Michael Moore Pledges Undying Love for Muslims

This past week the human blob known as Michael Moore, professional America-hating apologist for Islamic barbarism, donned a sign and picketed Trump Tower in New York.

Moore's sign reads "WE ARE ALL MUSLIM."  Whaaaaat?  You mean we all commit mass murder of infidels?  Support Sharia law as a replacement for the Constitution?  Set off bombs at the Boston Marathon?  Shoot 30 or so soldiers at Fort Hood?  Fly planes into skyscrapers?  Behead non-believers?  Kill our daughters for acting too western?  Clitoraly mutilate young girls?  Beat our wives?  Drink camel pee?

It is no surprise that a far-out leftist like Michael Moore would openly demonstrate in favor of evil.  The more odious an ideology is, the more leftists love it.  

Lots of folks have been photoshopping the image of Moore holding his sign in front of Trump Tower.  Some have changed the message on the sign, others have cut Moore and his sign out of the photo and pasted it into a scene of Muslims committing atrocities.  My contribution is at the top, left.  Another interpretation is below that, Photoshopper unknown.

Ben Afflack's Ignorance of Islam

Recently, Ben Afflack had an outburst in defense of Islam on HBO's Real Time.   He showed just how clueless and illogical are liberal ideas on the world's most violent religion.

Read all about it here, plus a stirring rebuttal of Afflack's delusional apologetics.

The Essence of Islam Revealed (by Lawrence Auster)

Lawrence Auster dissects leftist self-delusion by analyzing the many liberal excuses for Islamic violence. Here's one of his many essays on the subject that refute leftist apologia:

THE ESSENCE OF ISLAM REVEALED

In a letter to the Lansing State Journal published on July 5, 2006, a Muslim living in East Lansing, Michigan states in clear, matter-of-fact language what he and other Muslims believe,—that the penalty for converting from Islam to another religion is death—and why they believe it. It is not because they personally choose to believe it. It is not because they are personally “extreme” or “fanatical.” It not because they are “alienated” by the experience of living as Muslims in the West. It is not because they have been goaded into anger by anti-Muslim bigotry. It is not because they have been seduced into extremism by extremist imams or Wahhabi mosques. It is not because they are crushed by Arab despots. It is not because they lack democracy and freedom. It is not because they have an inferiority complex about Muslims’ having being “left behind” by Western progress since the seventeenth century. It is not because of Israel’s “oppression” of the Palestinians or American support for Israel. It not because of American involvement in the Mideast or the American occupation of Iraq. And it not because of inadequate Western aid efforts to poor Muslim countries. They believe what they believe because it is what Islam requires them to believe. Once we realize this simple fact, any question of “extreme” versus “moderate” Islam comes to an end. All Muslims by virtue of being Muslims are members of an extremist, totalitarian religion. From this it follows that no believing Muslims (outside small numbers for diplomacy, trade, etc.) should be allowed to live in non-Muslim countries, let alone in a country founded on religious freedom.

Some may call my conclusion extreme. I call it a no-brainer.

Here is the letter:

Islam or death

I read Le Roy Barnett’s letter (“Muslims, speak up,” June 26) about Muslims’ opinion on Abdul Rahman’s [the Afghani man who had to leave Afghanistan in fear for his life] conversion to Christianity.

Islam is not only a religion, it is a complete way of life. Islam guides Muslims from birth to grave. The Quran and prophet Muhammad’s words and practical application of Quran in life cannot be changed.

Islam is a guide for humanity, for all times, until the day of judgment. It is forbidden in Islam to convert to any other religion. The penalty is death. There is no disagreement about it.

Islam is being embraced by people of other faiths all the time. They should know they can embrace Islam, but cannot get out. This rule is not made by Muslims; it is the supreme law of God.

Please do not ask us Muslims to pick some rules and disregard other rules. Muslims are supposed to embrace Islam in its totality.

Nazra Quraishi
East Lansing

*********
Note, Auster has listed the various (and false) theories that explain away Islamic violence as caused by anything but Islam here:

Non-Islam Theories of Islamic Extremism

These are worth reading and consulting from time to time.

Muslim "Blowback"....in 1786? Muslim Violence Against the US is Not New

Fighting the Barbary Pirates

A few posts back I wrote about the "blowback" theory of Muslim violence.  Adherents to the theory believe that Muslim violence is not related to Islam, or its teachings, tenets or beliefs.  They believe that Muslim violence against the west is merely a reaction to past American aggression, or "blowback."  Both Ron Paul and one of his former advisors, Robert Pape, believe this theory.  Pape wrote a book on how we can stop Islamic violence by not having any military presence or supporting any other country's presence in Islamic lands.  The book is called "Cutting the Fuse."

I believe the "blowback" theory is bunk.  While the presence of infidel soldiers in Islamic countries and the support of Western countries for the supposed "occupation" of Islamic lands (e.g., the very existence of Israel) may provide a further motive for jihad attacks, the fact is that the Koran commands aggressive war against infidels even in the complete absence of any infidel "aggression" against Muslims. Muslims attack us because of Islam, because they are commanded to do so by their prophet and holy book, the Koran. Our sin is merely that we are not Muslims, that we do not accept Muhammad as a valid prophet.

Muslim violence and aggression against the United States is not new.  In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Muslim pirates were attacking our shipping, stealing cargoes and ships and enslaving our sailors.  These were the infamous "Barbary Pirates," operating out of Tripoli (now Libya) and neighboring Islamic states.

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right wrote to me and supplied these facts:  In 1786, John Adams and Jefferson, then our ambassadors to Britain and France, met the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain, Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, and asked him why his government was so hostile to the United States even though it had done nothing to provoke any such animosity.  Adja answered them (as they reported to the Continental Congress):  "that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise."  

Doesn't sound much like "blowback" does it?  There was then, as there is now, a religious reason for Muslim aggression.  President Jefferson sent the navy and the marines to fight the (Muslim) Barbary Pirates in Tripoli in 1804, to stop them from attacking and pirating our commercial shipping.  Our military response to Islamic states, then as now, results from Muslim aggression, terror and murder.  The "blowback" theory is false.

President John Quincy Adams, who was President from 1825 to 1829 didn't believe in "blowback" either.  He wrote this about Islam:

“…he [Muhammad] declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind…The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God.”

President Adams also wrote this about Islamic violence and aggression:

"….Between these two religions [Islam and Christianity], thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet [Muhammad] shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”

Israel Belongs to the Jews: Muslims Must Get Out

If ever there were an unjust cause, it is the cause of Muslims attempting to steal Israel from its rightful owners, the Jews. Back in 1947 when the allied powers ceded a small slice of desert to the Jews, the Jews called the small plot "Israel." They were immediately attacked by the surrounding Muslim countries who quickly got their asses handed to them. In fact, every time the Muslims attacked, Israel only got bigger. After the 1967 war there was a popular saying: "Visit Israel and see the pyramids!"

The Muslims who want to steal the Jewish homeland call themselves "Palestinians." It's an Arabic word for squatters. The Palestinians think they are entitled to the land since their ancestors successfully stole it centuries ago. That's back when Muslim hordes were gobbling up great swaths of land owned by Christians and Jews; they could do this because their big fat prophet told them they could. They should have asked my prophet; he would have flipped them the bird. Yes, you Muslims, my prophet can whip your prophet any day of the week.

Muslims just hate it when land they successfully stole has been taken back. They are still pissed off about Spain, which they like to call "Andalusia." They conquered it and ruled it for a few centuries until the local inhabitants had enough and kicked them out. Islamic conquest is not necessarily a permanent condition. The Greeks also rebelled and threw out their Muslim conquerers. What nerve. Don't they realize that Allah gave their country to the Muslims? Non-Muslims should just shut up and die as they are interfering with Allah's plan.

Sorry Muzzies, but we just don't agree. We think your big fat prophet was a phony and your evil god doesn't even exist. Well maybe, but by his other name, i.e. Lucifer.

Muslims have been attacking other people for centuries and are just outraged when anyone resists. Now they are busily infiltrating and subverting the West, so that we see crowds of idiots in those awful fish hook designs walking around with their heads well wrapped looking as serious as a heart attack and as uncomfortable as a case of hemorrhoids. You see them carrying signs calling the Israelis "murderers" and accusing them of "war crimes." You have to understand the language difference, however. "Murderer" in Arabic means "anyone who resists Islamic aggression" and "war crimes" means "anyone who fights back when Muslims attack."

Of course, there are our usual home-grown morons called Leftists, like International Answer, a communist organization who always supports everything evil and opposes everything good. Which probably explains why they support communism, since it completely eradicates human freedom and prosperity. Now they are supporting the murderous Muslims because, well, because they kill people and conquer people and blow up buildings and busses and pizza parlors and otherwise make nuisances of themselves. Commies like people who share their values. It's understandable, I guess.

Ignore the head-wrapped, fish-hook design-wearing morons with their nasty little signs. It's time we got in their faces and told them the truth: that their crappy religion is an evil joke, that we are not fooled by their lies, that we will never accept head scarfs when baseball caps are available. And as long as they are going to hate Jews, plot to commit terrorist acts and plan to replace democracy with Sharia, they have no place in the West and need to relocate to the desert shit hole of their choice.

While we're on the subject, some other things we need to make clear: Israel belongs to the Jews not the Muslims. Get the hell out of Israel and do it now. After sixty years we hoped you would get the hint by now but some people just aren't sensitive enough to pick up on subtle clues. I guess it's time we were more direct, which probably explains the Israeli troops on the Gaza border.

Muslims in the West: Massive Deportations Needed

Atlas Shrugs is running a lot of outrageous photos of Muslims and Palestinian supporters, with their hateful, anti-semitic signs and slogans. Palestinians murder Israeli civilians, yet carry signs saying "Israelis Are Murderers."

I hope Israel keeps it up. As for the swine who are demonstrating for the Palestinian barbarians on the streets of our cities, how about rounding them up and shipping them back to the cesspool that spawned them?

Here is one of my favorite graphics. Use it, enjoy it, pass it around.

Screw the "Palestinians" indeed.

The Muslim Pro-Terrorist Canadian Billboard

Little Green Footballs has pointed out a new Muslim billboard advertisment in Canada that praises the terrorist group Hezbollah. These must be the moderate Muslims we are always hearing about, the ones who are so invisible.

Seems the Muslims in Canada believe that Hezbollah is "fighting for freedom" and that Hezbollah is their relatives who "stayed behind" while they came to Canada. One moron stated "We're not trying offend anybody. We have freedom of speech. It's a free country. We can do anything."

Yeah, well the USA is still a free country too, and we also have freedom of speech. Here's mine: Hezbollah is a violent arm of a violent and evil religion, Islam, who seeks to kill anyone who resists its poisonous ideology. All Muslims should be kicked out of Canada and the USA immediately, en masse, and at once. We wouldn't tolerate religions that shrink heads or practice cannibalism or human sacrifice, why should we tolerate one that practices mass murder and seeks to rule the world by force?

Well Muslims, you have your billboards and I have mine. Here it is. Enjoy.

Dhimmi Derangement Syndrome: Why Tony Blair Is Nuts

Yesterday Tony Blair had an article that appeared in Foreign Affairs in which he praised Islam and the Koran. His comments were patently ridiculous and transparently false. If you missed it at Little Green Footballs or elsewhere, Blair said:

To me, the most remarkable thing about the Koran is how progressive it is.
I write with great humility as a member of another faith. As an outsider, the
Koran strikes me as a reforming book, trying to return Judaism and Christianity
to their origins, much as reformers attempted to do with the Christian church
centuries later. The Koran is inclusive. It extols science and knowledge and
abhors superstition. It is practical and far ahead of its time in attitudes
toward marriage, women, and governance.

Under its guidance, the spread of Islam and its dominance over
previously Christian or pagan lands were breathtaking. Over centuries, Islam
founded an empire and led the world in discovery, art, and culture. The
standard-bearers of tolerance in the early Middle Ages were far more likely to
be found in Muslim lands than in Christian ones.

Here is a short rebuttal by someone (me) who is well-read on the Koran and the history, beliefs and practices of Islam:

The Koran is filled with ignorance and superstition. It expresses the beliefs that a big chariot moves the moon around in the sky and that the sun sets into a muddy pond at night. Shooting stars are arrows fired by the hosts of Heaven at demons attempting to spy on them. A child resembles the parent who had his or her orgasm first during the copulation that produced him. At no place in the Koran is science and knowledge extolled. Blair's comments are idiotic and ludicrous.

The Koran is far ahead of its time in attitudes toward marriage, women and governance? What a load of happy horseshit. Before Islam women in Arabia were far more equal to men than after. Mohammed's first wife was a successful and well-off merchant. She hired Mohammed and was his boss! She married him later - after she proposed to him! She was Mohammed's only wife until she died - he took no other wives beside her - he didn't dare!

After Islam was established, women's status fell precipitously. Women were valued at one-half that of men, in inheritance rights, in testimony before a court. As for marriage, under Islam a woman has little or no rights. Her husband can divorce her at will but she does not have the same right. A man can have four wives and any number of concubines, including those captured in war.

And governance? Do as Islam says or be beheaded. I fail to see how this is an improvement over what went before Islam. As for Islam's "tolerance," it never existed. Islam's intolerance was the fuel that propelled its conquests of much of the civilized world and its subsequent execution of millions of "infidels," its looting, savagery and enslavement.

The truth is that Tony Blair is of that liberal persuasion where reality can be molded like wet clay to anything you like. Wishful thinking, urban myths, wild-eyed Pollyanna optimism take the place of actual historical facts.

However, it seems that Blair style dementia is not uncommon with regard to Islam and Mohammed. Last week I saw a PBS television documentary on how Islam influenced Christian reformation and lent spiritual color and inspiration to the Christian faith. The documentary also claimed that Islam and Judaism are so similar as to be almost indistinguishable. I turned off the TV set in disgust. Who writes such garbage and why?

A few weeks ago I was reading the book "Why I Am Not a Muslim" by Ibn Warraq. Warraq described one university textbook on Islam that claimed Mohammed was such a fervent practitioner of non-violence that his attitudes closely resembled those of Gandhi. Once again, the exact opposite is true - Mohammed was a very violent man, ordering critics assassinated, beheading 800 captured Jews, launching attacks on caravans and ordering the killing of any Jew that his followers encountered. These facts are documented in Muslim writings (the Haddiths), as opposed to the cotton-candy dreams of demented liberals.

Indeed, Mohammed was probably even more sadistic and cruel than the surviving Haddiths and Surahs tell us. Centuries ago a Muslim historian destroyed documents of Mohammed's life that he considered too controversial.

I suspect that non-Muslim apologists for the Koran and Mohammed suffer from a variation of Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm Syndrome is the name given to the phenomenon of hostages who come to identify with their terrorist-captors. This identification is some sort of coping mechanism. Hostages adopt this attitude hoping to win favor with their captors and so be spared. Hostages apparently wish to tell the terrorists, "Don't kill me, I'm on your side." A possible example of this is heiress Patty Hearst, who was kidnapped in the 1970's by the radical Symbonese Liberation Army, and who later helped them rob a bank.

Muslim-apologists probably don't see it that way. They think that "if you give someone a good reputation, they will do their best to live up to it." That slogan may work in western societies, but it is absurdly simplistic as a way to deal with the problem of centuries-old Islamic violence and malevolence.

Tony Blair should grow up and try living in the real world for a change.