Sunday, June 11, 2017
Hesperado Podcast #13: "Is it possible to vett Muslims at all...?"
Rhetorical question, of course. See a couple of my Hesperado essays on this: Betting on vetting: Muslim Roulette as well as Whack-a-Mo vetting -- relevant to my main theme of this podcast, commenting on this editorial remark by Robert Spencer. (Also see this Google page of my many essays spoofing Garrison Keillor, "the news from Lake Mobegone", which I discuss in the first half.)
Listeners will note that my relaxation into the medium continues, and I'm actually beginning to have a bit of fun (oh no!).
Here's Podcast XIII:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I guess you can't defend your assertions that (a) Islam constitutes an existential threat to the West (b) all Muslims need to be quarantined (c) 1.5B can be quarantined (D) colonialism+modern interference and unspeakable violence are causal factors in the violence we see in Islam. etc, etc on your podcasts either! Maybe you'll just say that the aforementioned list are "unhinged invective" - that was pretty funny.
Ever hear of the availability heuristic? That's your primary problem. You've read these lists of Muslim atrocities and so you know them well - they're available to you. So you conclude that they're unique and that Muslims are uniquely evil. But that's just because you know more about it.
What about Southeast Asians? I bet if you spent the same amount of time reading about the Kmer (sp?) Rouge as you have Muslims (and they were still around), you'd say similar things about them. Or the Germans a few generations ago. Or early Americans who committed atrocities against the Indians AND black slaves (twofer!), or the English colonialists who , well, ran this game everywhere. On and on it goes. You just picked your place and time in history and imbued it with > significance than other places and times.
And spare me the Muslims are historically more violent. It just doesn't wash. You're just more VERSED in their violence, so you've again cast the illusion that there's more there. As I pointed out.
None of this covers the cowardice part of course. The inescapable conclusion of everything you say here are that all the Muslims have to die (ironically because THEY are barbarians - can't make this shit up), but you're too much of a pussy to actually say it. Let's just call a spade a spade, shall we?
BTW - if you want me to appear on your podcast, I think that's be fun. I'd liven shit up a bit, and you desperately need that.
You took 4 minutes to explain Prairie Home Companion. That was rough.
Steve writes:
"I guess you can't defend your assertions that (a) Islam constitutes an existential threat to the West (b) all Muslims need to be quarantined (c) 1.5B can be quarantined (D) colonialism+modern interference and unspeakable violence are causal factors in the violence we see in Islam. etc, etc on your podcasts either"
Apparently, Steve hasn't grasped how vast and complex these issues are that, in his uncouth way, he stabs at in the air before his addled eyes, while demanding that every utterance or sentence of mine "answer" them. This overall complex of issues needs to be discussed in civil manner; a feat for the Steves of the Internet which their psychology seems to make impossible.
"You took 4 minutes to explain Prairie Home Companion. That was rough."
I wasn't so much "explaining" Prairie Home Companion as I was expatiating on it and Garrison Keillor with reference to one series of essays on my blog. Can this Steve character get anything right? It seems his emotional hostility and ideological fanaticism has blurred his eye of comprehension with the acidic blear of politically correct multiculturalist hate.
"Steve hasn't grasped how vast and complex these issues are that"
Irony, oh irony. This form the 4 year old whose solution is quarantining 20% of the world's population. I know it's complex. You're the one with the childish nonsense solution.
I'm speaking in brief as to the causes that YOU have dismissed too hastily, but I'm oversimplifying. The guy whose causal model is that they're just bad or inferior tells me I'm oversimplifying.
But most of all, the guy whose solution would surely lead to WWIII and millions (billions?) dead cries out in the night for civility. CIVILITY I SAY!
Good grief.
You're terrible on your podcast - boring, you can't get to the point etc. To be fair, you've not done it and I'm sure you'll improve. I love radio Garrison Keillor (sp?) to Howard Stern to baseball. It's a skill that takes time to develop. I sound overly critical, sure - I'm just giving you an honest read.
Hey Steve,
Let's narrow the thesis: Muslims are an existential threat to clitorises.
Among other topics (like how the Muslim infiltration dynamic is simply copying the Jewish infiltration dynamic), Gates of Vienna came to a point of censoring my comments about the demonstrable Muslim threat to clitorises - which was very curious and disheartening since over half the world has clitorises - legitimately billions in this case!
Plenty of objective evidence supports my claim - and the Muslim 'War on Clitorises' (TM) both well and truly predates colonialism and modern Western meddling in Muslim lands.
The modern West needs to expel barbarous Islam so that (as the Muslim Obama would promise and renig):
If you like your clitoris, you can keep your clitoris.
P.S. I bet you're a real dick. Wink! :)
Post a Comment