Muslims Need to Know: We Will NEVER Stop Mocking the "Prophet" Who Ordered Our Deaths

Muhammad Meets His Maker

Reflecting Light blog has referenced an article on a huge Muslim protest going on in London.  The Muslims there are protesting and picketing Google's London headquarters, demanding that Google remove the YouTube video "The Innocence of Muslims."  That film, they say, mocks their glorious prophet, Muhammad.  Indeed it does, and indeed it must remain.  Western freedom of speech takes priority over any and all religions, and it is more important when it addresses Islam.

Approximately 1,450 years ago, Muhammad pledged war on all mankind, at the Pledge of Aquaba.  All humans on earth would convert to Islam, or be killed or enslaved if they did not convert.  Those who became Muslims would live under a brutal ideology with little empathy for human suffering, and absolutely no tolerance for individual liberty.

In early times, Muslims invaded and conquered many Christian countries, including Greece and Spain, and forced their populations to convert.  The Muslims have also been aggressive towards Hindus, killing millions of them as well.  This aggression has reawakened in recent years, and once again Muslims are attacking us "infidels."

911, the London and Spain bombings, the mass murders in Beslan, Mumbai and Fort Hood, are the worst of recent Muslim mass murder, but there are many other smaller attacks and failed attempts (See here and here).  And when Muslims aren't killing non-Muslims, they are busy killing each other, all in the name of their religion.

We see Islam as a death cult.  Its mission is mass murder.  Almost no one is safe in the west these days, and for that reason we cannot and will not stop mocking Muhammad and the religion that he created.  We simply cannot offer any respect, reverence or credibility to a religion whose goal is to kill us or conquer us.  We must constantly show our contempt for Islam because of the evil deeds it does daily, and to retard its growth, cause doubts in its believers and awaken westerners to the threat.  We must, because if we do not, then death or dhimmitude will be our lot, and we acquiesce in our own demise.

Make no mistake, we don't care what religion anyone practices, as long as it is peaceful and tolerant of differing views.  We do not attack Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto or Sikhism; we do not mock these religions or their prophets or equivalents.  We say "go in peace, and may God be with you."  The only reason why we attack Islam and its prophet is because they are a mortal threat to us, and to all followers of other faiths.

I don't see any way out of this conflict, except for Muslims and non-Muslims to live separately and apart, in separate societies.  Once the Islamic threat is lessened to a significant degree, the mocking of Islam will decline naturally.  In any case, we will never allow any laws to be passed that restrict our freedom of speech and our ongoing criticism of Islam and its prophet.  We will fight before we allow that to happen.  So protest and picket until you are blue in the face; it will be of no avail.

The Big Picture: Stogie Explains the Peter King Hearings

Welcome to our Islamic future

Being the deeply wise savant that we all know I am, I have consulted the tea leaves and now come forth to explain the Peter King hearings on Islamic radicalization.  Here it is.

Peter King's hearings on Islamic radicalization.  King wants to hold hearings and elicit testimony on how and why Muslim youth in America become radicalized, and why domestic Muslims do not generally cooperate with law enforcement to stop the threat of domestic terrorism.

Explanation:  King need not hold hearings because the answers are already known.  Here they are:

Islamic terrorism is a product of Islam itself.  The Koran and the Haddiths are the holy scriptures of Islam, and they command continuing violence against those who do not convert to Islam.  The Haddiths provide the example of the "prophet" Muhammad, who was a ruthless and murderous warlord.  Muslims are encouraged to emulate this man, and to do that they must become ruthless and violent and/or support those who are.

Terrorism is a key component of the Islamic faith.  Where you have large numbers of Muslims mixing with non-Muslims, some of the former will always attack the latter.  Many Muslims believe that they must murder a Jew as a condition for entering paradise; others believe that dying for the faith is a sure ticket to Heaven.  Why?  Because Islamic texts clearly teach this.

Solution:  Without a significant change in the beliefs of Muslims, separation is the only feasible solution.  This can be achieved as follows:

• Cease all Muslim immigration into the United States.  
• Encourage those already here to leave, with public assistance to do so.  
• Profile Muslims seeking to buy airline tickets.  
• Remove the non-profit status of mosques and prohibit the building of new ones.
• If terrorism continues, move to the next stage which should include interment camps and forced removal.

Complications:

• Muslims in America will have loud snit-fits over the hearings in an effort to stop them and reveal what the stealth-jihadis don't want widely known, i.e. the irredeemably violent nature of Islam.
• The majority of Americans do not understand the beliefs, practices and history of Islam.  Many believe the fiction that the violent ones are untypical fanatics who have "hijacked" the religion.  They will therefore not be sympathetic to their own survival.
• Many believe that the U.S. Constitution is indeed a suicide pact that will prevent any legal moves to remove Islam from our midst.
• Muslims will continue to portray themselves as victims of a new "McCarthyism," and assert that they are being "singled out" just because they are different.  (They're right -- they are the only major religion that advocates murdering members of other faiths.)
• Democrats will support the Muslims and do everything possible to prevent an effective strategy to deal with the terrorist threat.  They will be supported in this effort by Democrat propaganda outlets, i.e. those in academia and the mass media.  Republicans and anti-jihadi groups will be effectively painted as bigoted, racist and utterly backward.

Probable Outcome:
Nothing will be done to stop the threat.  Americans would rather die as politically correct than survive.  In fifty years the United States will join Europe in becoming part of the new caliphate, i.e. as a Muslim nation.

Islamophobia is a GOOD Thing: Support Radicalization Hearings

Peter King, a representative from New York, is holding hearings to determine the extent of radicalization among domestic Muslim youth.  He is being denounced as conducting a "witch hunt."  Oh yez, it's not as if any Muslims were going to open fire on soldiers at Fort Hood or plant bombs in Times Square, for goodness sake.  Or shoot people in airports, cultural centers or army recruiting stations, or run over them in cars.  Or plan dozens of other missions that have failed.  To fear Islam is called "Islamophobia" and there are now organizations formed to combat this menace, lest any terrorist be stopped before he can detonate his bomb or pull a trigger.

Islamophobia is, I suppose, the left's description of an "irrational" fear of Islam.  Just as in the 1950s - 1980's there was an "irrational" fear of communism.  Fearing murderous, totalitarian ideologies whose followers are bent on your death or enslavement -- oh yez, that's truly "irrational" all right.  Especially when you consider that much of the world has already fallen prey to these movements and have suffered the very things that you "irrationally" fear.

Any irrationality is in those who do not fear aggressive, violent ideologies -- in effect, those who are in denial about the reality of the threat.  

We have millions of Muslims in our midst and they aren't anxious to help law enforcement ferret out the fanatics who will attempt bombings and other acts of terror.  Why is that?  Possible, even probably, it is because the non-cooperating Muslims know full well that the fanatics are merely practicing Islam as it was designed to be practiced, by making enemies of all non-Muslims and working for their subjugation through treachery, force and violence.

Islamophobia is a GOOD thing.  Islamophobia may result in our physical and spiritual survival.

You go Peter King.

Read more about it here.

Another (Muslim?) Terrorist Plots Mass Murder in Virginia (Yawn)

From the Washington Times yesterday, we learn that a man with an Arabic sounding name plotted to place pipe bombs on trains and in sewers "to produce the greatest number of casualties." The article doesn't mention the suspect's religious affiliations, but I am willing to bet my shorts that the man was a Muslim, attempting to carry out Mohammed's commandments to commit ongoing, violent jihad against us "infidels."

What's up with this insane form of political correctness, that the nature of a growing threat against American lives cannot be named or sourced? Do these fools in the media and in government believe that if we just don't mention Islam, the threat will somehow go away? We must face the facts, that Islam is a deadly ideology that has no place in the 21st century or in America.

Islam is murder. All Islamic immigration into the US must cease and Muslims already here invited to leave. That and that alone will stop the threat from violent jihadis. (Hat tip: Lawrence Auster of View From the Right.)

Excerpt from the Washington Times:

An Arlington man is accused of threatening to set off bombs around D.C., including in the Metro system, but was caught through messages he sent on Facebook before a plot was developed.

Younis, who was born in Afghanistan, used Facebook to threaten to set off explosives, according to an affidavit for his arrest by Joseph Lesinski, a special agent with the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force.

The documents say Younis described how to build a pipe bomb and advocated placing bombs on the third and fifth cars of Metro trains because they "had the highest number of commuters on them and he could place pipe bombs in these locations and would not be noticed."

Younis also said he could put a bomb under a sewer head in Georgetown at rush hour "to produce the greatest number of casualties," the affidavit says.

Read it all here.

Our Islamic Future: a Preventable Evil

This is a reprint of a very important article posted at Infidel Bloggers Alliance.

Below is the speech given at yesterday’s (30th Oct 2010) demonstration at Generatorstraat in Amsterdam by the British author and former Parliamentary candidate Paul Weston.

My name is Paul Weston, and I represent the International Free Press Society.

And I am standing here today because our liberal elites have betrayed our countries to Islam.

Forty-two years ago the British politician Enoch Powell made his famous “Rivers of Blood” speech, in which he stated that “The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils.”

Our politicians today do the exact opposite. They actively promote a preventable evil.

But eighty years ago one man, Winston Churchill, was very clear about preventing a clear and present evil, Herr Hitler and the Nazis. But Churchill was a lone voice crying in the wind of appeasement, and the carnage that could have been avoided came with a vengeance.

And today Europe finds itself in much the same position. Even as Islam grows demographically, territorially, and militantly, it is promoted as the “religion of peace” by the same type of cowardly, careerist politicians who once appeased Hitler. Islam was not the religion of peace to Winston Churchill. He described it as the religion of blood and war.

Anyone with a knowledge of the foundations and history of Islamic expansion knows this to be the truth.

Mohammed was a warlord. And a very good warlord indeed. By the time of his death he had militarily defeated and converted most of the pagan and Christian tribes of the Arabian Peninsula.

After his death Islam rapidly expanded at the point of a sword, defeating ancient civilisations and overrunning continents as it did so.

And today it is within Europe, it is within the West, and it is calling for what it has always called for: total Islamic domination. And if we wish to resist, then they will use terror against us.

Yet still our treasonous politicians call it the “religion of peace”, and tell us that if we refuse to share such a fantastical and ridiculous notion, that if we choose to believe Winston Churchill’s argument that Islam is a religion of blood and war, then we will be sent to prison.

Of course it is not a religion of peace. Its founder was a warrior, and the highest honour bestowed upon a Muslim is the promise of hordes of scented houris and an eternal leg-over in the after life, achievable not by being a good Samaritan, but by dying as a martyr in the physical battle to expand imperialist Islam.

Islam literally means submission. What kind of a religion can possibly call itself submission?

Islam divides the world into two spheres. The House of Islam (submission) and the House of War. What kind of religion defines itself by military conquest?

Yet our leaders tell us we cannot criticise Islam because it is a religion, whilst the organisation of the Islamic conference, in cahoots with the united nations is striving to make any criticism of Islam illegal.

But Islam is so much more than just a religion. It is a political, social, legal and structural blueprint which totally dominates a devout Muslim’s life, and wishes coincidentally to dominate all devout non-Muslims’ lives as well.

It is profoundly illiberal and it is profoundly undemocratic. It does not believe in the man-made laws of democracy, preferring instead to adhere to the absolute word of Allah, as interpreted by an illiterate 7th-century desert dweller.

And our politicians have imported this illiberal and undemocratic ideology into the liberal democracies than make up the West, and then they dare to criminalise us when we object to this!

But how can we not criticise Islam? Can our politicians really protect it as a religion and therefore place it out of legal reach?

When homosexuals are hung from cranes, is this political Islam in action or religious Islam?

When adulterous women are buried up to their shoulders in sand and stoned to death, is this political Islam or religious Islam?

When Muslims who wish to leave Islam are issued with death sentences, is this political Islam, or is this religious Islam?

When wives and daughters are slaughtered to protect their families’ honour by husbands fathers and uncles, is this political Islam or religious Islam?

If it is political, then it must be denounced as evil and barbaric. If it religious, how can it possibly not be denounced as the same? What is evil is evil and what is barbaric is barbaric and cannot be exempted from criticism because it is sheltered by the word “religion”.

In criminalising free speech, our socialist leaders reveal their dictatorial ambition. The mark of a free society is freedom of speech. To take this away is a totalitarian act, made all the worse because freedom of speech is our only defence in the peaceful opposition against the foreign totalitarian ideology of Islam.

And I hope this irony is not lost on you. In order to protect and advance a foreign totalitarian ideology, our own rulers are prepared to adopt native totalitarian means to stop us defending our democracy and our freedom.

The West lives in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights. Islam does not. They signed up instead to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam.

But they have a very important caveat: when sharia law collides with human rights law, guess which law prevails?

Quite so. Sharia is the top trumps when it comes to human rights.

This is like a signatory to the Geneva convention murdering and torturing prisoners of war, and being given a pass at a war trial because it was “part of their religion.”

And when our politicians today excuse Islam as a religion of peace and allow them to set the rules both at home, at the European Union, and at the United Nations, then our politicians are betraying their countries and they are betraying their people. They are committing treason.

“Can one commit treason in a time of peace?” people may ask. But are we really at peace?

We may not consider ourselves at war with Islam, but Islam considers itself at war with us.

And it is a war we are losing. Territorially, demographically, politically, and democratically.

In fact, it is a war of aggression on two fronts. Radical Islam on the one, and left-wing treason on the other.

Our children are told to celebrate multiculturalism and Islam, without being told the real history of violent expansionist Islam.

Instead, they are told that their own history, their religion, their culture, their traditions, their very being, is just a litany of imperialism, racism, murder and slavery. This is a proven psychological technique designed to render an enemy helpless, or to quote Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “in order to destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.”

Any government that does this to its own people, to its own children, is a government that deserves, manifestly deserves, to be overthrown.

Can anyone really argue that a government that praises the foreign invader whilst psychologically and legally stripping away the defences of its people is a government that is not guilty of treason?

Now here we come to a more uplifting part of this depressing monologue, because in this part of the battle we are advancing. Slowly, admittedly, but relentlessly, and I think we are now unstoppable.

Geert Wilders here in the Netherlands, René Stadtkewitz in Germany, whose immediate popularity caused Angela Merkel to make an abrupt U-turn and denounce Multiculturalism.

The Sweden Democrats, Heinz-Christian Strache in Austria, the Swiss People’s Party, and in England we await a political movement to pick up the baton from the rapidly growing English Defence League.

And that growth can only accelerate. As more and more people become aware of Islam and become aware of the depth of treason perpetrated by their liberal rulers, and most importantly, as people lose their fear of being labelled a racist — which was a label specifically designed to strip us of resistance against a racially designated invader who uses race as a weapon.

In fact, let us deal with this “racist” label right now. It is not racist to defend your country against an obvious and growing threat. It is not racist to defend your culture, your heritage, and your traditions. It is not racist to work to ensure a democratic future for your children and grandchildren.

If you choose not to defend your country, your culture and the democratic future of your children, then you may well pat yourselves on the back in your non-racist champagne socialist cocktail bars in Islington; you may well love other people’s anti-racist credentials almost as much as you love your own; but there is no getting away from the label I have for you.

You are a traitor and a betrayer of your country, a betrayer of your culture, and a betrayer of our yet unborn children.

And you are a racist, indeed a genocidal racist. Young native Europeans will become a demographic ethnic minority within their own homelands if immigration rates and birth rates stay the way they are for just one more generation.

This can politely be called population replacement. More crudely, it is bloodless genocide.

The United Nations is very clear on this. Their definition of genocide is as follows:

Quote.

Article 2.

In the present convention genocide means any of the acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, racial or religious group.

We have been betrayed.

And one of the saddest aspects of this betrayal is the effect it has had on those old ex-warriors who fought for their countries in recent living memory.

Ex-Spitfire pilot Alex Henshaw died three years ago. He was acutely aware of the political betrayal of his country. He said:

“I feel extreme emotional sadness for the young men I knew that gave their lives willingly for a cause in which we all believed. And I often say to myself that if those young boys would come down now and walk through the villages, through the towns and through the cities and look around and see what is happening to us, they would say somewhere along the line we have been betrayed.”

Yes, Mr. Henshaw, I am afraid you have, and all of you socialist/liberal/left-wing people need to know what you have done.

You need to take a walk around your cities, towns and villages, take a look at the hundreds of thousand of graves standing as testament to the ultimate sacrifice made by our young men in order that you may live in a liberal democracy today.

You need to understand that this a not just betrayal, but a triple betrayal:

*The betrayal of all our old soldiers whose sacrifice granted us freedom,

* The betrayal of my generation who you threaten to imprison if we defend our inherited freedom, and

* The betrayal of our yet unborn, who, unless we stop it seem set to inherit a country racked with tribal and religious hatred, which must inevitably lead to a continental scale multicultural war that will make the break-up of Yugoslavia look like a bun-fight.

And, of course, it is also the betrayal of freedom and democracy.

Because freedom and democracy did not just magically appear. They evolved over two and a half thousand years, rooted in Greco-Roman Judeo-Christian ancestry. And were fought for and defended with much blood and sacrifice.

Democracy and freedom are not the personal possessions of socialist politicians to be handed away, without our agreement, to the descendants of a 7th century desert warlord, who view our attachment to democracy as just a weakness to be used against us.

I do not blame Islam. Fundamentalist Muslims are just doing what it says in the book.

But I do blame our politicians. There are two sides in this civilisational stand-off, and our politicians have sided with the enemy.

So I say to them:
You may well hold the levers of power at the moment, but we are on the rise and we are unstoppable. Do you seriously think you can do what you have done to your own people without repercussion?

You could stop this now if you chose to, by the simple expedient of putting the interests of your own people before the interests of Islam.

But you won’t do that will you? So you put us in an almost impossible position. If we do nothing we must accept our children and grandchildren will one day live under sharia law.

And if we do something, then it must by definition be revolutionary. But we did not start this. You did. Most of us would have been quite happy to mow the lawn, hold down a mundane job, and pay our taxes.

You have made us revolutionaries. And whilst your behaviour suggests you fear Islam more than you fear us, let me tell you something, you lying, betraying, treacherous, socialist careerists:

We might not hold power today, but given another decade, we will, and then we will hold you to account. You will appear before a Nuremberg-style court, and you will be tried for treason, and you will be tried for crimes against humanity, and for the first time in a very long time you will be answerable to us!

Bill Maher Voices Concerns Over Western Islamization

Bill Maher, a dedicated leftist who hosts the show Real Time on HBO, has expressed concern over the Islamization of the West.  Mediate reports:

Maher made a Juan Williams-esque confession on his program when he apprehensively noted that Mohammed has just become the most popular baby name in Britain. “Am I a racist to feel alarmed by that?” Maher asked his panel. “Because I am. And it’s not because of the race, it’s because of the religion. I don’t have to apologize, do I, for not wanting the Western world to be taken over by Islam in 300 years?”

One panel member informed Maher that if he worked for NPR, he'd be fired for saying that.

Hoover further stoked Maher by claiming that the U.K is saddled with a “far bigger problem” than baby names: Sharia Law, which she said is creeping into England.

“Then I’m right,” Maher said, taking her for her word. “I should be alarmed. And I don’t apologize for it.”

Lawrence Auster at View From the Right says that Maher's statements may indicate a signficant awakening to the Islamic threat.  He writes:

My guess is that Maher himself doesn't mean anything serious by this, because he's too much of a liberal hater of our society to want to defend it from any enemy. But, just as with the recent stunning statements about Islam by Chancelor Merkel, who also didn't mean anything, the fact that he uttered such thoughts indicates a growing, or at least dawning, awareness in the West of the Islam threat, and this is significant. 

Islamic Extremists in the Workplace: Department of Defense Covers It Up

The Washington Times had an editorial this week that describes the disturbing delusional tendencies of the Pentagon brass regarding Muslims in the workplace.  The editorial describes the review of the Fort Hood shooting incident in which a Muslim army officer shot and killed 14 people, most of them soldiers.  The review is an exercise in denial and a cover-up of internal Islamic threat:

On Aug. 18, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates released the final Fort Hood follow-on review, in which he proposed initiatives to "mitigate internal threats, ensure force protection, enable emergency response and provide care for victims and families." Radical Islam is nowhere to be found.

The DoD report offers incorrect solutions to a misdiagnosed problem, i.e., that ardent Muslims kill people.  It's what they do.  So the DoD and the Army have simply refused to admit the problem exists.  This is the real danger of "political correctness," when reality itself is denied through a determined effort not to see it.  An alternate reality is promoted instead, and God help anyone who pricks the bubble of illusion.  So speak no evil of Muslims, voice no doubts as to their loyalty or propensity to treason, regardless of the mounting evidence:

The Defense Science Board currently is examining "behavioral indicators of violence and radicalization," and the report recommends a better force protection reporting system for suspicious behavior. This is where the system breaks down. Maj. Hasan didn't slip under the radar because of an inadequate reporting system or lack of indicators that he was a problem. He escaped strong scrutiny solely because he was Muslim.

The DoD's message -- Don't report suspicious Muslims:

In the prevailing politically correct climate, few officers want to risk reporting anything to do with a Muslim for fear of official retaliation.

Read the entire editorial here.  Hat tip View From the Right.

Let's Make THEM Die for Freedom

I can't speak for Facebook, but I can assure the morons in this picture, that I am not willing to die to insult the glorious prophet Mohammed.

However, I am perfectly willing to have hateful fanatics die for my privilege to do so.

So screw Mohammed and Islam, and remember this, you fanatics:  if you come for me, they will carry you out by the hands and feet.  I won't back down, now or ever.

As one American once said:  Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?

Western Denial and the Islamic Threat

Another Black Conservative has an interesting post this morning, in which Dick Cheney criticizes Obama for his denial of the war declared on us by Islamic extremists.   Cheney said, in part:

"As I’ve watched the events of the last few days it is clear once again that President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if he gives terrorists the rights of Americans, lets them lawyer up and reads them their Miranda rights, we won’t be at war. He seems to think if we bring the mastermind of 9/11 to New York, give him a lawyer and trial in civilian court, we won’t be at war."

Cheney makes a good point, but it applies to more than just Obama.  Many western politicians, political leaders and media types are in denial about the Islamic threat.  They seem to think that by redefining the terrorist war on the west, they can make it go away, or at least transform it into something less frightening.  The reality of an external threat is highly inconvenient to those who already despise their own country.  9/11 generated a lot of patriotism within the United States, making the goals of the hate-America crowd much more difficult.  Denial then becomes a key counter strategy of the disloyal left and right.

Denial can be deadly, however, as 9/11 proved.  Denial takes many forms.  For many liberals, Islamic terrorism is merely unlawful activity to be fought and punished by the police and courts of law.  For nutcases like the 9/11 Truthers movement ("9/11 was an inside job"), there is no threat at all, except for the one posed by our own federal government.  If 9/11 represented a declaration of war by Islamic extremists, then they would be honor bound to do something about it.  They would have to acknowledge that pacifism doesn't work, that our wars in the Middle East are morally justified, that multiculturalism is a lie, that their own personal value systems are culturally based and not the law of nature as they previously believed.

So, they just deny the existence of terrorism altogether.  There is no external threat, just a massive, intricate and widespread conspiracy by a high cabal right here in our own government.  This is denial on a massive scale, substituting an absurd fantasy for an unpleasant reality.

Others try to provide justification for the terrorists' actions.  They are merely reacting to "American Imperialism," or are annoyed by our carbon emissions, our support of Israel, our national arrogance.  Again, it is denial.  Since Muslims have murdered 280 million people since Muhammad invented the wretched religion, what "Imperialism" were the Muslims reacting to?  Was it Hindu imperialism that caused the Muslims to murder 40 million Hindus (the latest installment being the Mumbai, India massacre of one year ago)?  School children imperialism that resulted in the terrorist murder of 300 children in Beslin, Russa?  Perhaps it was European imperialism that caused the Muslims to invade Europe in 1683 and make it all the way to the gates of Vienna before Christian forces stopped them?

History shows that wars with Islam were the result of Islamic aggression and Islamic imperialism, and not that of their victims.

Wise men and women do not attempt to reorder reality to fit their ideology.  They amend their ideology to fit reality.

Islam, a Terrorist Ideology and the West's Slow Awakening

In light of the terrorist attempt to bomb a plane on Christmas day, more people are waking up to the Islamic threat.  No, Islam is not a religion of peace.  It is, and always has been, a religion of war, aggression and imperialism.

There are a couple of news items today that support my statement above.

Ralph Peters in the New York Post writes that we are lying to ourselves about Islam.  He writes:

Despite vast databases crammed with evidence, our leaders -- of both parties -- still refuse to connect Islamist terrorism with Islam.  Our insistence that "Islam's a religion of peace" would have been cold comfort to the family members of those passengers had the bomb detonated as planned.

The U.K. Telegraph ran an editorial, a murderous ideology tolerated for too long.  The editorial says 

Jihadist Islamism is also a murderous ideology, comparable to Nazism in many respects. The British public realises this; so do the intelligence services. Yet because it arises out of a worldwide religion – most of whose followers are peaceful – politicians and the public sector shrink from treating its ideologues as criminal supporters of violence. Instead, the Government throws vast sums of money at the Muslim community in order to ensure that what is effectively a civil war between extremists and moderates is won by the latter. This policy – supported by all the main political parties – does not seem to be working. 

Meanwhile, the American mainstream press are trying to engender sympathy for the terrorist of Flight 253, saying that he "was lonely and depressed."  (Awwwwww!)  So it is loneliness and depression that leads to Islamic terror!  At last, we have the key connection!  Terrorists are people who just need a hug!  Idiots!

Lorne Gunter of the Edmonton Journal adds more common sense to the discussion.  He writes that, because of the attempt on the Detroit bound flight, the airlines will devise more passenger tests and taboos to "prevent" terrorism, but it is mostly for show.  With each new ban -- from box cutters to sports drinks, terrorists will simply invent new ways to carry and hide explosives.  Gunter notes that the west will continually engage the PC fiction that all passengers are equal in their potential as terrorists, instead of profiling young Muslim males, who are by far the most likely terrorists.  Profiling would greatly improve security and reduce the risks of a serious terrorist attack.

Read it all at the link above.  (Hat tip:  American Power)

Andrew McCarthy - "The Islamist Threat is Worse Than You Think"

I found another website worth mentioning and linking to. It's called SANE (Society of Americans for National Existence). They have posted an article by Andrew McCarthy of National Review entitled Beyond Terrorism: The Islamist Threat is Worse Than You Think.

In this article McCarthy describes and refutes the sophomoric beliefs that Jihad is a "peaceful, inner struggle" rather than a violent one, and that Sharia (Islamic law) is compatible with our western laws and, therefore able to be accommodated.

McCarthy describes our western angst in refusing to acknowledge that it is Islam itself that is the threat. He writes:

Because America is a beacon of religious freedom, we’ve limited our focus to operatives who plot and execute acts of terror; the ideology fueling this savagery is not our concern — lest we betray our first principles and smear every Muslim as a terrorist. This disposition is suicidal, for at least three reasons. First, Islam is not merely a religion. It is a comprehensive socio-economic and political system, which believers take to be ordained by Allah, its elements compulsory and non-negotiable. While those elements include tenets we would regard as a religious creed, these tenets constitute only a fraction of the overarching Islamic project.

McCarthy makes a lot of sense in this article. He dispels a lot of popular nonsense about the so-called "Religion of Peace."

Via: Creeping Sharia
Via: SANE

Geert Wilders on Islam: "A Dangerous, Totalitarian Ideology"

Geert Wilders was interviewed yesterday about his looming prosecution for "insulting Islam." The interviewer asked hard ball questions but Wilders smacked them all out of the park.

You have compared the Quran to Mein Kampf, and called Islam a fascist ideology.
Why do you find that these remarks fit within the confines of the law?

"I am not the only one who thinks so. The public prosecutor also agrees, and many
professors. Churchill said the same thing."

"I view Islam not as a religion, but as a dangerous, totalitarian ideology - equal to communism and fascism. [Stogie: This is my position exactly.] Aren't I allowed to say so? If I say that about communism, there would not be a problem. I have never talked about people, I've always made it about ideology."

The Geert Wilders dilemma is a microcosm of the battle in the Western world today. On one side are people who see Islam as a dangerous, totalitarian ideology that is both a physical threat to life and property and a long-term threat to freedom and democracy. On the other side are people who see Muslims as just another ethnic group or religion, and any criticism of Islam a kind of bigotry, be it racism or another version of anti-semitism.

The most virulent form of Islam protectionists are now banning free speech in European countres and in Canada to make it illegal to truthfully discuss the history, beliefs and practices of Islam -- even when they are a dangerous threat to the indigenous population. Truly, Europe is in the process of committing national suicide. Liberalism is one massive death wish and perhaps that is why the death cult of Islam is so appealing to them.

I am in the Wilders camp. I see Islam as violent, anti-freedom, evil and dangerous. The Qur'an is a book of hate, advocating terrorism against non-believers.

Some leftist painted me as someone who wants to "kill all the Muslims" because I have stated that, in 50 years or 150, Islam must be wiped out. I was talking about the ideology, not the people, just as Geert Wilders is. If a major war occurs between the non-Muslim world and the Muslim world, we would be foolish to do anything other than ban the practice of Islam once we have defeated them. Without that,we would only wind up fighting them again and again until they eventually conquer us.

What is happening to Geert Wilders right now is frightening. It will happen here soon enough.

Read the interview here. Hat tip Atlas Shrugs.