:
            – There aren’t any mainstream Christian denominations that accept White Nationalism or Nazism
            – Atheists/agnostics/non-religious population doesn’t oppose White Nationalism and Nazism nearly as much as the religious people do

            So basically what the atheist/agnostic/non-religious population directly CAUSES is for there to be no opposition towards White Nationalism and Nazism.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            OK, you are banned from this site for calling nominally a most honorable commenter to this site “subhuman”.


    • pshakkottai Says:

      Murder for religion is different from all other murders. Murder for religion is barbaric in a special way. Civilization should not tolerate it.


      • itsnobody Says:

        How is it different if it’s a religious murder? It’s the same result.

        You’re basically saying if your friend or relative was killed in a non-religious homicide you wouldn’t really care and just say “it’s different”.

        The friends and victim’s family members of the elementary school shooting, Batman movie theater shooting, Virgin Tech Massacre, and other non-religious homicides don’t really care that the person did it for non-religious reasons do they?

        How does it matter?

        When you grow up in the US having your friends and friends of friends killed and stuff you know it doesn’t matter…

        Like a friend of mine was child raped and this person who reaped her killed her mother…she had to live without a mother since age 11…how does it matter to her that it’s a non-religious homicide?

        People have to realize what atheists are trying to do to society and that this racist White Nationalist Nazi stuff is directly caused by the atheist population.

        100% of all modern day atheist countries are extremely racist and nationalist and they don’t care if you are Muslim or non-Muslim.

        Like in atheist countries like Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand they really hate Indians and don’t care if you are non-Muslim or whatever.

        There is lots of racism in NZ against Indians and Asians, they don’t care if you are non-Muslim or whatever, they are atheist.

        You fools (atheists) can’t really stand up to me since I use hard facts and valid reasoning.

        I believe that I was chosen by God and there aren’t any savage atheists that can stop me with their subhuman intelligence and mind.

        You fools (atheists) can’t stop me, all I have to do is use my words of truth as a sharp sword to cripple you all.

        If you’re atheist and reading this – just give up, go home, ignore the whole situation and block everything out of your mind.


  9. gmax Says:

    I think you should BAN and BLOCK “ITSNOBODY”, who is just a hateful, crazed out Islamic terrorist. He also glue and paste repeatedly what he said before.

    OK, agreed, it is good to see how the individual mind of a Jihadist works. He insists that you want to “exterminate Muslims”, something completely the exact opposite to what you preach, because he is a hater, and he wants to hate ever more, to justify his angry mental retardation. So it is good to see, but his presence may indispose some serious, but timorous readers


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes, he is even worse than the local Nazis… He had the occasion to speak freely, and make his hateful lies and threats. Thus, show himself. I hope the NSA and the like have used the occasion to track such a potential terrorist.


      • gmax Says:

        Hopefully, the NSA ought to have his number by now. This is typical of dormant, but extremely dangerous Muslim fundamentalists. Not only they can explode all by themselves, but they encourage each other’s madness


      • itsnobody Says:

        I never threatened anyone…what’s wrong with viewing atheists as subhuman beings if racist speech, holocaust hoax people, Nazi speech, hatred against certain religions, etc…is interpreted as free speech and nothing bad.

        I view atheists as subhuman beings just like how you said you want Islam exterminated or whatever but you don’t interpret it as hateful.

        You think it’s hateful for me to criticize atheists for being Nazis and racists and White Nationalists but not hateful to actually be a Nazi or White Nationalist ROFL!

        Why don’t you fools (atheists) go post stuff on White Nationalist or Nazi web sites about how it’s hateful?

        Oh wait you don’t interpret that as hateful, you interpret me criticizing atheists for being racist and White Nationalistic as hateful…ROFL

        For every other group except for atheists hate speech is allowed.

        You’re allowed to hate on every ethnicity, religion, group, etc…except for atheists since they are protected by the atheist-controlled media.


    • itsnobody Says:

      Dumb and dense as usual…if you fools can’t tolerate free speech and keep interpreting me criticizing atheists as hateful why can’t you just say so?

      Just say that you don’t support free speech, you support only speech that you agree with and never interpret any speech as hateful except for speech against atheists, who are protected from everything.

      ROFL at the false accusations of me being Muslim.

      Why do you fools (atheists) accuse me of being Muslim? ROFL.

      It’s well known that Muslims really really hate Carlos Mencia and I’m the same person who made the very first YouTube video defending Carlos Mencia after he was accused of stealing that joke by Joe Rogan – , this was all the way back in 2007.

      So this basically proves the fools wrong, as usual they are wrong about everything.

      I insist that viewing atheists as subhuman beings should be interpreted as free speech just like this user’s rants against Muslims (if that’s part of free speech).


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        I am not “ranting against Muslims”, but criticizing ancient texts and their uncritical acceptance. I view “ranting” against as ill defined a group as “Muslims” a form of madness.
        On the other hand you “insist” that some categories of people are “subhuman”. To just use this (Nazi) notion is not just a mark of disrespect to the concept of humanity. It is a mark of a will to exterminate (historically it has been OK to do this to animals).
        As Eugen pointed out nobody ought to have to tolerate continuous insults and, I would add, being implicitly threatened for termination.
        Thus you are engaging in HATE SPEECH


        • itsnobody Says:

          You claim that you aren’t ranting against Muslims but you clearly are…you clearly express hatred against Muslims equivalent to or worse than calling someone subhuman.

          I never threatened anyone…when did I?

          Your definition of “hate speech” is very subjective as you don’t interpret any of your rants against Muslims as “hateful” or “hate speech” even though anyone unbiased would.

          I don’t think it’s bad to view people as subhuman for being racist, Nazi, White Nationalist, and hateful.

          You subjectively interpret it as it hateful but I don’t. I think it’s a good thing to fight off racism and Nazism and White Nationalism, that’s my subjective opinion.

          I view atheists as subhuman beings, lower than dogs, cats, and other domestic animals…so what’s wrong with it?

          You don’t have an issue with White Nationalists, Nazis, and racist speech and say “that’s protected by free speech so who cares”…so why do you have an issue with me viewing atheists as subhuman for?

          Why don’t you go rant about how it’s hateful to be racist, White Nationalist, Nazi, or hate certain groups for? It’s because you’re a nasty person with a nasty attitude who only wants speech that subjectively agree with to be allowed.

          That’s the real reason .

          Like I said I know your kind and your type and I know that you all hate non-Muslims as well, that’s why I’m encouraging you fools (atheists) to gain a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population.

          If I’m wrong you fools should have no issue with that suggestion!

          I’ve proven on my blog site that the atheist population directly causes White Nationalism and Nazism to thrive and rise like it has in 100% of all modern day atheist countries.

          – Tom Metzger founder of the Neo-Nazi group White Aryan Resistance is an atheist

          – Larry Darby former state director of the popular atheist group “American Atheists” is a holocaust denier

          – Alex Linder owner and operator of the popular White Nationalist Nazi forum WNN is an atheist

          People have to realize what the atheists are trying to do society before it’s too late.

          Sweden is so racist that they think that Eastern Europeans ARE AFRICAN.

          A Swede said to me “I’m not a racist, I have a friend from Croatia”…but he was really completely serious and not joking.

          They think that Eastern Europeans are tall, athletic, loud, violent, get into fights, are lazy, and basically the same as Africans.

          I don’t really know how you can really be that racist you know…to really think Eastern Europeans are actually African.

          Liberia, Siberia, Nigeria, Serbia, etc…it’s all the same in their mind.

          A female atheist said to me “I just…..don’t like Asians”.

          I’ve never really met you know one non-racist atheist before.


  10. itsnobody Says:

    The author of this blog site is simply a liar, I finally found the blog post where he/she claimed that to want to exterminate Muslims (and doesn’t interpret it as hateful):

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

    “So what do we want exterminated? Palmyra? Or the Islamists?

    Patrice Ayme’”

    I just don’t understand why you think it’s hateful for me to claim that atheists are subhuman beings for being Nazis and White Nationalists but interpret your rants against Muslims as hateful.

    The reason is simple, you’re biased…you subjectively interpret rants against atheists as hateful but nothing else as hateful.

    It’s just your subjective opinion that you want to force and impose onto society.

    You have to realize that EVERY SINGLE atheist is in on this White Nationalism Nazism thing together, that’s why they’re trying so hard to stop me from criticizing atheists for being racist – because they strongly agree with racism and Nazism and want it to thrive.

    What atheists want is a society where every other speech is allowed except for speech against atheists.

    With hate speech laws they can subjectively interpret only the speech they personally agree with as hateful, then say other speech isn’t hateful, it’s free speech.

    It’s the free market, free speech, free society!
    Support socialism, support a Whites-only type society!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      I am not lying. You extracted the quote from the context of the essay at that point, the destruction of Palmyra. You also equate “Muslims” and the Islamists attacking Palmyra. Finally the said Islamists have already destroyed two precious, 13 centuries old mosques in Palmyra already, something I consider a crime. Not destroying those Islamists is identical to destroying Palmyra. The West has decided not to intervene.


      • itsnobody Says:

        So you justify saying that you want to “kill all Muslims” and “exterminate Muslims” not interpreting it as hateful by saying “Not destroying those Islamists is identical to destroying Palmyra”.

        But if someone were to say something like “kill atheists” justifying it with the fact that North Korea is an atheist country that kills Christians you would interpret it as “hateful”.

        You threatened people and encouraged violence and don’t interpret it as hateful….so why do you interpret me saying that I view atheists as “subhuman” as hateful?

        I never threatened anyone or encouraged violence…I merely said that I view atheists as subhuman for being racist and White Nationalist.

        You said that cartoons that harshly insult Muslims, and your other rants against Muslims isn’t subjectively interpreted as “hateful” in your mind…so how you determine what’s hateful and what’s not? Just your delusional subjective opinion.

        Full-fledged free speech is allowed on my blog site, I don’t have to pre-approve comments or whatever this is because I know that I’m right and can handle any type of speech against me.

        If a statement really is true then it will stand up to any amount of criticism, so what’s wrong? Are you afraid?

        ISIS is weak in comparison to North Korea.

        North Korea executed 1,200 Christians in 2013, 2,400 in 2014.

        – World and Its Peoples: Eastern and Southern Asia. Marshall Cavendish. Retrieved 2011-03-05. North Korea is officially an atheist state in which almost the entire population is nonreligious.
        – The State of Religion Atlas. Simon & Schuster. Retrieved 2011-03-05. Atheism continues to be the official position of the governments of China, North Korea and Cuba.
        – Elizabeth Raum. North Korea. Series: Countries Around the World. Heinemann, 2012. ISBN 1432961330. p. 28: “North Korea is an atheist state. This means that people do not pray in public or attend places of worship. Buddhist temples exist from earlier times. They are now preserved as historic buildings, but they are not used for worship. A few Christian churches exist, but few people attend services. North Koreans do not celebrate religious holidays.”
        – Chryssides, Geaves. 2007. p. 110
        – Alton, 2013. p. 79. As of 2005 the agency “Religious Intelligence UK” estimated 3,846,000 believers of Korean shamanism, 3,245,000 Chondoists, 1,082,888 Buddhists, 406,000 Christians, and the rest non-believers.
        – Association of Religion Data Archives: North Korea: Religious Adherents, 2010. Data from the World Christian Database.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          I never said I wanted to kill all Muslims. Nor to exterminate them. You will excuse yourself for telling lies so grievous, they allege illegal activities on my part, or you will be banned again. Effective immediately.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Criticizing an ideology such as Islam is not insulting “Muslims”, except in those minds who are not pixelated enough to be considered intelligent.
          You are the one who is equating “all Muslims” with the lethal fanatical Islamists who took over Palmyra (and already conducted public executions there and destroyed several world heritage mosques, all of which I condemn).


          • itsnobody Says:

            So you’re basically just arguing a subjective opinion.

            You directly implied that you wanted to exterminate Muslims, you don’t interpret it as hateful justify it people who took over or whatever.

            There are all types of non-Muslims who kill, execute, and take over regions all around the world.

            According to the FBI Isis and Al-Queda are relatively weak organizations.

            In my opinion criticizing White Nationalists, Nazis, and Communist atheists isn’t hateful…I said on my blog site I would consider atheists to be human if they came out to oppose racism and White Nationalism like how they voice up their position on things like gay rights and abortion rights.

            You have to realize that the entire atheist community is in on this Nazi White Nationalist stuff.

            You’re saying that you want to force your subjective opinion onto the world, only the speech you personally disagree with is hateful and everything else is “free speech”.

            You’re the one who has the mentality of terrorists, believing that it’s ok to force and impose your way and your beliefs onto the entire world.

            Many Muslim blog sites don’t allow criticism interpreting it as “hateful”, just like how you don’t allow criticism, so you’re the one who’s just like Muslims.

            On my blog site full-fledged free speech is allowed, I can handle anything, knowing that if a statement really is true it will stand up to any amount of criticism.

            North Korea already has a 0% Muslim population and is an official atheist state.

            Notice that atheists never say anything bad about North Korea since they agree with killing people for possessing Bibles.


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            I do not want to exterminate Muslims, implicitly or not. Gross distortion, hate speech. The next time you do that, I will put your comment in the trash.


  11. itsnobody Says:

    So basically to summarize the nasty author of this blog site’s argument:

    – I subjectively interpret my rants against Muslims as “free speech” or “criticism” and subjectively interpret itsnobody’s rants against atheists as “hateful”

    It’s just a subjective opinion.

    You can subjectively interpret any type of speech as hateful or not hateful if you wanted to.

    I subjectively interpret what I said as a criticism and part of free speech, I don’t think it’s hateful.

    I view atheists as subhuman beings, nasty people, the most disgusting form of life, always there forcing White Nationalism and Nazism to rise.

    If the atheist community really disagreed with White Nationalism and Nazism then we would predict that they would come out to oppose White Nationalism and Nazism.

    Instead the atheist community opposes me much more for criticizing atheists than they do racism, Nazism, and White Nationalism.

    What do you fools (atheists) think would happen if you opposed other racist/Nazi/White Nationalist atheists as much as you opposed me?

    The atheist community REFUSES to come out to oppose White Nationalism and Nazism…they oppose me much more because they CARE about making atheists look good and protecting atheists.

    With hate speech laws they can subjectively interpret only the speech they personally disagree with as hateful censoring it out and only interpret the speech they personally agree with as “free speech”.

    With free speech you can criticize people for being racist and hateful.

    It’s much better if you can’t criticize.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Criticizing some trashy books full of hatred has nothing to do with “ranting against Muslims”. This has been explained to you many times, and it has to keep on being said as not answering it would be to condone it. You practice here a basic technique of Islamist terrorists.
      You don’t, and apparently can’t, progress mentally. I guess dog/god is thinking for you, and you have nothing left.
      This takes too much of my time.
      Another reason to ban you.


      • itsnobody Says:

        The one who has the mentality of Islamic terrorists is you not me.

        You encourage violence and hatred against Muslims and want to exterminate Muslims.

        You interpret only the speech you disagree with as “hateful” and nothing else hateful.

        I never encouraged violence or threatened anyone.

        I support free speech and allow people to harshly insult or criticize me.

        So you’re the one who has the mentality of terrorists since your mentality and attitude is to force and impose your way and your beliefs onto the world.

        I think that criticizing people for supporting White Nationalism and Nazism isn’t hateful, that’s my opinion.

        You believe that criticizing and insulting Muslims isn’t hateful, that’s your opinion.

        So why do you want to force your opinion over others just like Islamic terrorists do as opposed to allowing free speech?

        I don’t have to subjectively interpret criticism as hateful, free speech is allowed on my blog site.

        My blog site already got nearly 500,000 views and my YouTube videos got more than 1 million views.

        I had this video on YouTube called “Atheists/Racists are trying to take over” explaining what’s happening to society and after the video got popular some atheists cried and got it removed for hate speech. What a bunch of losers.

        The fact that you said that you wouldn’t ban Nazis and interpret it as “hateful” shows you your hateful mentality and attitude.


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          I already told you that presenting my views as hating and wanting to exterminate them Muslims is itself not just an enormous distortion, but hate speech, and will not be tolerated.


    • EugenR Says:

      Isnobody thank you, thank you again for exposing yourself to the public, to show to all of us, who you and others like you are. I will repeat ; …..It is important to us people who base their understandings on reason, logic and observed evidence, to understand how actually think people of your kind….. And i would add, that i don’t expect from you to understand what these words, reason, logic, and observed evidence mean. It is obvious you are not familiar with such words, Your vocabulary is focused rather on words, like; “…atheists as subhuman beings, when atheists talk to me ……. it’s just like a dog, a cat, or some other domestic animal talking…. then you can use the word like fools, i wish you to be murdered etc.
      I want sincerely to ask you, you really believe, these words do have any meaning to a reader, or they are just expression of your anger and hate, against those, who do understand the words reason, logic, evidence etc. You wrote, i hate you. This claim of yours is very odd to me. How can i hate someone whom i never met? I can disagree with you, condescending your ignorance, feel pity for you wasting your life in trying to provoke hate and animosity to those and in those, who are obviously better than you in human relations, cleverer than you in every day life, and know much more than you about the realities of the world you live in.
      Let me give you a small advice. I see you have lots of energy wasted on useless hate. (Useless, unless your aim is to provoke a global conflict between you and your kind of people and the others, whom you hate for reasons mentioned above. As to my point of view, such a war, if emerged, due to the general ignorance of people like you, can’t do any more damage to our civilization, than what you have already done, which in global point of view is very little. My advice is, aim your wasted energy rather to some good reading, which is beyond the realm of Koran, Sharia law etc., that you probably tried to read, but never understood, since cleverer people than you tried it and failed.
      And the last, Nazis, as to my understanding have exactly the same argumentation as you, cased by same low level of understanding what all this is about. The only difference between you and the Nazis is that they don’t turn their curses and violence towards Atheists as you do, but towards Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Blacks etc.
      Then at the end of the day, Atheists, Jews, Muslims, Blacks of the kind the Nazis and YOU try to curse doesn’t exist in reality, except in your poor imagination. So you can try to annoy them with all you have in your brains, (between us not too much) and they will not feel it even as a scratch.

      If you behave yourself, next time i will teach you about what faith, belief, God (be it called Allah or Yahve) means, but only if you learn to behave like a decent human being.


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        Hitler had actually an alliance with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who sent him a few thousands fighters (an appreciated gift, because the Nazis, starting with the Battle of France, but especially in Crete and the USSR after a few months, started to lose so much of their most capable and motivated personnel… that Nazi armies were shadows of their former selves.)
        Hitler was very complimentary about Islam, and said it was a good religion, whereas he attributed the despondent (!) state of the German (!) population to Christianism.

        Going in a rage in the defense of god, as if god were a beaten dog, is a self-contradiction. If god is only a dog, why does it deserve to lead?


      • itsnobody Says:

        [Troll comment by deranged character crazy with god and indulging in hate speech deleted by Admin]


  12. Patrice Ayme Says:

    “Itsnobody” is banned from this site for, among other things definable as hate crimes, calling nominally a most honorable, and long standing, commenter to this site, Eugen, “subhuman”.


    • EugenR Says:

      Pity i just answered to him above.


      • gmax Says:

        No, you did well. We have to know evil, and answer it, but can’t spend our lives doing so


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        No pity, excellent, just as GMax said. Basically:

        We have to know evil, so we can fend it off.

        Now he is just forcing us to focus on mentally retarded arguments, and putting us in a bad mood. I never banned anyone before (not even obsessive Nazis! Not even blatant rabid Islamists). But now “Itsnobody” is occupying the bandwidth, and has nothing new to say: he is god, we are subhumans, etc. So I would believe you agree with me…


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        As he is on the automatic approval system, he will show up at least one more. Calling other human beings “subhuman” is clearly the genocidal line.


  13. gmax Says:

    It’s good to know there are lunatics out there, and how they *think*. However, we now know how “Itsnobody” *thinks*. He thinks he is sent by God, and he misquote you deliberately, insisting you insult all Muslims, whereas, obviously your goal is to help all Muslims. So we have to suffer his insults and threats. He says we are “subhuman”, and that’s an implicit threat, as “subhumans” do not have HUMAN RIGHTS.

    BTW, that fits Islam perfectly, because in standard Islam, NON-MUSLIMS do NOT have full human rights (they cannot marry who they want, they had to wear a yellow star, or something, they cannot bear witness the same, they had to pay special taxes, etc.)


    • itsnobody Says:

      I don’t support Islam or know what you’re talking about.
      I disagree with racism and hatred.

      Like I said it’s well-known that Muslims really really really hate Carlos Mencia, so why do you disbelieve me?

      Like I said if I’m wrong and you fools (atheists) are merely anti-Islam as opposed to racist or White Nationalistic you should have no issue with my suggestion of gaining a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population.

      So why don’t you fools prove me wrong?


      • Patrice Ayme Says:

        itsnobody: stop insulting the commenters on this site by calling them “fools”. I don’t think GMax knows who Carlos Mencia is. If you keep on insulting “atheists”, whom you apparently confuse with agnostics, you will be banned again, and your comments will not appear at all, again. Besides, your fourth paragraph above makes no sense (how do you “gain a 0%”?).
        A reason for not proving you wrong is that your statements often make no sense whatsoever, to start with.


        • itsnobody Says:

          This blog site is lame.

          You don’t interpret Nazi speech or racist speech or insulting Muslims as “hate speech” or insulting, you only interpret what I said as insulting.

          In fact in your other article you celebrated “free speech” saying that cartoons that insult and ridicule Muslims is “free speech” not “hate speech”….so what’s your problem?

          If I were to make a cartoon ridiculing atheists you would just breakdown and cry.

          You had also repeatedly thrown personal attacks at me in desperation since you couldn’t refute any statements that I made.

          You insulted me in desperation since you couldn’t refute any statement that I made you just said “You don’t, and apparently can’t, progress mentally”.

          What don’t you understand about the statement “gaining a 0% Muslim population and a high non-white non-Muslim population”?

          So basically you support hate speech against groups that you personally disagree with.

          You don’t support free speech, I support free speech, I don’t have to pre-approve comments or breakdown and cry when criticized.

          You threatened people and encouraged violence and don’t think it’s hateful but think that me viewing atheists as “subhuman” is hateful…ROFL

          That means passing a law banning Muslims but allowing non-white non-Muslim immigrants.

          If I’m wrong and you all are right you should have no issue with that.


  14. itsnobody Says:

    The author of this blog site is an angry nasty hate-filled person who only subjectively interprets speech that they personally disagree with as hateful and nothing else hateful.

    You defended the cartoons ridiculing and insulting Muslims as “free speech” in your other article so what’s wrong with me viewing atheists as subhuman? I don’t think that it’s hateful to view people as subhuman for being racist, Nazis, and White Nationalists, so what?

    I asked you why you don’t interpret the cartoons and your speech against Muslims as “hate speech” but interpret what I said as “hate speech” and you still can’t give a clear answer.

    I pointed out that Tom Metzger the founder of the Neo-Nazi group White Aryan Resistance is an atheist, Alex Linder the owner and operator of the popular White Nationalist forum VNN is an atheist, and Larry Darby the former state director of the popular atheist group “American Atheists” is a holocaust denier…so how is that hate speech? It’s just criticism.

    Your statements on the other hand isn’t mere criticism, it’s JUST insults and personal attacks, but you don’t subjectively interpret as hateful.

    The author of this blog site is a clear example of how hate speech are dangerous and only promote hatred.

    What he/she wants is a world where only the speech that they personally agree with is allowed, and other speech is interpreted as “hate speech” thereby allowing people to be as hateful as they want.

    I view atheists as fully subhuman, so what? That’s free speech.

    If you’re an atheist reading this then to me you’re subhuman, so what’s wrong with that?

    I started a petition to get society to view atheists as fully subhuman –

    An atheist is lower than a domestic animal to me.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      There were no cartoons ridiculing and insulting Muslims (differently from criticizing some versions of an ideology known as Islam). Calling some individuals “subhumans”, though, is hate speech.


      • itsnobody Says:

        [Editor’s Note: The comment below was deliberately partly censored by the editor. The most offensive parts were deleted. Calling “subhuman” some category of people is exactly the TOP THOUGHT CRIME the Nazis committed, making a category of human beings who are viewed as non-human, and that means, deprived of human rights. In other words, calling some people “subhuman” is synonymous with throwing them in ovens at Auschwitz.]

        Foolish (atheistic).

        You’re just playing semantics.

        Ridiculing Islam is nearly the same as ridiculing Muslims, you said it’s free speech, but now you’re saying that me criticizing atheists for being Nazis, White Nationalists, and racists is “hateful” and “hate speech”.

        I view atheists as fully subhuman for being racist…
        It’s free speech.

        Just like how cartoons ridiculing Muslims is free speech.

        We can end racism, White Nationalism, and Nazism by doing the right thing – viewing atheists as subhuman.


      • itsnobody Says:

        The author of this blog site is just biased and hateful.

        You had an article CELEBRATING the cartoons intentionally ridiculing and insulting Muslims as “free speech” but now are you telling me that criticizing atheists for being Nazis, White Nationalists, and racists is “hate speech”…ROFL

        You used semantics saying that it’s “criticizing some versions of an ideology” but anyone unbiased would think that cartoons intended to ridicule and insult isn’t mere criticism.

        The cartoons were designed to insult and ridicule, not criticize.

        So why can’t you just tell the truth for once? The truth is you don’t care about “free speech” or “hate speech”, you support biased speech, meaning you support only speech that you personally agree with and interpret speech that you disagree with as “hateful”.

        The cartoons or speech ridiculing and insulting Islam, Jews, Blacks, Asians, or whatever group isn’t interpreted as “hate speech” to you, it’s “free speech”.

        Someone criticizing atheists for being racist, White Nationalists, and Nazis is interpreted as “hate speech” to you.

        How is it “hate speech”? I’m just criticizing atheists just like how you celebrated the cartoons intentionally ridiculing and insulting a group as “free speech” in your other article.

        If that’s “free speech” then what I said is also “free speech” as opposed to “hate speech”. The only way you can disagree with me is you’re really biased and one-sided.

        It shows you how backwards your reasoning is.

        I really support full-fledged “free speech”, meaning on my blog site people are allowed to insult me or whatever group, and I’m allowed to criticize them back, etc…it’s really “free speech”.

        Why don’t you just put a sign on your blog site saying that “you’re not allowed to disagree with the author, it’s hate speech”.

        You can have an agreeing-contest!

        Do you agree with me or do you really really agree with me?

        When you have “hate speech” laws like this author’s blog site all it does is protect racists, Nazis, and White Nationalists from criticism.

        My blog site ranks higher than yours on Alexa and I don’t even try, I just share my real opinion, based on science, logic, and facts.

        One of the main principles in science is criticism and scrutiny because if a statement really is true it will stand up to any amount of criticism and scrutiny, that’s why I always allow full-fledged free speech and criticism.


  15. Tom Metzger Says:

    subhuman: just a word. hate speech just two words. doesnt effect my day at all. Tom metzger


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      In human beings, words and sentences are neurologically connected to emotional centers. Bad words, bad concepts, bad emotions. “Subhuman” means that Human Rights are not supposed to applied to the creature so qualified. It’s of some import. In normally constituted morality.


    • itsnobody Says:

      Tom Metzger, the founder of the Neo-Nazi group White Aryan Resistance is an atheist has FULL SUPPORT from the atheist community!

      It must feel great being both an atheist and a Nazi/White Nationalist/racist, you have support from the ENTIRE atheist community!

      I view Tom Metzger and every other atheist as subhuman, it’s free speech.

      When atheists personally attack me and insult me I don’t feel anything, it’s just like a dog, a cat, or some other domestic animal insulting you….why would you be bothered?

      It’s the free market, free speech, free society!

      Think progressive, support socialism, support a Whites-only type of society!


    • itsnobody Says:

      Tom Metzger, you’re a Neo-Nazi, but do you know the origins of Nazism?

      I know a lot about Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism (but not much about Judaism or Islam).

      As Nazis view Christianity as a disgusting Jewish Semitic religion they are attracted to “Aryan” religions.

      It’s connected to Hinduism and Buddhism, the word ‘Arya’ in Sanskrit or “Ariya” in Pali means “Noble”.

      In Buddhism, the Noble Path is called “Ariya-magga”…this means “The Aryan Path”.

      In the Buddhist Pali canons it says:
      “His eyes are deep blue.” – Lakkhana Sutta, The 32 marks

      Siddhartha Gautama (the one who started Buddhism) is described as having blue eyes, black hair, tall, athletic, and handsome.

      But I figured out that Nazism is false… I believe that higher souls can take birth in any ethnic group.

      As modern science has proven that we don’t have free-will I believe that I was chosen for a special purpose, and that no one can stop me.

      If the Evil One wins, I won’t achieve perfection while still in this human body.
      If the Evil One wins, if I achieve perfection while still in this human body I won’t reveal my teachings to anyone.
      If the Evil One loses, I’ll achieve perfection while still in this human body and become a world-teacher as well.

      Who can stop me? I view atheists as lower, they cannot stop me with their weak fragile minds, they are nothing more than savages, animals.

      The truth can’t be suppressed forever.


  16. Tom Metzger Says:

    thanks for your support


    • itsnobody Says:

      Well at least you know have support from the ENTIRE atheist community.

      Like with Sweden for instance, an atheist country, a Nazi party gained power for the first time there since WWII!

      Nazis/atheists can finally rejoice that the dream of a Nazi society is finally coming back.

      Tom Metzger (founder of the Neo-Nazi group White Aryan Resistance) has commented on my site a few times as well.

      All you really need for a Whites-only type of society is socialism, when you have lots of regulations and laws preventing companies from setting up it works to automatically stop migration, immigration, and hold down non-whites without any type of anti-immigration laws!

      We need bigger government, more regulations, and higher taxes, we need a Whites-only type of society!

      Vote Democrat, Vote Liberal, Support socialism, support a Whites-only type of society!

      I’m not allowed to criticize you because it’s “hate speech”.


  17. Tom Metzger Says:

    An atheist is a free thinker.They only have to agree on one thing.Their are no spooks in the sky.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Atheist = No-god. It’s a pretty neutral position. India has a million gods. Why to have this one rather than that one? Indians have no fantical answer to this one, so they pretty much tolerate all gods.

      Theists have god. A natural question is how they came to be in possession of god? How did they become owners of god? Did they meet him in a bar? “Itsnobody” describes on his site that it was a sudden revelation that he knew something nobody else did, and he had to communicate it. Something similar we heard in roughly the same language from PascaL, Joan of Arc… or, in general, from people suffering a sudden neurological event.

      The latter are now increasingly documented. They can come from a cerebral circulatory event. In the case of Pascal, he fell gravely ill, nearly died, and an infection seemed to have got to his brain. Thus, on the face of it, virulent theism seems rather to have to do with psychiatry.


      • itsnobody Says:

        lol…India is one of the most intolerant of all countries, just like North Korea (Communist atheist).

        In India brahmanical supremacy is still popular and brahmins don’t want to tolerate Dalits and lower castes.

        Nazism is based on and inspired by the Hindu caste system.

        In North Korea, religion is not tolerated, especially Christianity, they executed 1,200 Christians in 2013 and 2,400 in 2014.

        You believe in tolerating this, as it’s intolerant to not tolerate the caste system, lol.

        The only thing you won’t tolerate is me criticizing atheists for being racists, Nationalists, and Nazis…ROFL


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          Nobody is promoting North Korea here. That regime is evil incarnated.
          To call India, an extremely diverse democracy, intolerant, is intolerable (but I will tolerate it today). The bit about Nazism is true, but Islam also played an important role in Hitler’s mind. A-theists are basically honest. Theist, especially the fanatical type, place themselves above that god they claim to personally know. So, in a way, they insult the very creator they pretend to worship.


          • itsnobody Says:

            Islam played virtually no role in the development of Nazism except for the fact that both Nazis and Muslims hate Jews and support holocaust denial.

            Hinduism, Buddhism, and other religions considered as “Aryan” by the Nazis strongly influenced Nazism, this is basic history.

            India is indeed an intolerant society, based on all of the evidence we have, especially with hating women and the lower castes.

            In Hinduism women are viewed as a deterioration, a mistake, the corrupters of the world, inferior and lower to men, and born to be servants, this is clear from Hindu and Buddhist scriptures…this is why Hindus practice female infanticide.

            A female cannot achieve the same things that a male can, according to Hinduism.

            In Buddhism, the Buddha had said that Buddhas are always born as male and never as female.

            I’ve studied Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism so I know a lot about those religions.

            You seem to have no issues with the negative aspects of every other religion and ideology and only an issue with the negative aspects of Islam…why is this?

            Like for instance you celebrate the Greeks and the Romans who had treated women much worse than the Muslims did (by far).

            Almost every civilization around the world viewed women as lower and inferior to men, and treated women worse than the Muslims.

            For instance the Norse religion (pre-Christian Europeans) viewed women as lower, and by LAW women were under the authority of their husbands and fathers….this means the wife and daughter by law had to do whatever their husband or father ordered!


          • Patrice Ayme Says:

            Relating is not “celebrating”. In Rome women and men became pretty much identical under the law after a few centuries. Differently from “Islam”, Rome is no fixed target. Islam was indeed a progress, in some ways for women, and, especially girls. But not in all ways: Muhammad was peeved to have married with a rich woman who made him all he became, him, the poor, uneducated, illiterate, epileptic, dejected reject form his own tribe (the Quraish)….


          • itsnobody Says:

            LOL…women and men identical in Rome? Which world are you living in?

            The historical evidence clearly shows us that women were viewed as vastly inferior in Rome, the only women well off in Rome were the very wealthy women or those favored by men in power.

            Muhammad was indeed illiterate and uneducated, as were the majority of people around the world in pre-modern times.

            For instance, in the year 1950 only 15% – 25% of China was literate.

            In modern times India and many countries are still struggling to overcome illiteracy.

            During Muhammad’s time almost everyone around the world was illiterate.


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: Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: