Bruce Bawer’s “An Anatomy of Surrender” asks “Do we love our freedoms as much as they hate them?”
What has not been widely recognized is that the Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1989 fatwa against Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie introduced a new kind of jihad. Instead of assaulting Western ships or buildings, KhoÂmeini took aim at a fundamental Western freedom: freedom of speech. In recent years, other Islamists have joined this crusade, seeking to undermine Western societies’ basic liberties and extend sharia within those societies.
The cultural jihadists have enjoyed disturbing success. Two events in particular—the 2004 assassination in Amsterdam of Theo van Gogh in retaliation for his film about Islam’s oppression of women, and the global wave of riots, murders, and vandalism that followed a Danish newspaper’s 2005 publication of cartoons satirizing Mohammed—have had a massive ripple effect throughout the West. Motivated variously, and doubtless sometimes simultaneously, by fear, misguided sympathy, and multicultural ideology—which teaches us to belittle our freedoms and to genuflect to non-Western cultures, however repressive—people at every level of Western society, but especially elites, have allowed concerns about what fundamentalist Muslims will feel, think, or do to influence their actions and expressions. These Westerners have begun, in other words, to internalize the strictures of sharia, and thus implicitly to accept the deferential status of dhimmis—infidels living in Muslim societies.
Call it a cultural surrender. The House of War is slowly—or not so slowly, in Europe’s case—being absorbed into the House of Submission.
[…]
So it goes in this upside-down, not-so-brave new media world: those who, if given the power, would subjugate infidels, oppress women, and execute apostates and homosexuals are “moderate” (a moderate, these days, apparently being anybody who doesn’t have explosives strapped to his body), while those who dare to call a spade a spade are “Islamophobes.”
I am not an Islamophobe; my fear of Islamic extremism is completely thought out and logical.
What you do, Kate McMillan, is grossly exagerate the fundementals of your case. A movie maker is stabbed, there are riots, upheaval, and an even more terrifying spector, toothless human rights actions in Canada, and just how is your freedom speech curtailed?
You have received excellent support, including financial support, so in the end, excitement and stress aside, you personally are not suffering any awful consequences.
There is no question that a statistically small but very influential band of maniacs would have you stoned, Kate. Me, I’m already stoned. The point is that this terrible future, the one where we are all called to prayer three times a time, against our will, is not going to happen.
People need to get educated about Islam since the news media is frightened to publish anything critical of Islam. There is evidence that the Mohammad Cartoons were not published primarily because Newspaper editors were afraid of being murdered, not because of respect for multiculturalism. Consider how few comedians take on Islam. Since when have comedians self-censored themselves when it comes to anything sacred. The truth is they are afraid of being murdered by members of “the religion of peace”.
Robert Spencer, although wrongly vilified, is an honest source of information about the widespread acceptance of violent jihad and supremacist thinking amongst many Muslims. See http://www.jihadwatch.org for his web site.
And here’s a little irony, Kate. You are one who pokes incessant fun at movements you consider to be panic based and sheep-like in their approach-like the adherents to global warming theory.
Johnny Maudlin writes an awful lot of nearly coherent sentences for a stoned person.
You’ve already been defeated, Mr. Maudlin.
The best part about free speech is that every nut has the right to self-identify. As J.M. and I are proving.
Reading Maudlin’s posts is like looking down at the urinal puck.
The problem with the west is in becoming aware and alarmed enough to learn the truth about the Islamic ideology through it’s own texts, history, preachers, so-called ‘scholars’ and political leaders who justify their actions and sayings based on the texts. Particularly Mohammad’s life example. It is they who have declared a holy war and impose fear through threats of violence and terrorism. It’s time to take them seriously and listen.
The truth about Islam cannot be directly learned through western based imams and scholars, because of their ingrained practice of taqiyya and kitman, (allah sanctioned lying and half truths directed at the kaffir) they cannot be trusted. Neither can it be learned through dhimmi apologists and appeasers, such as Karen Armstrong, John Esposito, Bernard Lewis, or George Bush for that matter.
Anybody wishing to learn must be aware of the alien idea of dualism in the Islamic doctrine, as well as abrogation based on the division of the Quran between the Mecca and Medina periods.
A good place to start is with Dr. Andrew Bostom, Robert Spencer, Ibn Warraq and a host of other canaries, which we should all be thankful for. That’s, of course, while we still have some semblance of freedom of speech.
The political level that has to be engaged now is through elections. MP’s should be questioned as to the extent of their knowledge and what they plan to do to stop the spread of Islam in our country. Fabricated cliches, such as ‘the religion of peace’ must be summarily rejected. So must the sleep inducing term ‘moderate’ Muslims, (I say this despite the fact that most are moderate, or nominal). The problem is, how do we know who is moderate and why should we take the risk? What’s the benefit? 70% of Spain’s prison population are Muslims. France and Britain are approaching the same numbers. Certainly there is no such thing as a moderate Quran, Sira, Hadith, or Mohammad. Witness the radical Toronto Muslim interviewed in the Post last week.
The UN must be challenged on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Islamic Human Rights declared and signed in ’92 is a sham – abrogated by Shariah law in the last two articles. It is unacceptable that these very same countries control human rights through the UN, without signing and acting upon the UN’s own Universal declaration.
Furthermore, demands must be made and met for any sort of aid going to Islamic countries. The demands should progress until the state, laws and schools are separate from the ideology. Much the same as the US did with Shintoiism in Japan.
Perhaps, most immediately though, is to expose the dhimmi appeasers in our midst for their ignorance, if not outright treachery and treason. Every dhimmi professor, journalist, human rights activist and politician must be engaged, exposed and discredited by a knowledgeable and active public.
Otherwise the problem will only get worse as history has proven.
From Dr. Peter Hammond’s article, “What Islam Isn’t”:
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:
United States — Muslim 1.0%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1%-2%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).
France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago — Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris –car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam – Mohammed cartoons).
Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 10-15%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%
At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:
Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:
Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:
Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%
100% will usher in the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace — there’s supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:
Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 99.9%
Of course, that’s not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.
——
Apologies for the long post.
Wowser. “…called to prayer three times a time…”
Daly, it’s 11:35 in the bloody morning and you’re already wasted! What a useless bag of skin you truly are.
Cultural surrender, you bet, we’ve surrendered to lefty elitists our safety, our borders, our schools and our reverence for the our country and religious values. It’s no surprise that militant and expansionist Islam picked this time in history to assault westerners again.
I despise Islam. Its a vicious cult that expands outside its primitive tribal boundaries by intimidation rather than through acts that give humans more dignity and comfort. One need only to look at its treatment of women, gays and non-Muslims to see that.
The westerners not repulsed by Islam are the lefty self-loathing hedonists or the totally clueless or both combined. And, it will be off of the efforts and sacrifices of others that they are spared the harm that Islam wants to inflict on them. Too bad.
Penny …. yep! And ditto too….
irwin – that really puts Islam’s behavioral progression in perspective. And, the correlation is playing out before out eyes. It’s chillingly accurate. Do you have a link to that?
Bruce Bawer’s While Europe Slept makes an excellent book gift for thinking liberal friends who might be turned. The author has all the street creds: East Coast (New York no less!) Gay Liberal.
What is remarkable about the book is seeing his gradual disillusionment after his initially euphoric emigration to the kinder, gentler, “progressive” Denmark. He even ends up not hating Reagan (gasp!), not hating American power, per se (double gasp!).
It’s the ultimate “mugged by reality” read. Give the book to a thinking liberal friend if you have one.
Despite all the evidence, the Western world still prefers to practice willful ignorance of the current round of Muslim expansionism. They took large parts of Europe before, using the sword, this time they are using immigration and breeding once in country.
The real problem is the Progressive Class that currently grips the levers of power and government at this time. They can’t admit there is a problem because it totally undermines their political philosophy, their raison d’etre.
But as the Jihadis get bolder, they will make a mistake. Sooner or later, some wanna-screw-72-virgins whack job is going to have his home made bomb go off prematurely just as a group of school kids walks by – or something similar. As the media shows the little kiddie body parts hanging off trees and houses, the utter brutality of their methods will be enough to act as extra strength Braino and clean out the mental clogs.
The Progressives need something brutal to happen before they can shake off the fog of myopic thinking that currently restricts their ability to see the world for what it is. The mark of the Progressive is the imposition of a I-want-it-to be, it-should-be-this-way-thinking on their ability to make policy decisions that reflect reality.
“.. grossly exagerate the fundementals of your case..”
Er, none of the case presented is Kates. It’s Bawers’ whose position by the way agrees will all the major western Islamic scholars, researchers and renowned authors who present exactly the same story, even though the MSM won’t. Even Rep. Sue Merrick in the USA gets it and speaks out on it. Why don’t deniers read a little Spencer, Fitzgerald, Pipes, Ye’or, Sultan, Warraq, Ali? How about the positions of the Muslim Canadian Congress even? Get informed.
HRC conduct does not rise to the level of the Van Gogh murder and youth riots. HRC is hardly toothless, though. The article seems to refer more to an internal surrender, of one’s history and values, to accomodate another. There is nothing essentially wrong with that, except in the rare case of those who exploit our freedoms for their own ends (Islamist terrorist types, for example).
Unfortunately, murders and riots are but a hint of what violent Islamofascists would wreak upon us, given the means and opportunity. The present military response is also but a hint of what would be forthcoming should a mass destruction (and death) attack occur.
Our freedom and speech and values (all of us), are being used by hated filled, criminal minded people, to very destructive ends. JM is right, they don’t have the capability (not yet anyway), and the states they occupy are somewhat deterred.
When our history, values, institutions and political culture are subjected to sophisticated espionage, even by a few, we need not panic; we should at least take notice.
Sounder, if that ‘get informed’ was directed at maudlin it would be in vain.He would only be more confused by facts.
However, the list of important sources that you include is valuable for us to ‘inform’ the ROC.And we still have the freedom of the internet to spread the facts.I would add Brigit Gabrielle to the list.
MSM is more afraid of their lib-left audience calling them Islamaphobic (recall Avi Lewis and Hirshi Ali) than they are of Islam.Reality will bite them in the butt soon enough.
Yes bluletech I was referring to Maud and also many, many more authors and scholars could indeed be added to that short list, including the famous Gabrielle.
I clicked on the link to the Bruce Bawer piece Kate provided and found this,
Mainstream outlets have also served up anodyne portraits of fundamentalist Muslim life. Witness Andrea Elliott’s affectionate three-part profile of a Brooklyn imam, which appeared in the New York Times in March 2006. Elliott and the Times sought to portray Reda Shata as a heroic bridge builder between two cultures, leaving readers with the comforting belief that the growth of Islam in America was not only harmless but positive, even beautiful.
Though it emerged in passing that Shata didn’t speak English, refused to shake women’s hands, wanted to forbid music, and supported Hamas and suicide bombing, Elliott did her best to downplay such unpleasant details; instead, she focused on sympathetic personal particulars. “Islam came to him softly, in the rhythms of his grandmother’s voice”; “Mr. Shata discovered love 15 years ago. . . . ‘She entered my heart,‘ said the imam.” Elliott’s saccharine piece won a Pulitzer Prize.
When Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes pointed out that Shata was obviously an Islamist, a writer for the Columbia Journalism Review dismissed Pipes as “right-wing” and insisted that Shata was “very moderate.”
this part is worth repeating,
Though it emerged in passing that Shata didn’t speak English,
refused to shake women’s hands,
wanted to forbid music,
and supported Hamas and suicide bombing
A Pullitzer prize for obfuscating the truth about that Islamist ???
But then again… I should not be surprised, they gave a Nobel prize to Al Gore for fabricating evidence about Global warming…
The lunatics are running the nut house and distributing prizes to the “best” lunatics…
***shaking head in disbelief***
Here is Johnnies logic in a nutshell:
You can accurately predict long term events in the earth’s climate
You CANNOT predict the growth of human populations on a long term basis.
Go back to school, moron.
Maudlin – your head is stuck so far up your butt you can’t walk straight. (I like that line). Some day you’ll walk around in a self-inflicted haze singing “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t know what you’ve got till its gone.” Wake up buddy – these are not your garden variety, nice “next-door-neighbor” type people we are talking about here.
I just finished reading “America Alone”, and while I don’t agree with everything Steyn says (like his take on the nature of the connection between atheism and civilizational exhaustion) I will be recommending it to others for sure. Food for thought. Many thanks to you all for building awareness and promoting truly free thought and speech.
Oh, and who knows which part was published in Maclean’s? The intro/prologue?
Penny,
The article link: frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=4DE15EF9-A76C-4DD4-81E2-75683AEED74D
While there you also might want to look up a recent debate on Islamic reform (can’t remember the name of the article) including Spencer, Muslims against Sharia, Haddon and a couple of others. Very informative.
Errmmmm, Maud-Lynn has it right, we don’t need to worry about Islam as much as we should worry about liberals, like him!!!!
Johnny Maudlin;
Who knows whether you’re right. I hope you are, but never say never. I’m old enough to remember the 60’s and 70’s when there were race riots in American cities. Europe of course was in full fledged moral preening saying only in America, not in their far more sophisticated lands.
Been reading any news about France in the last few years. Go try and convince them.
“When, after van Gogh’s murder, a Rotterdam artist drew a street mural featuring an angel and the words THOU SHALT NOT KILL, police, fearing Muslim displeasure, destroyed the mural…”
Hmm, what’s wrong with that picture?
Here’s an excellent example of how the treasonous dhimmi’s work. From a critique on the Wahhabi bought and paid for Esposito’s new book, “Who Speaks for Islam?”:
Dr. Esposito and the seven-percent solution
“Bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are.” —Harry Frankfurt, On Bullshit
Professor John L. Esposito runs a slick operation at Georgetown with $20 million of funding from Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. The shared agenda of these two is to make us all feel guilty for having wondered, after 9/11, about Saudis, Muslims, and the contemporary teaching of Islam. Esposito now has a new book (with co-author Dalia Mogahed, who runs something called the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies), bearing the pretentious title Who Speaks for Islam? What a Billion Muslims Really Think. It’s based on gleanings from the Gallup World Poll.
The core argument of the book is that only 7% of Muslims are “politically radicalized,” and that “about 9 in 10 Muslims are moderate.” On what does this factoid rest? The authors explain (pp. 69-70):
According to the Gallup Poll, 7% of respondents think that the 9/11 attacks were “completely” justified and view the United States unfavorably…. the 7%, whom we’ll call “the politically radicalized” because of their radical political orientation… are a potential source for recruitment or support for terrorist groups.
So an essential precondition for being “politically radicalized” is to believe that 9/11 was “completely” justified. The pool of support is only 7%. Don’t you feel relieved?
Yet a year and a half ago, Esposito and Mogahed used a different definition of “radical,” in interpreting respondents’ answers to Gallup’s 9/11 question. In November 2006, they gave this definition:
Respondents who said 9/11 was unjustified (1 or 2 on a 5-point scale, where 1 is totally unjustified and 5 is completely justified) are classified as moderates. Respondents who said 9/11 was justified (4 or 5 on the same scale) are classified as radicals.
Wait a minute…. In 2006, then, these same authors defined “radicals” not only as Muslims who thought 9/11 was “completely justified” (5 on their scale), but those who thought it was largely justified (4 on their scale).
So for their new book, they’ve drastically narrowed their own definition of “radical,” to get to that 7% figure. And they’ve also spread the impression in the media that the other 93% are “moderates.” In 2006, their “moderates” included only Muslims who thought 9/11 was “totally” or largely unjustified (who answered 1 or 2 on a 5-point scale, where 1 is “totally unjustified”). But what about Muslims who answered with 3 or 4? Well, they weren’t “moderates” by 2006 standards. The 3’s were neither “moderates” nor “radicals,” and the 4’s were “radicals.” But this year, they’ve all been upgraded to “moderate” class, because they didn’t “completely justify” 9/11. Whether they largely justified it, or half-justified it, they’re all “moderates” now.
That’s certainly how the press has interpreted it. Here, for example, is the Agence France-Presse report on Esposito’s “findings”:
About 93 percent of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims are moderates and only seven percent are politically radical, according to the poll, based on more than 50,000 interviews.
Can there be a more distorted interpretation than that? Sure. Here’s the Deutsche Presse-Agentur, reporting the same “findings”:
The overwhelming majority of Muslims—93 percent—condemned the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.
Ah. So anyone who didn’t “completely justify” 9/11 is now thought to have somehow condemned it.
the rest: sandbox.blog-city.com/dr_esposito_and_the_seven_percent_solution.htm
You wanna kno wha’s wrong wid dat picture?
I’ll be tellin you what. Nobod’ gon be tellin me not to be killin no infidel, hear?
It be a muslims prorogatory to be killin infidels anyplace day is.
Alan Finn is his name. An AGW angler, apparently.
Remember this …. It’s Islamo-Realists who are raising awareness of the STATED goals of Islam and most notably the Wahabiist enemies of the Civilized world.
It’s butt-ostriches like the trolls on this blog and in the MSM who are helping the enemies of civilisation. Sticking your head in your nether regions does not prevent you from being a target ….
Irwin daisy:
–Not to nit pick, well perhaps I am but your stats on Muslims in Canada is low at 1.9%. According to recent numbers I read about, there are 750,000 Muslims and the Canadian population is 30 million so that gives 2.5%. That moves Canada into the next grouping with the U.K., Denmark et al.
Things are so swell in the UK….
http://tinyurl.com/5tzpel
*
“I don’t know about you… but I’m looking forward
to becoming a visible minority…”
anyway… resistance is futile.
*
Canuckguy,
They weren’t my stats, they’re from an article. The various Muslim organizations claim around 700,000. But they are notorious at exaggerating their figures. For example CAIR claims there are 7 million in the US. Yet PEW research found that there are 2.2 million in research done last year. I seriously doubt that there are 1.2 billion in the world.
But that’s what you get with taqiyya.
not too unlike the gay population saying their percentage is near 10%
I suppose it would only fall to “zero” (like Iran) if the full weight of islam were brought to Canada.
thanks for the % post Irwin Daisy.
I’d only like to ask, is it “phobe” if we’re not afraid…?
I’m not certain what it is if it’s merely “anger” or whatever…
perhaps when asked about their numbers, perhaps Muslims such as those from CAIR just tally up the entire populations of countries commonly described as “Muslim”, the way the Roman Catholic Church once did with countries like Italy, Spain, Latin America, etc; just assume everyone in the selected country follows the same religion. Therefore, to CAIR, everyone in say, Iraq, is a Muslim, whether that’s true or not (and it isn’t).
Thank-you for all the information Irwin Daisy. You are correct to note that only an informed population will stop the undermining of our own precarious freedom by Islamist fanatics. Canada, like every nation in the world, has a choice: Liberty or slavery.
I am in agreement with Penny – on all her well stated points.
Here’s a view on the topic from across the pond:
http://www.dotsub.com:80/films/moredemands/index.php?autostart=true&language_setting=en_1618
marc in calgary at 5:52 PM
mark, you trip over your bible on the way to your computer????????
Johnny Maudlin: “grossly exagerate the fundementals of your case”.
s/b exaggerate and fundamentals
“an even more terrifying spector” s/b spectre, or, if you prefer, specter
But, of course, you know these things — we know that you are just toying with us. And you know that we know you are toying with us. What you may not realize, however, is that we know you know that we know you are toying with us.
no, I’ve never tripped over a bible, I was refering to Mr. Ahmadinejad (Mr. Poopy-Pants) in his denial of the gay reality.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_3RVwAJ_MI
I haven’t been able to find the photos of the “gay, guilty and hanging around in Tehran” lately. but the groups I support tend to promote freedom, not the so called religon of Mo.
If I were a proctologist I’d definitely be a Islamoprobe.
I think, Marc, that it is distaste for a savage ideology that I thought the world had moved past several centuries ago. Perhaps I’m wrong and Mo is right.
“I’ve been made victorious through terror.” the mo-monkey said.
In other words, our ancestors have produced a civilization of pc dhimmi wimps.
I, however, am not one of them and will not tolerate such an ideology.
GYM, according to recent reports, the Gays in Denmark are now largely Conservative, yet I don’t think it has much to do with the Bible.
GYM…just wondering why you would challenge marc in such a way.
Most commenters here are not Bible thumpers ( I am) but one doesn’t have to be a Bible believer to understand Muslim’s anti-gay stance, or the clarification of stats. Those stats don’t come from the Bible.
Thanks to irwin daisy for the hard work.
“What you do, Kate McMillan, is grossly exagerate the fundementals of your case. A movie maker is stabbed, there are riots, upheaval, and an even more terrifying spector, toothless human rights actions in Canada, and just how is your freedom speech curtailed?”
Well, Johnny Asshate, I don’t know how Kates freedom of speech is curtailed but I’ll tell you how MINE is curtailed.
When I comment on the internet about muzzies and islam I put a hell of a lot more thought into my comments than I do about politicians,and other non muslim people.
So as far as I’m concerned there isn’t near enough concern.
Horny Toad
Richard Ball: thanks for clearing that up. So, Richard, did the Muslims who are here now, in Canada, steal the real estate they own? And as much as Kate is on the job reminding us what a grave danger our home and native land is in, I’m still waiting for her final, or even temporary solution.
The place where I buy my groceries hasn’t waited until Canada’s Muslim population reaches 5%. The stats in irwin daisy’s informative comment puts Canada at 1%.
I saw some halal-chicken/Sharia law-labelled chicken in my supermarket, and have to admit that a few alarm bells went off. Why? Because I’ve rarely seen a hijabed female in the aisles, which would indicate that Muslims are, in fact, exercising an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
Though I have no objection to Muslims having the kind of chicken they want, can’t they buy it at a Muslim butcher? When is No Frills going to start selling Kosher food? Or Easter Eggs for Ukrainian Easter (which was this past Sunday)?
only those willing to fight physically against islam will do anything to slow or reverse the onslaught of islam.