Yes, Killarney...that probably was a bit bellow the belt from me - I was trying a bit too hard to make my point.

And it is difficult to get a fix on things.

I'm presently watching the march of solidarity taking place right now in Paris. World leaders lined up to march with the greater populace - and there standing splat in the middle next to Hollande and Merkel is Benjamin Netanyahu...whose forces recently spent many days ruthlessly targeting and then slaughtering defenceless men, women and children - bombing hospitals, schools and designated UN compounds to do so...2,000 deaths and around 10,000 injured.

And yet there he is marching against atrocities!

Crazy world...

To NathanJ

If the whole of North Africa was populated by blue eyed, blond haired Nazis, who were immigrating to Europe in very large numbers, and if those Nazis killed anybody within their own Nazi nations who criticised Nazism or der Fuhrer, and if almost every act of terrorism in the world was linked to Nazis, and if the Charlie Hedbo massacre had been carried out by blond haired, blue eyed Nazis screaming "Adolph Hitler is great!", I doubt if you would have any trouble linking Nazism to terrorism.

The leftist cognitive dissonance, is that they have no problem stereotyping Nazis, Ku Klux Klansmen, Bogans, Rednecks, or One Nation supporters, but any negative stereotype of their favourite, pet minorities has them frothing at the mouth in self righteous indignation.

The entire philosophy of the humanitarian left is that human beings are all equally good or bad. (unless they are Nazis or Ku Klux Klansmen) Therefore, it does not matter what race or religion you are, everybody just wants to live in peace with their neighbours. So, it does not matter who immigrates into western society, because everybody wants peace except a few criminal hotheads.

Then along comes Islam which proves that you are wrong. How you as a person who considers himself a liberal, can defend a religion which openly advocates the murder of apostates and homosexuals, that women are minors inferior to men, that ecclesiastical law overrides secular law, or that raped women should be punished, is beyond me. And when Muslims in Europe do exactly what their religion instructs and mass murders Europeans who criticise or satirise their religion, you deny reality and claim that this has nothing to do with Muslims.

Islam is the most dangerous and aggressive social ideology in the world today, and you defend Muslims. If the majority of Muslims are "moderate", why is almost every Muslim country violent and dysfunctional? And the more Islamic a state is, the more violent and dysfunctional it is.

@ Cant-stop-the-boats-Killarney,


You say: <<What a shame the West is still a long, loooong way from waking up to the same problem. Stay out of Muslim countries (especially stop bombing and regime-changing them) and they'll stay out of ours.>>

Wow soooooo if the West had no involvement -- all the non-Muslim minorites would co-exist in blissfull harmony with their Muslim majority overlords ...that deserves a double DUH!

@ Killarney -more

And does <<and they'll stay out of ours.>> involve (them) NOT sending us hundred of thousands of economic refugee --who turn out to be Islamist sympathizers!

Hi SPQR,

Clearly there is no such thing as a principled Left any more.

Killarney, as I understand her, would have sucked up to Saddam (and Gaddafi, Mugabe and Assad as well ?) and every other anti-US dictator across the Middle East, but now that there is a democratic government in Iraq which happens to be pro-US, she is trying to find some way to suck up to Islamists, i.e. the 'Anybody-But-Americans'. A bunch of total opportunists: like that old Italian bloke in Catch 22. Sluts for Islamism.

Opportunism: look it up, Killarney.

This long war will see the extinction of any Western Left. I feel like I've lost close relatives :(

Joe

Loudmouth,

"Killarney, as I understand her, would have sucked up to Saddam (and Gaddafi, Mugabe and Assad as well ?).."

Lol! - you mean like the US "whenever it suited them"?

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

"Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein:
The U.S. Tilts toward Iraq, 1980-1984

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 82"

Same with Gaddafi - and Mugabe appears to be allowed to do as he pleases because Zimbabwe is apparently not worth the bother of intervention.

Let's not deny that the US totally misread the proposition in Iraq - those of us who cited a huge vacuum followed by a continuing debacle in the wake of the 2003 invasion have been proven correct.