The war will be lost incrementally because we are unable to reverse the ongoing radicalization of Muslim populations in South Asia, Indonesia, the Balkans, Western Europe and, yes, North America. And who’s behind that radicalization? Who funds the mosques and Islamic centers that in the past 30 years have set up shop on just about every Main Street around the planet?
For the answer, let us turn to a fascinating book called “Alms for Jihad: Charity And Terrorism in the Islamic World,” by J. Millard Burr, a former USAID relief coordinator, and the scholar Robert O Collins. Can’t find it in your local Barnes & Noble? Never mind, let’s go to Amazon. Everything’s available there. And sure enough, you’ll come through to the “Alms for Jihad” page and find a smattering of approving reviews from respectably torpid publications: “The most comprehensive look at the web of Islamic charities that have financed conflicts all around the world,” according to Canada’s Globe And Mail, which is like the New York Times but without the jokes.
Unfortunately, if you then try to buy “Alms for Jihad,” you discover that the book is “Currently unavailable. We don’t know when or if this item will be back in stock.” Hang on, it was only published last year. At Amazon, items are either shipped within 24 hours or, if a little more specialized, within four to six weeks, but not many books from 2006 are entirely unavailable with no restock in sight.
Well, let us cross the ocean, thousands of miles from the Amazon warehouse, to the High Court in London. Last week, the Cambridge University Press agreed to recall all unsold copies of “Alms for Jihad” and pulp them. In addition, it has asked hundreds of libraries around the world to remove the volume from their shelves. This highly unusual action was accompanied by a letter to Sheikh Khalid bin Mahfouz, in care of his English lawyers, explaining their reasons…
Two news flashes on August 1, 2007. First, the lawyers representing the so-called Flying Imams in their lawsuit against US Airways announced that they were not going after the unnamed passengers whose concerns prompted the men to be pulled off the Arizona-bound flight (here). I suppose that is good to know, now that the long-term policy implications of their lawsuit are about to justify (literally) an act of Congress. Second, Cambridge University Press announced that it was going to destroy all copies of the 2006 book Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World, in response to a libel claim filed in England by Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi banker (here).
Connected? Absolutely.
Read them both.
Very well said, BATB.
I was considering the kids I teach. As the decades have gone by, they’ve become more and more self-referential and lethargic and less and less respectful of themselves and others, as well as less and less trustworthy or accountable. To quote Neil Postman, they’re mainly preoccupied with “entertaining [them]selves to death”.
And these are the heirs to whom we’ll bequeath the death fight with the jihadists? If I didn’t feel like crying about this, I’d laugh.
I totally agree with BATB about the spiritual aspect of the problem. In fact, the West’s general loss of Christianity—received via Jerusalem and Athens—upon which its societies were built and have been sustained, is the root cause of the selfishness and loss of both reason and courage so prevalent in the developed world. Such malaise is holding the West hostage–as surely as the Islamists will.
We’re in big trouble.
Sorry: wrong form of the verb!
I said, “Such malaise is holding the West hostage–as surely as the Islamists will.”
This should read, ” . . . as surely as the Islamists ARE.”
THAT’S another big part of our really big problem.
been round the block – my conclusion that the west, ie, the ideology of the individual, of freedom of speech and thought, of science, reason and capitalist progress will survive is purely functional.
Viewing the world, as if I were an alien, I consider first, its 6 billion population. This population cannot be maintained without the ongoing developments and results of science, ie, the use of individual reason.
You posit ‘what if Islamic fascism’ wins – a question akin 40 years ago to ‘what if communism wins’ and before that, European fascism. My view, as that alien, is that IF Islamic fascism won, the population of the world would have to be reduced at least in half and more. The reason is that, as I’ve said, Islamic fascism has no economic or scientific capacity to sustain an industrial economy.
bdoggonit – china isn’t as evil as you claim. Kindly allow it to move out of communism into capitalism. The Beijing Olympics are a powerful force for change right now in China – and the ‘gaze of the world’ on China, now that it is globally industrial – is also changing China. It is finding that it can’t get away without standards, it can’t isolate itself anymore.
I agree with lookout’s forecast of ‘blood, toil, sweat and tears’ – [what a magnificent speech that was] – and equally despair over the smug and ignorant sophistry of the leftists in the west who, because they promote utopias both as collecctivist states and the relativism of multiculturalism, support islamic fascism.
But again, viewing the world as an alien, this 6 billion population can’t survive without industrialism – and a collectivist ideology, whether it be communist or islamic fascist – can’t function as an industrial economy. So – are we really going to lose more than half the world’s population to enable islamic fascism to turn back the clocks to a peasant agricultural economy? That’s all it can operate within – it can’t operate within industrialism.
Outlook— not to be too depressed. The nature of these leftist fools is to follow not to lead. When push comes to shove they will be on there unrealistic knees very quickly.
So when did everyone here stop hating just radical muslims and start hating ALL muslims?
Why did we bother apologizing to the Canadians of Japanese decent interned in WW II if we are willing to turn around and criminalize all Canadian muslims for similar reasons.
It’s funny that many of the same people here who use the sensible logic ‘only criminals commit crimes with guns’ to defend all decent gun owners,can’t use the same logic to defend decent muslims over the actions of a few criminals.(Surely no person here is bigotted enough to believe no good muslims exist.)
I agree the left is complicit in creating the atmosphere for radicalism to spread here and I have also expressed my concern before about a lack of outrage coming from the muslim community re the terror created in their name.
But that is no excuse to promote bigotry towards an entire group because of the actions of an evil,brainwashed few.
Muslims…in our streets…with jobs.
Oh my!
ET, from a mechanical perspective, your position that Islamism cannot defeat the West may be correct…but all it takes is nutjobs in Pakistan (or elsewhere, for that matter) to get their hands on nukes and USE THEM…perhaps they won’t win in the long run, but neither would we!
A good muslim is one who follows the teachings of Muhammad and the Koran. And those teachings are the jihad and “slay the infidels.”
You’re being very naive CO but that’s why Islam will win. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali pointed out recently, the war on terror should be called the war on Islam, because that’s what it is, only we are afraid to call it that.
ET: Even if the ‘civilized’ world will win in the end, how many millions will have to die before Islam is defeated? We won from the Nazis and the communists, but at what price? At the moment I only see Islam winning. There is no opposition, there is not even a sense of reality about the threat.
Canadian Observer. I do not hate any Muslim, but I have a real problem with Islamists. And the difference between the two is not very clear at times. Maybe if we did not see “mainstream Muslims” calling for the death of jews and bush and whoever, some folks might not have mixed feelings. Time for the “moderate” Muslim community to come out of their closets and show their true feelings.
Here is a quote from Brussels Journal of August 2:
“Earlier this year the current leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi Akef, stated that the ongoing Jihad will smash Western civilization. Akef decreed that in the event that Muslims cannot achieve this goal in the near future, “Muslims are obliged to continue the jihad that will cause the collapse of Western civilization and the ascendance of the Muslim civilization on its ruins.” The spiritual leader of the Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has voiced his support for suicide bombings and publicly boasted about how Muslims will conquer Europe.”
I’m afraid that these are the people who are running the show, not the ‘moderate’ Muslims.
Bad news.
I tried to buy a copy of “Alms for Jihad” at ebookimpressions.com (as suggested by “marc in calgary” on the second post).
Unfortunatelly, (after accepting payment) I was informed that “the requested title is no longer available.”
Now I look forward to the always fun process of getting my money back from a failed online purchase.
ET, some very good points.
But what if, after the jihadists are somehow vanquished—Winston Churchill’s “blood, toil, tears, and sweat”, indeed (but the first two are not very likely to be expended by the soft Western kids I teach)—all we’re left with is a polity full of heathenish self-seekers? (And, from our experience of China so far and its abysmal human rights record, I confess to not sharing your optimism about its future role on the world stage.)
Banishing the Judeo-Christian God from the equation, as we’ve effectively done in the West, has made our societies far less civilized and far more brutish and barbaric. I fear that a secular, self-serving polity will dish out as many atrocities as we fear from the Islamists. Think of all the Communist regimes of the 20th century, their gulags and killing fields, their abysmal stewardship of their human, natural, cultural, and economic resources.
If we had some Christian guts in the West—and the few we’ve got left are because we’re borrowing on the moral capital bequeathed to us by the Christian faith—we’d have pride in our culture and tell the Islamists to go fly a kite in their own backward countries. ET, you and I fully agree on and deplore the appeasement of our elites and agree about the appalling damage it’s doing. However, I think you have a blind spot when you refuse to connect the dots that lead from Christianity to free societies, and those dots that lead from less or no Christianity to societies full of deprivation, anarchy, cruelty, and backwardness. (Consider the dominant migration patterns: always FROM non-Christian countries TO democracies built on the shoulders of Christianity. That’s a FACT.)
This is an argument we’ve had before, and many in the SDA community—against all the evidence, I posit—agree with you. However, if the problem’s not diagnosed properly, it cannot be solved effectively.
At our peril, the West ignores the spiritual virtues and strengths Christianity has bequeathed to us and on which our civilization rose and prospered. A short list of these virtues, now in pretty short supply, are: faith, trust, reason, humility, sacrifice, mercy, forgiveness, altruism, discipline, and courage. Polities which do not honour or teach these qualities—Western societies don’t much any more—are in for a precipitous fall.
Civilizations have disappeared. There’s no reason, in my mind, that a catastrophe could not happen to the West, especially considering our implacable enemies, both inside and out. Destruction of a society is much easier to accomplish than building one and can happen in a short period of time. It’s already happening to us.
IMO, without the will to both fight back and rediscover and reinvigorate the Christian CULTURE—that doesn’t mean that everyone has to be a Christian—of the West, this story doesn’t necessarily, as you seem to think, have a happy ending.
Ultimately our struggle is not with flesh and blood but powers and principalities in the spiritual realm. That the socialist -leftist – intellectual crowd seemingly has formed a coalition should come as no surprise to anyone. At their heart is rebellion toward the Giver of life.
The rejection of the Giver of life is shown in their rejection of life. Feminism far from woman affirming is at its deepest core death seeking. Socialism at its core is rejecting of human life. The gay movement seeks death instead of life. The Muslim faith is likewise death embracing at its core.
Each of these has established a set of rules and a phony ‘theology’ to justify their death wish. However they fail to understand that life didn’t begin with them and they shall never succeed in destroying it.
To those of us who are life affirming falls the task of facing down the destroyers. This task will take much effort on our part. Those who try to rationalize and intellectualize will only wind up in endless argument and prove themselves ineffectual. Those who launch wars will soon find themselves faced with an enemy whose philosophy is death and since war is as effective as any other method of killing the war will continue.
The only thing that shall change the situation is the affirmation of life through a life affirming message; lived not just spoken. Enduring insult, receiving without retaliating, blessing and not cursing. Caring less for the outward behaviour than the inward heart. Carefully choosing the battles we engage in. Speaking the truth in LOVE.
Remember always the battle is the Lord’s and knowing that He whom we have trusted is able in all things and all ways to bring to completion that which He began.
Peace
Mark Steyn has probably been the most influential person extant in terms of waking people up to the realization that the attributes that have made the West successful are now being wielded, very deliberately, as powerful weapons against us. His writing always seems to contain an understanding that the ground we’ve lost pertains to language.
There’s no doubt that formerly utile words, once simple indicators of an object or idea, are increasingly anti-rational social enforcement mechanisms instead.
There are certain words which cause the utterer to turn into an unconscious promoter of an “ism”. Consider the word “tolerant,” as used since the 60’s. To describe someone now as tolerant is to pay him a high complement; to call him “intolerant” is an insult and, often, an attempt to silence. This usage is a huge moral blackout. Those who shrugged off the persecution of Jews by Nazis in 1930’s Germany were being about as tolerant as human beings can get; and similarly those who could not abide by the actions of certain Germans on Kristalnacht were being “intolerant” of that same group. It should be obvious that tolerance can be a good or a bad thing depending on what’s being tolerated, but that isn’t the case anymore; these days, if a person or group could not tolerate the actions or behaviours of say, radical Islamists in their London neighbourhood, their “intolerance” would be considered, prima facie, a bad thing, when in fact it may be noble, and good, and the self-defense of loved ones.
And now, perhaps, we can add the word “defamation.” Islamists pointedly ambitious at the prospect of wielding our legal system against us seem to be attempting to enlighten us to a new meaning of the word, one which advances their cause. Khalid bin Mahfouz, the Saudi banker who intimidated Cambridge University Pres into going out on an extended search and destroy mission against one of their own publications, typifies a particularly audacious overreach that’s also on display in Jeffrey Breinholt’s list of similar legal actions that have been undertaken in the West by Muslims. The new version of defamation, should it stick, would have it that if the expressions and actions which come from your own deeply-held beliefs, and which are not just acceptable but laudable and encouraged in your own ambit, are made public note of in another country where those same attributes are frowned upon and/or legally proscribed, then you have been libeled in that other country.
That “don’t look, lie down” demand, coming from a cultural intruder and being issued on our own soil, is certainly audacious, but we tend to not even blink at such demands when they’re dissolved in (western) lawyerly process. We’d laugh at one of our own attempting the same thing, mind you. If a famous Westerner who cohabits with his girlfriend sued a Malaysian newspaper for libel over a biographical article about him, on the grounds that his own lifestyle is not acceptable in Malaysia, and that he has therefore been defamed, it certainly would not fly. And if he claimed to be as outraged by the accusation that he is who is is as the public who are outraged by what he is, would his own outrage entitle him to use the Malaysian legal system to shut up Malaysians, demand reparations, etc.?
Probably not. Because he could never find a lawyer there willing to be outraged on his behalf, and if he found one, the judge would say to that lawyer “You’re not making any sense, man! For god’s sake, don’t speak English!
ET:
“So,- are we really going to lose more than half the world’s population to enable Islamic fascism to turn back the clocks to a peasant agricultural economy?”
That is the definition of victory for Islam. Is it possible? With the tacit/ignorant support of our own left, why not? Why would we assume that the society with the tallest towers, or the fastest airplanes, automatically comes out ahead? It’s about people, and their individual strength, not technology. This world has seen a “dark ages” before, with the destruction of the productive civilization of the time.
I’m not saying it will happen, but the possibility exists if we lose this one.
Can you imagine our grandchildren, half-starved and semi-literate, gathered around a sputtering fire in an abandoned building telling outlandish tales of men walking on the Moon?
I hope not, but the logical follow-on to the unchecked rise of tribalism is exactly that. They won’t take ourlifestyle away by having a better, more productive one…We may just let our societies die by our own ignorance.
Western civilization has been bought, over and over again, at a price: the price of men’s and women’s lives, those brave enough, stalwart enough, tough enough, and faithful enough to take on whichever enemy has been at its gates.
We’ve grown lax, lazy, bloated, and comfortable. We don’t seem to think that our freedoms are precious and costly but, rather, that we are entitled to them, that they are “free” for the taking.
What naive and ungrateful sheeple we have become. The Islamofascists know this, which is why they are so confident of our defeat.
You know, I’m beginning to think that the epidemic of childlessness in the West has a lot to do with our acquiescence to deadly threats to, and actual attacks on, our way of life, to our blindness in not recognizing what’s actually happening to us. (I’m not saying everyone needs to have children but it sure seems like giving birth in the West has become an infrequent phenomenon.)
I am making this connection between our apathy and childlessness because when we have children, we become extra-vigilant. We’re always watching to see if what they eat is safe, if their environment is safe from predators, toxins, and other dangers. We get in the habit of thinking of the well-being of another and are not fixated on our own selfish and narcissistic desires.
In a society so little aware of “the other” we are like children playing, dancing, and fiddling while “Rome burns.”
So, while we are preoccupied in entertaining ourselves to death (h/t Neil Postman via lookout) and not being vigilant, the Islamofascists are deadly serious about blowing our civilization to smithereens.
Amen, Joe. Thank you for your clear sighted and honest post. Yes, lots of groups about whom we’re supposed to be “tolerant” seem to embrace what John Paul II coined “the culture of death”, the very antithesis of the Christian culture you and I honour.
EBD, your exposition of the hijacking of language is helpful and insightful. Thanks.
This has been a very good thread–intelligent, thoughtful contributions and not hijacked by any trolls, thank God! (What a waste of time and grey matter they are!)
Mad Mike and BATB, right on. I agree with BATB’s observation about the West’s childlessness: if one isn’t already inclined towards altruism, having a child kick starts one out of selfishness–at least it used to.
But, I’ve noticed how many parents these days are just big babies, with not a clue how to discipline a child or provide the kind of emotional security children need to thrive, they’re so busy trying to meet their own, often juvenile needs.
This Godless society’s in trouble in so many ways that, as many of us have noted, our success is far from assured.
All it takes is one pdf on piratebay or such.
If all copies have been can there be a copyright violation? At the very least there can be no damages from lost sales.
enough
As Steyn has stated so many times, demographics is everything, all else is just details. We may have over 6.6 billion people but populations are in decline everywhere except for the muslim communities and countries. Most countries are declining in numbers and aging. Surveys show muslims in western countries want to live under sharia law and as their communities grow they interact less and less with other segments in their new homelands. As their mosques and imams spread with Saudi help the mythical moderate muslim with grow quieter.
ET, so many muslim factions have stated they are not interested in western ideas like reason and science and want a world-wide caliphate. With the liberals weakening every social tenent we might be in real trouble. Our society must fight against the overturning of the structures of freedom and equality but with our governments, educators and bureaucracies hamstringing any effort we make and the general apathy of Canadians this will a difficult battle.
David Hand:
Exactly. Death by…Apathy.
Sad.
Herman,
Ha…you dismiss my points as naive but you are the one with the narrow-minded and laughable logic.
All terrorists are muslim.
Therefore all muslims are terrorists.
Done.
kingstontard,
“Time for the “moderate” Muslim community to come out of their closets and show their true feelings.”
Agreed,it’s well past time.
No doubt we need to wake up Canadians to the dire threat of’radicalness’infecting our muslim population.But it must be muslims themselves who make the firmest stand.
I think what many here fail to see is that when a few commentors make ignorant and hateful remarks about muslims in general and everyone else let’s them slide(after all,they’re fellow conservatives),it gives the impression that all us conservatives are intolerant,bigotted hicks.
Is that not a leftist stereotype of us that we should take every opportunity to prove is a lie?
For a group of people claiming they desperately need to create awareness,understanding and support from fellow Canadians to fight this threat,a lot of posters here don’t exactly demonstrate the ability to’reach out’.
Well, CO, I’m not trying to “reach out” to those who are trying to obliterate me, my children, and my democracy. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms and all of the bleeding heart liberals are doing a good job of reaching out to all of the extremist jihadists, as it is, and just see where it’s got us.
Duh.
kingstontard ( i just love that):
We shall see how smug Jeff and his latte sipping friends are when Johnny Jihad Jr. self-detonates on Yonge Street on a busy Saturday.
as a sensible person, i avoid latte and yonge street at all costs.
the sad part is you, and everyone like you, secretly craves the deaths of innocent torontonians at the hands of crazy extremists just to say “i told you so.
“as a sensible person, i avoid latte and yonge street at all costs”
and that folks in a nutshell sez it all, oh brother.
Jeff. To predict what one’s enemies will do, is not to want it to be. My brother’s and I spent over 50 years in the military keeping fanatics clear of you moonbat types, while you peacefully marched for cause of the day. We know first hand the face of terror, and we all better hope it does not hit our shores.
Thanks, kingstontard and your brothers, for keeping the rest of us safe, for keeping the battles from our shores.
As I said earlier, entitled ingrates like jd, have NO idea of the sacrifices others have made for them to live in freedom and enjoy all of the privileges they take for granted.
I, for one, am grateful for our men and women in uniform and their families. Thank you.
batb,
“Duh”
Well,that about sums it up for your reading comprehension skills anyways.
jeff,
“..you, and everyone like you…”
I just love the open-minded,unbiased types that frequent these blogs….
Pre-ordered my copy of “Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World” from Amazon.ca, says it’ll be available Oct,07
What does it say about a society that would burn it’s books ??? Shame Cambridge University Press.
“this kind of stunt actually works only in Britain – because of their paternalistic and outdated libel laws.”
England and Wales, not Britain: it is specifically the English courts that are the world’s defamation forum of choice due to the way English defamation law shifts the burden of proof, and its place as the last UK refuge of the civil jury. And what this creates is a race to the bottom. Notice how you can’t buy this book anywhere in the world on Amazon, due to an English lawsuit? Amazon itself, and certainly its clients (the publishing houses, not the end-consumer) could be liable as a publisher or distributor of defamatory material. And then any property of theirs in England could be attached to satisfy a judgment.
Further, although US courts generally refuse to enforce English libel judgments on First Amendment grounds, most other jurisdictions will give them effect.
Example of an alternative course:
http://tinyurl.com/388ko7
“Muslims Silence Critics
By Robert Spencer
FrontPageMagazine.com | 8/6/2007
After a police raid Friday at Your Black Muslim Bakery in Oakland, bakery employee Devaughndre Broussard admitted to murdering Chauncey Bailey, the editor of the Oakland Post. Bailey was writing a series of investigative articles about the Bakery – and that’s why, according to police, Broussard killed him.
Your Black Muslim Bakery is an outpost of the Nation of Islam, not of any orthodox Islamic sect, but in this murder Devaughndre Broussard has followed a pattern that some orthodox Muslims have also followed. Violent reprisal has long been an occupational hazard of those who dare to question or investigate Islamic groups or criticize Islamic practices. Filmmaker Theo van Gogh was brutally murdered in November 2004 by a Muslim who took exception to his criticism of the oppression of women in Islamic societies. In 1947, the Iranian lawyer Ahmad Kasravi was murdered in court by Islamic jihadists; Kasravi was there to defend himself against charges that he had attacked Islam…”
The reason why the government subsidizes Quebec to the tune of billions is because they have a voice, a lot of voices because they procreated, while the rest of Canada was busy aborting their babies and losing their voices. Muslims procreate; we will all be screwed.
Six years ago, I had to ask what that woman was with the scarf on her head, and now I’ll see at least 20 at any given time in Wal Mart. Nearly every single cab driver is black, straight out of Africa and has a Koran on the dash. Let’s not kid ourselves, we are going to be outnumbered sooner than we think, and I don’t live anywhere near Toronto.
Posted by: Herman at August 6, 2007 12:29 PM
You bring up a good point about Muslims worshipping Allah, not God.
It reminds me of the Temptation of Christ.
Jesus rejected the offer of Satan to have the power to rule over the entire world.
Is there a chance the same offer was made to Muhammad and he accepted?
Canadian Observer: I think what many here fail to see is that when a few commentors make ignorant and hateful remarks about muslims in general and everyone else let’s them slide(after all,they’re fellow conservatives),it gives the impression that all us conservatives are intolerant,bigotted hicks…For a group of people claiming they desperately need to create awareness,understanding and support from fellow Canadians to fight this threat,a lot of posters here don’t exactly demonstrate the ability to’reach out’.
Agreed. I’ve said the exact same thing, on numerous SDA threads, imploring the many not to let the hateful remarks of the few slide. But because I’m from the opposite end of the political spectrum, the response every time is that I’m merely a terrorist-supporting leftard surrender monkey, and should just shut up, stop trolling, and go away.
Perhaps you and ET, as conservatives, will have better luck than I. But I doubt it.
CO, A’dam, the world works on the basis of generalizations. “conservatives are…”, “liberals are…”, “Canadians are…”, “Americans are…”, “Christians are…”, “Islamists are…”, etc. and ad nauseum.
What you are trying to say is that the problem isn’t with the group as a whole, but with individuals within the group. That is true…but it is also misleading.
If statistics say that cigarettes cause 40% of all lung cancer, the rational response is to say that cigarettes are bad and to ban cigarettes. Of course, some people can smoke 2 packs a day for life and never develop complications. So? Does this mean that we shouldn’t say anything negative about cigarettes?
Islamism accounts for…what…80% of world terrorism and kills thousands per year? A rational response is to say that Islamism is bad and to ban Islamism.
And yes, I am equating humans to inanimate objects…this is called objectivity. You guys are mixing in emotion with logic…that’s nice and sensitive but will complicate solving the problem.
Cigarette smoking is a choice and can reasonably be left up to the individual. Death by Islam is not a choice and cannot be left up to the individual. I can choose not to smoke or be around smokers…but with open immigration and emotional types such as yourself, I cannot choose to stay away from Islam.
Muslims, if they choose to reject all tenets of their belief that condone murder, revenge killings, rape, slavery, etc. and ad nauseum, are welcome. If they don’t, they aren’t. Show me the Muslims that reject barbarity and I will support them…so, where are they?
If you have a cancer in your body, you cut it out or kill it. You don’t “negotiate”, you don’t “talk”, you don’t “tolerate”. Islamism is a cancer…cut it out or kill it.
Please note well…I said Islamism not Muslims. Hate the sin, love the sinner.
I’d like those who libel SDA posters, by saying they make “ignorant and hateful remarks about muslims [sic]”, to document those statements by giving examples.
eh: I also ordered the book at Amazaon.ca and received the same message that you did. That doesn’t guarantee that you’ll get it. Amazon has cancelled orders on me before. As far as I know the ebook is still available at booksonboard.com.
A’dam:
There’s a basic contradiction within the Muslim cult.
At the same time that it cites certain Biblical passages and purports to follow the tenets of Ibrahim and Musa, whose viewpoints are the underpinning of both Jewish and Christian thought, there is a fundamental difference.
Christ, for example, invited people to ‘seek peace and pursue it,’ as King David articulated in the 23rd Psalm.
Muhammad, on the other hand, brought ‘peace’ to the world by launching military actions and murdering those who did not agree with him.
The difference is in the nature of the prophets: While Christ is known as the Prince of Peace, Muhammad spread his version of peace through the Sword of Allah.
Even Ray Charles could see that modern-day flags of nations which embrace Islamist intimidation carry crossed swords (Saudi Arabia). The flag of Hizb’allah even updated that concept. Their flag contains crossed AK-47s.
Therefore, one of the most important symbols of nationhood scream out … power through intimidation.
“The world will always have an emotional longing for the utopianism of collectivist ideologies such as communism, socialism and Islamism. My point is that these must remain peripheral and cannot ever become dominant because they cannot, on their own, maintain large populations.”
ET,
I don’t think Islam wants a large non-Muslim population. They may well do a Joe Stalin on the West if they are in charge and simply go about eliminating us from the earth which they often state.
How China and India will fare with the Muzz if and when we are gone is anyone’s guess. I don’t understand why China presently helps the Muzz since that is akin to a business plotting to kill it’s customers.
You are right, no large population can survive under the lunacy of either Islam or Communism, there would be a huge die or kill off …………………………………………………………………..
But then, wouldn’t suit the Al Gores, Maurice Strongs, and David Suzukis of the world? Fewer humans more birdies and bears and eternally stable sea levels? Frozen in time.
Refer back to the British Channel 4 secret videos of mosques in London where the imams are lecturing the hundreds of men quietly sitting listening to their message of hating the kaffir and jihad against the west. Is anyone standing up and denouncing this hateful message? The brother of the one of the 9/11 terrorists, himself a muslim, urges Britain and the west to really listen to what is said in these mosques. Our general reaction to these warnings, “Hey, how about those Blue Jays.” or “Can’t we all just get along.” Listen and read what Hirsi Ali and others like her are saying.
At it’s foundation, Islam is violent. At it’s base, it appeals to violence and greed in mankind. It not only condones violence, Allah demands it and rewards it – typically with the most sinful carnal pleasures in a spiritual place (completely illogical).
Violence as foundational to Islam is a fact, proven in the Quran and in Mohammad’s life example.
Whether fanatics or moderates, this is what Muslims must deal with. Without rejecting Mohammad and editing out the calls and rewards for violence in the Quran, so-called ‘reformation’ is not possible.
Therefore, Islam, regardless of sect or interpretation, in it’s present form, will always be the cause – the impetus of Islamic terrorism and imperialism.
More and more Muslims are becoming aware of this and rejecting Islam – becoming apostates. IMO, this is the only way to win this 1400 year old confrontation. It’s a war of recruiting.
The more Muslims are confronted with the truth of their cult; the more they are allowed freedom to leave, the closer the world will be to defeating this toxic ideology.
It requires knowledge of Islam and a mirror to hold up to them.
Allowing further Muslim immigration and more importantly, the multi-culti ghettoization of Muslims in the west is suicide. Regardless of good, or well-meaning Muslims – there is always the danger of spontaneous jihad, let alone organized jihad.
There is also the danger of critical mass, the progressively negative effects of which are observable based on growing Muslim populations throughout the east and Europe.
Allowing immigration of such a non-compatible culture/ideology should not be an experiment foisted on the generations to come. That is inhumane and monstrously cruel.
I agree with ET, that China will more than likely prove to be a strange ally against the spread of Islam. Recently, they created a law against Chinese Muslim’s journeying to Mecca during the haj.
I wonder why?
What a great read this has been! Thanks to BATB, Lookout and so many more posters for being so eloquent about their convictions. This level of discourse couldn’t be found in our biased media and so I thank Kate for providing a forum for it. I don’t feel that my Canada has totally disappeared when I come here.
“CO….the world works on the basis of generalizations.”conservatives are…”, “liberals are…”, “Canadians are…”, “Americans are…”, “Christians are…”, “Islamists are…”, etc. and ad nauseum.”
Eeyore..
Muslims are terrorists.
Some muslims are terrorists.
Conservatives are fundamental christians.
Some conservatives are fundamental christians.
Canadians are polite.
Most Canadians are polite.
Americans are arrogant.
A few Americans are arrogant.
Liberals are thieves and liars.
(Sorry,I can’t argue that one) 😉
My point being,a simple qualifier makes all the difference between accuracy and gross exaggeration.I assume most visitors here are trying their best to communicate accurately,but absolutes are common and just plain misleading(and insidious…I still slip up myself at times).
Actually,I believe absolutes are the first step towards bigotted thinking.Packaging complex topics into neat little bundles of ‘all’ and ‘every’ is intellectually lazy(which would explain why the world ‘does it’).
I hope this helps you understand my POV on the topic.
lookout,
May I politely and respectfully suggest a ‘time-out’ from the blogosphere for you….as I regularly do for myself?
You seem an intelligent individual so your inability to detect any anymosity or even hatred towards muslims from posters to this site speaks for where your perspective currently is.
The entire political blogosphere has a decided intolerance and hatefulness about it.Between the ‘us and them’ attitudes and the anonymity of posting,the lowest common denominator always seems to prevail. Conservative blogsites are most definitely not immune to this.
I believe it is painfully obvious for anyone not emerged in it to see.
At least,that’s this individual’s perspective.
CO, I appreciate your respectful tone, but, with respect, I don’t need your advice or put-downs, thanks. It appears that you don’t mean to be arrogant, but that’s how it comes across.
FYI, the colleague with whom I worked closely for five hours a day, every day last year was Muslim. It was never an issue and we had a strong and positive working relationship, partly because, both being religious, we had a strong mutual understanding of one another. So, in general, re issues like responsibility, discipline, and accountability, we also shared the same value system. We made a great team and had a most respectful, affectionate relationship.
If you think I’ve made comments which are racist or include “animosity and hatred”, please give examples. I’d then be glad to respond to specifics.
Otherwise, you may avert your eyes if my comments offend you.
CO, not all Muslims are terrorists. But the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims.
All over the world, they’re at war with Christians, Hindus, Animists, people of any religion that isn’t Muslim, and even with other Muslims!
You may find these statements distasteful. Too bad. They’re FACTUAL, fully based on empirical evidence.
And, if there’s a terrorist attempt or attack in Canada, it’s likely to be carriecd out by the KIND of quiet, polite children my Muslim colleague has–they go to Muslim school: think the British Muslim doctors–than by the children of my hundreds of colleagues of all other religions or none. That’s a FACT, CO.
So to say that terrorist attempts and atrocities are likely to be perpetrated by Muslims is not hateful. What it is is scary and a very serious threat to our beliefs and freedoms, which were won at great sacrifice: they’re not free, as you appear to think. So, we need to be watchful and ready to parry.
CO: I was not saying that generalizations are good or acceptable, just that they are a fact of life. Everyone (including YOU…guaranteed!) use them everyday…but perhaps not about sensitive topics such as muslims or blacks or gays or christians or whatever.
I don’t disagree with the sentiment behind your position or A’dams…but if you water down statements sufficiently, they lose all meaning or import.
To the statement “Some muslims are terrorists” will come the retort “Oh yeah, so are some Christians!”. So, you have to come back with “No, no…what I mean is that a far greater percentage of muslims than any other religious group are terrorists and there are few if any muslims who denounce terrorist activities or other barbarous acts or even denounce how terribly muslims treat women and homosexuals…and if they do, they are considered apostates and often victimized”. Wouldn’t it be so much easier just to say that “Islamism is bad”?
When someone says “Omigod, I hate Christians” I strongly suspect that they don’t mean EVERY CHRISTIAN ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET…just those that get up in their face…so I read into their statement that proviso. When someone says “Omigod, I hate muslims” I do the same thing. So should any thinking individual.
If you want to be pedantic about it, you should preface every post with “In my opinion, I believe on the face of the facts to which I have been exposed that…” and then end them all with “…but of course I am not in possession of all of the facts, so it could be that I am mistaken” and in the text in between use qualifying words like “some”, “a small percentage”, “several”, “perhaps”, “maybe / kinda / sorta”, etc.
At the end of all that pedantic posting, you may as well delete it and forget about saying anything at all.
I would dearly love all posters to exercise restraint and caution in their postings, but they don’t and, despite protesting, won’t. So, just go with the flow and if you can’t stand it, don’t come back.
Eeyore: Please note well…I said Islamism not Muslims.
I did notice, Eeyore, and it should also be well-noted that this wasn’t always the case on SDA. In previous threads, commenters blithely treated “Islam” as interchangeable with “Islamism,” and likewise “Muslim,” with “terrorist.”
“Muslims account for…what…80% of world terrorism and kill thousands per year?…”
…versus…
“Islamism accounts for…what…80% of world terrorism and kills thousands per year?…”
What a difference a word makes, especially if the reader happens to be a peaceful, law-abiding Muslim. And amazingly, it didn’t require a convoluted preface or multiple qualifiers either.
Besides, “it’s just easier to say ‘Muslims'” is no excuse. Especially if it’s a sensitive topic, and especially if you intend to subsequently demand that moderate Muslims stand up to the extremists within their own communities, then you damn well better take pains not to alienate those potential allies in the first place. Convenience/laziness would be hugely self-defeating in this case.
When someone says “Omigod, I hate muslims” I do the same thing. So should any thinking individual.
Context, Eeyore, context. If the phrase “Omigod, I hate Christians” appeared as the title of a thread on, oh, say a Muslim community online discussion forum, I doubt you’d interpret it as referring specifically to just “those that get up in their face.” Ditto for “Omigod, I hate Conservatives” showing up on Rabble. And yeah, believe it or not, SDA is perceived by outsiders as a stridently anti-Muslim website. Not anti-Islamist — anti-Muslim.
Gee, I wonder where it got that reputation…
K. Payne, you’re obviously a very discerning type! Thanks for the compliment.
Islam is the religion, Muslims are the ones that practice it. Muslims committing terrorism in the name of Islam is costing the world billions in dollars and millions in lives. Who are the peaceful Muslims? Who are the ones who will kill others in the name of Allah? Not even other Muslims necessarily know who these people are? Islam is at the root of this evil, because Islam is evil. Once a Muslim, always a Muslim. Islam treats women like dogs and so many men practice what their religions teaches. The problem is no one really knows which Muslim they can trust to not kill them. There does not seem to be any common traits all terrorists possess, other than they kill freely.
I don’t hate Muslims; I just don’t trust them.
I was able to get Alms for Jihad from booksonboard.com fo US$ 17.34. I’m reading it now.
History has shown that all “empires”, however powerful, eventually fail.
Ming Chinese. Mayan. Roman…
They fail because of a combination of internal weakness and external pressures. The interval issues are usually socioeconomic, the external are usually an invasion of some sort.
The current world empire, the post-industrial revolution Anglo-American colonical capitalist society, suffers from apathy, gluttony, and loss of the sense of self-reliance that was the basis of its emergence from the middle ages. The Muslim invasion is simply the 21st century equivalent of the Visigoths and Huns.
People living in one of these empires, born to it, fed on its glorious history, and knowing no other way of life, cannot conceive that the status quo can fundamentally change, even as the signs are all around them.
But history proves that it can, it must eventually, occur. Nothing lasts forever.
Who was that idiot a few years ago who wrote about “the end of history”. How could anyone be so wrong?