So, let me get this straight; if I make the argument that a religion or creed is fundamentally flawed … I’m a bigot … right? Painting one particular group with the same brush, tends to make it so.
I suppose that in it’s purest form, any blanket rejection of any religion, culture, or creed may make me a bigot … unless I’m a “progressive” of course, in which case the rules don’t apply.
In this context, I give you a lengthy and well thought-out two part essay on Islam. The picture it paints ain’t pretty: Part One Part Two
The theological iron curtain is draped over every country with a majority Muslim population. Wherever the Muslim faith predominates, political repression and despotism are the rule. Afghanistan and Iraq are no exception: any pluralism which is now tolerated in these two countries would recede quickly if the encouraging presence of the United States military were withdrawn.
Turkey is often cited as an exception — the exception — to Islamic despotism. But secularism in Turkey is enforced from the top down. It has shallow roots, and requires repeated interventions by the military in order to survive. Indonesia and Malaysia also used to be relatively tolerant places, but as European colonialism recedes further into history, these countries have become more and more Islamized and repressive.
Speaking of bigotry: CLICK
The whole phenomenon has become so convoluted, that despite the fact that one group, fundamentalist Muslims, openly and articulately express their hate of our institutions, democracy, religions, and liberty, we continue to invite them to come and live among us. We continue to talk in abstract terms about a “War on Terror”, when it is in fact a “War on Us” being carried out by Muslims.
We have been taught to suppress that wee small voice inside, that diminutive primitive germ of an instinct that is trying to scream aloud and warn us that mortal danger is just over the next hill.
In an age long ago, they would’ve simply called it “common sense”.
“Ban immigration, Start emigration.”
Congratulations Sounder. You successfully cut through the BS and offered up the only solution to the Muslim problem: Total separation between the West and the Muslim world. Not to split hairs, but I would have phrased it “Stop immigration, start deportations.”
Either way, JP, works for me!
Dean and Lori, picking apart petti things like spelling or which example used is called not being able to see the forest for the trees.
Because the Christian religion reformed it’s self into something more “human” does not mean Islam will, however it does not mean it woun’t.
As I see it the people make themselves into sheeple in Islamic countries out of fear. What excuse do the sheeple of the western world have?
“WELFARE”
rb, people like you will never be safe. ommag, correct. dean spenser, 1400 years and islam is still doing it. folks, you could live next to a muslim for 20 years. watch his kids grow up with yours. if a jihadi had a gun and your neighbour had a gun and the jihadi was going to kill you. guess who is going to die?
for all those who like to quote the old testament. it is a history not a manual. with the execption of the 10 commandments. if islam would live by them we would all be better off.
ET: I believe as you do that Islam can be reformed, but there is little else other than economic pressure at this time forcing it to do so. I know that over long periods of time, socio-economic pressure can reform just about anything, but we are talking about conditions as they exist today … and they don’t pressure for much change among Muslims. In fact, the industrialized west panders to Islam. Reformation within Christianity took centuries … yet my present concern doesn’t have centuries to wait.
To this end, the problem is owned by Muslims themselves … they must reform, not us. We are stuck with the choice of reforming ourselves into something Islam will tolerate, or protecting ourselves.
Let’s also keep in mind that many Western Muslims are now arguing that Islam can’t be reformed as it is … it must be remade.
I understand that you are coming at this from an anthropologic point of view, but keeping history in mind, let’s not forget that drastic “reformation” usually came at incredible human cost. If Islam reforms peacefully, it’ll be a first.
“Muslim,Christian or Jew it’s all a load of crap.”
Posted by: ok4ua at October 4, 2007 5:01 PM
Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were atheists. It’s debatable whether Hitler was; I suspect he used religion solely for manipulation.
Muslim,Chtristian or Jew it’s all a load of baloney. All it does is give people false hope.
You know nothing of religion yet have the gall to claim it gives people false hope. The vacuous arrogance is astounding.
sheik yerbootie @ 5:56 PM said
‘A curse on him who is lax in doing the lord’s work. A curse on him who keeps his sword from bloodshed’.
-Jeremia 48.10
You wanna play eisegesis? A classic one…
Matthew 27:5b + Luke 10:37b
🙂
John West @ 6.10PM
“Whenever you enter a church of any kind, you must check your brain at the door.”
Rather odd behaviour. Hope you’re not making a habit of it. Personally, I check my pride at the door.
“One of the main comments was “I will not support my tax money going to support muslim schools and tomorrow’s terrorists!” People see what is happening around the world with rising muslim violence and butchery and dont want it here.”
Exactly David Hand. A quiet revolution, perpetrated by those who don’t want to be labelled a bigot or racist by the multiculti fingerpointers for knowing the truth.
As far as Islam is concerned, you cannot reform a lie. I will make a post on this proving it tomorrow.
As far as Andrew is concerned, I think Caveman is right. The little shit has been hoisted by his own petard.
paul2 – my viewpoint has nothing to do with anthropology but with reason and logic – and a knowledge of history.
Yes, reformation of the Christian church took about 4 centuries – and very bloody centuries they were too. It coincided, as is the same in the Islamic world, with an economic and political upheaval and structural change. I think that ‘things work faster’ now in our electronic era, and the Islamic reformation will be accomplished faster.
I doubt if Islam will reform peacefully; no deep structural change ever occurs, in nature or in social systems, without great ‘energy’ costs. My point is that the US was exactly right to force the conflict back into the Muslim lands. It was moving out of the Muslim lands – thus leaving the reform motivation ‘dead’ – and instead, had changed into violence against the West. Rather than violence against their own Islamic strait-jacket.
It HAS to change; it can’t remain as it is, which is a social, political and religious ideology that is operative only in a 7th century pastoral nomadic society. Non-industrial, medium size population, no capacity to adapt or change, focused on defending its land base against the rapid settlements of the agricultural economies of the ME (which were primarily Christian).
Right – they must reform. Not us. Therefore, we must reject multiculturalism, we must reject moral relativism, we must reject their demands that WE change when they move to our lands.
Whether the term is ‘reform’ or ‘remade’ isn’t relevant; the point is, as an ideology and mode of life, it can’t remain as it is, in the modern world.
And no, total separation between the Islam and Western world is quite frankly, nonsense. This is the 21st century; you can’t isolate people, billions of people. They will interact electronically, economically, and physically. The important thing is that the ME must industrialize and become democratic.
and in the West, what must be done – is no multicultural accomodation.
(And the catholics were asleep at the switch, when they failed to get pedophilia enshrined in our constitution.)
Posted by: sheik yerbootie at October 4, 2007 5:56 PM
I didn’t know Gordon Stuckless and John Roby were Catholic priests, or that the Catholic church ran Upper Canada College and Maple Leaf Gardens or the Bountiful commune in BC..
Did they run the New Brunswick’s Kingsclear Youth Training Centre as well?. How about the Grandview Training School in Cambridge, did they run that place as well? The Boy Scouts? Hmm?
Did they also run the Jericho Hill School for the Deaf?
Those dirty Catholic priests sneaking into all those homes and molesting those children while the mommies and “daddies” slept!
And then Catholic priests went on United Nations peacekeeping missions disguised as peacekeepers! The dirty scum! And did you know that they even infiltrated the Anglican church?
And don’t forget those evil Catholic priests even infiltrated the public school system and did the same thing!
Why sometimes they even disguised themselves as “mommies” so they could do even more dirt! There is no end to what those filthy Catholics will get up too! Did you know that they infiltrated the parliamentary system and lowered the age of consent?
I hear that they are even disguising themselves as officers of the court to permit further acts of debauchery?
Your a fn idiot sheik yerbootie, and you can kiss my Catholic a&&.
not the anon at October 4, 2007 1:18 PM
“As far as Andrew is concerned, I think Caveman is right. The little shit has been hoisted by his own petard.”
This is not a forum or a repository for off-topic link dumps. Profanity is discouraged.
Have some consideration for those of us who have jobs, Irwin Toy, and watch your language. Let’s see your liberal data supporting your liberal position which conflicts with Uncle Andrew’s cold, hard data. Or shut up.
I’m with Andrew on this one. Put up or SHUTUP!
Thanks ET: My thoughts … just articulated better. Isolation; no … but incredible caution.
My personal concern is that large numbers of Islamic immigrants tend to form enclaves, where the “old” ways are reinforced and enforced. I can’t think of a single case of large scale immigration from Muslim countries to any non-Muslim region where enclaves, then strife, didn’t follow.
“One of the main comments was “I will not support my tax money going to support muslim schools and tomorrow’s terrorists!” People see what is happening around the world with rising muslim violence and butchery and dont want it here.”
A quiet revolution, David Hand. Against the fear of being labelled a racist, or bigot by leftists, fact based reason will triumph.
You cannot reform a lie. I will post irrefutable evidence based on Mohammad and his method, otherwise known as the Quran, tomorrow.
I agree with Caveman. Andrew has been hoisted by his own petard. Check his posts several months ago.
Let’s keep the name calling down folks; and watch the language. Otherwise, have at’er.
From Jihad Watch: Hirsi Ali: “…There is no moderate Islam. There are Muslims who are passive, who don’t all follow the rules of Islam, but there’s really only one Islam, defined as submission to the will of God. There’s nothing moderate about it.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018370.php
From Jihad Watch: Interview of Hirsi Ali by Reason magazine:
“When the interviewer asked her if she thought Islam could bring about positive social change in the same way that religious Protestants helped end US slavery, and Catholicism helped end communism in Poland, she responded sharply:”
Hirsi Ali: “Only if Islam is defeated. Because right now, the political side of Islam, the power-hungry expansionist side of Islam, has become superior to the Sufis and the Ismailis and the peace-seeking Muslims.”
Reason: “Don’t you mean defeating radical Islam?”
Hirsi Ali: “No. Islam, period. Once it’s defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It’s very difficult to even talk about peace now. They’re not interested in peace.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/018370.php
Hirsi Ali has bigger balls and courage than all our political jackals in DC.
“I’m with Andrew on this one. Put up or SHUTUP!” – anon
‘Nuff said.
ET,
I agree with much of what you say. The straight jacket of multiculturalism, pcism. PoMo, etc, drags against reason. However, you compare all religions as equal. Let me restate an assertion: Islam, fundamentally is based on foundational violence against all that will not join, or would leave; Christianity is not. In fact, most other religions are not. With exception. For example, Sikhism is a result of pacifist Hinduiism – primarily brought about as a militant answer to muslim aggression. 80 million Hindus exterminated by Islam.
Thought and belief as virus.
Based on historical record, I maintain that Islam = death. It cannot be reformed. It is a 7th century secretion of the Arab mind. Think about it. What is the number one name of muslim males, regardless of culture? Why do once great cultures embrace Arabic, despite the fact they can’t even read it, or write it?
It is an ultra violent lie, perpetrated by enforced ignorance. Not comparable to anything else. In that respect, without editing the Quran, without the removal of Mohammad, there will always be violence amongst the devout. Nice Muslim parents, produce terrorist child.
But in the meantime, Islam is a useful ally to leftists. Anarchy creates change.
Ahmadinejad and Bolivia.
Apollyon, I’ll second that motion! She surely is one smart, brave, focused and frank woman. We need to be listening to those who KNOW Islam first hand. Our opinions cannot possibly substitute for stark truth.
Based on historical record, I maintain that Islam = death. It cannot be reformed…….It is an ultra violent lie, perpetrated by enforced ignorance. Not comparable to anything else.
Multiculturalism has been an unmitigated disaster in the West. Speaking as an American it has been catastrophic here and our political cowards choose to address symptoms and ignore the cause. Our kids are getting dumber by the generation, pockets of our nation are becoming balkanized and our societal rot encourages this degeneracy. Our liberal plague is so endemic it may not be remedied at the ballot box; Americans will tolerate only so much and it seems our political jackals are trying to find out where that breaking point is.
Like Hirsi Ali, the only trustworthy Muslim is an apostate.
Interesting article about kow tow’ing to Islam in the US Congress at:
http://foehammer.net/2007/10/has-the-united-states-already-submitted-to-islam.html
irwin daisy – I do NOT compare all religions as equal. I analyze religions and consider their socioeconomic origins. After all, they are created by human beings.
So- Judaism is a tribal religion, ie, it confines its membership to hereditary descendants. Interestingly, its hereditary connections are matrilineal rather than patrilineal. That suggests to me, that the early Jewish economy was based primarily around gardens and the work of the women. That is, the original Jewish society was small population (smaller than patrilineal economies), settled and reasonably self-sufficient. It is not a converting religion; it doesn’t seek to convert and add members.
Later Judaism went through various reforms, but these did not change that hereditary membership; they just adapted it to the economies of the time, ie, market economy, industrial economy etc.
Christianity is a religion that I analyze as emerging within an expanding population and economic base – and economy that was settling people into settled agricultural rather than migrating lifestyles. This was due in part to both the expanding population and the Roman infrastructure of roads, irrigation and money, that enabled a connected market economy. The Christian religion is focused on different peoples ‘being neighbours’, getting along, collaborating. This is obviously an ideology that arose to enable an expanding economy of settlements that required peaceful interaction. Christianity is also, importantly, NOT hereditary. You CHOOSE to belong – and that enables expansion into formerly hostile neighbours.
Islam, in my view, is a reaction to the Christian expansion settlements, that were encroaching on their lands. Islam is a sociopolitical and economic ideology that is very obviously based around pastoral nomadism, ie, an economy based around herding animals. This requires a large land base with a lot of land left fallow. Christian settlements were encroaching on this, and Islam developed as a militant and violent reaction to this.
Christianity was politicized by the church, which set itself up as a political and economic power in the 4th and 5th centuries…and this enormous control lasted until the reformation, when the economic control moved back to the control of the people during the reformation.
So- I don’t discuss religions as equal. I analyze their historic emergence..and discuss changes that are needed.
Current Islam has to be changed; it’s suitable only within its original nature and unsuitable for a modern society and economy.
Agreed, paul – immigrants form enclaves. A lot of that is encouraged by our multiculturalism. And a lot is encouraged by their religion.
I would gently suggest that if you want to ponder Islam you should have a minimum notion as to its motives, methods and mandate. Its quite simple, spend a day scanning the Quran. I would bet that 9 out of 10 normal non muslims would come to a similar conclusion. A tip or two….remember, believing muslims do not have a “western mindset” and that vile creature that Allah and Mohammed PTUI are always encouraging the believer to convert, destroy, rob, rape, sell, humiliate, murder…..that would be you if you are not a muslim.
Reform Islam? Destruction would be the only reform Islam might acknowledge.
Its a thin book and it will vaccinate you. Please read it.
Up Constantinople.
Believe me, there is no such thing as a liberal or secular muslim, if you scratch the surface alittle, there is a fundalmenalist underneath!!
If by “reforming Islam” commenters here mean “mulims adopting western ideals” then you fail to understand the religious mind.
I am a Christian and I don’t want to adopt ‘western ideals’. I view western ideals as base, evil, secular humanist pap verging on the Satanic in belief and practice and I reject them for all these reasons. As a Christian I have an obligation before Yahweh to bring as many as I can to a knowlege of the saving Grace of Jesus Christ. However as a Christian I am forbidden to take up weapons to force a non-believer to accept Jesus as Savior and Lord. The only tools I have to bring this transformation of the non-believer is the life I lead and the words I speak.
Likewise the religious Muslim views western ideals as base, evil, secular humanist pap verging on the Satanic in belief and practice and thus rejects it. He believes he has a mandate from Allah that he must bring as many people as he can to a place of submission to Allah aka Islam. Unfortunately for the rest of humanity the religious Muslim is not forbidden from resorting to violence and in fact is commanded to use violence, deceipt or physical threat to impose Islam on the infidel.
I have been a Christian for over 30 years and in proclaiming the Gospel have suffered physical threats and shunnings from all sorts, religious and non religious alike. These rejections have not made me want to adopt ‘western’ ways and in fact have served only to deepen my convictions and like St Paul more bold in my declaration of the Gospel.
Likewise attempts to modernize Islam will fail. Why would a religious Muslim modify his beliefs and practices to assuage the bleating of the west which he views as evil infidels?
Using the words of Jesus “Does one pick figs from thorn bushes?” to explain the thoughts of the religious mind. I don’t ask Satan (western culture) to show me Yahweh’s will, I read my Bible and attend Church. The religious Muslim doesn’t ask Satan (western society) to learn Allah’s ordained practices, he reads his Qu’ran and attends Mosque.
BL@KBIRD at October 4, 2007 9:46 PM
It’s interesting that Blogging Tories, which routinely links to discussions on SDA, will not link to this discussion which has more action in it than every single current blog link on their web site put together.
It shows that “mainstream” politicians still are afraid to touch this topic with a 10 foot link.
Oddly, Blogging Tories will link to places like Mesopotamia West, which have a strong anti-Islam message.
lori,
i see that you have in interest in reforming immigration policy – i do agree with the direction that you indicate with respect to this; however, it seems maybe the link to a potential threat is a bit tenuous.
i think stopping terrorism at the embassy (via visa restrictions) is not the right approach – maybe it will work for stopping SARS or Ebola, but ultimately all anti-terrorism efforts need to be informed by the intelligence community. i was under the impression that you had some link demonstrating that the intelligence community had advised such an action, but the statistics and arguments you’ve provided so far do not suggest this.
i don’t even think the intelligence community would endorse your proposal – imagine how much more difficult it would have been if the 9/11 or 7/7 terrorists were in the country illegally – no paper trail or documentation on them? clearly our guys need as much engagement as possible with those that would conspire. hope this clears things up.
hi dkjones,
When doctors cut a cancer out, they sacrifice healthy tissue to ensure to get the bad stuff. Apply this logic to immigration.
as i mentioned to lori, i don’t agree with the medical analogies. stopping the movement of people doesn’t stop the communication of ideas. in today’s world, it’s not inconceivable for some radical cleric in some mosque in saudi arabia or pakistan to teleconference in to some place in any western city and give a speech. if bin laden can regale us by videotape from some cave, there’s really no limit and the real problem is one of intelligence, not immigration.
But why add to the problem and hope the police can catch EVERY act of terrorism? Lets minimize the potential by minimizing the offenders.
i have to agree that another terrorist attack is on the horizon at some time. as i mentioned to lori, i haven’t read anything from the intelligence community – our primary defense against terrorism – advocating this kind of “anti-muslim” visa policy; in particular, how it would affect (even undermine) their work and also how much further it would push out the next terrorist attack? we have porous borders so i’m under no illusion that even a strict visa policy has much weight for a determined attacker. the bottom line is that we need input from the intelligence community. perhaps you have some you could share?
Then there are those who will not even allow our governments to monitor communications. I hate the need to have the government spy on me and my neighbors, but I understand the need. I would like to get rid of the need.
hard to say where this will lead. i’m in the data warehousing industry and there’s lots they can do with data these days. lots of inference work, etc.. ultimately we might all be leading very public lives the way technology is developing.
rb – Part of the problem is that precisely the kind of statistics you wish we had, and the opinions you wondered if I heard expressed, are not available because the topic considered so taboo that no one is willing to gather the data.
Surely it is possible to gather stats on:
-what percentage of immigrants from which country pay taxes within 3 years of arrival, vs those that are on social assistance
-what percentage of immigrants from which country bring in how many family members per immigrant on “family unification”
-what percentage of immigrants from which country have how many doctors visits for medical and psychiatric problems
-what percentage of immigrants from which country have criminal convictions
-what percertage from which country segregate into their own ethnic enclave
But no one dares gather those stats because they would be accused of racism, of not considering the impact of the data on the “public at large”, etc etc. So, a few mandarins somewhere in Ottawa may have some of this data, do not consider Canadians competent to interpret it, and god knows what troubles we are unnecessarily importing.
Further, I would bet (but naturally have no data to back this up) that people who work in national security believe that profiling on the basis of ethnic and racial origin is more efficient and effective than not doing so, but the political culture does not permit this option.
My frustration comes largely from the fact that we are not permitted even to ask the questions, let along get the answers and interpret them.
lori – those stats are available. You’d have to correlate separate stats, eg. immigrants and welfare, immigrants and criminal convictions – and this may already be done but the correlations may not be available on the Stats Canada website.
Lori, excellent questions and if it is ever possible to ask them and you find out the answer shows that it is muslims what do you do? These questions have been answered to a great extent in many Europian countries with unemployment 300% greater in muslims, high welfare usage and so on but as politicians seek the muslim vote nothing is done.
We got into this discussion last night with several friends from my wife’s company, a large accounting firm. They have now set aside a special room that muslims use for praying, never had one for any other religion. When I asked why would they do that the reply was, just being accomodating. Pressing on I asked when they ask for footbaths, seperate rooms for the females and additional time for praying will the firm also accomodate them? “I guess so” was the reply.
One long time personal friend who travels to Europe a lot for the firm said she could not believe the changes taking place in places like Brussels or London with the surge in muslims everywhere.
I always enjoy the philosophical discussions on SDA but this stuff is real and happening all the time. The answer may not be stopping muslim immigration but the old saw of when you are in a hole the first thing you do is stop digging seems to appropriate here.
david hand – the accomodation that you outline, ie, a room for praying, doesn’t seem outrageous to me. If their religion requires praying five times a day – then, allowing them to do this, doesn’t seem to me a problem.
I’m an atheist; praying to a man-made idea seems absurd, but, my view has to be irrelevant.
What would be an issue of concern, would be when these people insisted that YOU change YOUR lifestyle to accomodate THEM. That’s when the ‘walls should go up- and the answer should be ‘NO’.
So, if they were to insist that the male and female employees be segretated – the answer would have to be ‘no’. If they insist that you can’t keep a piggy bank on your desk, that their veiled women be allowed to vote without visual identification and so on – the answer has to be ‘No’.
These rituals and ideologies, will, I hope, reduce over time. The problem is that the world has, since WWII, become global and previously isolated cultures have opened; their members have migrated to Europe and N. America. Because they were formerly isolate, and quite frankly, living within a 7th c ideology, they haven’t modernized their beliefs and behaviour.
I’m going to say that these beliefs and behaviour WILL modernize. Many of you won’t accept this, but, it’s not only a biological truism that different species can, over time, merge some of their identities, but, socially, different ethnic groups do, over time, merge and accomodate and change each other. It’s happened in Europe often, as European populations mixed and merged.
The big problem in this opening of the ME countries to the world, is their own conflict. They have a 7th c ideology; Islam is a social and political mode of life, defined as a religion. That makes it difficult to challenge its axioms and modernize them. But the ME peoples can’t stay within this 7th c. lifestyle.
The conflict has resulted in the rise of Islamic fascism. They have to deal with this conflict and modernize Islam to enable its practioners to function in a global industrial and diverse world. This is a violent conflict, and the US was exactly right to push this conflict back into the ME.
BUT, in the West, we may accomodate them up to a point, BUT, we must insist that WE and our beliefs are not negotiable. We don’t and won’t operate according to their beliefs and we must insist that they do not ask or expect us to be ‘like them’. So, if they choose to live, as citizens in the West, that means that they must obey our civic laws – equality of women, free speech, separation of church and state, etc.
We have to stand up for these basic rules, which we in the West fought long and hard for, but, minor accomdations are not part of these rules.
ET: I agree with accomodating all religions to a certian degree. My problem with Islam in the West is that it often asks for accomodations that are seldom given in Muslim countries; ie, foot-baths; and special decorations during ramadan. It’s a way for the Muslim extremists to use our ignorance in order to push the boundaries of our sensibility. There is nothing worse than uneducated and ignorant progressive bureaucrats offering concessions that aren’t even given in Muslim countries.
Take a look at this, yes I know Memri is a Jewish run site, although I have yet to see anyone show where their translations were wrong.
“Does Religious Law Permit Visiting Egyptian Pyramids?”
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD173207
Wearing a veil is no more offensive than wearing a yarmulke. I don’t in any event concede that you have the right to decide how anybody else should dress. Nobody died and made you queen. If you don’t like how your neighbours dress in Toronto, shut up and move to Orangeville.
ET, in my view setting up a prayer room is just a foot in the door. At my son’s university in Guelph there are demands for footbaths, special foods, special handling and seperation of these foods, on campus prayer rooms, seperate times for women only to use the pool and on and on. Could you go to Saudia Arabia and wear openly a Christian cross or even find a church or pray at your office, being a woman you probably wont be allowed to be in a office anyway.
You know the environment of work here in Canada when as a muslim you came here, why should businesses especially small ones have to change their practices to suit you?
EBT, wearing a veil is not a muslim religious requirement it is a political statement forced on women to render them invisible to men in society. It is certainly not the same as a yarmulke and why should I have to move from where I grew up but I probably will because Toronto is becoming increasingly alien to me.
It becomes painful to read asinine attempts at deciphering Isalm by folks who do not know it. I don’t mean to be rude but forget all you think you know about Islam and actually find out about it . Read the Quran , the accepted Hadiths The sunna of Mohammed. Speculation from a western mindset is horseshit and useless. There is indeed a bogey man out there folks. Check out some islamic porn (beheadings done by 12 year olds etc.)Step outside your insulated world and come to know evil. Learn about Islams plan for you.
I’m on the fly. But I’d like to thank Joe for his excellent post: an honest and helpful analysis, IMO.
I say Amen.
I had to become Muslim to marry my wife who is Malay, I get to see the good and the bad of Islam. My wife stayed here because there is no way she was going to raise her daughter in a Islamic society. I think that says it all.
Our own culture war between the politically correct Left who is rolling over for our muslim immigants and the more realistic freedom loving common sense Right who say enough … will have to be fought violently and won and perhaps a military coupe in the US and Canadian governments will need to happen. New constitutions will need to be written and new strictly enforced laws will need come into effect ………………………………………………………….. If we are to prevent the Jihad from taking us over.
Print this out and put on your fridge door. Read it ten years from now and tell me I am wrong.