Richard Wiig

Members
  • Content Count

    690
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Richard Wiig

  • Rank
    $$$$$

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Richard Wiig
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking
  1. It doesn't beat the guitar intro to Steely Dan's Reeling in the Years.
  2. Not sure if I can warm to that version, Jules, although I can't say I disliked it. I'm a big N.Y. fan, apart from his loony lefty, enviro-wacko beliefs. To keep with the thread title, perhaps this song is anti-life. Or, perhaps not. The lyrics don't make it clear. Anyway, I love this song regardless. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frtJQFe9apw/p>
  3. One of my favourite caterwauling songs from many many moons ago.
  4. If only a Western leader had the courage to say the same things that Al-Sisi is saying. http://www.raymondibrahim.com/in-the-media/we-are-in-need-of-a-religious-revolution/
  5. The question "Why does anything exist" can be quite honestly asked, But it is a futile unanswerable question. Any question that has an answer requires the existence of some domain from which the answer flows. If anything exists then something must exist and there is no why.Ba'al Chatzaf It can be honestly asked for sure, but it can't be honestly sustained. My experience, generally, with Christians faced with contradictions in their beliefs is that they revert to "Who are we to know God". I haven't really found a fully honest Christian yet. It seems to be the same pretty much with Socialists. Their evasion might not constitute the act of a savage, but it does ultimately lead to the ascension of savagery. It would help to determine just what it takes to be a savage.
  6. No, this is the mentality of the honestly philosophically ignorant dealing with a non-obvious and difficult series of ideas. Branden's is the mentality of the religioso and cultist who attempts to intellectually intimidate and silence the innocent and good by wildly unjustly calling them "mystics" and "savages". Branden is immorally attempting to cut off discussion and debate in mindless and malicious fealty to the cultist version of the philosophy of Objectivism. And even 52 years later, and from the grave -- he's doing a really good job of it. It is certainly a non-sequiteur, but that doesn't mean that the man who asks it isn't a mystic or a savage. It all comes down to whether there is honesty or dishonesty behind the question.
  7. Greed, fear and the urge to merge rule the world. --Brant my asseveration is as such as valid as yours and maybe even more defensible Kyrel is right, and so was Ayn Rand. Philosophy and powerful thinkers do rule the world. Greed and fear is nothing, other than something to be guided by philosophy.
  8. Although, Geert Wilders, doesn't think that way. He sees it as a global issue and he acts globally. "As I said, our leaders still refuse to defend our freedoms because they are either cowards or appeasers. This is why the task of defending freedom has now fallen on us. On you, on me, on ordinary citizens. To this end, I have established the International Freedom Alliance IFA." "IFA aims to be a network of resistance fighters in all the countries threatened by Islam." You have my respect for what you've done and where you've been, it doesn't change the reality though. Islam is fascist. That is a bare-naked fact, and responding to it defensively isn't to fight a religious war. It's to defend liberty. To the extent that any problems are universal, they don't just apply to Australia. Australia is wrestling with the exact same things they are in New Zealand, in Canada, in France, etc. We all can learn from each other. As someone who values freedom. That isn't country specific, and neither is Islam country specific. The Caliphate is a religious imperative. They want Islam to be united and strong, headed by a Caliph. In Islamic law only a legitimate Caliph can all Muslims to war. That is one of the aims the jihadists are working towards. They want the Ummah to unite and put an end to Dar al-Harb for good. This is what they're aiming for. It is a religious imperative, and they work for it across a broad front, overt and covert. You might find this an interesting read. It was written ten years ago, and so far what was predicted has all come to pass. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/raymond-ibrahim/exposed-obama-helped-decade-old-plan-to-create-is/
  9. The average Muslim relies on Islamic scholars to tell them what is halal and haram. Islamic scholars have used the doctrine of abrogation to overcome contradictions. So, when Allah told Muhammad one thing, and it is later contradicted by another, it is the latter that has authority.
  10. If I have misrepresented you then it's because I haven't understood you. I don't want to misrepresent you. I'll make an effort to read you correctly. Likewise, your comment above misrepresents me. I am not about going to the mosques and hounding Muslims. That Muhammad wasn't a nice guy is simply a fact. It's a fact that I think should be widely known amongst non-muslims and not hidden. No. I advocate really kicking the Islamic States ass too. I'd go further and decimate Iran's nuclear facilities. Fair enough. You don't care enough about Islam to look at it, but that doesn't mean other's are like you. They do care, and do look at it, and they do not like what they find. P.S. I'm not quite sure just in what way I've distorted what you've said? Do you mean my voluntary submission blasphemy law comment?
  11. That's their problem. It is your problem. You are telling critics of Islam that they shouldn't criticise Islam by pointing out that Muhammad was a pedophile or a "bandit prophet" because it radicalises muslims who would otherwise remain peaceful, but here you are criticising Islam. You've been making efforts to say that it's fascism, not Islam, that is the problem, but you're not able to maintain that fiction.
  12. I haven't prejudged existence. I look at the real world. We don't live in the abstract. The real world is brimming with collectivist, tribalist mentalities, with desires and urges that are anything but freedom loving or good. It's true to say that Islamic theology won't inevitably make jihadists of all people, or inevitably turn a person into a jihadist. Certainly not everyone will choose it. Perhaps the majority will not choose it. But that isn't what you said. It is inevitably going to find targets and mould them like putty.
  13. I think that statement can only hold true in a world where everyone is an individualist who desires individualism and individual rights. But that world doesn't exist. There are literally millions who don't desire those things, who in fact desire the opposite, who choose and love mysticism, collectivism and whatever collectivist cause suits their need. I think it is inevitable that when psychopaths, pedophiles, power-lusters, and other misfits and deviants find a theology that gives sanction to their desires, they will latch onto it. The animals in the below video have found plenty of sanction. Islamic theology encourages them and urges them on. And what a terrible place to be if you're in the middle of that, and you have doubts. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVISyjFwXAU
  14. You can say you are fighting fascism rather than Islam all you like, but every muslim who knows what Muhammad and Allah wants will know that you are fighting Islam. Go and smash the brothers in Iraq and Syria, but do so knowing that there are millions of muslims around the world who will think of you as an enemy of Islam.