Milo v Muhammad - Seriously?

One of the most controversial pundits to be given space in the controlled media in recent years is self-styled dangerous faggot Milo Yiannopoulos. While he is spot on with his critiques of the insane totalitarian ideology of third wave feminism, his attacks on Islam and his endorsement of the phony gates of Vienna narrative are sorely misguided, and it is difficult to argue that this ignorance of the world’s third great religion is anything but wilful.

One of the things Yiannopoulos says he worries about is the attitude of Moslems to homosexuals, and he stresses here that he means ordinary Moslems rather than the Saudi brand or the fanatical Islamists of ISIS. What are the facts? Before answering that question, perhaps we should ask a different question, namely, if you were/are the father of a young boy, which of these two scenarios would you rather see for your son: bowing down in the mosque, or bending over in the bathhouse? Women tend to be more sympathetic to the faults of their offspring than men, but no mother worthy of the name would rather her son grow up homosexual anymore than she would rather see him grow up confined to a wheelchair or suffering from cystic fibrosis.

Male homosexuality gave the world AIDS; Islam gave it algebra. This really is a no-brainer. Male homosexuality is a far greater threat to the West than this supposedly anti-Western jihad. Now back to the question, what do ordinary Moslems think about homosexuals? Here is white convert Hamza Yusuf explaining how Islam really deals with homosexuality; Milo can drop his trousers for his black friends all he likes in the privacy of his own bedroom, where there will not be the four witnesses required to grab him by the scruff of his neck and drag him into a Sharia court, but the moment he attempts to bring his perversion into the public space, that is when the mullahs will come for him, that’s if the mothers of his sexual conquests don’t get him first; most blacks are just as revolted by homosexuality as Moslems.

When he discusses the chimera of sexism in the Islamic world, Yiannopoulos wants to have his cake and eat it. On the one hand he says women are oppressed by Islam, yet on the other hand when he tackles the sisterhood about their nonsense on gender roles and the education of girls, he points out rightly that while in the West, very few women take STEM subjects, in Bangladesh and indeed in other Islamic nations, there is no shortage of women engineering graduates and the like. Clearly he is confusing the innate modesty of Moslem women, and the high esteem in which motherhood is held, with Islamic dress codes and the segregation of the sexes. If the West had not removed barriers to sexual segregation, we would not now be plagued with spurious allegations of sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and in particular false allegations of historical sexual offences, including rape.

Finally, while like the rest of us he deplores the grotesque scenes of women being violated en masse on the streets of Cologne as happened during the 2016 New Year celebrations, is it right to equate this with Islam? Let’s put this another way, why do brazen sexual assaults of this nature not happen under Sharia? Because in Malaysia, rapists are caned, and in Iran, the sexual violation of a woman can be capital.

So what is the problem if not Islam? Does anyone believe the recent and ongoing mass invasion of Europe would provoke such controversy if the invaders were white? Of course not. This isn’t about religion, it’s about race, in particular white guilt and the hysteria generated by decades of left wing brainwashing.

All mainstream politicians and pundits are terrified of speaking about it for fear of being branded racist, so instead they use facile arguments about foreign workers claiming benefits in the UK and other European countries, or similar issues. Now there is certainly a security issue here, but the simple fact is that no white European in his right mind wants millions more non-white immigrants the same way the Thais don’t want immigrants from different racial backgrounds and neither do the Japanese; the big difference is they don’t suffer from the same kind of guilt and Marxist agitators as Europe. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t help these people, but the idea that millions of them should be granted asylum in Europe is a step too far. Incidentally, Moslems are also helping these refugees, as Yiannopolous surely he knows.

In conclusion, which would you rather live in, a society in which homosexuals are kept in the closet, or one in which they are free to spew their poison over not only the adult population but especially the young? A society in which the social scene revolves around alcohol with all the associated evils: drunkenness, violence, sexual violence, ladette culture, cirrhosis of the liver...or one in which alcohol has no place or is at least very restricted? These are just two of the alternatives offered by Islam, and for many people, including non-believers, they are better alternatives to the madness we have at present.