Your Comprehension of History is Laughable (A response to Extra Credits)

Something I have always hated is people who look back at history and don’t learn shit from it.  Combine that with people who believe that entertainment somehow will “normalize” a societal value, and you have a good amount of stupid that one can pick apart.  Which is where Extra Credits comes in.  I’d heard of these guys around, but never really seen much of their content.  But this video has been making the rounds lately, and I just had to respond.  It’s so fucking stupid.  They talk about how we shouldn’t have Nazis in video games anymore because it normalizes them.  Oh boy.  I’ll have the video on here so you can see it with me, then we’ll talk about it.

Alright.  We start with little Billy playing his game, when suddenly he is a Nazi in multiplayer!  Now, this is a game centered in World War II, and in multiplayer that means that someone has to play the opposing side.  That’s how it works.  And most people wouldn’t even think about it.  You’re thinking about taking out the people you’re against in the game.  You wanna do better in the game than the other side.  Would you rather the Allied forces kill each other?  There’s some meta commentary about the nature of warfare.

Apparently, this is bad on so many levels.  Let’s hear it.  The dude starts off saying that by having it so you can play as the Germans in a World War II focused multiplayer game, you’re alluding to the fact that German soldiers are on the same level as the Allied ones.  Um…what?  That is INSANE levels of reaching to make your point.  Nobody is saying that, dude.  Nobody.  Find me someone who says that who isn’t a white nationalist.  It’s saying that when you have two sides in a game squaring off against each other, you typically have them as the enemy they are fighting so that it fits.  Otherwise you’re having allies kill each other.  Is what you want?  Want Americans to kill each other in-game?

Man, people say that I overthink things.  This dude makes me look like a fucking amateur in this department, because this is some quality overthinking.  It doesn’t matter if the game tells you that the person you’re playing as was forced into military service for Germany during World War II.  Hell, that was pretty much all men at that time, so yeah.  It’s how the game works.  What proof do you have that playing as a Nazi in a game does any real damage?!

The narrator goes on to then say we need to stop forcing people to play as terrorists in games like Counter Strike.  What is the rationale this time?  Here the dude goes into more details.  See, people have been hurt by terrorists and Nazis.  Not even gonna talk about those still alive who were hurt by the Nazis, because the amount of Holocaust survivors goes down every year.  There are very few left, if any at all by this point.  It’s been almost 80 years since the war ended.  So the amount of people hurting because of this is a VERY small number.  As for those hurt by terrorism, it’s weird to hear this coming from an American.  Yeah, 9/11, but fuck that.  You wanna talk about those hurt by terrorism, Europe has a MUCH bigger leg to stand on at this point.  Radical Islam has been killing so many people there over the last few years that it’s almost commonplace at this point.  Kinda like mass shootings here in the US.

His argument is that nobody should be part of an ideology they don’t like without their permission.  So then don’t play the game.  Nobody’s holding a gun to your head.  It ain’t like the game is making you swear allegiance to the Nazi party.  It’s a skin for your character to fight the other side.  It’s just a place-holder, which you said you’re against, but the one argument you’ve made so far is just bullshit.  If they are so abhorred by the idea of playing as a German soldier in a game where the goal is to be better than the opposing team, with nothing political involved save what skin you have on, what’s the problem?

Finally, we get to the meat of his argument, and it’s so fucking stupid.  By having it so you can play as a Nazi in a video game, we “normalize it”.  It becomes just another part of life.  That Nazis stop being super bad, and just become “meh.”  Then he asks if we’re ignoring history with this statement and says the answer is no.  Um, fuck yeah you are!  This is blatantly ignoring history.  And because you’re almost-certainly an American, I’m not surprised.  It’s not exactly a mystery that American education doesn’t even do the most basic of stacking up against other developed nations.  Education in this country is a fucking joke.

The Nazi party isn’t something that just came from the ether.  They didn’t just come out of nowhere and say “let’s start killing Jews, homos, and gypsies!”  No, there is a long and ugly history.  Like the Treaty of Versailles, which was an egregious document that destroyed the German economy.  Then there was the burning of the Reichstag, which galvanized the German people.  Then there’s the fact that, historically speaking, blaming Jews for people’s problems has a LONG history.  During the Black Death, whole communities of Jews were killed, because people thought they were bringing the plague.  Mostly because they weren’t getting sick nearly as much, partly because of their social isolation and partly because they had more standards of cleanliness than other people of the time.

So when this dude says that the concept of Nazism is being “normalized” by playing CoD: World War II and being on the Nazi team, I’m left to wonder something – what the fuck is he talking about?  The dude goes off on this tangent of how if it’s normalized, you might go to Nazi websites and read their ideas and become radicalized.  What?!  This is so fucking stupid.  Like some kid who is raised in typical, accepting and pro-diversity America is just gonna go “you know, I looked at Nazism, and I think it’s a good fit.”  Let’s totally ignore that white nationalism ideas are typically taught by families who are racist as fuck.  That you don’t just go onto a website and believe an ideology.  That wanting to become a Nazi is WAY more complicated than “I played a video game and was a Nazi in it, so now I’m gonna become one in real life!”  Jack Thompson 2.0.  Well, maybe 3 or 4.0, at this point.

The dude then says one of the dumbest thing I’ve EVER heard.  That after playing over a thousand hours of CS: Go, you’re gonna be celebrating terrorism!  Are you fucking kidding me.  What fantasy world does this delusional fuck live in?  What absolutely bonkers fucking reality does this intellectually-vapid moron live in where he can think that all it takes to become a terrorist is seeing in a fucking video game?!  Never mind that terrorism as we know it today almost-exclusively comes from a very violent and very bigoted religion that is pretty popular, worldwide.  Granted, there are plenty of people who subscribe to a much less radical version of that religion and just want to live in peace.  Good for them.  But the more radical element of that religion has a pretty big stake in terrorism as we understand it.  I don’t hear a lot of these games praising Allah.  So what is your proof of this, troglodyte?

So we get to the moron’s solution to his intellectually-insipid non-issue that exists only in his vacant mind – make PvP just training exercises or color everyone red and blue, a la Halo.  He then makes the argument that people who claim that needing to have Nazis or terrorists in games multiplayer for historical accuracy is stupid because it isn’t historical.  A guy who literally ignores ALL of history associated with EITHER of the groups he is decrying in games is telling me that people arguing for historicity is bullshit.  Um…pot, kettle on the line!

The rest of the video is just him restating what he already talked about.  This is stupid.  This is so fucking stupid.  This is the Anita Sarkeesian argument that violence against women in video games normalizes violence against women in real life.  There’s no measurable difference between these arguments.  Meanwhile, there is a lot of history for both sides that we as a society could learn from and not repeat.  But this stupid fuck wouldn’t even know where to begin on that.  It’s clear that he is historically illiterate.

Until next time, a quote,

“Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it, while those who do learn from history are doomed to watch other people repeat it.” – Anonymous

Peace out,


Let’s Answer Questions That No Atheist Can Answer

An pro-Islam YouTube channel has decided to make a series of questions that no atheist can answer.  I figured that since I haven’t done anything atheist in forever, I would take on these questions.  Here’s a link to the video, now let’s do this.

How did existence emerge out of no-space and no-time?

How do you know there was no-space and no-time before reality as we understand it?  The truth is that we don’t know how exactly the universe came into being.  There are a number of theories, but all of those could be proven wrong.  Meanwhile, your religious book says that Allah somehow always existed outside space and time and magically made everything.  Yeah, I’ll take actual science over sky wizard magic.

How can an atheist assume his atheism is valid?

I am an atheist, therefore my atheism is valid.  Given what I’ve seen of modern science and the various religious texts I have read, I have concluded that their beliefs in a divine being are absurd, so I do not believe in them.  Boom, that was easy.  Aren’t these questions supposed to be so hard that no atheist can answer them?

When the moment of the start of existence is stark proof on the creativity of the creator and his ability to originate existence?

Oh, I jumped the gun there.  Well, I can answer this too.  There is NO proof that the universe was created by a magical sky-wizard.  None.  You all talk about sunrises and rainbows and a nice ass on a sexy lady, but then decide to just ignore the fact that most of reality cannot support life, because it exists in a massive void called space.  That there are a TON of things that are not beautifully made on this world, such as birth defects, evil people, and the fact that our planet is one giant asteroid away from humanity being dead.  I can see my atheism as valid because I can see that there is ZERO proof of your creator, and your pathetic supposition about the beauty of existence.  Again, wasn’t this supposed to be hard?

How did no life transform into life?

We don’t know.  See, once-again, this is something science has that religions does not.  We have the humility to acknowledge when we don’t have all the answers.  Meanwhile, ancient books written by primitive savages are what you hold up as absolute truth.  But please, tell me again how you are so enlightened.  There are a lot of theories about the origin of life on Earth.  Eventually, we will be able to create rudimentary life in a laboratory, and on that day, I will smugly look at your retarded morons and say “where is your Allah now?”

How did matter mutate from lifelessness into living cells?

Again, we don’t know for sure, but there are a number of theories.  Science is looking for the answer.  Meanwhile, I haven’t seen your bullshit religion figuring anything out.  Given that your religion has a bad habit of being shit on by actual science.  Like how the Quran says that night is as a cover over day, when we know that is patently untrue.  Or how you can somehow transmute mud into man.  I’ll take science over that stupid shit any day.

With all our techniques and advances, we cannot originate the simplest form of life, so how can we explain the origination of life in the dead matter?

What a weird phrasing.  Matter isn’t dead or alive.  It is.  Living cells are dead or alive.  As I said, we currently haven’t gained the ability to create life in a laboratory, but the day is coming.  And when it does, I cannot wait to watch you eat those words.  Not to mention, isn’t this a tacit admission that it takes magic to do it?  So you do believe in magic.  Good to know.

Wouldn’t we, at least, be able to originate a form of life that supersedes the one that originated in the dead matter by at least a million times?

Someday we will be able to create rudimentary life, but complex life forms grow over millions of years of evolution.  They aren’t just made in a factory.  That’s your religious bias talking.  You don’t just make complicated organisms.  We will no doubt be able to clone current life, but creating organisms that are (as you put it) at least a million times more complicated than current life is asinine.  Genetic modification through gene therapy is one way we can alter genetics of an organism, but creating all that from scratch is ridiculous.  Because you think that life is created, you have this bias.  Sorry that reality doesn’t work the way you want it in your head.

How can the atheist argue against the annihilation of all mankind?

Because I was born with empathy I don’t want to kill my fellow human being en masse.  I joke around that human needs to die, but there is some part of me in the dark recesses of my little black heart that hopes that somehow, some way, humanity figures out how to save itself from its own stupidity.

What is the rational, substantial, scientific evidence an atheist can present to prove the annihilation of all mankind is a mistake?

Easy, the human brain has the capacity for empathy.  We see looking after our fellow human being as a goal to aspire to.  We want to improve the world we live in.  Meanwhile, let’s take a look at your holy book.  It calls for death for those who leave the faith, or to kill non-believers, unless they convert to Islam.  Your religious text condones more murder than atheist secularism EVER will.  But please, tell me again how I believe in genocide.  You then decide to ditch the questions and tell us that we must naturally assume that genocide is rational to save the species.  Um, no.  I believe that sexual education and access to contraception will do more to stop overpopulation than your retarded book.

Atheism assumes that human beings are just animals who came into existence after a long and slow sequence of evolution from meaner beings, so what if a higher being came into existence?

There is a LOT to unpack here.  Atheism doesn’t believe that we came into existence from really mean beings.  We came from less evolved forms of life.  But since human history is a litany of violence (so is your religion, both post and current times), saying that we came from “meaner beings” is a really strange way to phrase things.  I believe we came from less evolved forms.  Sure, they were violent, but nature is violent.  Humanity is violent.  Violence is a part of life.  One that, unfortunately, humanity can’t get away from.

As for your second question, what would happen if a higher being came into existence?  Well, if the Q shows up one day, I can’t stop it from choosing to destroy humanity.  If we meet some hyper-evolved intelligent being that has figured out the right way to live, I guess we can sit back and realize how bad we fucked up and feel sad.  This is such a strange question.

Will it have the right to put us in cages and use us as lab rats?

The right?  No.  It might have the power to do that.  But if there is a being who has evolved and grown to the point that they realize the nature of reality and that we have to look after each other, they aren’t going to want to do so.  Western society evolved socially to see slavery as wrong.  Here in America, we had a big old war over that belief.  It’s telling about your view on reality when you think a higher being has barbarous intentions.  Islam at work?  You then once-again go out of the mode of asking questions to give your answer – the “darwinist” answer is “Yes!”  For one, Darwinism is a bullshit term that I have only ever heard creationists use.  For another, find me all the biologists who want to enslave people.

Oh, but we can look at your religion and see people enslaving people.  Like how ISIS has taken women all over the Middle East as sex slaves.  Like that?  I love that a Muslim is telling me about how immoral I am, when the immorality of Islam is everywhere to be found.

So, what is the purpose from protecting mankind or providing them with meaning or purpose when it comes to atheism?

Atheism tells people that meaning and purpose is what you make of it.  There is no higher being to give us purpose.  We have to find it in our own lives through our own values systems that are unique to every individual.  I’m sorry that our belief structure is all about freedom while yours tells you to accept easy answers from a sky-wizard despot.  Oh, but you decide to answer your own question again, with the propaganda that you approve of.  Wasn’t this supposed to be questions that atheists like me are supposed to answer?  I’m feeling really gypped here.

What if, according to evolution, we proved that one race is higher than the other?

Higher how?  We have proven that the Asian community tends to favor intelligence in their genes.  We’ve shown that black people tend to have much bigger cocks than white people.  What is your metric for “higher”?

Will the higher race be allowed to transform the lesser race into used matter: as we do with the insects or animals?

You haven’t even defined what the “higher race” is.  I suppose this is to be about eugenics.  Well, since we are all part of the same species, there is no “higher race.”  We are all human.  Different humans have different genetic traits, we we share a same species.  This ties in with that creationist bullshit you hear about “kinds” and shit like that.  But since we know that not all evolution is done by “survival of the fittest,” the argument that only the strongest organism will survive is no longer valid.  We now know that weaker organisms evolve defenses against the stronger organisms.  Or they will go to other areas and once they no longer have that predator, they evolve in different ways.  That’s called genetic drift.  Your whole argument is based on a bullshit analogy of what evolution teaches. Muslim creationists, go figure.

Then you decide to once-again answer your own question and say that your “brilliant” argument is enough to demolish atheism from the mind of anyone that uses common sense.  I just refuted it, so yeah, didn’t do shit to me.

After this he goes into a long diatribe about how atheism says that morals are relative, but that atheists then say that morals are absolute when shit hits the fan in our own lives.  A statement that is blatantly not true.  Citation needed, moron.  I’m gonna try and figure out if I can put into words what this dude is trying to ask here, since there is no question.  It’s just a sermon from this guy for a long stretch of time.

If morals are relative, how can you claim there is immorality for the bad things that happen?

Okay, let’s play a little game with that.  Your holy book tells you to murder people who leave the faith.  It’s a fact.  It also tells you that men are stronger than women and to use that strength over women.  So, when was the last apostate that you killed?  Or the last woman you beat?  Both are fine according the moral precepts of your book?  Meanwhile, in Christianity, it says that you shouldn’t beat women, but you should silence them in church, because they should ask their husband whatever they are confused about.  What Christians tell their bitch to shut up in church?

Morality is relative.  The morals of ISIS are not the morals of contemporary Islam, correct?  However, in places like the UK, it was found that the vast majority of Muslims there would not report to the police if they knew a terrorist attach was coming by a Muslim.  What is the correct thing to do?  The moral thing to do in that instance changes.

Meanwhile, atheism says that morals are relative, and instead of following some moral code set out by some ayatollah or religious leader, to follow empathy and try and be an empathetic person.  That is as close to actual objective morality as we will ever get.

How did the amazing constants of physics emerge?

Stephen Hawking wrote a book about how the universe could easily have come into existence, physics and all, without the need for a God.  I hate to be accused of the argument from authority argument, but this guy was one of the smartest people to ever live.  I think his source trumps your ancient desert tomes.

You then decide to go into the Cosmological Argument.  For those who want my beautiful destruction of that stupid-ass argument, here’s a link.  One thing you make is the argument that if things were even the slightest bit different, reality would collapse.  How do you know this?  How do you know that instead, it would just be another reality where there are new laws of physics?  It’s why Neil DeGrasse Tyson said if we ever do find a door to other words, best to send a probe first, because it may have laws of physics that don’t interact with our reality.

How did the genome emerge within the living cells?

This ties into the emergence of life.  Even the most basic bacteria cells have DNA.  You answer the story of the origin of life on Earth, you answer that question.  Idiot.  But you make the argument of “there had to be writer for it.”  So dumb.  We’ve seen how natural processes can change DNA, through forces like mutation, where the DNA of one cell mutates.  Cancer is a mutation of healthy cells into cancerous ones.  Did Allah decide to just go into all those cells and change things?  Neat fact – cancer cells don’t age, so long as the host organism survives.  In theory, cancer could live forever.

Where do morality and values come from, when it comes to atheism?

I’ve already answered this question.  Next!  Oh, wait, there is nothing next.  You just summarize your bullshit.

Well, that was…not fun at all.  I hate it.  Never doing this again.  I’m tired of answering stupid questions.  I have a headache.  This was beating a dead horse.

Until next time, a quote,

“When the black plague swept the land, people killed cats, mistakenly thinking they spread the disease. In actuality, the plague was spread by rats–and we had done them a favor by genociding their natural predator. We haven’t gotten smarter since.” – TJ Kirk

Peace out,


Let’s Answer Questions Muslims (of BuzzFeed) Have for Non-Muslims

Yup, BuzzFeed actually went there.  This isn’t on their BuzzFeed Yellow channel.  I guess this is supposed to be a more serious video.  It seems that this “news” outlet wants to tackle religion.  Clench your assholes, people.  This can’t be good.  Here’s a link to the original video, now let’s do this.

What’s the deal with Santa?  So breaking and entering is okay, so long as it’s a chubby white dude?

No.  I have no issue with Santa because he isn’t real.  Just like Allah, now that I think on it.  I do, however, have problems with the religion of Islam.  But I’m sure that the rest of your questions are going to be much more serious.

When are you gonna stop asking me if I pray five times a day?

I wouldn’t ask.  I don’t care.  I couldn’t possibly care less about what you do with your religion, so long as you aren’t hurting anyone.  If you’re just praying to your bullshit religion and honoring your pedophile prophet, that’s your business.

Why must you put bacon in EVERYTHING?

Because it’s tasty.

Do you really think women who wear a hijab don’t have hair underneath?

What…?  Who thinks this way?

Why do you think all Muslims are Arab?

I don’t, actually.  That’s something I point out to people who are stupid enough to make Islam out to be a race or a culture, like Ben Affleck did.  I know quite well that there are Muslims of all ethnic origins.  That’s why, when I insult the religion, I’m not talking to any ethnic group.  I’m talking to those who follow the religion.

Why are only Muslims mentioned in talks about religious extremism?  Did you know hear about the KKK?  Westboro Baptist Church?  Crusades?

Last I checked, the KKK didn’t blow up an airport in Brussels.  The Westboro Baptist Church didn’t drive a truck into people in Nice, and then subsequently get out of the truck with a rifle to continue killing.  And the Crusades?  That’s old history.  Are you still on about that?  You and Black Lives Matter should get together.  The simple reality is that Islamic terrorism is the predominate form of religious extremism right now, and it has an ever-growing body count.  Christian extremists took over a state building in Oregon.  The biggest false-equivalence that I have ever seen.

Why do you assume all Muslim women are conservative, virginal souls?

I don’t.  But when you have stories about gangs of Muslim women in Germany attacking women there while shouting that they are whores, it does make one wonder how big the liberal community is in Islam.

Why do you expect every Muslim woman to wear a head-scarf?  Does  every Catholic woman dress like a nun?  Does every Jewish man wear a yamaka?

Why do you keep making assumptions about my expectations?  There are old photos from Iran before extremist Islam took over where women are wearing bathing suits and looking like normal people.  Islam has all stripes, and if only there would be a movement like the suffragettes in the Middle East, then maybe the good days can come back and we can stop having insanity like ISIS palling around.  One of the reasons why I think that the Kurdish women fighters are just tops.  As for all Catholic women being dressed like nuns, pretty much every Eastern European woman I know who is Catholic dressed insanely conservative.  So there’s that.

Are you really scared we’re going to take over America with Sharia Law?


Do you really think I want to donate 2.5% of my income to charity?

I’m assuming not, given your tone of voice and the look on your face when you said that.

What is the secret ingredient in Church’s chicken?

That is the dumbest question on any of these lists that I’ve tackled so far.

How can I hang out with the new Pope?

Got me.  Pope Jorge is just a figurehead, in my eyes.  At least until he starts giving some of these pedophile priests to the law.

Well, that wasn’t even approaching serious. That was stupid.  There were a thousand really interesting questions that they could have asked.  Maybe challenged some atheists on how we tend to be very visceral on the attack with their religion.  Believe it or not, but I would have loved to debate stuff like that.  Instead, we got empty questions that are about as insightful as a bologna sandwich.  Kinda want one of those right now.

Until next time, a quote,

“Don’t ask stupid questions, Murph!” – Joker, Batman: The Animated Series

Peace out,


Your Courage is Inspiring (A response to Nadine Al-Budair)

We all like to think that we have the strength of our convictions, even in the face of danger or possibly death.  We want to think that if we were in a situation where we could make a difference, we would step up and be the ones who lead the charge.  It’s easy enough to say.  But the reality is that it’s easy enough to say, but the truth is that people are pretty cowardly in general.  It’s only in the face of real adversity that we get to find out what we’re made of.  The thing about me is that I’ve been dead before.  I have a death wish.  Still, I don’t know if I would be able to speak truth to power, knowing that there is a very real risk of power finding me and killing me.  Most of you will probably say you would.

Then you get to see someone who actually does speak truth to power, knowing that their life is in danger.  In this case, it is a news woman named Nadine Al-Budair.  She’s a Saudi news anchor, who decided to do a neat little editorial where she spoke truth about the problem with terrorism, and spat in the face of the regressive left’s idea that terrorism is no fault of Islam.  What she has done takes incredible courage, so here is her video.

That’s incredible.  This woman has more guts than most anyone I will ever see.  The reality is that this piece of editorializing could end up getting her killed.  The Muslim world has shown itself to not be very nice about statements that show the darker side of their religion.  And they have shown that women who speak this way can be in real danger.  This woman’s life could be in jeopardy.  However, knowing the risk, she came out and decided to say something that needed to be said – that the regressive-left’s fight to show that Islam has no connection to terrorism is ridiculous.

She acknowledges that this isn’t as simple as Muslim = evil.  There is more to it than that.  But the reality is pretty much all the people who are committing terrorist acts in the name of religion are associated with Islam.  Her perspective of coming from this culture beats the shit out of the regressive left, who wants to speak for these people. She’s grown up in it.  She’s a part of it.  This is a life that she knows first-hand.  So none of the people who want to speak for her and hers have no right to claim that they know better.  Seeing this perspective was pretty interesting.  It shows that the politics of the religion are very complicated.

When I see the regressive-left make sport of the comments of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has been very open about her perspective of the faith.  For all their talk about wanting to give other people voices, it is only when the voices agree with them.  Meanwhile, there are Kurdish women who are currently fighting a war with ISIS.  A war that, if they lose, they could end up as sex slaves for the men who defeat them.  Women in real danger, all the time, because of this religion which supposedly has no problems.  I’ve watched people on the regressive-left apologize for ISIS too. It’s fucking bizarre.  When SyeTenAtheist made his video about how similar Islamism and feminism are (linked here), there’s a reason.  It’s time that we stop apologizing for people and start trying to examine the nuance of the situation.  Because this is getting insane.

In the meantime, Nadine, your courage is an inspiration.  I hope that nothing bad happens to you.  I’m some nobody on WordPress, but I wish you the very best, and I wish more people had the brass balls (figuratively speaking) that you do.  Have a good day.

Until next time, a quote,

“Let us pray not be sheltered from dangers, but to be fearless when facing them.”  -Rabindranath Tagore

Peace out,


Let’s Talk about Cologne (Germany)

I don’t suppose I have to tell you all about what happened in Cologne, Germany on New Year’s Eve.  That night, gangs of refugees from the Middle East attacked and sexually assaulted women.  It was the most wide-spread act of sexual violence that Germany has seen in the modern age.  It took the world by storm, and almost before it happened, I knew what would be the reaction.  See, the progressive left wanted us to understand that these refugees were angels of light and mercy and would perfectly integrate wherever they went.  The moment they came to a Western democracy, they would be better people.  Is that what happened?  No.  No it isn’t.  Instead, both Germany and Switzerland had a mass outbreak of sexual violence against women, to the point that both countries have given girls codes to follow to keep them safe.

The German police force was woefully unequipped to deal with this crisis, with both their police being woefully short, and there not being enough space to hold all the suspects that have been apprehended.  Everything about this has been one giant clusterfuck, and before we could actually talk about this issue seriously, what happened?  It became another ideological battleground between the progressive left and everyone who disagrees with them.  Or, as they see it, conservatives.  Because if you disagree with them in any way, that’s what you are.  Right?  Of course it is.  Because these people are for social justice, and they want to help the dear oppressed refugees, who comes from nations that have abysmal views on women and how women should be treated.

The articles started coming out before we even know what exactly happened.  The Swiss papers tried to play it off as not gangs of refugees’ fault.  The Guardian published a bold headline talking about how it wasn’t the refugees, but the patriarchy and bullshit like that.  It was madness.  Meanwhile, the facts of the case spoke for themselves.  Here’s a fantastic article from The Daily Mail which gives a clear breakdown and leaves nothing to the imagination about how it was, without question, the fault of gangs of refugees.  Now, as reported by CNN, a wave of protesters in Germany are coming out demanding that the refugees be sent home.  They want them gone, and that very well might happen.  If things don’t improve, these people may end up being sent back on the same boats that brought them to Germany.  Here’s where my urge to make this post comes in.

Amidst all this violence and the politicization of it, there is a real conversation that needs to be had.  Because the truth is that there are people among those refugees who condemn what happened.  There are people who need help, and don’t want to hurt anybody.  They just want to keep to themselves and help their families.  But because both sides of the debate about this issue are being polarized to such an extreme, nobody is even paying attention to the fact that there is a middle ground that will go absolutely ignored in the weeks to come.  There are more and more people in Germany who want these people gone.  They want to send every last one of them back to the war-torn regions they came from.  But that is not fair for those who are not of the same mindset as the gangs who did this.

That being said, let’s all take a moment and be honest about something – the religion that the bulk of these people came from has a part in this.  The progressive left will try their best to apologize for Islam, but where do you think the ideology that has many of the women who have their own gangs that have been assaulting women in Germany in bee-keeper suits came from?  It came from Islam.  It came from their culture that tells women that they are second-class citizens and should be ashamed of themselves for their femininity, and that women who do not dress conservatively are asking for it.  Passage after passage in the Quran about it.  For atheists like myself, this has been evident for years.  But then you get people like Ben Affleck who yells on camera that Islam isn’t a religion, it’s a culture.  Now, the progressive-left are becoming ACTUAL rape-apologists and trying to apologize for the religion and the culture it created within these refugees.  Anyone who can defend a culture that has this kind of behavior is just that – a rape apologist.  Because that’s what’s happened.  Real women have been sexually assaulted, in droves.  A sectarian conflict is brewing in Germany, and Switzerland won’t be far behind.  Other European countries are next.  The thing is, it has made an issue that was already contentious here in America that much more divisive.  If the people in Germany wants these refugees gone, why bring them here?

Which brings us back to the people being ignored – the ones who want to just livei n peace.  What do I think should be done?  First – the people who are in the German cells – send them back.  Every last one of them.  We gave them an opportunity to leave the war-torn regions they came from, and they chose to bring that here with them.  A chance to start over,and they forsook it in order to get their rocks off.  Fuck ’em.  They can go back home, and live out that kind of life there.  But we shouldn’t be immediately condemning all the rest to the same fate.

I for one am one of these people who believes that an interview process should be required before taking refugees in.  Ask them serious questions about their values and if they believe certain activities are acceptable.  Inform them of the fact that if they decide to partake in these behaviors, they will be sent home.  Have a very quick legal process, and then send them back.  But don’t immediately condemn their families.  Send the guilty home, and let those who are innocent remain.

Does that seem unreasonable?  That we take RATIONAL steps to trying to maintain security?  I am open to others.  I, unlike the social justice crowd, want to talk about this.  I think I might be the very last.  Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

Until next time, a quote,

“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”  – Voltaire

Peace out,


Paris Attacks, the Left, and Islam – #NotAfraid

For those of you who didn’t know, there were a series of attacks today in the city of Paris.  These attacks have left over 140 people dead, with countless more wounded.  These attacks were the result of Islamic terrorism.  And I have seen on Twitter that people are already coming out in droves, to defend Islam.

Let’s have a real moment here, people.  There are plenty of Muslims who are very good people.  They don’t want to hurt anyone.  They just want to do the right thing.  That’s good.  I think that that is an excellent thing.  This post isn’t about them.  But we have a huge part of the progressive-left who constantly goes out of their way to defend Islam from attack.  Why?  Well, in the name of tolerance.  Because these people have this strange idea that Islam is a race.  And by insulting Islam, you’re insulting a race of people.  Which is patently false.  There are Muslims of all ethnicities.  I think that these people just think that Muslims are all of Arabic descent.  Maybe that’s the thing.  But it’s not true.  Islam is not a race.  It is a religion.  And that religion…is fucked up, and can go fuck itself.

The simple reality is that Islam has a TON of problems, if you read its religious texts.  Like how their prophet Muhammad (gays be upon him) was a pedophile who married a nine year old girl.  Oh, but he fucked her when she was eleven.  I’ve had that argument thrown at me with the intent of it being a good excuse.  Because the man isn’t a sick pedophile if the girl is older than ten.  Hey, he’s doing better than Sarah Butts.  That thing went after a girl who was eight.  Or there is the blatant misogyny that their holy book promotes.  For those who want to come at me that the Christian Bible is the same, I agree.  I have no more love for that book either.  They are both sexist as shit.  The difference is that Christianity has evolved this left-leaning wing who goes out of their way to pretend that those parts of the book doesn’t exist.  Islam has a significantly-smaller part of their population who does.

Then there is the stuff about how those who do not worship Islam must be killed.  It may not have been the most even-handed documentary, but Religulous did have some great quotes from the Qu’ran showing plenty of quotes, along with Islamic religious leaders who promote murder.  And let’s not get started on the fact that there is a sect of Islam that has taken to turning women into sexual slaves.  Yeah, that’s right.  I’m talking to you, ISIS.  But plenty of the people who defend Islam also defend ISIS.  I think it’s madness.  So, sexism is wrong, until a religion promotes it?  Wow.  The progressive-left and their double-standards are a thing to marvel at.

It’s good to want a world where people are accepting of other people…to a point.  I won’t accept a belief structure that condones the senseless killing of innocent people.  It’s happened more time than can be mentioned.  And every time, the uber-tolerance crowd comes out to make sure that everyone knows that Islam is totally fine.  That it’s the people who antagonize them’s fault that they got killed.  Yes, because the people who were sitting in a cafe that got shot up did something so horribly wrong to the pieces of shit who did this, right?  Of course they did.  Or going so far as to blame the people who get attacked for what happens.  Like what those pedo-defending pieces of shit at did before the bodies of the dead went cold.  Seriously, fuck Salon.  I fucking hate those people.  I will never condone violence being perpetrated on someone, but if by some chance the entire staff of that publication all got crushed under a semi, I won’t be shedding any tears..

People are coming together in solidarity with the hashtag, #NotAfraid.  I take up that mantle.  I am not afraid of these pieces of shit.  Fuck Islam.  Fuck the prophet Muhammad (gays be upon him.  Right up his ass).  Fuck any belief structure that can tell people that wanton killing is okay.  Fuck it.  Fuck it right up its ass.

That’s all I’ve got to say about this.

“All you have to say is that murder is wrong.”  -Bill Maher, Religulous

Peace out,


You and Yours are Victim-Blaming, and Screw You (A response to Pope Jorge)

Yes, once-again, the PC left has come out in defense of terrorism.  Don’t ask me how that works.  I guess they are so desperate to appear accepting that they will even accept violent psychopaths.  Because if we don’t, then people get sad.  And in one of the most foul and disgusting pieces of victim-blaming ever, people like Glen Greenwald and the intellectually-void Johnathan McIntosh came out against Charlie Hibdo, basically saying – you had it coming.  Man, I guess they never saw those PSAs that would tell us, “it’s never the victim’s fault.”  For real, that’s basic logic.  But probably the most offensive bit of victim-blaming came from the last remaining theocrat – Pope Jorge.

He goes by Francis, but this little worm hasn’t earned the right to be called by that name.  This duplicitous piece of shit is undeserving of any respect at all.  And yet, because Catholicism is a belief system still stuck in the Dark Ages (and very much resenting that they don’t have the power that they had back then), this aging theocratic monarch has a TON of people who listen to what he says, and believe it, too.  Because that’s a totally rational way to live your life, right?  In any case, Pope Jorge had some thoughts on what happened to Charlie Hebdo, and the reactions have been…astounding.  Don’t believe me.  See for yourself.

I love that CNN has plenty of photogenic blonde hand-puppets.  It’s all the rage on Fox.  But let’s not focus on that.  We have bigger fish to fry.  Yes indeed, Pope Jorge decided to say something profoundly stupid, and now I’m going to take him to task for it.  The stupid thing of the day – free speech is limited.  The fuck?!  Um, no!  No it is not!  The freedom of speech is absolute.  Regardless of whatever stupid bullshit you believe, you have the right to say it.  That’s how this works.  Listening to Jorge tell us about how freedom of speech does not extend to attacking other people’s religion sounds very much like some Catholic butthurt.

Speaking of, did you hear the guy who commented after Jorge was finished?  Yeah, LOTS of butthurt.  I can’t imagine way.  After all, it’s not like the Catholic church is full of priests and cardinals who have diddled little children, right?  That never happened.  It’s also not like Catholicism worships an imaginary man in the sky, who has jealousy problems of other religions, gets butthurt and then genocidal, make a convoluted and retarded plan to have his son (who is also him.  What was that song, I’m My Own Grandpa…) killed for the mercy of the world.  Or hey, let’s talk about how petty your Gawd is, since he doesn’t like it if consenting adults have buttsex.  Yeah, that sounds like a belief system that deserves respect.

Which brings us to Islam.  There is no reason why Islam should be exempt from criticism.  None.  At all.  It is a religion that has 109 passages about converting or killing non-believers.  They will go on and on about their religion being one of peace, but it’s in their holy book that it’s not!  Come to think of it, the holy book of Christians condones a lot of violence too.  That’s interesting.  Hey, maybe you and the Catholics should get along!  After all, both of you believe that someone who diddled small children has a special connection to God.

It all brings me to this – the freedom of speech is absolute.  That is something I believe from the bottom of my heart.  If some racist holocaust denier wants to spew his vile bullshit, it’s his right to do so.  Just as it’s my right to call him a fucking idiot for saying that.  If someone wants to say that having sex with small children is cool, it is my freedom to come right back at him and say, “why the fuck are you out of the basement?  Back, vile creature!  Back to the pit from whence you came!”

So to Pope Jorge and to all the people who agree with him, I’m going to use my freedom of speech to say – fuck you!  Fuck your stupid bullshit religion.  Fuck your phony-bologna Gawd.  Fuck your smug attitude.  Fuck your PC pandering so you don’t hurt some precious little snowflake’s feelings.  Fuck all that!  You people are part of the problem.  Because once you start saying that this group of people or that group deserves special consideration and how nobody should hurt their feelings, where does it end?  History has been made by the hurting of feelings!  The greatest changes have come from people who made other people mad.  Martin Luther and nailing the 95 Theses to the church was one of the catalysts of the Protestant Reformation.  Martin Luther King insulting the bigoted parts of America helped get his cause off the ground.  Mohandas Ghandi leading his march to the sea angered the British.  Hurt feelings have changed more history than any other.

And it makes sense that people like Johnathan McIntosh are against free speech.  After all, he is part of a very new religion – Puritan Feminism.  Just like all religions, anyone who questions it is quickly denounced and made example of.  I suddenly get why they are quick to defend Islam.  But here’s the truth – questioning and mocking religion is one of the best things that can be done.  Because while there are the butthurt losers who will scream and shout and kill people for their faith, there might just be some people who look at that and go – why are they making fun of my religion?  And then they might look into what these people are saying.  Then they might learn something.  Once they do that, then they might start to doubt in its validity.  Then that person can spread that to others, and change can happen.

So fuck PC pussies, and fuck Pope Jorge too.

Until next time, a quote,

“Don’t kill him!  If you kill him, he won’t learn nothin’!”  -The Riddler, Batman Forever

Peace out,