The ‘Unholy Alliance’ Between Islamic Jihad and Utopian Socialism
We recall that old parlor game: if you could take ten books with you to a desert island, what would they be? Obviously, the list is something of a “moveable feast” and may be modified as our tastes and intellectual needs change over the years, but this is a time in which certain books have become essential to our understanding of the tumultuous era we live in. Jamie’s Glazov’s Showdown With Evil, a selection of FrontPage interviews that he has conducted for the site over the last eight years, is one of those “desert island” books, meant to illumine and accompany us in discretionary solitude.
Of course, in today’s wired (or wireless) world, which is also a world in which a “terrorist event” can detonate anywhere and at any time, there are really no more desert islands where one can disregard the burdens and confusions of the real world and pretend that one is not implicated in history. There is no doubt an Internet café on Bouvet Island and a terrorist lurking about on Tristan da Cunha. The world we now experience has banished solitude and turned it into a nostalgic reminiscence, leaving us awash in information and susceptible to the unpredictable irruption of violence. This is one of the principal tenets of Glazov’s politically incorrect chrestomathy, a book which is a “body of learning.” But although there may be no more islands where we can retire from the turmoil of the world, there are introspective oases we can find here and there in books like this one.
On the one hand, Showdown With Evil applies to specific contexts now very much in the news. For example, it is especially timely in the light of the Oklahoma amendment prohibiting the introduction of Shari’a law and CAIR’s legal suit to block its implementation. It is also relevant for anyone intent on clarifying the issues involved in the ongoing controversy over the Ground Zero mosque or the debate over the selective voyeurism of airport screening techniques. But in a larger sense, it supplies a panoptic overview of the preeminent struggle of the modern age between a resurgent and supremacist Islam and a deeply conflicted West whose survival instinct is being ruthlessly probed and tested.
The book is divided into eight sections, grouped under umbrella titles: “Obama’s Destructive Path,” “Unholy Alliance,” “The Religion of Peace,” “The Terror War,” “The Evil Empire,” “Leaving the Faith,” “The Titans,” and a concluding interview with the interviewer himself, “Looking to the Future of Freedom,” each prefaced by a brief introduction. Richard Perle provides a short but compendious foreword in which he signals the major themes of the collection, namely, the apology for Islam promoted by the useful idiots of the day who are “drawn almost entirely from the Left,” the “parallels between the Left’s indifference to Soviet totalitarianism then and Islamic fundamentalism now,” and the emotion-fraught journey of important contemporary thinkers from the stultifying and destructive ideology of the Left, aka “the political faith,” to a more discerning, open, and realistic perspective on the political and cultural world.
The authors/interviewees collected between the book’s covers constitute a veritable Who’s Who of significant voices: Norman Podhoretz, Christopher Hitchens, William F. Buckley Jr., Natan Sharansky, Victor Davis Hanson, Phyllis Chesler, Andrew McCarthy, Theodore Dalrymple, Kenneth Levin, Robert Spencer, and Andrew Klavan, to mention only a few. Unlike so many in the liberal media, they do not crouch before the facts. A particularly resonant phrase from Hanson’s offering might have served as a premonitory epigraph: “there are no easy solutions, as is always true when the postmodern meets the premodern.” But of course, there are difficult solutions proposed throughout the collection, if we are prepared to attempt them.
The problem in a nutshell is that ‘difficult solutions’ are usually anything that incorporates common sense or upholding American law.
Solutions, on the other hand, involve the wholesale transfer of useless people from broken Third World polities into the United States and our own government and colleges having de facto relationships with muslims who do not like America.
I guess a CD called “Fear of A White America” wouldn’t have the same traction as “Fear of A Black Planet”.
The unholy alliance is an old one and easy to explain. It was forged by hatred of Jews and a total disrespect for human life.
Tyranny is good for achieving social justice for left/liberals, so what if it’s islamic (halfway there, at least, for ‘em)?
This is an excellent example of the difference between “feeling ” and thinking. There is a large group of influential people, most of whom are Liberal Arts grads, the make decisions based on their ideas of what is right not on reality.
True and to that point they are fulfilling the “useful idiot” role that they were born, bread for and taught (think brain washed) in our “public education” system. And oddly enough it seems the more time they spent in the upper end of the primary school system (collage prep, honors), the more “left” higher education that they then pursue.
Once done the useful idiot gets the “Liberal Arts Degree” from said “finishing school” they usually turn to social work, education or politics because that is the only things they “fit” into.
They rarely have if ever worked with their hand, or done a real days work sweating for a dollar. And they never intend too, or understand “why any one would ever do such a vile thing as that!”
I believe we got the “stimulus” deal because if we actually ever hit the real bottom all the useful idiots would have starved and died, and thier masters knew it!
Unholy alliance, indeed.
The race to the OneWorld via Islamic jihad and by leftist taqiyya is run on parallel rails by the same runaway Loco-motive…extremely Loco but much the same motive.
Relatively insane radical Islam (blowing oneself up in order to kill innocents of another race, creed, religion or ethnicity… when peeled back from the political world where insanity goes to blend in…would be defined as psychopathic, at a minimum, among most of the sane population) is invested in creating a OneWorld Order, in which Sharia law is imposed upon all…who convert, submit or die.
There is no means by and/or through which these ends can be achieved…that is out of bounds. Lying, murdering, stealing, …this is a fervor without Commandments. It is an animalistic pack of dogs, snarling over the next carcass gulping down the innards of polite society.
It’s parallel rail, Rampant, Unchecked, Leftist, Elitism…seeks to RULE the world, replacing jihad with Olympian Taqiyya. The war conducted is not by explosion, but implosion. They get inside a body politic and like a flesh-eating disease, work their way from the inside-out.
They guilt trip Western society as their main weapon, spread the BIG LIE, like a virulent disease and tear away at the fabric of truth, information, news, pop culture…until it reflects their hideous filth as beauty, their lies as truth, their distortion as reality.
They invade academia, news outlets, entertainment and left-leaning political parties…and begin to chip away, until ANY ounce of reason and/or sanity is gone.
The Utopian OneWorlders make caricatures out of their “enemies”, piling upon them the grotesque slanders of horns and being the sons of pigs, dogs, and barnyard animals. As such, the slander of Jews is great target practice.
The Islamic jihad and Utopian Guilt-trippers use each others language quite often, tactics, and speech patterns. The path to OneWorld domination is being fought by Sharia purists and hedonists on parallel tracks…and they will use each other just as easily as they will use you.
Their collision comes only after YOU are defeated. They make strange bedfellows…but you are their chambermaid.
It is the hatred of life itself that is the nuclear fuel rod that drives both the jihadists and the Left. Jamie Glazov does na outstaning job of connecting the death-loving, power-addicted, totalitarian dots that define the Leftist-jihadist axis. I offer this quote from Jamie Glazov from a FrontPage Magazine interview with Victor Davis Hanson:
Glazov nails it with that statement. I contend that hatred of life driven by the will to power and enabled with attainement of absolute control of the apparatus of the state is the prime formula for every monstrous act of atrocity and mass murder committed by totalitarians over the last 150 years or so.
Little else besides psychopathy can make sense of so much killing conducted by history’s monsters. And even mental disorder isn’t sufficient to account for the actions of these monsters.
Islam and the Left hava a common enemy…the American people.
So the Left basically ignores Islam. It isn’t a threat to them. Why should they waste energy defeating an enemy that can be crushed in a month at any time in the future, when there is a much more dangerous enemy to be defeated; an enemy that is preventing them from totalitarian rule. The dangerous enemy is us, the American people.
The American people are well armed, educated, increasingly alert and they constitute 98% of the armed forces and police forces. Islam not only isn’t a priority for the Left, Islam is valuable as a convenient distraction to avert the eyes of the clingers from the slow boil of creeping marxism. And if the clingers get unruly enough, as they are showing signs of doing, it may require that a few suicide bombers have to be let through to blow up a few thousand clingers. That’s always a foolproof way to re-direct the anger of the country class rubes toward the middle eastern rubes.
From the Muslim perspective, they hope that the game goes on long enough to give them time to acquire nuclear weapons.
The Left is effecively in an Alliance of Convenience with radical Islam.
I think the alliance between the left and Islamic fascism is because both are ideologies based on utopianism. That is, on a rejection of reality and a focus instead on the hypothetical future.
First: Both operate within hypothetical statements, within the fictional rhetoric of: IF we do this, THEN, this WILL result.
Second: Notice the format. IF-THEN. This connection is deemed necessary, it is deemed inevitable that IF you do this…THEN, the result will be guaranteed.
Third: Notice the nature of each part of this format. The first part of ‘if’ is viewed as necessary and must be carried out. By force if required…because that second part is considered inevitable if that first part takes place.
So, the utopians will always resort to force to carry out that first part of the statement: military force, religious theocracy, brainwashing…whatever it takes.
Fourth: the end point – is always utopian. It is perfection. It is purity. So, if you do such and such – poverty will cease to exist. Or, the unemployment rate will stay below 8%. Or, there’ll be no more wars. Or…whatever. It’s always a perfect-state-of-existence.
Utopianism or perfection is a basic denial of reality.
Our material world is complex and can never be ‘one state only’. There can never be perfection or purity in the material world. Only in the fictional world – and utopians exist only – in the fictional world of a hypothetical future.
So – whether it’s communism and its linear steps-towards-perfection, or fascism, and its vicious self-cleansing of impurity and impure beings, or socialism and its authoritarian redistribution….the end goal is a utopia. And these people, with their heads firmly trapped within the fanciful and the fictional…will do anything, even the most amoral and heinous…to reach that unreachable goal.
“both are ideologies based on utopianism.”
Not likely. See my response to cfbleachers above.
Leftists don’t have affection or sympathy for anybody but themselves. And only low-level Leftists are idealogical anyway. The boss Leftist’s only ideology is totalitarianism. All of the crap about multiculturalism is a ruse. When the time comes, they will destroy the Middle East in a heartbeat.
Islam is convenient for the leftists. They use Islam to distract their real enemy, free Americans. We are what worries them, not Muslim nutters.
proreason. I presume your response to cfbleachers was titled ‘anonymous’. I usually agree with your very intelligent comments but I’ll disagree on this point.
I refer to the left as found in all nations, not just the US. Their hostility is to the individual, to free enterprise, to capitalism, to private business. [This is similar to Islamism.] This is a perspective of ‘how to live’ and is thus, an ideology. So, I don’t agree that the left is only ‘anti-American’.
Certainly, the US was founded on the basic principles of: freedom of the individual – and all that follows from this freedom; namely, private enterprise, capitalism etc. But, the left’s hostility to such freedom of the individual is, I think, an ancient one. Plato’s Republic is a basic ideological text against the free individual and in favour of an all powerful government.
Marx’s hostility to the government was to the capitalist government, and he denied the diversity of the individual in favor of a homogeneous ‘blob’ supported, somehow, by redistribution. Unworkable.
I’d highly recommend Karl Popper’s ‘The Open Society and Its Enemies’ for a discussion on socialist ideology.
We do disagree on this. Yours is the more common viewpoint, which is probably shared by the author of the piece we are commenting about. My view is that idealogical leftists certainly exist, but they are riders on a movement the root purpose of which they don’t understand.
The left is controlled by thugs, Stalinists, nouveau aristocrats whose only ideology is totalitarianism. Lenin, Stalin, Castro, Mao…thugs, not intellectuals. I don’t believe they even had an interest in communism, no matter cared to understand the theoretical underpinnings. We don’t really know who their equivalents are today. Soros is probably one. Gore may be. Obama is a puppet controlled by these people. Don’t doubt for a second that their ONLY ideology is power. If democracy worked better to trick the rubes, then they would go for that, not socialism. The only reason marxism / socialism is the prefered base is because it is directly appealing to the suckers.
Below them is a hierarchy of leftists. The ones you refer to are the academics, who are the intellectual engine of leftism, based on marxism and offshoots like climate change. The intellectuals are tools of the thugs. They are fools, but they do feed at the trough.
Below them are the remora fish leftists, who are along for the ride. Those include American trial lawyers, unions, crony capitalists, many greenies, homosexuals, feminazis and a host of individuals who are hoping to grab more than their share of the treasure trove. Many politicians fall into this category. This group are not intellectuals either, but they all want something, and for most, socialism is incidental. Socialism isn’t even on their radars. Their philosophies are close to the upper echelon thugs..i.e., money, power, theft. Socialism, schmocialism, they don’t care. They just want more goodies, easy money, ‘benfits’. They simply don’t have the power base to grab for the gold ring, so they are satisfied with the chum thrown in the water by the top thugs.
So I think it is misleading to suggest that Islam and the Left are attracted to each other because of compatable “philosophies”. That doesn’t explain much at all about them and the compatability is a mighty thin reed. Hatred of each other is more accurate. Rather, they are using each other as tools to get what each wants, dominant power over the world. That explains the otherwise unexplainable. Like Germany and Russia in WWII, Lefists and Islamicists will turn on each other in a flash if either succeeds in supressing their more pressing enemy, freedom.
proreason – Now I understand your perspective. We agree…a bit. But just a small, tiny bit.
The thugs to which you refer – are found everywhere and always, Stalin, Castro, Lenin…and Chavez, Mugabe, Kim Jong Il, George Soros, Gore, and the various political leaders in the Islamic world (Arafat, Ahmandinejad etc) are not, in my view, left or right. They have no political ideology. They have one agenda and it’s a personal agenda: Power. Totalitarian power. That’s it. Nothing to do with left, right, ideology.
Then, there is another group, also interested in power, but not personal power but class or identity power. I’ll call this level: The Tribe. These are the elitists, those who consider themselves defined by status, education, tribal links..as superior to the hoi polloi. The academics, the political class, the educators. They consider themselves alone, ‘suited to govern’.
Then, there is the ideological (not tribal) level.This is a real ideology with many devoted followers, who consider that ‘the best world’ is one where all are homogeneous, all subservient…etc.
Now, if we compare these levels to the Islamic world – there are thugs within that world as I mentioned. These have nothing to do with ideology.
It’s the next two levels – within both the left and within the Islamic world, that I maintain have strong similarities. There is a tribal elitism within the Islamic world, where people in some tribes are defined as superior to others – and as more fit to rule. A major problem in the Islamic nations…is this tribalism, this elitism, this rejection of democracy and elitism.
And then, there’s the ‘ideological level’ – of fervent believers who consider that IF only…everyone believes in Islam, THEN, peace and whatever will reign. The similarity with fervent socialists on the left is similar.
Now – where do we agree? That bit about Obama. He’s a puppet. Of Soros – who is a thug interested in power. And of Pelosi and Reid who are also thugs interested in power. Each has their own agenda. And, Obama is also a puppet of kin or tribal identity groups: anti-American groups, anti-white, anti-capitalist. AND, he’s a puppet of the ideological left, gained from his mother, grandmother and wife.
Will the left and Islamists ever turn on each other? I don’t see that happening. Since both are focused on the same thing: suppressing the individual, then, they’ll merge with each other. There’s not much difference between them.
You give them more credit than I do, ETAB.
If true believers are 1% of Leftists, I’d be shocked to learn it. As I see it, they are just greedy bastards, including the contemptible toadie Paulie Krugman.
Islam may have a higher percentage of true believers, because it has religion as the base. But even there, I think the real fury is based more on envy than religious doctrine. It’s really hard to get worked up over ideas, but really easy to get worked up because somebody else has more of something (unfairly, of course) than you do. There’s another flame fanning factor in Islam as well. The whole scam is designed to keep all but the most priviledged young men away from the women. And there is no fury like the fury of 19 year-olds who have no chance whatsoever to get laid, while octegarians and priviledged overseers are covorting with the 19 year old women. That’s probably 75% of the fury, even though the screamers would never admit it.
Bottom line, I just don’t buy into the high-minded ideology explanations of leftist mental illnesses. It doesn’t jibe with my experience, which is that they are only ‘high-minded’ when it suits them. It’s all just part of the scam to pick your pocket and set them up as our fuhrers forever.
2. Mike2 “The unholy alliance is an old one and easy to explain. It was forged by hatred of Jews . . .”
Why do we always have to dumb-down the conversation just when it’s getting interesting?
What’s the dumbing down? The basis of the unholy alliance is antisemitism, though I’ll admit that antisemitism needs to be understood in terms of its basic anthropological attributes and is such not strictly about “hatred of the Jews” but rather hatred of what the Jews represent – the desire to embrace the human capcity for freedom, i.e. to take a lead in creating new differences, to live with the unpredictableness of history, the contingency of events, to live according to a moral law without demanding any guarantees from God that one is in fact living up to the covenant. In other words, antisemitism can be applied to others, like the America that thinks itself a leader in the world, bound by a constitution (rooted in Biblical thinking) that encourages freedom and makes the US exceptional in world history.
The basic conflict that stirs the unholy alliance is between a desire for some kind of re-feudalization of the world (left-Islam) and a desire for freedom and open-ended history in a world of more or less free markets and entrepreneurial transformations of the division of labour.
I’m with Truepeers on this one for the most part.
Anti-Semitism is often nothing to do with “Jews” qua Jews, being that no one can know them, only a few or so, and beyond that one has to rely on stereotypes or, more likely, mystic visions of “The Jooos.” As Truepeers puts it, “on hatred of what the Jews represent – the desire to embrace the human capacity for freedom….”
I think we see a competition for control of the Order, as it were,the one side being “open” in the sense of teleology, the other closed. This might come to a personality quirk, for all I know. That one is open to mystery and insecurity, if religious, then comforted in the possibiltity of salvation; or not, in which case the Order is in the hands and in the minds and Will of the man, security deriving solely from his abilities to know and create, hence control, the eschathon. This leads me to think of the Left dhimmi fascist as hierophantic in pursuit of control of the chthonic, and thus neo-fuedalist in relations with the West working class, and philobarbarist in relations with Islam. Of course it’s going to be, and must be, anti-Semitic.
The entrails-reading hierophant competes with the monotheist Jew and comes into conflict for control of the understanding of the Order. Is it closed or is it open? Text-entrails swapped in for chicken guts might seem “intellectual” to some, but it’s not truly impressive on close examination. Thus, the hierophant relies on Human sacrifice and scapegoating to enforce his position of controller of the Order. Offering security and predictability in the face of insecurity, the anti-Semite is far ahead if his audience is committed to the Irrational. To demonise the Jew/American/ Modernist is to show oneself in control over them at least, and to gain power over the weltanschauung of the insecure many. Promising “the people” cosmic control is an effective tool for creating power for oneself. That such devolves into a sado-masochist norm is all to the good for the control-desiring, top or bottom. And for every problem, there is a solution: blame the Jews. In the s/m round, there is always him at the bottom to kick.
Freedom is one of the last things people in general want. They want security. They want someone who can promise control of the Order. They want someone to kick when they are kicked. For the omophagic, what could be better?
heh Dag, maybe this is some confirmation, or maybe not, depending on how you read the difference between the image and the thing itself: http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Want+like+caveman+being+more+polite/3822574/story.html
Since when is telling the plain truth “dumbing down”?
Mike2:
Your comment was correct. When discussing the shared pathological hatred of progressives and muslims, always look to Israel. That is indeed the starting point.
“That is indeed the starting point.” Indeed it is in this post foundation of the state of Israel world. And the proof of the pudding is that ever since Stalin decided that Israel would not be a communist nation and that perhaps The USSR’s bread would be better buttered on the Muslim side of the equation the left has been increasingly antisemitic.
Calling it “antisemitism” is really dumbing-down the discussion. It’s a weak and shallow term What we’re really talking about is the Muslims’ hatred of Jews because they won’t submit to Mohammed’s enforcers. They were so psycho about the Jews that they forged an alliance with Hitler to exterminate the Jews, possibly in exchange for mid-east oil. But I’m not a scholar. I simply get irritated when a good discussion gets dumbed-down like this, especially when we’re on a roll. As soon as someone hurls the “antisemite” card onto the table, all intelligent learning stops.
So you are talking about the Muslim’s hatred of the Jews and how they allied with Hitler because, I assume, he also hated Jews and yet say it is dumbing down to use the word antisemite. I always thought that antisemite means hatred of Jews. So, I reject your dumbing down statement.
Leftists in the media and academia tend to be, more or less, a form of entertainment for people who really can think. The insult they inflict on our intelligence is more than offset by the many laughs they create as they provide ‘intellectual’ cover for their friends in power. The latter are no laughing matter. Unlike their garden variety cousins they get to implement their theories. Our recent experience with the result will make the dems a permanent minority party before the end of the next decade. The Democratic Party deserves this fate. The Lesser Evil Party had better not try to fill their shoes. People won’t be laughing anymore if they do.
How to defeat Radical Islam:
http://newzeal.blogspot.com/2010/11/allen-west-on-how-to-defeat-radical.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NewZeal+%28New+Zeal+Blog%29&utm_content=Yahoo%21+Mail
Islam is taking over the world and it is now America’s turn to fall:
Very Important to know this before it is to late:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpM6QKaAgP0&feature=player_embedded#!
video:
http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=2734278%3ATopic%3A210787&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic
What is so new here? Just go back 34 years in history. You will find ample evidences of Islamists / Marxist cooperation in History. For example in Iran they ultimately defeated the pro-west Shah with the help of the same type of people / organizations in the West as exist today. When terrorist groups like MEK in Iran were called Marxist- Islamist, liberal made fun of this terminology. But in fact Stalinist, Maoists, and Khomeinists ganged together and destroyed the only real friend of the West in that area. Of course, later Islamists assumed upper hand and got rid of most of the liberals and Marxists who openly pursued socialism. The rest of Marxists changed guards and cooperated with IRI and are still in power with the goal of poking at the West and particularly the US any time they can. Here is one example how their agents (in this case a researcher) work in the West and abuses freedom and democracy. According to a report published today in Yahoo news (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20101206/wl_csm/345721) titled:
“A stronger Iran returns to nuclear talks in Geneva”, apparently IRI is getting stronger. Guess who is quoted the most as the expert in that report. Following the same policies of Soro-like one world government, a guy that works both for Harvard university, and Islamic republic of terrorists in Iran. You might be surprise to know that if any body challenges Khomeinist in this country, he / she will be sued by IRI agents who have open bank accounts, using a bunch of leftists lawyers who do anything for the money.
The alliance between the far left and supremacist Islam has ALWAYS been there. After all, Islam is determined to finish off Hitlers holocaust, just now against all non-islamics. Gamal Nasser only stayed in power in Egypt because of being propped up by the Soviets, and the KGB was the biggest puppetmaster of islam in the 70s and 80s. Today, who is supplying Iran with weapons grade nuclear material-Any bets its RED CHINA(same with North Korea). Funny, but id like to know what university in Iran teaches nuclear physics(i DONT THINK ANY DO). The one thing the stupid marxists and socialists will never learn-your islamic pals HATE YOU ALSO. After all, didnt Khomeini once refer to the USSR as an “abortion” of a nation? Personally, they both deserve each other. They will eventually destroy each other.
There may be several or even many reasons for the “unholy alliance” of communism and Islam. In the Philippines terrorist units from both of those ideologies often collaborate to rob, rape, torture, kidnap, murder, burn, etc. Some see such cooperative ventures as the biblical Beast and False Prophet prediction in action.Both are satanic in that they are aimed at the destruction of mankind. Both are vicious, loaded with gratuitous cruelty. Both share many of the same rationales for their egregious conduct. Both hate the Judaeo-Christian God. Both deny Jesus Christ as the ultimate authority. Both offer an illogical, chaotic apologetic. Neither can produce peace and prosperity. Both feed on stupidity and ignorance. Both build power through force and fear. Both are capped with deception; the one thing of which one can be sure is that their speakers are lying. Some see them both as different units of Satan’s army; come to enslave and butcher mankind- with the imbecilic assistance of many of the sacrificial lambs.
Wow, wasn’t there just an article called “Muslims Behaving Badly”?
And another article called “Islam Expert Not Shocked by Disappearance of ‘Draw Muhammad’ Cartoonist”?
And another called “Christians Warn Against Double Standard in Wake of Quran Burning Row”?
And another “Koran Burning: How Dare the Muslim World Lecture America on Religious Tolerance”?
And another “Muslims Resume Building on Christian Graveyard in Pakistan”?
And another “NYC Mosque Rhetoric May Harm Persecuted Christians”?
And another “Controversial Jesus TV Show Canceled in Lebanon”?
And another “Pakistani Court Acquits Christian Woman of ‘Blasphemy”?
And another “Prospects of Religious Freedom Appear Grim in Islamic Maldives”?
And another “Poll: 3 in 5 New Yorkers Oppose Ground Zero Mosque”?
And another “Muslim Protesters Surround Worshippers in Indonesia”?
Gee, for so few radicals out there in the world, they sure get around, don’t they? But, they told us their religion was peaceful? You mean they lied to us? And we Socialist Progessive’s (I mean Democrat American’s) believed them? I guess I should stop watching the Main, I mean Lame-Stream Media? Oh my God, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR, and PBS have all become Pravda America?
I wonder if the “strip joint” around the corner from the Mosque at Ground Zero was similar to the one that many of the 911 Muslim terrorists attended the night before they flew the planes into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, etc murdering thousands, many who were women and children?
If these people were religious terrorists and not political terrorists or people acting out on political grievances, how could they have drank, gone to strip clubs, and rented hookers the night before they supposedly wanted to meet Allah? (Notice I didn’t say God, I said Allah). So if everybody doesn’t accept their version of reality, that somehow invalidates it for them. Everybody must believe the same things they do. Solution to this problem? Believe it or not, there is. It’s called an election and it just happened. Next, America needs to vote Barry Hussein Soetoro out.
Creeping Sharia in the United States
In some ways, it speaks of the goodness of America that we have had such difficulty coming to grips with the challenge of radical Islamists. It is our very commitment to religious liberty that makes us uncomfortable with defining our enemies in a way that appears linked with religious belief.
However, America’s commitment to religious liberty has given radical Islamists a potent rhetorical weapon in their pursuit of sharia supremacy. In a deliberately dishonest campaign exploiting our belief in religious liberty, radical Islamists are actively engaged in a public relations campaign to try and browbeat and guilt Americans (and other Western countries) to accept the imposition of sharia in certain communities, no matter how deeply sharia law is in conflict with the protections afforded by the civil law and the democratic values undergirding our constitutional system.
The problem of creeping sharia is most visibly on display in France and in the United Kingdom, where there are Muslim enclaves in which the police have surrendered authority and sharia reigns. However, worrisome cases are starting to emerge in the United States that show sharia is coming here. Andy McCarthy’s writings, including his new book The Grand Jihad, have been invaluable in tracking instances in which the American government and major public institutions have been unwilling to assert the protections of American law and American values over sharia’s religious code. Some examples include:
In June 2009, a New Jersey state judge rejected an allegation that a Muslim man who punished his wife with pain for hours and then raped her repeatedly was guilty of criminal sexual assault, citing his religious beliefs as proof that he did not believe he was acting in a criminal matter. “This court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.” Thankfully, this ruling was reversed in an appellate court.
In May 2008, a disabled student at a public college being assisted by a dog was threatened by Muslim members of the student body, who were reluctant to touch the animal by the prescription of sharia. The school, St. Cloud State, chose not to engage the Muslim community, but simply gave the student credit without actually fulfilling the class hours so as to avoid conflict.
In a similar instance in November 2009, a high school senior in Owatonna, Minn., was suspended in order to protect him from the threat of violence by radical Islamists when he wrote an essay about the special privileges afforded his Somali Muslim counterparts in the school environment.
In order to accommodate sharia’s prohibition of interest payments in financial transactions, the state of Minnesota buys homes from realtors and re-sells them to Muslims at an up-front price. It is simply not the function of government to use tax money to create financial transactions that correspond to a religious code. Moreover, it is a strategy to create a precedent for legal recognition of sharia within U.S. law.
Amazingly, there are strong allegations that the United States now owns the largest provider of sharia financing in the world: AIG.
Last month, police in Dearborn, Mich., which has a large Muslim population, arrested Christian missionaries for handing out copies of the Gospel of St. John on charges of “disturbing the peace.” They were doing so on a public street outside an Arab festival in a way that is completely permissible by law, but, of course, forbidden by sharia’s rules on proselytizing. This is a clear case of freedom of speech and the exercise of religious freedom being sacrificed in deference to sharia’s intolerance against the preaching of religions other than Islam.
Shockingly, sharia honor killings-in which Muslim women are murdered by their husbands, brothers or other male family members for dishonoring their family-are also on the rise in America but do not receive national attention because they are considered “domestic disturbances.” (A recent article in Marie Claire Magazine highlights recent cases and the efforts to bring national attention to this horrifying trend.)
Cases like this will become all the more common as radical Islamists grow more and more aggressive in the United States.
Gird your loins, America. More bloodshed to follow.
The alliance is that both sides (the Left and the Muslims) think they can use the other as a tool to conquer America and then eliminate them.
With the Muslims it’s obvious: they never utter a peep about abortion in America. Ever seen a Muslim group at a clinic protest? I never have. Ever seen them protesting a gay “sex in broad daylight” parade? I’m still waiting. They don’t want to upset their Left-wing tools.
With the Left it’s not as apparent, but here goes my theory: The Left is helping Islam to run rampant in the West so they can eventually say, “See how horrible religion is? We need to clamp down on it.” They need things to get so bad that Christians will willingly step into the shadows and agree that rampant religion is a terrible thing.
You heard it here first.
The founder of the “Left,” (because he sat on the left-hand side of the semicircular National Assembly during the French Revolution) was Maximillian Robespierre. He organized the Reign of Terror, and in February of 1794 gave a speech justifying it as a means of enforcing virtue. The revolutionaries who followed him called themselves “the Left,” and the current “Left” follows in his footsteps. (Incidentally, Vladimir Lenin founded the Soviet Union with a secret police to prevent counter-revolution by establishing the permanent “Red
terror.”)
It does seem strange that utopian socialism, with its love of income redistribution, extreme feminism, and extreme LGBT power advocacy would join forces with radical Islamicism, which favors oil mercantilism, suppression of women, and harsh cruelty toward homosexuals. But they unite to attack a common enemy: the Judeo-Christian ethic.
Their common enemy goes beyond Jews; evangelical Christians are equally disdained. It goes beyond the United States; conservative thinkers in Australia, the U.K., France, eastern Europe, South Korea, the Philippines, and many other locales are disdained. It is the Judeo-Christian ethic, and its advocacy of free economies, human dignity, and strong family that are hated so badly. And so the Humanist Manifesto lovers and the extreme-interpretation Quran lovers hold their noses in the presence of one another, and attack Bible believers.
It’s freedom they hate. Free people are a threat to authoritarians. They can’t even allow a spark of freedom, because sparks turn into fires. And they hate capitalism even more, because it isn’t just an example of freedom, successful capitalists can challenge any political system. The US, as the premier example of freedom is most hated of all.
I’d love to be a fly onthe wall when the shite hits the fam between the athiest Marxist and the so called Allah loving religious famatics. I’d have to be a fly because I’d be killed for believing in freedom as a human beign.