If The Romans Already Did It, Why Can’t We?
Indeed, the Romans outlawed any religion conducive to human sacrifice. Let’s heed their example. Each time someone preaches, in the name of god, dog, or the local camel messenger, to kill some category of people, let’s put them in jail for ten years. And if they keep on preaching there, makes that solitary confinement (hey, that’s what Sultan Saladin imposed in the Twelfth Century: I have the best advisers!)
We hear this, we hear that. Some people say we should not fear religions who want to kill us, or which want to kill entire categories of people we view as innocent. Out of respect. What? Respect for whom? The executioners? I have nothing against executioners, as long as they execute for good reasons.
We also hear that what is good for one, is bad for the other, and vice versa, so it all does not matter, everything is relative. Except, not everything is relative. Poincare’ named the “Principle of Relativity”, relativity of UNIFORM motion. Accelerated motion is something else entirely. It is not relative. Actually a twin accelerated close to light speed lives longer, because she is the one accelerating at some point. So physics does not say all is relative, far from it.
[Men straddling squirming men: cheap sexual thrill?]
Who is “we”? The Charter of the United Nations, in other words the Rights of Man and the Citizen. That, too, is not relative. The Rights of Man are anchored in human ethology, the Cult of Man.
I was watching a debate on German TV, brandishing approvingly considerations of Mr. Macron, the plutocratic French finance minister, claiming “Muslim violence” was related to poverty and exclusion. I subscribe myself to this thesis, and have done so for ever. However, it’s getting to be so much yesterday.
Material poverty can be boosted by intellectual poverty. Ordering all of one’s life around “reciting” the same little book, makes for a very small brain.
Exclusion is no doubt facilitated by a literally religious urge, to kill one’s neighbors, and all sorts of them. I have provided with enough quotes to make it clear that so it is with the “Cult of Death’s” most sacred texts.
Here are quotes I did not use before, and found in the Hadith, the indispensable, loquacious companion to the all-too short Qur’an:
Muhammad Got His Critics Killed (Think Charlie Hebdo):
Hadith from Bukhari:V4B52N270 “Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Who is ready to kill Ashraf? He has said injurious things about Allah and His Apostle.’ Maslama got up saying, ‘Would you like me to kill him?’ The Prophet proclaimed, ‘Yes.’
Hadith from Ishaq 551: “Another victim was Huwayrith. He used to insult Muhammad in Mecca. Huwayrith was put to death by Ali.
Ishaq:597 “When the Apostle returned to Medina after his raid on Ta’if, word spread that he had killed some of the men who had satirized and insulted him. The scared poets who were left, ran away in all directions.”
[Yes, gory again, and I don’t condone goriness; however those who avert their eyes, DO condone it, because they refuse their hearts to get agitated by horrors: that makes them anxious to live in good intelligence with horror. There again, Christians were assassinated just for being Christians who happened to be in Libya, a land which was Christian for six centuries, before being invaded by Islamists propelled by Muhammad’s Hadith and Qur’an; comment below the picture is a translation from the Islamist State; Egypt retaliated by bombing the Islamist State.]
Serious doctors and students of the Islamist Faith know that, interpreted textually, literally, as it is, the Faith is completely incompatible with civilization. For civilization to survive, this has to be understood in a timely manner. In a more timely manner than was understood with Christianism. (Which nearly destroyed civilization, especially around 400 CE.)
Muhammad Punished Well:
Ishaq 595 “The Apostle said, ‘Get him away from me and cut off his tongue.””
Ishaq:316 “Following Badr, Muhammad sent a number of raiders with orders to capture some of the Meccans and burn them alive.”
(A little horror is most persuasive!)
Muhammad Killed Refuseniks and Apostates:
Sunan Abu -Dawud,4390 “Narrated Atiyyah al-Qurazi: I was among the captives of Banu Qurayzah. They (the Companions) examined us, and those who had begun to grow hair (pubes) were killed, and those who had not were not killed. I was among those who had not grown hair.”
Ishaq:551: “The Messenger [Muhammad] ordered Miqyas’ assassination because he became a renegade by rejecting Islam.”
Bukhari:V4B52N260: “The Prophet said, ‘If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.’”
Tabari VIII:143 ” He set out with fifteen men. He encountered a large force whom he summoned to Islam. They refused to respond so he killed all of them.”
Surprise Attacks on Villages Brings Booty and Captured Women:
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer [Prayer of Fear] near Khaybar when it was still dark. He said, ‘Allahu-Akbar!’ [Allah is Greatest] ‘ Then the inhabitants came out running on their roads. The Prophet had their men killed; their children and woman were taken as captives.”
nThe Prophet enjoyed 17 year old Safia as his share of booty.
Bukhari vol 3,Book46, No. 717: “Narrated Ibn Aun: The Prophet had suddenly attacked Bani Mustaliq without warning while they were heedless and their cattle were being watered at the places of water. Their fighting men were killed and their women and children were taken as captives; the Prophet got Juwairiya on that day.” (Reference: Waqqidi, Tabari)
So why have we become weaker morally than the Romans? The Romans of the Republic?
Because, meanwhile, lethally minded, apocalyptically longing Christianism passed by, and Islamism is its mentally retarded desert progeny (although Judaism was the other participant of this hellish union). Because also, more recently, plutocrats have realized their colleagues in Saudi Arabia and the like, were their natural allies and collaborators. Thus, the more severe Islamism, natural enemy of civilization, was favored. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, thought plutocrats, and they control the media, so they could make it so, and program the public for its own destruction.
Plutocrats control not just the media , but also the politicians, and, also, all those who passed, all too long, for the wisest philosophers the world could produce. And were nothing of the sort: celebrity philosophers (Sartre, Camus, “French Theorists” etc.) who, in the end, just preached the destruction of the civilization which harbor them, should be abhorred, rather than harbored.
Meanwhile, in Paris, at the CO2 conference, the possibility of limiting warming to 1.5 degree Centigrade was seriously considered.
nTo do so, though, one will have to touch all forms of transportation, including air transport, which emits 12% of transport CO2. However the COP 21 Paris conference excluded air transportation from the talks.
It’s the same problem as with the Cult of Death: why to make exceptions? Why to exclude the Cult of Death from the spirit of the law? Why to exclude air transportation from the spirit of the law? Should not the law apply to all equally?
If one is a plutocrat, or an obsequious servant of plutocrats, one knows the answer to this: of course not. The very fundamental principle of plutocracy is inequality. Pain and evil are made to be applied by the masters, and the low lives’ existence is justified only as the indispensable servants and recipients of pain and evil.