Tuesday, 3 June 2014

The Enemy is not Islam.

Opinion by cohenite.

This blog has published a previous article about the myth of the Moderate Muslim. Muslims, it is plain, are clear about their intentions, which are to replace the Western secular society with Sharia, an intolerant theological social and political framework which oppresses every form of non-Muslim, women, gays etc.

In the West criticism of Islam is muted at best with many left-wing/Green or progressive commentators not only endorsing the concept of the Moderate Muslim but actively facilitating Islamic values. Both major political parties often combine to prevent any semblance of offence or hindrance to the introduction of and maintenance of Islamic values.

For instance in Queensland recently both the Coalition and the ALP combined to resist a private member’s Bill which would have allowed officials to demand a burqa wearing woman to remove her covered head so identification could occur.
The Queensland state attorney-general, Jarrod Bleijie, declined to support the bill, saying he believed in “a free and democratic society”.
“This government believes in a multicultural Queensland. This government respects the rights of its citizens and individuals to practise the religion that they so choose,” he said.

This is capitulation of the highest order. A multicultural society can only work if all the divergent cultures accept and support the social framework which enable multiculturalism to exist. Islam does not do this. The Queensland decision is a classic example of tolerating the intolerant and is further evidence that the political class of this country is either stupid or betraying the best interests of their constituency.

This form of support for Islam is to be expected from the progressives and cowardly conservatives which make up the 2 main political parties. It is a surprise however to find such stupidity amongst the rambunctious commentators at Catallaxy, the blog site for Libertarianism.

However in a long debate with self-proclaimed libertarian, Aristogeiton, I discovered the pro-Islam gene can take many forms. Aristogeiton’s position is simply that ‘pure’ libertarian principles means no freedom of any group can be infringed even if they are fundamentalist, Sharia advocating Muslims.

I suggested to Aristogeiton that his form of libertarianism was merely pacifism such that any libertarian cannot infringe the rights of anyone else even if that anyone else is threatening not only the social structure upon which libertarianism is dependent but the life and limb of the said libertarians.

In true progressive style Aristogeiton suggested that my opposition to Islam was merely a form of Die Judenfrage. Die Judenfrage refers to Marx’s solution to the Jewish problem that for Jews to be rid of their pariah status was for them to cease being Jews.

Apart from being a woeful resort to Godwin’s law and a pathetic attempt of equivalence between Islam and the Jews this attitude mistakes the true nature of Islam. Islam is not like other religions or cultures which can and do adapt to the superior Western secular model. Islam seeks to replace the Western model. So it is not about wanting Muslims to stop being Muslims so they can fit into their Western hosts’ society. It is about Islam ceasing trying to tear down and replace their Western hosts’ society.

I also suggested to Aristogeiton his attitude and comments were wrapped in the same sort of condescending exclusivity encountered in the AGW and in fact every other ‘debate’ with the progressive elite; which is to say meaningless since the elite’s argument is entirely centered in ego which is the only and best proof they offer that their position is better than anyone who disagrees with them. Naturally he didn’t agree.

Aristogeiton’s approach ultimately is both a confused and very damaging one. Firstly anyone who disagrees with people like him about Islam is a fascist or at the very least a stranger to libertarian principles.


But more than that distracting nonsense this ‘pure’ libertarian approach contradicts libertarian values or at least vitiates them. The introduction of security measures in the West is a both a blight and an illustration of this. They affect everyone at every level of life. The reason for these security measures is Islamist terrorism; in reality the security measures are a distortion of Popper’s maxim of not tolerating the intolerant. These measures are a bastard hybrid of libertarianism and muddled thinking; the notional libertarianism is in the fact the measures affect everyone not just the Muslims; but paradoxically that concession undermines both the libertarian content of the West while ostensibly protecting that libertarian content. It does so by reducing the libertarian values in society overall while still allowing the Islamic threat to those libertarian values to have the same reduced rights.

How much more simple would it be to say it is Islam which has a declared purpose of destroying the Western social structure along with its libertarian elements and only applying security measures against Muslims? To isolate Islam and treat it as the threat it is would preserve libertarianism along with the other ‘cultural elements’ of our ‘multicultural’ society.

But alas like the progressive the libertarian like Aristogeiton values his ego and deluded principles more than his society and cannot even see the first paradox.


Where's Wally's Warming? IPCC needs help!

How logical  does this sound? The atmosphere got warmer because it had a miniscule 0.04% CO2. The same people pushing the warming alarm talk about "Solar Energy;" talk about having solar panels collect energy from the Sun to create power. 

And yet......

These same people say that the sun is not warming us. No, it's not the Sun. It's carbon dioxide. But it's not ALL of the carbon dioxide. In fact, it's only the carbon dioxide put into the atmosphere by man's burning of fossil fuel. A minute portion of a miniscule amount. Some put it at 4%, so 4% of the total 0.04% is 0.0016%.

Can you imagine, in a hundred years time, what they will think when people look at their history books and see the alarmists' alarm over a tiny 0.0016% of the atmosphere that was meant to cause dangerous warming. Will they believe it? Would YOU?

But wait! There has been NO significant global warming for 18 years. Doesn't that completely blow away the theory?

No, the alarmists, not to be denied their alarm, have come out with an extension to their exceptional theory. The heat has scampered out of the atmosphere and scurried into the ocean. Seems it has managed to get through the surface without warming it and gone into deep cover. Now that's deep!

But wait! The Argo buoys haven't detected it. If it's not down, deep down....

The IPCC have sent out the Global Regeneration of Enlightenment Numismatists (GREENs) to find the missing heat.

William Briggs explains:
Forecasts have said the temperature should be ever increasing, yet actual observations proved that nothing has happened. Yet since the Science is settled, therefore the temperatures must have really gone up even though nobody has seen it—it must be that Global Warming has gone missing. 
Communications experts know that if we are to restore the panic and dread which is necessary to create change in democracies, we have to find that missing Global Warming. The IPCC has thus dispatched several international teams of experts and charged them not to return without it.
Looking for the missing warming

The Bullet ridden hulk "SS The Great Global Warming hoax" is struggling to stay afloat.


Some Recent Scientific Quotes:




This may come as a shocker to some, but scientists are not always right — especially when under intense public pressure for answers. “Based on previous PBSG estimates and other research reports, it appears there are probably at least another 6,000 or so bears living in these regions and perhaps as many as 9,000 (or more) that are not included in any PBSG ‘global population estimate,’ " experienced zoologist and polar bear specialist Crockford wrote on her blog.

Dr. Jean-Louis Pinault explains his experience with climate politics (link - Climate Guy)

 skeptics cannot enforce their arguments in scientific journals that are subject to censorship since the Copenhagen Climate Conference.

New paper finds Antarctic temperatures were warmer in 1800′s and 1940′s Published in the Annals of Glaciology

A new paper published in the Annals of Glaciology shows Antarctic air temperatures were warmer during the early 1800's and 1940's in comparison to the end of the 20th century. The authors find evidence of a quasi-periodic climate cycle lasting 30-50 years, with at least 5 climate shifts over the past 350 years, the last beginning during the 1970's. 


H/t Marc Morano and Climate Depot