The Counter-Jihad Mainstream: Still soft and incoherent after all these years...

"I'll have a triple decaf, triple moderate Jihadaccino..."

Not only soft and incoherent; but arrogantly incognizant of how and why they remain soft, and evidently imagining themselves to be robustly oh-so no-nonsense about the problem of Islam. Two Jihad Watch comments veterans, "PRCS" and "Wellington" (also members of that high-school-clique-cum-lynch-mob, the Rabbit Pack), weigh in on a comments thread about the recent terror attack in London, leaning their veteran weight against the temerity of some newbies daring to suggest the West ban Islam:

PRCS says:
September 15, 2017 at 1:31 pm

1. Because, in the U.S., the First Amendment prevents that. 2. Whether here or abroad, it can’t be “banned” from the minds of a billion+ people. 3. Destroying every copy of the Qur’an–everywhere–isn’t going to happen. 4. It’s not going to be banned from the Internet. A better approach, if you will, is to help our friends and neighbors learn the truth about Islam’s teachings.

Wellington says:
September 15, 2017 at 2:40 pm

I completely agree, PRCS. Banning Islam is not the right approach. Rather, properly identifying Islam as the one major religion which is spiritual fascism and thus a mortal enemy of freedom (much as Nazism and Marxism are, except these two are examples of secular fascism) is the correct way to proceed. Exposure, not banning, should be the imperative of imperatives here.

Hesperado says:

I would ask PRCS and Wellington the painfully obvious question that they left conspicuously unaddressed:

"Okay, let's say a comprehensive education effort actually succeeded in enlightening the majority of our fellow sleepwalking Westerners about how pernicious Islam is. Then what? How would this mass enlightenment about the problem of Islam change our behaviors, vis-à-vis Islam -- and vis-à-vis the Muslims who, by putting Islam into practice, make it a concrete problem for us?"