on defining evil echoed Augustine and Aquinas from centuries ago. As an
informed and educational comment on Unleashed
II, I could not resist republishing it in full. The author is one of the
editors of Gates
of Vienna, perhaps the best blog site reporting daily on the Islamic invasion
of the West and the destruction wrought by the barbarians at the invitation of
our political elites. Gates of Vienna is
one of the very few blog sites that has consistently damned Islam as a religion, so I stand corrected. What I think deters such bloggers as Pamela
Geller and Robert Spencer from across the board condemnations of Islam is their
own religious tenets. It’s just a smidgen of political correctness that serves
to undercut their arguments and reportage on the ongoing depredations of “radical
Islam,” which is a term I myself have opposed for years. Examined more closely,
Islam is nothing if not “radical” qua political ideology. And here is the comment:
was the Bishop of Hippo, a cosmopolitan city with a university he founded. The
city disappeared under the Islam hordes a few hundred years later). It was he,
and later, Thomas Aquinas, who preserved Aristotelian and Platonic thought, and
the philosophy of good and evil (later to be called “ponerology” in
the realms of political evil).
I have often described Islam as evil. And we say repeatedly at GoV that it’s
not a religion but rather a juridical, supremacist, utopian world view (their
Utopia would be the Ummah, of course). Islam closely resembles Marxist
Communism. The main difference is that Islam has Allah stuck on top of its
ideas where for Communism; the ‘withering of the state’ is the summum bonum.
Islam is not only evil, it’s psychologically regressive; any kind of moral
development stops at Level One or Two: something is wrong only if you get
caught doing it.
what’s clean* vs. what’s not, with what’s haram vs. what’s halal (the list of
the former is much, much longer, including music, dogs, laughter)
a very good case* for why Mohammed, if he existed (and that is becoming more
problematic as they examine original documents) probably had a lesion in his?
parietal? lobe. That’s why he was often slightly incontinent and obsessed on
the long bathing rituals before prayer – a spot of urine on clothing meant you
had to start all over. He also seemed not to be aware of his left side -or not
as aware. Wore no jewelry on his left side, for instance. “Radical”
imams, in imitation of Mohammed, wear watches on their right arm. His obsession
with ritual was concerned with base things – the kind of poop/pee obsessions
that very young children display. Thus the rules about which foot goes first
into the toilet cubicle. It’s a normal part of child development; Islam never
Its obsession with women’s sexuality is also primitive: baby/momma revenge
fantasies that normal Western adults outgrow as they move into the ten year-old
range remain a conscious focal point for Islamic men. Thus their repetitive
acting-out on women.
Part of the reason for so many unhinged adult male Muslims is the extremely
high rate of sexual abuse of children, especially males, starting in infancy.
In a kind of you-break-it-you-pay-for-it ‘morality’, a man who we in the West
would call a pedophile is not seen that way in Islam. He only owes for his
transgressions if he does any physical damage to the child-object. Same rules
apply to a neighbor’s goat. His own goat? He contaminates the animal for his
own future consumption but he’s free to sell it in the next village without
mentioning his hobbies.
tribal cultures are, Rousseau and Margaret Mead be damned.