How 'Rational Atheists' spread anti Islam pro US military propaganda

[awepittance]

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

yep, but they've done an amazingly good job of re-branding themselves (some of them). Michael Ledeen, one of the biggest proponents for attacking Iran didn't learn to adapt, he still seems openly nutter, but his smarter/savvier friends learned a long time ago how to basically created a series of 'logical' sounding arguments that when you take them to their inevitable conclusion means we need to overthrow the Iranian regime. To me that's a lot more dangerous than being openly and blatantly nutter, at least there is a certain threshold where regular people can tell when someone is openly that fucking crazy. With Sam Harris he's actually playing into an intellectual side of our brain and diverting it down a road of 'yeah these people are very barbaric' which serves to dehumanize entire populations we're already waging an endless war against

[chenGOD]

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

 

Yet 84% of Pakistani Muslims favor enshrining sharia as official law. These seemingly divergent views are possible partly because most supporters of sharia in Pakistan – as in many other countries –think Islamic law should apply only to Muslims. Moreover, Muslims around the globe have differing understandings of what sharia means in practice.

Remember Sharia is a complete legal system - just as broad in scope as Napoleonic code or Common Law. Supporting Sharia doesn't inherently mean you want to cut people's hands off for revealing a square millimetre of flesh. For example I'd love to take bits of Sharia where they pertain to banking - imagine how neat a non-ursury, non-FR banking system would be.

 

Yeah I thought that's what I was saying with the quote from the report.

 

But I also think the interesting bit is that Muslims think Sharia should only apply to Muslims.

 

Also interesting to note that in the US, religious courts operate on a daily basis.

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

 

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

yep, but they've done an amazingly good job of re-branding themselves (some of them). Michael Ledeen, one of the biggest proponents for attacking Iran didn't learn to adapt, he still seems openly nutter, but his smarter/savvier friends learned a long time ago how to basically created a series of 'logical' sounding arguments that when you take them to their inevitable conclusion means we need to overthrow the Iranian regime. To me that's a lot more dangerous than being openly and blatantly nutter, at least there is a certain threshold where regular people can tell when someone is openly that fucking crazy. With Sam Harris he's actually playing into an intellectual side of our brain and diverting it down a road of 'yeah these people are very barbaric' which serves to dehumanize entire populations we're already waging an endless war against

 

 

There's a mod on this forum that fits very squarely into this category

[chenGOD]

 

 

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

yep, but they've done an amazingly good job of re-branding themselves (some of them). Michael Ledeen, one of the biggest proponents for attacking Iran didn't learn to adapt, he still seems openly nutter, but his smarter/savvier friends learned a long time ago how to basically created a series of 'logical' sounding arguments that when you take them to their inevitable conclusion means we need to overthrow the Iranian regime. To me that's a lot more dangerous than being openly and blatantly nutter, at least there is a certain threshold where regular people can tell when someone is openly that fucking crazy. With Sam Harris he's actually playing into an intellectual side of our brain and diverting it down a road of 'yeah these people are very barbaric' which serves to dehumanize entire populations we're already waging an endless war against

 

 

There's a mod on this forum that fits very squarely into this category

 

 

Who?

[chenGOD]

If you (not anyone in specific) think delet supports foreign intervention into another nation's domestic affairs, you're not reading his politics very well. Admittedly, he's not always the most coherent of writers.

 

Agree with what you wrote - Bill Maher is pretty ugly on the topic. He's kind of an idiot though, hard to take seriously.

[LimpyLoo]

probably delet?

 

just on the topic on the thread but not really related to the present discussion, i find bill maher is one of the worst at this, and I think he needs to be called out for being the racist fuckwit he is more often. i'll still watch his show sometimes and catch some interesting discussion, but it looks pretty ugly to be that cocky and hateful.

 

Cite one example of him being racist

Literally one

(I don't care for him but c'mon now)

[LimpyLoo]

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

 

 

 

Yet 84% of Pakistani Muslims favor enshrining sharia as official law. These seemingly divergent views are possible partly because most supporters of sharia in Pakistan – as in many other countries –think Islamic law should apply only to Muslims. Moreover, Muslims around the globe have differing understandings of what sharia means in practice.

Remember Sharia is a complete legal system - just as broad in scope as Napoleonic code or Common Law. Supporting Sharia doesn't inherently mean you want to cut people's hands off for revealing a square millimetre of flesh. For example I'd love to take bits of Sharia where they pertain to banking - imagine how neat a non-ursury, non-FR banking system would be.

Soooo...you want scripture-based laws?

Should we import laws from the bible too?

 

Name one 'rational atheist' who supports a first nuclear strike anywhere

[awepittance]

 

Cite one example of him being racist

Literally one

(I don't care for him but c'mon now)

 

it would be hard to find just one since literally every time I've watched his show for the past 2 years he says shit easily more offensively racist and even dumber/less funny than that silly Jim norton michio kaku video you posted here.

 

in general this is why the 'rational atheism' movement bothers me so much, i think it's a very dangerous trend, not just Maher but i'm seeing it a lot more just in general among liberals (and alarmingly on an increase here on watmm especially with younger members) . In a way it reminds me of the knee jerk reactions to SJW campaigns. Like because some of those are really off base and annoying and maybe have poor techniques being employed doesn't mean that the issues in and of themselves are invalid or aren't worth standing up for. This is similar to how i think people (Sam Harris fans for example) get too reactive at this whole notion of 'islamophobia'. Instead of acknowledging the fact that the US government and most of the mainstream media here for the better part of *8 years* deeply fed into and basically mythologized and inflated this idea of Islam as a bogeyman, they act like its some noble liberal anti-status quo gesture to say 'hey wait a second, these people cut people's heads off and kill gays, we gotta do something about it'. I suspect some of these people maybe weren't old enough to understand at least in part how profound these ripple effects were after 9/11, and how it's not noble or new or revelatory to show how a lot of the muslim world doesn't live according to liberal principles.

[awepittance]

here's what a 'rational atheist' has to say about the differences between extremist islamic groups (hint: there are none, they are all 'death cults')

The final point I’ll make is to remind people of who those neighbors are: Hamas is a death cult—as are ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Al-Shabab, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Hezbollah and every other jihadist organization we could name. Despite their differences, they are in fact the same death cult.

 

how in the fuck is Sam Harris taken seriously? I continue to be amazed not just by the over simplified childish way he writes but also the sensationalist fox newsy way he talks about Islam. guys is a real piece of shit


update: i've been working on finding out who donates to Sam Harris' 'Project Reason'. They seem to have a surprisingly large amount of money for an organization just ran by Harris and his wife. Of course they don't list who donates to them on their website, what are the chances defense contractors or people actually actively pushing wars send good ole sam money?

[LimpyLoo]

 

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

yep, but they've done an amazingly good job of re-branding themselves (some of them). Michael Ledeen, one of the biggest proponents for attacking Iran didn't learn to adapt, he still seems openly nutter, but his smarter/savvier friends learned a long time ago how to basically created a series of 'logical' sounding arguments that when you take them to their inevitable conclusion means we need to overthrow the Iranian regime. To me that's a lot more dangerous than being openly and blatantly nutter, at least there is a certain threshold where regular people can tell when someone is openly that fucking crazy. With Sam Harris he's actually playing into an intellectual side of our brain and diverting it down a road of 'yeah these people are very barbaric' which serves to dehumanize entire populations we're already waging an endless war against

JE, I don't know what to say to you

Part of me wants to be really nasty

And make jokes about TYT and nano-thermite

All i'll say is I strongly think you're mistaken

And that your 'tolerance' is more reppressive than tolerant

 

And I still have yet to say even once

That 'yeah, those Pew numbers are indeed problematic'

Instead you just say 'not all Muslims are bad

You racist

How dare you suggest there's a problem'

 

This false dichotomy

Is worse than

When people who opposed the Iraq war

Got accused of 'not supporting the troops'

 

Am I racist for bringing up UN anti-blasphemy laws?

Is it skin color-based prejudice to NOT want to live under theocracy?

Wise me to your PC rules, JE

 

P.S.

 

i forgot

In the Muhammad cartoon debate

You took the 'we shouldn't draw Muhammad' side

I took the 'people should draw whatever they want, fucking period'

So maybe you're kinda sympathetic to these anti-blasphemy laws

[LimpyLoo]

 

Cite one example of him being racist

Literally one

(I don't care for him but c'mon now)

 

it would be hard to find just one since literally every time I've watched his show for the past 2 years he says shit easily more offensively racist and even dumber/less funny than that silly Jim norton michio kaku video you posted here.

in general this is why the 'rational atheism' movement bothers me so much, i think it's a very dangerous trend, not just Maher but i'm seeing it a lot more just in general among liberals (and alarmingly on an increase here on watmm especially with younger members) . In a way it reminds me of the knee jerk reactions to SJW campaigns. Like because some of those are really off base and annoying and maybe have poor techniques being employed doesn't mean that the issues in and of themselves are invalid or aren't worth standing up for. This is similar to how i think people (Sam Harris fans for example) get too reactive at this whole notion of 'islamophobia'. Instead of acknowledging the fact that the US government and most of the mainstream media here for the better part of *8 years* deeply fed into and basically mythologized and inflated this idea of Islam as a bogeyman, they act like its some noble liberal anti-status quo gesture to say 'hey wait a second, these people cut people's heads off and kill gays, we gotta do something about it'. I suspect some of these people maybe weren't old enough to understand at least in part how profound these ripple effects were after 9/11, and how it's not noble or new or revelatory to show how a lot of the muslim world doesn't live according to liberal principles.

 

Again

Find one example of him being racist

(If he's racist often, this shouldn't be hard)

 

 

I'm getting so sick of these accusations on the left

With zero evidence

[luke viia]

off topic, but

am i the only one

that finds limpy's

writing

to be

ridiculous

?

 

it reads

like a fat kid

who can't finish

a sentence in one

breath

 

*wheeze*

 

totally unrelated

to islam

and the left

i know

[doublename]

His poetiprose is hot gossip all of a sudden.

[awepittance]

 

I'm getting so sick of these accusations on the left

With zero evidence

 

what an ultra weird thing to say. 'the left'? the fact that you say you watch Maher's show and have seen no evidence of him being a bigot is actually extremely alarming. I'd have much more respect for you if you were like 'yeah he's a bit bigoted but he has some really good points about islam'. But to deny it completely is seriously twilight zone shit to me.

[luke viia]

His poetiprose is hot gossip all of a sudden.

 

that's why

i mentioned it

[eugene]

nm.

[chenGOD]

 

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

 

 

 

Yet 84% of Pakistani Muslims favor enshrining sharia as official law. These seemingly divergent views are possible partly because most supporters of sharia in Pakistan – as in many other countries –think Islamic law should apply only to Muslims. Moreover, Muslims around the globe have differing understandings of what sharia means in practice.

Remember Sharia is a complete legal system - just as broad in scope as Napoleonic code or Common Law. Supporting Sharia doesn't inherently mean you want to cut people's hands off for revealing a square millimetre of flesh. For example I'd love to take bits of Sharia where they pertain to banking - imagine how neat a non-ursury, non-FR banking system would be.

Soooo...you want scripture-based laws?

Should we import laws from the bible too?

 

 

 

Why do you insist on putting words into other people's mouths?

 

 

 

 

In my experience a lot of these "Rational Atheists" are in fact better described as "Objectivists"/Randroids - whose worldview starts out as vaguely-reasonable-sounding blend of libertarianism and atheism, but following some impressive philosophical acrobatics, they end up championing fascist gobshite like pre-emptive nuclear strikes against Iran. Basically they're nutters.

yep, but they've done an amazingly good job of re-branding themselves (some of them). Michael Ledeen, one of the biggest proponents for attacking Iran didn't learn to adapt, he still seems openly nutter, but his smarter/savvier friends learned a long time ago how to basically created a series of 'logical' sounding arguments that when you take them to their inevitable conclusion means we need to overthrow the Iranian regime. To me that's a lot more dangerous than being openly and blatantly nutter, at least there is a certain threshold where regular people can tell when someone is openly that fucking crazy. With Sam Harris he's actually playing into an intellectual side of our brain and diverting it down a road of 'yeah these people are very barbaric' which serves to dehumanize entire populations we're already waging an endless war against

 

 

Instead you just say 'not all Muslims are bad

You racist

How dare you suggest there's a problem'

 

 

What JE says is that yes, not all Muslims are bad, and the dehumanizing aspect of lumping all Muslims together as the same is wrong.

When you stop putting words in other people's mouths, then maybe people will be more willing to engage you in good faith.

[delet...]

do you find it a bit suspicious when people focus on islam so heavily? it almost seems like these rational atheists just throw in a few jabs here and there about christianity just almost as a 'here's my black friend' type of approach/cover. I still stand by the idea that a lot of people even when using statistics to prove how evil islam is are driven by a deep seeded racist fear amplified by the post 9/11 world.

 

 

oh come on, we used to hate on christian extremism. Now that we see stats that are showing that core adherents to the faith of islam, are even more radical nutbags, it's not then racism to point that, it's just par for the course for an enlightened and sceptical being. It doesn't help that the saudi's have been spending tens of billions buying all the islamic press and publishing houses to promote their more radical wahhabism to the muslim world. In the same manner they have been pushing radical clerics in both the west and in islamic countries as well as opening radical madrassas everywhere. So we could have hoped before this retrograde intervention by the saudi princes, that islam would have started evaporating in at least the more sophisticated and modern islamic countries. Those that do the bidding of israel kind of fucked that natural ideological change by us having all these wars in the middle east.

 

-sie-

 

what a mess, still though this doesn't preclude one from criticizing islam, which as i stated, is just par for the course for an enlightened and sceptical being. fuck these dumb arse religions and the zealots that ride in on them. /waits for some loser to think he's smart by telling me that i'm a zealot too then, doesn't work, what is implied is that these religions are inherently oppressive in that they restrict one's philosophical growth, aren't you against oppression? etc

 

plus of course there are going to be some nasty people writing articles against islam that are neocons and part of the spin machine, blar dee blar. My case was that this shouldn't tar the discussion in any way shape or form.

[chenGOD]

I think the key word in your rant is zealot. Zealous bigotry comes in many guises.

[LimpyLoo]

 

I'm getting so sick of these accusations on the left

With zero evidence

 

what an ultra weird thing to say. 'the left'? the fact that you say you watch Maher's show and have seen no evidence of him being a bigot is actually extremely alarming. I'd have much more respect for you if you were like 'yeah he's a bit bigoted but he has some really good points about islam'. But to deny it completely is seriously twilight zone shit to me.

Still waiting for that evidence...

[delet...]

maher isn't the left anyway, he's put there by the powers that be to be a gatekeeper for left opinion. So we don't criticize the power structure or israel.

 

Also, there is plenty of evidence now of speech against radical islam being prosecuted, shut down by the authorities in the UK and in europe. So in fact the issue isn't that a few right wing dingbats and zionists are moaning about islam. The issue is that the natural reaction by locals to discuss the recent mass importation of radical muslims into europe and the UK, is being targeted by the authorities under the guise of political correctness. What the right and phoney left winger pontificates are doing isn't legislating an anti-democratic shut down of open discussion so why worry about their free speech and it's possible motivations, they are superfluous in the scheme of things.

[chenGOD]

maher isn't the left anyway, he's put there by the powers that be to be a gatekeeper for left opinion. So we don't criticize the power structure or israel.

 

Also, there is plenty of evidence now of speech against radical islam being prosecuted, shut down by the authorities in the UK and in europe. So in fact the issue isn't that a few right wing dingbats and zionists are moaning about islam. The issue is that the natural reaction by locals to discuss the recent mass importation of radical muslims into europe and the UK, is being targeted by the authorities under the guise of political correctness. What the right and phoney left winger pontificates are doing isn't legislating an anti-democratic shut down of open discussion so why worry about their free speech and it's possible motivations, they are superfluous in the scheme of things.

 

Such fear-mongering bullshit. How many times do I have to show the (very well documented) numbers that show the entire refugee population of Muslims would increase the total population of Muslims in Europe (if Europe took them all, which they are not doing), by ~1%.

Obviously they are not all radical Muslims, due to the definition of the word radical.

[awepittance]

 

 

I'm getting so sick of these accusations on the left

With zero evidence

what an ultra weird thing to say. 'the left'? the fact that you say you watch Maher's show and have seen no evidence of him being a bigot is actually extremely alarming. I'd have much more respect for you if you were like 'yeah he's a bit bigoted but he has some really good points about islam'. But to deny it completely is seriously twilight zone shit to me.

Still waiting for that evidence...

 

 

“Talk to women who’ve ever dated an Arab man. The results are not good.” - Bill Maher

looking forward to you finding a way to spin that as non-bigoted vs a harmless Michio kaku parody being cringe-worthy racist

 

[delet...]

his support for israel illustrates his disdain for palestinians, yes? Also, his hatred of middle american values illustrates his racism towards white america, heh (this part was a joke which obviously attacks the first part of what i said ironically).

 

also chengod, your figures are bullshit, and they are not going to europe as an whole, mass illegal population flow is going to rich western countries, and they are not all muslim, they are from everywhere poor (africa, central and eastern asia asia, south america and even from within the eurozone), and most importantly this is completely done without consulting the people that live in these countries whether they want this shit to happen or not and it is having a vastly negative impact on these countries which will dramatically change them, you'd think that this should be something open to debate and plebiscite beforehand, but no, we must do what the OECD tells us to do, free will isn't as important as the view's of the globalist cabal that runs everything. But if noone's figured it out yet, it's pretty obvious that you're a totalitarian, and who cares what those silly people think, they're all hate filled know nothings, papa bear knows what's good for them so they should shut up whilst the new world order shoves it down their throat, in their arm, into their neighbourhood and up their arse.

 

gleh.

[delet...]

the 'real world' is the one i am talking about, you are the one in the thought control grid bubble, this is why you have such amazingly ridiculous things to say about everything political. It pains me, but whatever. each to their zone