Message de Pat Condell

A message for America

Pat Condell has a message to America.

Transcript of Pat Condell’s Video:

"Wake up, America (hat tip KGS)You remember the cartel of Islamic dictatorships that hijacked the United Nations Human Rights Council don’t you? And then promptly passed a resolution banning the criticism of religion? Yes of course you do!

Well, apparently they’ve decided now that the Universal Declaration of Human rights gives people just a bit too much freedom and dignity for their liking. And so they’ve devised their own Islamic human rights charter which is a bit like Satan getting his own set of pearly gates and about as convincing. Unfortunately the Islamic charter is based on Sharia which is, of course, invalid because it’s God’s law and God doesn’t exist; to claim that he does is extremely offensive to those of us who passionately believe otherwise. It’s a grave insult to our most deeply cherished beliefs , an assault on the very core of our being, no less, and a violation, therefore, of our human rights – isn’t it?. Well, isn’t it?
Now all this would be something of a tiresome joke if not for the fact that this nonsense is beginning to have a real effect on our basic freedoms, certainly here in Europe, and Americans would do well to wake up and pay attention to what’s going on. Ever since the Islamic countries demanded that Western governments make it a crime to criticise Islam, all over Europe blasphemy laws and religious insult laws are being use to criminalise freedom of speech. The latest is Ireland, a country that has being literally raped by religion yet has passed a law protecting it from criticism. Talk about Stockholm Syndrome!

Free speech, they tell us, carries certain responsibilities; well too true, it does, the most primary one being that what you say should be the truth. And the truth should never be embarrassing and it should never be illegal, and any government that’s so embarrassed by the truth that it makes it illegal is governing under false pretences. The Dutch Government for example which is in the process of embarrassing itself by prosecuting the leader of one of the country’s largest political parties for the ‘crime’ of telling the truth. You see, these days in Europe we have become so used to weasel words and double standards that the truth has become distinctly unfashionable. Speaking your mind is now seen as virtually anti social because some opportunistic cry-baby is sure to take offense and throw a tantrum, and that might threaten community cohesion.

Now what has all this got to do with America? Well, President Obama is very keen on showing respect to the Muslim world and nobody can fault him on his record so far, bowing as he did to the King of Saudi Arabia like some kind of vassal, and then making a rather flattering and, some might even say, dishonest speech in Cairo, although to be fair to him he did stop short of prostrating himself towards Mecca... at least for the time being! But because he wants to play ball with Islam, especially now that they have given him a peace prize through their shills in the Norwegian establishment, that he’s going to have to justify for the next three years. The Iranians must be rubbing their hands with glee at that one.

The American Government has now done something that if they did it in their own country it would violate the Constitution. They have co-sponsored a UN resolution that puts a limit on freedom of speech because the Islamic countries don’t like free speech, they don’t like free anything, except free foreign aid - obviously they can’t get enough of that!

Even the Saudis want aid now, have you heard their latest? I could hardly believe it! The Saudis have said that when the world starts using less oil they expect to be compensated for loss of income! You really couldn’t make it up could you?
Now the problem with the new touchy-feely American administration is not that they want to be friendly and respectful towards everyone; that’s very laudable. It’s just that when you have a moral agenda like that it can be tempting to cut corners, especially when it comes to inconvenient things like... Constitutional amendments. And if they are doing this now outside the United States, where they can get away with it, it’s only a matter of time before this is allowed to become international law, and then you know they’re going to start trying to do it inside the United States as well; in the name of ‘community cohesion’- get used to that phrase America, it’s coming you way! And this matters, it matters a lot, not only to Americans but to all of us who see the American Constitution as the anchor for Western Civilisation, which is what it is! We know that no matter how spineless our politicians are here in Europe and elsewhere , and here in Europe. They barely got a vertebrae between them. between them. As long as America’s First Amendment remains inviolate there will always be an oasis of freedom on this planet that Islam cannot touch. But as soon as anyone is allowed to interfere with it, to water it down, to reinterpret, to chip and chisel away at the First Amendment for reasons of religious or cultural sensitivity then we wave our civilisation goodbye.

Americans voted for change at the last election, they didn’t vote for surrender. Watch what’s happening in Europe America, cherish that Constitution and don’t let Islam anywhere near it for all our sakes. Remember the words of Mr Omar Ahmad, co-founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations, who said that Islam is not in America to be equal to other faiths but to become dominant and that the Koran should be the highest authority in America. That would be higher than the Constitution then by my reckoning.You know, if President Obama is serious about showing respect to the Muslim world, then he should pay them the compliment of telling them the truth – that their religion is entitled to as much respect as it gives – zero! And that with their record no Islamic country has any business even holding an opinion on human rights, let alone serving on a legislative body. Then asking the people of the free world to compromise their fundamental values is far, far more insulting than any set of cartoons or any book could ever be. And that if the Islamic countries had an ounce of genuine honour between them, they would issue a full and unconditional apology. That’s what he should say, because that’s the truth. Everyone in the free world knows it’s the truth. So let’s hope the truth becomes fashionable again... before too long.
Peace – oh yes."

Citation de David Horowitz

"My correspondent’s second question was an unexpected one, more perplexing than the first: “Do you ever feel that you are wasting your breath? Do you think that truth will ever matter? No matter what you prove or disprove, in the end the truth will remain in the shadows of what people want to hear and want to believe.”

I agree more than I care to with this thought. It is the human wish to be told lies that keeps us where we are. A stoic realism lies at the heart of the conservative viewpoint. It is about accepting limits that are absolute, which the human condition places on human hope.One could define the left as just the opposite: the inability to come to terms with who we are; the obstinate, compulsive, destructive belief in the fantasy of transformation, in the desperate hope of an earthly redemption.

I have watched my friends whose ideas created an empire of inhumanity survive the catastrophe of their schemes and go on to unexpected triumph in the ashes of their defeat. Forced to witness the collapse of everything they once had dreamed and worked to achieve, they have emerged unchastened by their illusions to renew their destructive utopian crusades. The society they declared war on has even rewarded them for their misdeeds. Today they are cultural navigators in the nation most responsible for their worldwide defeat. I cannot explain this dystopian paradox other than to agree that politics is indeed irrational and socialism a wish as deep as any religious faith. I do not know that the truth must necessarily remain in the shadows. But I am persuaded that a lie grounded in human desire is too powerful for reason to kill." David Horowitz, Frontpagemag, 24 oct. 2009

________________________________________________

"Critical theory” – the coy self-description of the ideological Left – self-consciously describes itself by the totality of its rejection of the existing social order, in identical fashion to old-style Marxists (Marx himself was a “critical theorist”). The explicit agenda of critical theory is to undermine the credibility and authority of the status quo in order to prepare its annihilation. The task of undermining communal assumptions and stabilizing faiths is not incidental to the radical critique, but is its corrosive essence. It is what the theory intends. Yet, like the Marxist-Leninists of the past, critical theorists never confront the moral issue posed by their destructive agendas: What can be the rationale for weakening and ultimately destroying a system as liberal as the existing one, if no better has been devised?

Without its adherents noticing, the theoretical argument of the Left has been emptied of content by the failures of socialism. For what is the practical meaning of a socialist critique in the absence of a workable socialist model? In fact, there is none. By adopting an impossible standard, it is easy to find fault with any institution or social system under scrutiny. The ideal of socialist equality, for example, may or may not be admirable. But if social equality cannot be realized in practice, or if the attempt to realize it necessarily creates a totalitarian state, then the idea of such equality can have no significance except as an incitement to destructive agendas.

To raise the socialist ideal to a critical standard imposes a burden of responsibility on its advocates that critical theorists refuse to shoulder. If one sets out to destroy a lifeboat because it fails to meet the standards of a luxury yacht, the act of criticism may be perfectly “just,” but the passengers will drown all the same. Similarly, if socialist principles can only be realized in a socialist gulag, even the presumed inequalities of the capitalist market are worth the price. If socialist poverty and socialist police states are the practical alternative to capitalist inequality, what justice can there be in destroying capitalist freedoms and the benefits thy provide? Without a practical alternative to offer, radical idealism is radical nihilism – a war of destruction with no objective other than war. "

– The Politics of Bad Faith: The Radical Assault on America’s Future

Climate Modeling Nonsense

Oct 19, 2009
Climate Modelling Nonsense
By John Reid, physicist

SOURCE : http://icecap.us/index.php

The less a thing is known, the more fervently it is believed. - Montaigne
In effect a new religion has grown out of secular humanism. Global warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytising the new faith.
There are major differences, however. Whereas it is not possible to call oneself a Christian without entertaining the central belief in the Resurrection, it is certainly possible to be deeply concerned with the order and condition of humanity and so call oneself a humanist without entertaining a corresponding belief in anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Belief in a Resurrection which supposedly occurred some 2000 years ago is a matter of personal faith, whereas AGW is a scientific hypothesis which can and should be tested by observation. Imagine the consequences both to science and to secular humanism should this hypothesis turn out to be untrue and the dire predictions of the climate models fail to materialise.
The quasi-religious nature of AGW is evidenced by the rancour which is generated when people like me express scepticism about the theory. Scepticism is an essential part of science which has, until recently, been a “small-l liberal” pursuit in which the opinions of doubters were respected. Now we sceptics are called “deniers” and, by implication, lumped in with neo-Nazis who question the Holocaust. The accusation that we are somehow in the sway of the oil companies and similar big business interests is commonplace and indeed is the chief argument of non-scientist supporters of the AGW theory. This echoes the “work of the Devil” argument of fundamentalist Christians; it is a mental trick by which the faithful avoid facing the real issues.
Why then do a majority of scientists support the theory? I believe it is largely a matter of loyalty. Very few of us physicists know enough genetics to justify our belief in Darwin�s theory of evolution by natural selection but most of us support it because we believe it to be the outcome of rigorous scientific processes similar to those carried out in our own discipline. Most scientists would support the AGW theory for much the same reason.
By accident of history I find myself in the opposing camp. I was trained as a physicist and was granted a PhD for my postgraduate work in upper atmosphere physics. In the early 1980s I joined the CSIRO’s Division of Oceanography and worked in surface gravity waves (ocean waves) for a time. Much of the theoretical side of oceanography entails fluid dynamics which, because of its heavy mathematical load, is regarded as a sub-discipline of applied mathematics rather than of physics. Because of this, in my view, many practitioners of oceanography and climatology have a cavalier disregard for experimental testing and an unjustified faith in the validity of large-scale computer models.
Later in my career I was involved in running and refining numerical fluid dynamical models, so I gained some insight into how this modelling is done and how rigorously such models need to be tested. Naval architects and aerodynamical engineers do such testing in wave tanks and wind tunnels.
Meteorologists regularly test model “skill”. Climatologists don’t seem to have a concept of testing, and prefer to use the term “verification” instead - that is, they do not seek to invalidate their models; they only seek supporting evidence. My scepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.
Back in the early 1990s when I was still working for the CSIRO and the early versions of the AGW theory started to gain currency, I was rather bemused by the passions which were aroused in my colleagues and the gullibility with which predictions of future climate disaster were accepted. Surely the jury is still out, I thought. I remained agnostic about the theory. More recently, after reading the literature and looking in detail at the output of one well-known climate model (HadCM3) I have changed my stand. I now believe it is nonsense for the following reasons.
First there is the argument, commonly used by Al Gore and others, that carbon dioxide forms a layer like a blanket or greenhouse window pane high in the atmosphere which traps long-wave infra-red radiation, thus making the surface of the earth warmer. This is misleading. Certainly carbon dioxide is an infra-red absorber but, like most infra-red absorbing gases, its absorption rate depends on concentration and pressure and is at a maximum at the ground. The atmosphere is a gas, not a solid, and bits of it move up and down, carrying heat as they move. As a meteorological balloon climbs higher in the atmosphere, the measured temperature falls off with increasing height. This phenomenon, referred to as the lapse rate, has been known and described for more than a century. The lapse rate is determined by the thermodynamic properties of the gases that make up the atmosphere and has little to do with radiation. The convection term completely dominates the radiation term in the relevant equation.
Second there are the climate models themselves. In discussions with colleagues, arguments always seem to come down to “But the models show...” Those who use this argument seldom have modelling experience themselves and share the lay public�s naive faith in the value of large computer models.
I have been a fluid dynamical modeller and I know how flaky numerical models can be for even a relatively small chunk of fluid like the Derwent Estuary. The models are highly unstable and need to be carefully cosseted in order to perform at all realistically. One reason for their inherent instability is that the mesh size of the model grid (typically hundreds of metres to hundreds of kilometres) is always much larger than the scale at which friction and molecular diffusion operate (millimetres or less). These are the forces which act to damp down oscillations by converting free energy to heat. In order to get around this difficulty, in order to keep a model stable, it is common practice to set certain parameters such as eddy viscosity unrealistically high to compensate for the absence of molecular friction. This is reasonable if we are using the model to gain insight into underlying processes, but it means that fluid dynamic models are not much good at predicting the future. There is no exact correspondence between model and reality, and the two soon part company. Fluid mechanics and celestial mechanics are very different disciplines.
This country and the world at large have many real political, demographic and environmental issues to contend with. We do not need to create problems where none exist. The present hysteria diverts money and attention away from problems which do need to be solved. In my view, terrorism, the proliferation of nuclear weapons and pandemic disease are far bigger threats to my family�s comfort and security than are global warming and putative “tipping points”.
There is a danger that conservation failures will be blamed on “climate change”. This happened recently when the removal of feral cats caused a rabbit population explosion on Macquarie Island. Incompetent environmental management resulted in such massive erosion problems that eleven species of birds are now threatened. Climate change has provided a convenient alternative view of the cause of this disaster. Likewise the flooding of oceanic islands by “rising sea levels” has more to do with the removal of coral reefs for construction projects than with global warming.
Over the last few years, with remarkable rapidity, AGW theory has gone from a scientific curiosity to a politically-correct catechism. Nowadays it is not merely politically correct, it is politically essential. Somehow this nineteenth-century oddity has outlasted Das Kapital to become the banner of millions of environmentally concerned Westerners. It seems to fulfil a human need for sacrifice, a need to “put something back”. It is the ancient myth about guilt and sin and redemption in a new guise.
People are entitled to entertain whatever apocalyptic view of the future they choose, but such ideas have nothing to do with science. Climate prediction is not science, it is pseudo-science, and sooner or later more real scientists are going to wake up to this fact.
In the conduct of human affairs it is surely preferable that we base our actions on reason and evidence rather than on piety and myth. Read full essay here.



“Warmists scream “weather is not climate!”. We need to shout back “Venus is not Earth!” since the Venusian atmosphere is entirely different in compositions and forcings, and we understand it far less than Earth’s. Icecap note: as commenters said also 26 million miles closer to the sun and days 150 of our days long and has an atmosphere that is denser and deeper with surface pressures 90 times earth producing compressional warming. In the Venusian atmosphere at the same pressure as earth’s, temperatures are comprable to earth. Of course Nye did not mention Mars, where even though its atmosphere is mainly C02, the air is colder because the atmosphere is thin and pressures lower and of course Mars is farther away. See comments for much more." Anthony Watts, Watts up With That

-->

JUSTICE SOCIALE.......?????!!!!!

Elites and Tyrants: The Fruits of "Social Justice"
by Walter Williams (October 7, 2009)

SOURCE : http://www.capmag.com/

Rep. Diane Watson said, in praising Cuba's health care system, "You can think whatever you want to about Fidel Castro, but he was one of the brightest leaders I have ever met." W.E.B. Dubois, writing in the National Guardian (1953) said, "Joseph Stalin was a great man; few other men of the 20th century approach his stature. ... But also -- and this was the highest proof of his greatness -- he knew the common man, felt his problems, followed his fate." Walter Duranty called Stalin "the greatest living statesman . . . a quiet, unobtrusive man." George Bernard Shaw expressed admiration for Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin.

John Kenneth Galbraith visited Mao's China and praised Mao and the Chinese economic system. Gunther Stein of the Christian Science Monitor admired Mao Tsetung and declared ecstatically that "the men and women pioneers of Yenan are truly new humans in spirit, thought and action," and that Yenan itself constituted "a brand new well integrated society, that has never been seen before anywhere." Michel Oksenberg, President Carter's China expert, complained that "America (is) doomed to decay until radical, even revolutionary, change fundamentally alters the institutions and values," and urged us to "borrow ideas and solutions" from China.
Even Harvard's late Professor John K. Fairbank, by no means the worst tyrant worshipper, believed that America could learn much from the Cultural Revolution, saying, "Americans may find in China's collective life today an ingredient of personal moral concern for one's neighbor that has a lesson for us all." Keep in mind that estimates of the number of Chinese deaths during China's Cultural Revolution range from 2 to 7 million people. Mao Tsetung was admired by many academics and leftists across our country. Just think back to the campus demonstrations of the '60s and '70s when campus radicals, often accompanied by their professors, marched around singing the praises of Mao and waving Mao's little red book, "Quotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung." Forty years later some of these campus radicals are tenured professors and administrators at today's universities and colleges, as well as schoolteachers and principals indoctrinating our youth.

The most authoritative tally of history's most murderous regimes is in a book by University of Hawaii's Professor Rudolph J. Rummel, "Death by Government." Statistics are provided at his website. The Nazis murdered 20 million of their own people and those in nations they captured. Between 1917 and 1987, Stalin and his successors murdered, or were otherwise responsible for the deaths of, 62 million of their own people. Between 1949 and 1987, Mao Tsetung and his successors were responsible for the deaths of 76 million Chinese.

Today's leftists, socialists and progressives would bristle at the suggestion that their agenda differs little from Nazism. However, there's little or no distinction between Nazism and socialism. Even the word Nazi is short for National Socialist German Workers Party. The origins of the unspeakable horrors of Nazism, Stalinism and Maoism did not begin in the '20s, '30s and '40s. Those horrors were simply the end result of long evolution of ideas leading to consolidation of power in central government in the quest for "social justice." It was decent but misguided earlier generations of Germans, like many of today's Americans, who would have cringed at the thought of genocide, who built the Trojan horse for Hitler to take over.

Few Americans have the stomach or ruthlessness to do what is necessary to make their governmental wishes come true. They are willing to abandon constitutional principles and rule of law so that the nation's elite, who believe they are morally and intellectually superior to the rest of us, can have the tools to implement "social justice." Those tools are massive centralized government power. It just turns out last century's notables in acquiring powerful central government, in the name of social justice, were Hitler, Stalin, Mao, but the struggle for social justice isn't over yet, and other suitors of this dubious distinction are waiting in the wings.

Born in Philadelphia in 1936, Walter E. Williams holds a bachelor's degree in economics from California State University (1965) and a master's degree (1967) and doctorate (1972) in economics from the University of California at Los Angeles.

Please contact your local newspaper editor if you want to read the WALTER WILLIAMS column in your hometown paper.

Mahomet, serviteur du diable..

Ce texte est une réponse d'Ali Sina de Faithfreedom International à un Français, un peu perturbé psychologiquement, qui s'est converti à l'Islam mais qui est quand même effrayé par les injonctions du Coran.

SOURCE : http://www.faithfreedom.org:80/2009/10/18/to-be-a-good-muslim-i-must-kill-my-mother/

Hello David,

We can talk about the existence God until cows come home. For the sake of this discussion and to make things less polemic I accept the premise that God exists.

There are thousands of religions and faiths that claim to show you the path to God. Every day a new faith is born. Of course not all of them are true. All but one are invented by charlatans and liars to amass wealth, but more importantly, power and narcissistic supply. Power is the loadstar of the narcissist. Narcissists would even sacrifice their own lives, let alone the lives of others, for power. Jim Jones and David Koresh are good examples.

Now, assuming God exists, what would his nature be? Would he be a logical and a loving god or an illogical and hateful god? Any sane person would agree that God cannot be illogical and hateful. It is Satan that is illogical and hateful. (I am using religious terminologies freely and accept the premise that God and Satan are both real to make my point.)

Would the real God lie or deceive people. No! That is not logical because lies and deception are the instruments of the weak. If you are all powerful you don’t need to lie or to deceive. But according to the Quran Allah is khairul makirin (the best deceiver). You have to lie in order to deceive. So if Allah is deciever he must be also a liar. Deception and lies are not divine qualities. This assertion alone is enough to disqualify Muhammad’s Allah as God.

There are other satanic qualities that Muhammad attributes to Allah. Among the 99 names that he gave to Allah we find al-mutakabbir (the bloated), al-jabbar (the despot), al-qahhar (the subduer), al-khafid (the abaser) al-mudhell (the humiliator), al-mumit (the death giver) al-muntaqim (the avenger), ad-darr (the creator of the harmful /evil doer). Aren’t these satanic attributes?

We humans are advised to acquire divine qualities. Are these divine qualities? Is a deceitful haughty vengeful despot who humiliates people, subdues them and gives them death and destruction a good person?

Although proofs abound that Allah is not God, but a demon who seduced Muhammad, the above is more than enough to convince any sane person.

Religions tell us that Satan is a deceiver. He has no real power except the ability to deceive people who in turn will act as his instrument and do his bidding.

Let us say that God is so desperate that he is offended when humans don’t worship him. Now this is obviously a very stupid concept and a blasphemy. We humans love our pets and take care of them without any expectation from them. We won’t torture and kill a cat if he eats the food we provide for him and walks away without thanking us. Our love for our pets is unconditional. How can God who is infinitely superior to us humans be so petty to not have the same kind of love that we humans have for our pets? Although the whole notion that God would punish humans in such an excruciating way, like burning them and pouring boiling water on them for eternity is sheer idiocy and it takes a complete idiot to buy that nonsense, let us accept this foolish notion also for the sake of argument.

The question that arises is why would God need humans to act as his henchmen and do his dirty work? Why he does not kill the unbelievers himself? Muhammad’s god is like a Mafia godfather.

He has no real power over anything except the control over his gangsters and it is these criminals who kill people on his behalf. The powerful God does not need anyone to murder his detractors. If really God wanted to kill someone, he could do it without anyone’s help. He could stop their hearts from beating , or to make it more spectacular, he could lift them up to the sky and smash them to the ground so everyone could witness his brutal power.

You asked, “Didn’t Jesus say that his people would hate their family because of him?”
I am not a Christian but I am afraid you misunderstand what Jesus said. Muslims deliberately misinterpret his words to justify the evil teachings of Muhammad. Jesus never told his followers to hate their family because of him. He said that because of their faith they will be hated, persecuted and crucified even by their nearest and dearest. Muslims are Satan worshippers. Satan deceives people. He is Khairul Makerin. But we are endowed with a brain not to fall prey to the lies of impostors. No! Jesus never told his followers to hate anyone. He even said, love thy enemy. You grew up with Christian teachings. How can you fall for such a blatant lie?

You say the Quran is a miracle. The only miracle is the stupidity of so many people that believe in that satanic book of filth and terror. There is no miracle – not a single miracle in the Quran. It is a pack of lies made up by a mentally sick man for very stupid people. A mule must have more commonsense than a person who reads the Quran and thinks it is from God.

You wrote, “I said the shahada and prayed like a Muslim. I felt the presence of God inside of me during one or two nights in my bed. It was very nice. But of course, how could I be in peace if my mission was to kill my mother?”You also wrote, “For me, terrorists of 9/11 were the true Muslims. Once, in my bed, I felt a spirit entering my body, and giving me the desire of being a suicide bomber. It was very brief (two seconds perhaps), but scary enough to make me jump out of my bed and say No! to God. I was saying: no God, I don’t want a God who kills people, etc…”
Yes you are right. Terrorists are the true Muslims. But could that spirit that possessed you be possibly the spirit of God? The same loving god that created all mankind including your mother and sister and now is telling you to murder the peson who raised you and did not sleep night after night to make sure you sleep? Of course not! The moment you were deceived and said your shahadah you opened your heart to Satan. It was he who came to give you peace so you become confirmed in your deception. It was he who possessed you and told you to become a suicide bomber. Good spirits do not invade people’s bodies. They respect you and don’t violate your being. If at anytime you feel some spirit has entered you know that it is not from God no matter how you feel. It is a demonic spirit and you must seek psychological help or an exorcist.
Satan does not give a damn about your life and the lives of the people whom he wants you to destroy. Satan uses people who open their heart to him to do his evil deeds and by saying the shahada you gave him the chance to invade your body. Satan is a death giver, an abaser, a destroyer, and he is haughty. He is khairul makerin. Once you said your shahadah you invited him to possess you. All Muslims who have uttered these satanic words are possessed by demon. That is why you see they are committings so many evil things all over the world are so miserable and dejected. Their countries are war torn and they are busy killing on another everywhere.

God gave you conscience. That conscience shouted at you telling you that God does not want you to become a murderer, but you chose to silence your conscience, the voice of God inside you, and instead let yourself to be deceived by Satan.

You already know what you said is no proof for Islam and acknowledged that “it is all about faith.” But people can have faith in a lie too. There is no truth in Islam. I am offering $50,000 dollars since eight years to anyone who can give one sold proof in favor of Islam that I cannot refute logically, and despite the fact that this challenge is read by millions of Muslims and I have debated with hundreds, if not thousands of them, no one has been able to prove Islam is true. Meanwhile, my colleagues and I have provided thousands upon thousands of logical proofs that Islam is a lie and Muhammad was an evil monster, a demonic soul no different than Charles Manson, Shoko Asahara and Jim Jones.

Islam is from devil. That is why you feel awful. Take the Quran to a field, tear it apart and piss on it. Make a video of what you do (without showing your face) and put it on Youtube. I promise you that you will feel instant serenity and peace and no fear will ever come to you. This simple ceremony will make Satan fear you instead and leave you alone. He will know that he can no longer deceive you. There are millions of other fools whom he can prey on, but you will be safe.
This advice is not just for David. Anyone who lives with the fear of Allah should do it. You’ll feel sudden relief. I have not done this myself because I was a rational person always and never believed because of fear. Once I learned the truth I went through a series of emotions that I described in my testimony, but fear was not one of them. But I know of someone who overcame his fear of demon Allah by doing just that. You need to break this shackle once and for all and pissing on the Quran is a powerful symbolism that tells you, you are free. You can order a free copy of this satanic book from CAIR for this sacred ceremony. Do it fast before CAIR staff end up in jail, now that they are exposed for trying to overthrow the government of America. If you don’t want to destroy your Quran you may photocoy several pages of it for your pissing ceremony.

Please don’t laugh. I am very serious. The Quran is a fetish for Muslims. They fear even touching it with their left hand because that is the hand they use washing their derriere. Pissing on the Quran is like breaking an idol. The act itself may sound silly but its effect on your psyche is liberating. You will be telling your subconscious mind that you are breaking away with all the lies and setting yourself free from fear.

Humans have used ceremonies for important events, like initiation into a new religion, initiation into adulthood, wedding, graduation, etc. All these ceremonies are reminders that something important is taking place and a new life has begun. You can piss on the Quran as the reminder that you no longer believe in lies and are not afraid of the bogyman of a psychopath.

The Old Testament is a fairy tale, even then the reason you find similarities between the Quran and the Judaic scripture is because Muhammad plagiarized that book. He, like all pre Islamic folks in Hijaz grew up listening to Biblical stories. He remembered bits and pieces of those stories and plagiarized them, often making gross mistakes like confusing Mary the mothe rof Jesus (Maryam in Arabis) with Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aron (also Maryam in Arabis). This does not mean both books come from the same source.

You wrote, “If you believe in hell and paradise, then religious violence on earth is nothing compared to eternal anger of God.”

This is a good example of how satanic deceptions work. The deceiver bases a seemingly valid conclusion on a false premise. The belief that God has a rotisserie where he burns humans for eternity is a lie that only stupid people can believe. As I explained above, such sadistic behavior is inconsistent with the nature of God. Attributing such insanity to the creator of the universe is the gravest blasphemy.

Assuming there is a hell, who do you think is most deserving of it? The person who does not believe in God or the one who attributes insanity to God? Would you be angrier at a person who says I don’t know David or at a person who says I know David – he is a sadist psychopath, a haughty despot, a deceiver, a mischief doer and a murderer? With the lie that God is a sadist torturer Muslims want to justify their own evilness. But God is not a sadist and what Muslims do is satanic. To say because God is a torturer (qahhar) I am justified to be violent because I no matter how much I harm you I can never do you as much harm as God is going to do to you is a sheer deception.

Assuming God exists, an atheists can say, I am sorry dear God for not believing in you. The reason is that those who spoke of you did not have logical arguments and wanted me to have blind faith in something that made no sense. Since you gave me a brain I decided to use it and hence refused to believe in what people say without proof. Furthermore, those who believed in you did not agree even with each other so how could I know which religion is right when all of them demanded blind faith?

Since God understands reason he will be convinced that it is not the fault of rational people for not believing in him. In fact, those who believe without proof become terrorists and murderers. They do evil in the name of God. Instead of loving the creation of God they think about killing others. So atheists who did not do evil to others and did not attribute insanity to God will go to paradise, but Muslims who attributed diabolic qualities to God and accused him of being a sadist, a mass murderer, a psychopath destroyer, a humiliator, an abaser, a despot, an avenger and a harms maker /evil doer will most likely be thrown into hell for libeling God and for attributing demonic qualities to him.

Now, since if God exists, He most certainly is a merciful and companionate God he may even forgive stupid Muslims who blaspheme him. I would never take revenge of people who call me names and libble me, assuming they do not hurt me, and we know that no one can hurt God. I just ignore them. God must for sure have a lot more commonsense than me and he will most certainly not punish ignorant Muslims who believe in the lies of Muhammad and consequently blaspheme their maker. But will God forgive those fools who kill other humans? If God is just, He should punish the terrorists, otherwise he would not be a just God.

You can be as much stupid as you wish. You can even blaspheme God and call him all those shamelful names that Muhammad called him. You can point your keister to Him in heaven five times per day and insult him in this silly way too. I am sure God will still forgive you. If I can forgive people who insult me how can a creator who is infinitely greater than me not forgive people who are infinately smaller than him? But will He forgive you if you kill someone? Once you kill someone or harm them in any way your stupidity is no longer an excuse. You cannot say I was fooled by Muhammad please don’t sent me to hell to spend the rest of eternity with that monster.

Don’t kill your mother. Don’t kill your sister. Muhammad was a bastard liar. Don’t believe a word of that demon. Don’t do evil on earth and don’t harm people for a lie or even for what you may think is true. Just don’t harm others for any reason.

Islam is stupid. It is the most stupid cult made by a very stupid man for very stupid people. Don’t hide behind numbers. A lie is still a lie even if 1.5 billion fools believe in it. Anyone who follows Muhammad, believes in that psychopath and trusts that fool is a fool. It is okay to be a fool. God will not punish people for their foolishness, but woe to you if you do evil, commit murder, or harm another soul.

I am sending my book to you. Read it before murdering your mother and sister. It may bring you to your senses and prevent you from committing the biggest insanity of your life.

Dear reader, David has spent months in a psychiatric hospital. He may suffer from some sort of psychological disorder. maybe schizoferenia. However, as you can see from his letter, Islam has acerbated his psychological problem to the extent that he is now a real threat to himself and to others.

As I have shown in my book Understanding Muhammad, the prophet of Islam was insane. Islam is insanity. Under the influence of Islam normal people become insane, but when psychologically challenged people are influenced by Islam they become dangerous. It is like fire meeting a tank of gasoline. Fire burns everything, but a tank of gasoline explodes.

I hope David you read my book and snap out of this insanity called Islam and don’t commit a hideous crime for a sheer lie. We all make mistakes but if you commit this mistake it is irreversible. Once you realize the the gravity of your crime you can never forgive yourself and your situation will become far worse.

Read my book. It could save the lives of many innocent people and yours too. You won’t go to paradise by killing people. How much stupidity is enough? Even if you have psychological problems, which is not your fault, you know the diffrence between right and wrong. Don’t let the demonic man of the 7th century decieve you. He is in hell. Don’t hasten to meet him. Spit on his name, piss on his satanic book and leave his diabolic cult. Treat others the way you wish to be treated. This is the essense of goodness. This is what will save you and not the belief in a charltan who deceived people for his own gain and told them to murder in order to go to pardise.