Introducing On the Barracades

ON the Barricades The Atheist Watch Index, sort of the best of Atheistwatch. There I am grouping the best stuff I've done on this blog so it's easy to find.

This is the Index to the blog.

The best reports are grouped under these headings.

Atheist Ideology

Organization of the Atheist Movement

Analyzing Atheist Propaganda

Organized Hate And Bullying

Psychological Factors Influencing Atheist Identity

Fundies/New Atheists two sides of same coin: Let's watch atheits do damage control

how do you the atheist on CARM react to the piece I wrote here about Staffanellis call to eradicate Chrsitians? Or one might say "Christian fundamentalism?" You can see from their rationalizations how sever it is.

Javaman explains how they can justify using a word like eradicate:

"Because we all know only True Christians(tm) redefine words."

so Christians have redefined a peaceful word like eradicate (that one uses for genocide and war and killing bugs) yet he makes out like the real meaning is peaceful and just about ideas and we made up that it's about killing?


MFFJM2

It's not you Occam, it's anyone who disagrees with him. Thankfully, almost everyone on this board recognizes Meta for what he is.

Its not the guy who tries to make friends with them, it's the one who sees their trur nature is the pariah. would be worried if they liked me.

The Christian who wants to make friends with them says that I'm alarmist because the guy did say he didn't mean "kill." what do you expect him to say?


Asimov:

It is crazy. Yea, it's bullying to say that we don't want to secretly kill Christians.

That's like saying people who want to end racism want to kill racists...

Heeeellllooooooo!!!! McFly!!!!

hsmithson

Dude, you seriously need to relax. As a white, American, Christian male (right?), you're basically a member of the most privileged group of people the world has ever seen. Leave the paranoia to people who actually have to worry about persecution. This shtick is getting old.

Dychper

On the Radicalization of Anders Behring Breivik

"The media are blaming critics of Islam (such as Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller) for the radicalization of Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik. However, Breivik said that he turned to terrorism in response to media censorship. Who's to blame for his extremism?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3uTPcxLsFo


We could easily say that "Breivik was created" in part by the left wing tactic of demonizing opponents as "racist" etc.

And by the way, he was hardly "Christian". He did identify as being a "cultural Christian" or something along those lines.

Let's be clear about this: Being critical of Islam is not "racism". And it's not "islamophobia" either. Not unless you can actually enter into the debate and show that critics are very much wrong in what they say.

It's a big assortment of ridiculous excuses none of which really mean anything. Here you can see all the various aspects of defensive "the enemy is attacking" to "reverse the charges" to "denial."

now they put up a thread on "do atheists want to kill Christians" they talk about how it's cray wild nut so lunny and they never even acknowledge that the real issue was not killing but control. that's becasue they didn't read the article. they take the reader's mind away form the issue by mocking and ridiculing. the the same thing they do with all kind of rational argument.

hear Chris Heges on New Atheism

Atheist hate mail

I usually don't bother to post junk hate mail. This guy shows a craving to be noticed because he uses the ploy "you don't have the guts to post this." Meaning, he desperate to be noticed.

So let's look the kind of little ingenious comment comments atheists send all the time.

Sam said...

You Christians are a bunch of funny people.. Your holy book promotes hatred, bigotry, murder, rape, incest and other horrific things. Yet you call it a book of love.. What a croc. God is man made. God is a myth. Just like Zeus or Mythras. I'm an Atheist, yet I never go around saying I would love to kill someone or see someone dead because of their beliefs or lack of. Some of you radical extremist christians do act just like the radical muslims. Only when Religion is removed from this planet, with all its lies and deceit, will we truly have PEACE ON EARTH. God is a fallacy created by man. There is no god, now get over it and enjoy your life.. One more thing, those who don't believe in evolution usually look like they haven't evolved.. =0)

October 4, 2011 6:59 AM

Sam said...

LOL.. I'll bet anything my comment will not get approved by owner due to what usually happens when the christians and the bibles nonsense is exposed. Enjoy your day. And enjoy THIS life.. It's the only one you will get.. None before and definitely NONE AFTER!!..

October 4, 2011 7:03 AM

As your self fist, did he actually say anything that merits attention? We blather running off at the mouth with slogans and hate minute we have heard thousands of times. It's the typical repetition of slogans and hate speech that can be heard on every message board every day.Nothing there worth giving attention to. NO fact, no proof, no argument, no logic, no documentation. Just a bunch of opinionated bunk it rather ordinary for hate group atheism. He's so desperate to be heard.

He obliviously feels beaten because he's chafing under the weight of Christian oppression. Which is hilarious becasue fundamentalists feel the say way. Both sides are certain they are being oppressed. They are truly book ends. This is just proof that the Dawkies are merely the tails to the fudnies heads. They are both fundamentalists. Oddly enough for someone who is desperate to be heard his bio page is a blank. He wants to be heard but not known.

Your holy book promotes hatred, bigotry, murder, rape, incest and other horrific things. Yet you call it a book of love.. What a croc.

What a shock! I've never heard atheists say that before. Only about 10,000 times a year. Does he ad anything to it that's worth talking about?? No facts, no sources, no logic. just a know nothing opinion. Believe it or not thisi s a sign of brain washing. It shows that his head has been loaded with this stuff so much that he has to spew it back.He's heard it over and over so he just has to repeat it. Does it prove anything? No of cousre not, it's not even relevant. He posted this on the Atheist propaganda post about Christians saying they want to kill athesits. This has nothing to do with it. It's one of those fall back things they do when hey have nothing in particular to say.

God is man made. God is a myth. Just like Zeus or Mythras. I'm an Atheist, yet I never go around saying I would love to kill someone or see someone dead because of their beliefs or lack of.

what does one thing have to do with another? Reciting the stupid contra that God is man made, with out proof and no backing is just not significant.

Some of you radical extremist christians do act just like the radical muslims. Only when Religion is removed from this planet, with all its lies and deceit, will we truly have PEACE ON EARTH. God is a fallacy created by man. There is no god, now get over it and enjoy your life.. One more thing, those who don't believe in evolution usually look like they haven't evolved.. =0)

this shows extreme stupidity, he doesn't even know who he's talking to. He hasn't bothered to figure out who I am or what I think or he would know that I'm a liberal and I don't accept inerrenacy and I don't see the Bible as infallible. If you don't believe that read my page on Biblical Revelation. Of cousre he's so naive he mythology means lie, on that page I argue that the creation story is mythology, the Bible does use mythology. That is not a bad thing. Of cousre the atheist brain washing has kept this guy ignorant of what mythology really is and what it means to use it. He assumes I don't believe in evolution so he's totally ignorant of Chrsitian thinkers.

In fact I'm willing to bet that I've put it on the line for atheism far more than he ever has. I was an atheist. The whole class at UT Arlington (Philosophy 101, my Freshman year) threaten to beat me up because I said I was an atheist. I faced them down and made a room full of football players back off, not by threatening to fight but just standing up for what I believed in. I bet this guy has never been in a situation like that.

He probalby became an atheist in high school because he had no group to belong to. Lonely, confused and in need of an identity, perhaps hurt by religious people or feeling rejected by them, poor self esteem and thus anger at God, he found some atheists who began to pay attention to him and made him feel improtant. I'm sure he will deny it but why else would he be so craving to be heart that he has to email me and let me know what a shit hole I am?

This is the kind of weak vulnerable stooge the atheist movement depends upon. This is the grass roots solider that Steffanelli is talking to. This is the stooge who is supposed to get worked up enough to do some kind of violence,and he's half way there because he's so loaded with the their slogans that he has to spew them back without thinking.

Their movement reminds me of a movie I saw once. Innocent sings sang by well meaning people who wouldn't hurt anyone.

Al Stefanelli, leader of American Atheist calls for "Eradication" of Fundamentalist Christians: This is classic evidence for the Atheist Watch Thesis

Al Stefanelli, leader of American Atheists



This was first reported on the Tea Party blog "Blaze." It's here listed form the right wing source RS Red State. It's validated well enough because it's being reported on a hundred other blogs of all stripes. It's been admitted to and damaage control done by Stefanelli himself.

Posted by The Rat (Profile)

Friday, September 16th at 10:11AM EDT

Our pals at American Atheists are in the news again; surprise, surprise. The hateful bigots just can’t seem to avoid controversy, although truth be told, I’m sure they know exactly what they’re doing. In a column that would make Bill Maher and Christopher Hitchens proud – entitled Taking the Gloves off, Al Stefanelli, the group’s state director of Georgia, draws bizarre comparisons between “fundamentalist Christianity,” and radical Islam — referring to them both, as “sociopaths,” “psychopaths” and “delusional.”

The entire article exposes the irrationality of this bigot — including the laughable “NOTICE: INTOLERANCE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED” image included in the post. He makes broad-brush comments throughout his diatribe, while offering no proof for any of his ridiculous comments or comparisons. Here are a few of his best delusional comments:

”Intolerance toward beliefs and doctrines that serve only to promote hatred, bigotry and discrimination should be lauded, as should extremist points of view toward the eradication of these beliefs and doctrines.”

“Bigotry, discrimination, hatred, coercion, terrorism, slavery, misogyny and everything else that is part and parcel of fundamental Christianity and radical Islam should not be tolerated.”

“The fact is that fundamentalist Christians and radical Muslims are not interested in coexisting or getting along. They have no desire for peace. They want us to die.”

“Their interpretation of the Bible and Koran are such that there is no other course of action but to kill the infidel, and if anyone believes otherwise they are only fooling themselves.”

“The underbelly of fundamentalist Christianity and radical Islam does not operate in the legal system. They don’t respond to lawsuits, letters, amicus briefs or other grass-roots campaigns and they must, must, must be eradicated.”

“We [atheists] will become extinct not due to natural selection, but at the hands of those who believe that the supernatural has made the selection.”

In a May article, entitled Why do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? I discussed Greg Epstein, the “Humanist chaplain” at Harvard University, and author of Good Without God: What a Million Nonreligious People Do Believe, who has a different view of the role atheism and its believers should play in society.

Catholic Blog Creative Minority Report

Stefanelli wrote at Atheists.org:

The fact is that fundamentalist Christians and radical Muslims are not interested in coexisting or getting along. They have no desire for peace. They do not want to sit down with us in diplomatic efforts to iron out our differences and come to an agreement on developing an integrated society.

They want us to die.

Their interpretation of the Bible and Koran are such that there is no other course of action but to kill the infidel, and if anyone believes otherwise they are only fooling themselves. It is not just in the best interests of atheists to be intolerant of fundamental Christianity and radical Islam, but it is also in the best interest of mainstream believers within these faiths, as well. Moderates and even Progressives who stand in support of extremists just because there is a claim to the same deity are not doing themselves any favors. Fundamental Christians make all Christians look bad and radical Muslims make all Muslims look bad.

The growing ranks of fundamental Christians and radical Muslims should be of concern to everyone who is not part of these two groups. Everyone. Again, bigotry, discrimination, hatred, coercion, terrorism, slavery, misogyny and everything else that is part and parcel of fundamental Christianity and radical Islam should not be tolerated and anyone who agrees with this needs to adopt extremist points of view that includes the intolerance of their very existence. The only reason these groups exist is because they are allowed to, and we, as a society, are allowing them to...

But the underbelly of fundamentalist Christianity and radical Islam does not operate in the legal system. They don’t respond to lawsuits, letters, amicus briefs or other grass-roots campaigns and they must, must, must be eradicated. As long as they are allowed to exist, we will continue to be inundated with accounts of buses, buildings, markets and abortion clinics being blown up, rape victims being murdered for adultery, wives being beaten (sometimes to death), airplanes being flown into buildings, people being tortured and sometimes beheaded for blasphemy, people being burned for witchcraft and sorcery and all the other horrific, inhumane and insane practices that are part of fundamental Christianity and Radical Islam.

If we don’t take a stand and, as a society, insist that these doctrines and beliefs are treated just the same as they would be if religion were not part of the equation, we will become extinct not due to natural selection, but at the hands of those who believe that the supernatural has made the selection.

Naturally the atheist community is all atwitter moving fast to deny hat it means anything, as though people speak of "eradication" all the time without meaning anything.

message board where atheist denies that it's a call for violence.

http://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=142535

Blue Crab of Pain (O him again) on the message board:
Scam.com (9/16/2011)

I suppose it wouldn't take too much time out of your day to actually look into it just a tad further.

Quote:

It is most certainly NOT a call for violence. Not once did I ever suggest that we use weapons, violence or physical contact. Not once. Nor did I say we be “mean” to them. Nor is my article aimed at a majority of believers in the world of any one specific religion. The individuals that I am referring to, and that I was very careful to point out, are the fringe groups. The minority of the religious. The fundamentalist extremists who have no desire to talk with us, to open a dialog with the exchange of ideas.

What is so hard to understand that these people want us to die. They want us dead. They do not want to negotiate, they do not want to budge from their points of view, they do not care about what we think and they could care less about the things we hold to high value.

We need to be firm with them, we need to counter their activism with our own activism and make sure that we stay within the bounds of the law, and use the legal system to our advantage. We need to call them out on their doctrines of hate, bigotry and discrimination. We need to let them know that we are not going away, no matter how much they want us to.

I work very hard and with due diligence to create relationships between theists and atheists, including organizing “Freethought Awareness Day” events and getting involved in interfaith activities.

So, with all due respect as well, my position stands regarding the fundamental extremists.

It's hardly surprizing that Stefanelli denies that he meant to call for violence. It's hardly surprising that the atheists deny that he meant it or that they wish to pursue it.

Wasn't his language badly chosen? I'm sure all would agree, including himself. I don't buy it. He's speaking this way for a reason. It's a tactic and he knows what he's doing. It's an old political tactic and I've seen it done. As for proving what he's up to I present first an Atheist and student of rhetoric who has some interesting things to say:



atheist professor Mirada Celecest blames Stefani for "lazy and schoking langaue."

http://mirandaceleste.net/2011/09/27/american-atheists-are-an-embarrassment-to-atheism/

9/27/11

No surprise here: American Atheists are once again engaging in reckless and unproductively antagonistic behavior. This time, though, they’ve really gone beyond the pale. In a recent post on their “No God Blog”, “Taking The Gloves Off…“, American Atheists’ Georgia State Director Al Stefanelli uses lazy and shockingly vitriolic rhetoric, unsupported assumptions, and sweeping generalizations in a futile attempt to defend an indefensible thesis.

Throughout his rant, Stefanelli fails to provide any actual evidence in support of his assertions, instead relying on generalizations, stereotypes, assumptions, anger, and arguments from personal experiences. He wants his audience to believe that his rant is a legitimate argument that should be taken seriously, yet the combination of its extreme nature and his refusal to engage in civil, rational, and evidence-based argument results in a thesis that is ultimately indefensible. Stefanelli is not deterred by this fact, though. He is determined to defend his thesis no matter what, and the result is a completely ineffective, vitriolic, and potentially dangerous rant dressed up as a legitimate argument.

one snippet from a statement by Stefanelli

Intolerance toward beliefs and doctrines that serve only to promote hatred, bigotry and discrimination should be lauded, as should extremist points of view toward the eradication of these beliefs and doctrines. (ibid Miranda Celest)

This guy knows what he's doing. he's agitating. This is an old tactic used by both sides, but by very serious people on both extreme ends who want to foment violence. It's the tactic used agaisnt Obama in the summer of the big health care reform squabble when the insurrance company provocateurs started teh lies about death panels and fights broke out at town meetings. The object is to create an atmosphere of hysteria in which others will do your dirty work for you because you work them up. They stand back and go "I didn't say to hurt anyone, I didn't say burn churches. I just said we need to fire to the problem." That's an example.

This guy talks like communists I knew when I was a communist. He talks just like the older more experienced comrades who were working up the crowd. Different slogans, different isseus, the same style of speech; both the CPUSA (Stalinist--Moscow) and the Fourth International types (Torkskyists). They all that same tendency to stick in a bunch of epithets about the enemy; "those evil, hysterical, rampant bad people who are supporting this bill." Make the other guys sound like Nazis as much as possible and create a climacteric of hysteria, like the troops are marching this way now!

Here's an article by a leftist from Australia who is talking about the Spartacists an they way they use inflammatory language.

Green left discussion message

Green left discussion: policies like Hitler.

this use of language is typical of the provocateur.

Re: "Howard's land policies like Hitler's"

By Bob Gould

Inflammatory language creates the potential for violence on the far left

here's a left wing analyst who agrees with me, although he's writing about the Sparticist, a left wing extremest group and Australian politics. The tactics are the same.



On the basis of the evidence presented, I'm not certain whether the
Spartacists are telling the truth about a bit of an incident recently
in Melbourne. I'm aware over many years of the Spartacists' capacity
to whip up small things into big things, and they themselves use
inflammatory language against their opponents, including in this
particular case.

I don't intend to join the Spartacist campaign on this question
because I'm not sure what happened, but I would point out that the
Spartacists solicited support, and they even mailed me a document to
which they attached a statement by an ostensible non-aligned
bystander, who signed his name. This person claimed that he didn't
know either of the groups involved before the event, and he saw the
male thump the woman.

If it's true that he's a mere bystander, that's significant evidence,
but I don't know enough about the incident, or about who this bloke
is, to form a firm conclusion.

Over 50 years of activity I've seen a few pieces of marginal violence
and I've been thumped a couple of times myself by political opponents
on the left. I've made a bit of a verbal scandal about it, but I've
never made a public hullabaloo, not wanting to draw the media or the
right wing into the affairs of the left.

A bit of a fuss and the embarrassment of there being witnesses is
usually enough to calm down the people doing the thumping, and that's
the best way to proceed. I was present at a famous May Day booze-up at
which some proletarian Stalinists thumped Denis Freney, and I made
myself scarce, not wanting to be the next victim. Some may regard that
as cowardice. (I've was also roughed up by coppers quite a few times
in the Vietnam period.)

I've been in the room while old experienced communist agitators plotted to use this form of agitation. It was a priest from Peru who was a friend of the great liberation theologian Gustavo Gutierrez and a labor Union guy and member of the Socialist Worker's Party who wrote a speech for a protest agaisnt the gulf war that was just a born burner. I said said "hey this is really laying it on thick, this could lead to an altercation." They said "that's what we want. This is a tactic called 'agitation.' We can create a climite in which people will act but we can deny having worked them into it."

This is obviously what this guy is doing. Go back up there and read the comments by Miranda. she sees it too but she isn't as up front about naming it that way. This is not just this one guy. It's obviously the tactic of his group and even though a lot of atheists back off form it (it's designed to be backed off from that's the beauty of it--only the idiots will carry out the dirty work but it's what they want all along).

The book the God haters, research by Don Boys demonstrates his finding that many athiests want to take away freedom to believe in God:

The God Haters
New Book By Former Indiana Legislator
Email Message ^ | September 29, 2011 | Don Boys, Ph.D.

Posted on Thursday, September 29, 2011 6:45:37 PM by John Leland 1789

Every atheist states his motives clearly: It must be illegal for any teacher, preacher, or parent to teach any child an exclusive salvation based on the death and resurrection of Christ and a literal Hell. It should be treated as child abuse. Boys asserts that the prohibition will be expanded to apply to adults and sees a major confrontation where real Christians will refuse to obey that obtrusive, offensive, and obviously unconstitutional law.

Dr. Boys characterizes these New Atheists as being tyrants and totalitarians in the pursuit of their desire to remake America in the old Soviet image, and suggests that blood will flow through the streets if children are taken from homes and Sunday schools and parents are charged with child abuse.

The author says he documents outrageous statements, mistakes, general errors, and many lies by atheists to prove their case against a sovereign God. He charges that his opponents identify the “fruits, flakes, and nuts” in some churches as mainline Christians. “It would be like generalizing, the average atheist coming home each evening with a bottle of cheap rum, kicking his dog, bullying his wife, beating his kids and getting roaring drunk terrorizing the whole neighborhood,” says Boys, “when that doesn’t characterize the group as a whole. It shows how desperate, disingenuous, and dishonest some atheists are. Even honest atheists find that offensive and shameful.”

I am not the only one who sees the totalitarian movement growing in New atheist Dawkametnalist ranks. When I started atheist watch no one else talked this one. No one saw the totalitarian potential shaping up, not even me. Now I find others starting to see it. But that can't be. Atheism is not a movement, it doesn't have an ideology, and it's not organized.Just like there is no organization called "American Atheists." So then Stefannelli doesn't exist and thus there's no problem.

Atheist Propaganda

We can decipher the confusion in the way atheists think by remember the theory put forth on this blog: Atheists have low self esteem. They hate themselves and thus they hate God (he made them). they can't admit they hate God so they vent their rage agianst Christians.

One of the more confussing tendiences they have is that whatever you say about them they say about you. In fact turn the fact that you said it into proof of what you are like. For example for a long time after I started athist watch they began saying that because I'm pointing out their hate that means I'm full of hate. We see this again in a recent interview with Blair Scott, an atheist activist who did an interview on Fox News. Scott is related to the guys who are suing to take down the cross at ground zero, 9/11. This is illustrated on a blog called "Atheist:"

Christians Threaten to Kill Atheists

Written on July 30, 2011 by Ben Tegland in Christianity, General

After this interview the Fox News Facebook page became an explosion of hate. Blair Scott posted a bunch of screenshots taken from the comments consisting of death threats against him and all atheists.

Comments that are made on the heels of Bill O’Reilly saying “No one believing in Jesus commits mass murder,” calling the label “dishonest and insane.” Apparently they wouldn’t commit murder, but it looks like Christian fans of Fox News wouldn’t mind fantasizing about it . . . at least I hope that is all they are doing.

what a strange thing to say. Why does it mean they will fantasize about murdering atheists just becuase they say that the label of "mass murder" for Christian is insane? that makes it sound like if object to being called a mass murder than you are one. By that logic the atheists are mass murderers. The logic is shaky, he's saying the people issuing the death threats are Christians, Bill O'Reilly (not my pick for the spokesman for Christianity) objects and they is said to be fantasizing about it? The people making the threats are flakes, but what makes them Christians? Just because they are angry?

then the comments. the blog chooses the most inflammatory and stupid statements to reflect. If we go to an atheist message board you can see them say the same kinds of things about Christians. he shows some people,presumably Christians, saying such about atheist. Obvioulsy the person doing the blog is trying to inflame passions.

I hope that is all they are doing.

Those are all Stupid comments but that's just anecdotal as far as being evidence of Christian view points. When I do that from atheist message boards, and I can math he hatred of these comments from atheist boards, then I'm called names and said to be full of hate.

What purpose does this serve for the writer of the blog to makes the comments known? It's good propaganda. It's something to put up and say "see Christians are bad." When I do that with atheist I'm just being unfair. But when he does it that's good insight.

It gives atheists the excuse to hate more.

apology to the reader.

Albert Schweitzer, my hero and message board
avatar.

Ok so this guy Blondie lied or he's stupid ot whatever. who the hell cares. this is just not worth wasting my time and yours over.

It's my fault. I'm NOT declining the bearing of the blame but it is the case that when you get down in the mud and fight on their level you become petty like they are. That's what I'm doing. I apologize to the readers of this blog, from now on I will try to keep it on the high level of the self esteem articles instead of the petty personal vengeful level.

Tip of the hate to Hermit. I had discovered that it was there before you did. I even said so at the bottom of the page but you probably didn't read that becuase you had already read it and had no reason to think I altered it.

I am not going mount a defense. I will just say his link opened to page 4 adn the article was p119. that's what made me think he go the wrong article. he didn't give a page number, he didn't say "the link opens on the wrong article" or anything. I just assumed since he is generally rather stupid that he's being stupid again.

But then I became stupid myself because I got petty and personal. I disocvered the real quote by putting the first 2 lines in Google.

so from now on no more "look at this stupid guy isn' t he a jerk?" what a waste of time!

retraction

the quote in the post I put up this morning was erroneously attributed to the poster. I made a mistake in who said it. It was actually abut something else, a response to sarcasm. Thus it's not fair to the poster.

I issue this apology and retract.