BS: Islamic radicalism . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 19 May 14 - 08:52 AM

Yeah, nobody controls Israel. Obviously....

A very secular government according to er... the Israeli government. Mind you, in order to form a government they have to have a very non secular mandate. Can't be upsetting the land grabbers and electric fence erectors eh?

Shalom.

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 14 - 08:05 AM

Gaza broadcasting is state controlled like the rest of the Middle East (except Israel obviously).

The little Gazan children were being encouraged to kill all Jews.
The Jewish children were imagining themselves in battle, as their parents and grandparents were, defending Israel from foreign armies.
It is a very common childhood fantasy to imagine fighting bravely for your country.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 19 May 14 - 07:26 AM

That's me.

Perhaps you think people don't read what you put sometimes? Like I just said to Keith, you can't have it both ways.

I called you a top man or some such admirable trait in a thread the other day, and still do. However, you can be confused, contradict yourself and occasionally it is difficult to see where you are coming from.

Contemptible cheap specimens don't come around every day. I suggest making full use of them whilst they can be, as you say, arsed.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 May 14 - 07:03 AM

"All kids are interested in weapons, and the Jewish ones were not being encouraged to exterminate a race by their state broadcaster."
These kids are being brought up to expect to kill Arabs, you appalling bigot
You expressed righteous indignation about a film depicting Arab children being encouraged to talk about killing Jews, but when the opposite is presented you excuse it as 'just being children'
On both sides, children are being brought up to hate the other side - one side is no better or worse than the other - that is the fact of the situation.
Another fact is that Israeli is a wealthy and powerful militaristic state using brute force to extend its territory, the Palestinians are responding to Israeli acts of terrorism with similar acts of their own.
Everybody here, apart from your little Gang of Four recognise that and attempt to support the idea of the (now sadly defunct) Peace Negotiations - you lot wave your little flags for the Terrorist State.
Sickos - the lot of you.
Another one for you to excuse
ISRAELI HATE EDUCATION

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 19 May 14 - 06:44 AM

... except just to observe what a contemptibly cheap little specimen that Musket can be when it sets its mind to it, can't it?

Now I really have done.

I daresay

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 19 May 14 - 05:46 AM

Using a state broadcaster is not the same as taking responsibility for it.

Anyway, your Israeli friends reckon Palestinians are incapable of taking responsibility for anything. You can't have it both ways.

But you can try.

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 14 - 05:20 AM

No, but Hamas does.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 19 May 14 - 04:42 AM

Does the government here take responsibility for the output of our state broadcaster?

TC

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 May 14 - 04:02 AM

All kids are interested in weapons, and the Jewish ones were not being encouraged to exterminate a race by their state broadcaster.

Troubadour, that "disclaimer" was not mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 May 14 - 03:38 AM

""The report says that Israeli and Palestinian teachers both portray their neighbours as enemies, though Israel does so considerably less.""
Rather outbalanced by the sight of Israeli children with automatic weapons in their hands saying that they can't wait to be old enough to kill Arabs.
Hate doesn't come with one of your sliding scales when it reaches those proportions.
Small cheer indeed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 19 May 14 - 01:13 AM

One less ostrich then..

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 11:43 PM

Think I'd better leave this thread & really mean it this time. The effort of trying to get sense into the heads of selfrighteous stinkingmannered halfwitted ostriches is coming to sap my sanity and rob me of the will to live. Adieu. See you on some other thread. Some time. Maybe.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 18 May 14 - 06:54 PM

Sorry, me again.

I've been away from here for a couple of weeks and I'm out of practice.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST
Date: 18 May 14 - 06:52 PM

"If you really cannot see the distinction between the windy utterances and the symbolic but non-destructive to any particular individual, other than emotionally, of Westboro on the one hand; and the "let's kill all the bastards" approach of Boko Haram, whose leader & spokesman just this last week publicly & emphatically proclaimed the pleasure and delight he took in killing the enemies of Allah," MtheGM

You would have a job convincing any Muslim, however peacefully inclined, that there is any more than a mildly quantitative difference between your utterances here and those of the Boko Haram leader.

Qualitatively, you and he are equally guilty of condemning a whole culture, based upon a flawed stereotype.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 18 May 14 - 06:41 PM

Not trying to hide, simply forgot.

That last post was mine

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST
Date: 18 May 14 - 06:40 PM

"In that statement I am referring only (NB - ONLY) to the law-breakers, inciting or carrying out attacks, grooming young girls etc etc, NOT the vast majority of peaceful and law-abiding folk of ANY religion, colour or creed."

Dodgy disclaimer KA of H. You left out the bit about some of your best friends being Muslim.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 03:36 PM

Jim, from your links.
"The report says that Israeli and Palestinian teachers both portray their neighbours as enemies, though Israel does so considerably less."

Small cheer?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 03:26 PM

We were told it was overt, but OK Greg, what have you got?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 18 May 14 - 02:02 PM

Any overt references?

How about accept covert references, FW?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 18 May 14 - 01:32 PM

The number 600 is interesting. As a product of primes (as all numbers are) it reads 5 x 5 x 3 x 2 x 2 x 2.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 01:27 PM

600

Which is, as everyone knows, a significant number for this debate eh Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 01:13 PM

This war was overtly referred to by the people who started it, at least in the US, as a war of Christianity against Islam

Are you going to substantiate that statement or not?
Any overt references?

Every US president was and is a Christian.
That hardly makes every US war a religious one.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 May 14 - 12:57 PM

"Which conflict precisely, Jim?"
Any conflict that acquires the tag "Holy War" in order to demonise that particular religion Mike.
As I said, 'Holy Wars' per se are extremely rare beasts - these are always about something else.
To sympathise for the dead of one side and ignore all the other dead is to be partisan - what about all the Mrs Alis, whose sons died during one of the incursions into Gaza, or at Sabra.... or all of the other sites of mass murder - not human enough to deserve sympathy, or just the wrong colour or religion
And no - I won't differentiate one you've finished counting the body bags, I'm sure you'll end up finding very little difference in the figures eventuality and it's the intention that counts in the end - a 'master race', 'a chosen people' 'God on our side'.....
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 18 May 14 - 12:45 PM

The 'religious' element to the invasion of Iraq:

'I know that it is currently politically incorrect to quote Bob Woodward, but in his book, Plan of Attack, Woodward tells about asking President Bush if he asked his own father for advice about going to war against Iraq. According to Woodward, Bush replied that he had not asked his father for advice because, "He is the wrong father to appeal to for advice, the wrong father to go to, to appeal to, in terms of strength. There's a higher father that I appeal to."'

That is from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-wallechinsky/what-is-the-real-reason-g_b_11116.html


That there was no religious element involved is nonsense. In North America the reasons were not spelled out as official policy, but it surely was an influence among other reasons, and most of us knew that God was working for us, as usual.

In wars, there is lots of money to be made. And some corporations make a killing.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 12:12 PM

This war was overtly referred to by the people who started it, at least in the US, as a war of Christianity against Islam.

No it was not, and the death count there now, in a wholly religious conflict between Sunni and Shia, is truly horrific with daily bombings of public places that no-one even bothers to report anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 12:10 PM

Hurrah. Reason eventually prevails.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,#
Date: 18 May 14 - 12:01 PM

Further to John P's post I'd add that very few religions are willing to excommunicate whole sections of their believers even when the believers are violent murdering bastards. As John pointed out, ideology often trumps reality--or becomes reality. The Iraq war was one against the infidels, and the current 'terrorist' response in also a war against the infidels, which in this case happens to be us. Boko Haram's behavior is in its way quite like aspects of the US/UK-led Iraq invasion. It used to be 'Kill a Commie for Christ' and now we're surprised people elsewhere are pissed off. Shouldn't come as a surprise. Whether you're hacked to death with knives or blown apart by smart bombs, the end result is you're dead. Boko Haram is a product of its country and bad management within that country, and it's not coincidental that Nigeria has lotsa oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,John P
Date: 18 May 14 - 10:29 AM

Estimates for the number of civilian body bags in Iraq as a result of the war conducted there by the US and the UK range from 110,000 to more than a million. This war was overtly referred to by the people who started it, at least in the US, as a war of Christianity against Islam. They didn't really think that, mind you, but that was how they sold it to the ignorant Christian masses.

And that's just Iraq. Afghanistan probably doubles that number. Have the Muslim terrorists racked up that kind of body count yet? Does it really matter which violent evil-doers are doing the evil?

Singling out one group as if they were worse than any other is discriminatory thinking. Also blind, in that the connotation is that "my group of killers is better than that group killers because the other group does more horrible things." Open your eyes and add up the body bags filled by the US and the UK, starting with the formation of Israel and continuing to the present. Evil killers kill people, and they come from all religions.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 10:19 AM

I had no idea.

I am truly sorry for trying to reason.

Your last post reveals paranoia and discriminatory ideals.

Tell me, do you shit yourself when a dark skinned person with a rucksack gets on the train?

Do you know of thoughts and actions of relatives of the Bosnian Serbs in The Hague?

Are coptic Christians suspect too or does the word Christian make them inherently decent?

No wonder you defend Keith. You may as well rediscover Jesus. They need bigots to help overcome the rational thinking coming out of Synods this last few months.

Our forensic hospitals are full of patients who reckon God made them kill people. Doesn't stop them being people with personality disorder, schizophrenia or delirium. Do you blame followers of their God for their crimes? Don't get too close to Keith then, there's a rumour that the odd Christian murders people and days God told them to.....

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 09:34 AM

... and what do you know of the thoughts and actions of your nice GP's young nephew, eh? The killers of Mr Rigby were some nice person's nephews, I expect...

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 09:22 AM

I do so consider it so, Ian, as being a part of that would-be humane but actually ultimately destructive idealism so characteristic of so much left-wing thinking, that all causes, and all actions, are of equal validity so long as they are taken in the right idealistic spirit: of course you should "differentiate between religions"; they are all nonsense, but some are more harmless sorts of nonsense than others; and you had better learn to "differentiate" as to which, if you don't want yourself or your children or your grandchildren carried off in the approaching -- I'd say "holocuast" if the word hadn't been pre-empted to a specialist usage; but you will, I take it, get my point. So start differentiating right now if you know what's good for you.

If you really cannot see the distinction between the windy utterances and the symbolic but non-destructive to any particular individual, other than emotionally, of Westboro on the one hand; and the "let's kill all the bastards" approach of Boko Haram, whose leader & spokesman just this last week publicly & emphatically proclaimed the pleasure and delight he took in killing the enemies of Allah, then I can only put down such gross & grievous lacunæ in your thinking to an over-indulgence in that so satisfying to its possessors of the sort of pious self-righteousness so typical of the left. Which is what Amis considered to be what distinguished them from human beings.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 09:03 AM

"cause of this conflict" -- Which conflict precisely, Jim? If you mean the Israeli expansionism one, then you know we don't disagree. I know you sometimes like to dismiss my grief at the way it has all developed as 'lip-service', but you don't really know the half of it, you know; and are not as gifted as you sometimes appear to like to think in the ability to read my mind.

If the conflict you refer to, otoh, is the one whereby the world's entire safety is threatened by militant Islamism in C21, just as it was by Lenino-Marxist Bolshevism during much of C20, the very mention of which I have learnt by experience is liable to bring from you the oh-so-convincing counter-argument of a knee·jerk cry of 'racism': why then, I see little prospect of convincing you, either.

But by all means let us try to keep as much heat and personal animosity out of any views we may exchange on such matters, indeed.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:56 AM

I wouldn't know Michael. I have known a few lefties as you call them and consider them idealistic armchair socialists   Apart from the weird beard tree huggers of course.

Why do you consider my refusal to differentiate between religions "leftie?" Are you saying a local Muslim GP has more in common with terrorists than the old lady seeing him because she has problems kneeling pray in church these days?

If God botherers on this thread wish to differentiate between The Holy Q'ran and their bible, more fool them. Either can be used to get an army up, and both have such a track record.....

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:46 AM

"Won't resuscitate the counted bodies, will it now?"
No - but it might prevent more, just as recognising the militaristically aggressive nature of Israeli expansionism might just put a halt to it.
Pretending it isn't happening and blaming the other side certainly won't.
"...likelihood of either of us ever convincing the other..."
Have given up trying to convince you, Boo-Boo, Keith the Christian and Brucie the Zealot of anything Mike.
It doesn't stop either of us putting our opinions (hopefully without resorting to emotion-blackmail based appeals regarding personal sensitivities again)
It would be good to be able to discuss root causes now and again without finger-pointing one-sidedeness; coming to terms with the cause of this conflict rather than their effects (to both sides) is eventually going to provide some sort of a solution, if there is one.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:43 AM

Now, why am I suddenly reminded of a phrase in a long-ago essay of Kingsley Amis, I think it was? -- or perhaps it was a letter to a paper. Can't remember all the details of who made the remark Amis was addressing, or precisely what he said; but Amis said words to the effect that it "conveniently shows the difference between lefties and human beings".

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:30 AM

---riots that followed in many Islamic countries, four American servicemen were beheaded---
.,,.,.

Nice of you to make my points for me. Books on one side; heads on the other! Heads I win, I think...

But you still can't see any qualitative difference, can you? Too busy 'analysing' your precious 'root causes'.

Sigh!

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:18 AM

Just books eh?

It cost hundreds of lives in the riots that followed in many Islamic countries, four American servicemen were beheaded and two embassies attacked.

Just books....

The quill and the sword to use your flowery language...

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 08:15 AM

"All the same to me", absolutely, Ian. In what light it might cast you, is another point I would urge to your consideration.

--"Body Bag counting is important yes, but so is root cause analysis."--

Analyse away, and much good may it do you. Won't resuscitate the counted bodies, will it now? Whatever the 'root cause', they remain just as dead, and they were people. Those burnt Korans otoh were just books ~~ whatever orthogaphy for their nomenclature one might favour.

Jim, we can go on verbally fencing like this ad-∞; and in fact are doing so: to little likelihood of either of us ever convincing the other...

Regards to you both

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 07:51 AM

The Hegel model needs to factor in the phenomenon of selective media.

We see issues based on what advertising executives think go best with the interlude and Islamist fighters see what they are shown too. It is difficult to be truly objective even if you have the capacity to be so. With so many in politics and the media religious themselves, this is not easy.

You are the one comparing Westboro with Islamist groups. My point us that the hate, division and so called moral superiority is there. Far right Christian groups don't burn copies of the Q'ran in order to promote harmony. Body Bag counting is important yes, but so is root cause analysis.

If you want to dumb down the discussion to Keith's partisan simplicity, count me out. I'll just sit here taking the piss if it's all the same to you....

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 May 14 - 07:50 AM

If he body bags need to be counted Mike - count them for yourself.
The present conflict in Palestine is happening now, not in Roman time and it continues to tale lives - and, just as so-called Islamic crusades, it has been given a religious basis by taking place in order to set up a specifically Jewish State.
If one is a 'Holy War' so is 'tother.
It appears to be "ridiculous" to compare them only because it doesn't suit your own particular agenda.
By the way, was not around to respond to Keith's question on educating children to hate.
MILITARISING ISRAELI CHILDREN

EDUCATING CHILDREN TO HATE

PROMOTING HATRED THROUGH LITERATURE

Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 06:17 AM

Ian & Jim: I really do take both your points that this is not a phenomenon either historically or ontologically unique. But I would draw attention to the theory of Hegel [I think it was ~~ philosophy, you will gather is not a particular discipline of mine], that at a certain critical point, a quantitive difference morphs into a qualitative one. I think that this point has been reached when one considers the effects of the radicalisation of Islam with those of the radicalisation of any other group you can name in the modern world ~~ which is the world we are concerned with here. This is not to downplay the enormities of, say, Christians to the Lions in Roman times; or the Crusades or the Holy Office [aka The Inquisition]: but just to urge their irrelevance to the topic of this thread ~~ in the interests of which, Jim, I urge that body-bags NEED to be counted. If you can't see the difference between the numbers being killed by Bokar Haram, and the none being killed, however many may be ortaorically threatened, by the Westboros, well then you can't. But I think you make yourself faintly absurd by the attitudes of moral superiority you strike over this gigantic gap smack in the middle of your perceptions.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 05:49 AM

Michael,

before education kicked off in Europe in a big way, we too behaved in a similar fashion, thinking we could rule the world, and you know what? We had the church to tell the ignorant peasants God wanted it thus.

I repeat. Today's issue is Islamic radicalisation. However, many religions, including Christian, Judaism, Sikh, etc etc have present day examples of killing in the name of their particular imaginary friend.

Just because it is every horrid worrying, despicable threat we can imagine doesn't make it unique. It doesn't make Muslims "decent" it makes them er.. people. I don't blame our local vicar for the Serbian massacre of Muslims. I don't point at Indian people and ask how many Muslims were slaughtered in order to get the popular vote in the Indian election...

The problem with you, with Keith and others is that you appear incapable of seeing the bigger picture. You jump on the back of anyone who doesn't think Islamist radicalisation is the only problem ever. Ask the people of Palestine what they think when men in black coats, hats and ringlets nod their heads on Arab land claiming God gave it to them instead. I notice they can't find the deeds with their God's signature on it...

If you think Islamic radicalisation is a religious thing, you must have been reading the simple ignorance Bobad shows in his posts on this matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 May 14 - 05:06 AM

"But can anyone name the radicalisation of any other religion than the one named in this thread title whose radicalisation has led to anywhere near such extreme outcomes?"
Body-bag counting again Mike
Israel facilitated the massacre of 3,500 unarmed civilian refugees - fairly near the top of any list.
If you want to talk about Holy Wars, wouldn't you have to include the setting up of an exclusively Jewish state by militaristic aggression such a war?
It's certainly led to a large number of body-bags.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 04:30 AM

I just saw John Simpson on Andrew Marr, just returned from N Nigeria.
He said he had never seen a town attacked with such "brutal savagery" as he saw there (and he has seen some attacked towns!)
He quoted the Boko leader saying "I enjoy killing the people God tells me to kill."
He said BBC edited the quote out of his reports.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 04:06 AM

All the Muslims I have met and known have been decent people.
I do not stereotype, I acknowledge that such decent folk hate the violent extremists as much as I do.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 May 14 - 03:41 AM

Yes, indeed, "you can be radicalised in the name of any religion." Who would differ from that assertion?

But can anyone name the radicalisation of any other religion than the one named in this thread title whose radicalisation has led to anywhere near such extreme outcomes? I know all about the Jewish terrorists in pre-Israeli British-mandated Palestine; the lunatic Mr Jones, & that peculiar Westboro sect in Kansas [is it?] who claim to be Christian; the Hindu persecution of Muslims in just post-Raj India. But do/did any of these result in anything quite as spectacular as 9/11; let alone as extreme as the establishment of recognised sovereign regimes (N Nigeria, Yemen, Sudan, Malaysia cont p 94) in the international community where young women are regularly publicly beaten on the bare buttocks with canes for letting too much of their faces show, or stoned to death for having legally married a member of another faith?

Anyone?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 18 May 14 - 03:00 AM

Is "decent" a term meaning potential terrorist or somebody who has no need to be referred to in this thread?

Your stereotyping is breathtaking Keith. Truly awful.

TC



The main issue here is talking about the dangerous aims of people who use religion as a cover and relate it to people who happen to be of that particular religion.

As I said, it's like blaming your Granny for the crusades.

The term Islamist denotes radicalisation of Islam principles. You can be radicalised in the name of any religion. The threat to international harmony we see today is due to the vulnerability of people with little education. As ever, wicked people fill the gap with God.

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 May 14 - 01:55 AM

Decent Muslims are typically radicalised by Islamist hate propaganda.
Did you really not know this Greg?

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 May 14 - 04:11 PM

Ian ~~ I didn't suggest that all anyones were as bad as all anyone elses. I was simply replying to a specific point made by Steve which seemed to me erroneous. If you will trouble to reread his post, and mine in response, you will find that the absolute limit of my assertions.

But I don't suppose you can be, as you would doubtless put it, arsed...

Regards azzevva

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Islamic radicalism . . .
From: Greg F.
Date: 17 May 14 - 03:07 PM

When a decent Muslim person is converted to Islamism

How is this accomplished? And what about indecent Muslims?

In the words of the Chad Mitchell Trio, Islamism is the ism dismalest of all, I suppose, and the only thing we need to worry ourselves about.

Unless you count Christianism, Jewishism, capitalism, corporatism, Cliven Bundyism, Zionism, TeaPartyism, Hinduism, Jainism or militarism, colonialism, racism, fuckwitism & etc..