But I propose a new term for something I suffer from much more acutely — Islamophobiaphobia. It’s an irrational fear of ideological nitwits.
There are many examples but some recent ones are Fareed Zakaria — who has informed us that GZM critics are worse than Hezbollah — and the New York Times‘ Timothy Egan — who thinks most Republicans are dopes. Talk about projection. (Note to Egan: As one who was once a Democrat and now hangs out, relatively speaking, with Republicans, intelligence and ideology do not correlate.)
So now you can call me Islamophobiaphobic. But I am not the only one. My suspicion is that we are many. How do you know us?
Well, not just because we break out in a rash when touching the editorial page of the New York Times or get migraine headaches in the presence of Christiane Amanpour. There are subtler indications. One of the key ones is the ability to differentiate. For example: just because you oppose a mosque being built at Ground Zero doesn’t mean you oppose mosques in general.
And finally, as you know these are difficult times, so I have some special advice to you, in the tradition of that great Dos Equis ad: Wherever you go and whatever you do — stay Islamophobiaphobic, my friends.
UPDATE: This article has been translated into French by Daniel Laprès.
Think you’re one -phobia shy. Messrs. Zakaria and Egan are the Islamophobe-phobes. Fear of them ( although I doubt that’s the emotion you really feel) would be Islamophobiaphobiaphobia.
No worries: I always leave out one buffalo in “Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo. “
Or the word that best describes our attitude might be “Islamophrophylactia”, but then that would imply our concerns are rational – and progressives could never live with themselves if we got that point across. We must be seen to be “hate mongers” in order to validate their narrative. Else everything fails.
“Islamophrophylactia”:
I vote to include this in the vocab. of the general populous asap.
After all, if Islamophobia can become so popular, the reply that:
“Nope, actually I am just an islamo-prophylactic” could catch on.
Repetition, repetition, repetition – until it just rolls off the tongue and into the brain of the dhimmis – the fifth column.
No Roger, I’m sorry. You have misdiagnosed your own illness. The disease you suffer from is moronophobia, an irrational fear and hatred of morons.
And it is a bad thing. After all, what have morons ever done to harm you? On second thought, let’s not go there. I withdraw the question.
Since when is hatred of morons irrational?
Patrick
Lets see-I hate Islamic filth, communists, Nasty Piglosi,Barney the Fag, Hairy Reid, most of the demonrats in Congress and 4 USSC “jutices”. Doesnt sound unrational at all.
…just because you oppose a mosque being built at Ground Zero doesn’t mean you oppose mosques in general…
No. But it doesn’t mean you don’t oppose mosques in general either. I do as do many other thinking Americans. Mosques are a religious equivalent of KKK Klavens.
Here is a quote from Michael Ledeen’s current post: “The American Sufi leader Sheik Hisham Kabbani, who founded the Islamic Supreme Council of America to combat the influence of radical (Saudi) Wahhabis in the United States, testified at a State Department hearing that 80 percent of the nation’s mosques were under radical influence or outright control.”
…80 percent of the nation’s mosques were under radical influence or outright control.”
Many Muslims go to a home mosque because they don’t want their families to be under the influence of radicals and they do not want to support such mosques.
So what’s your point Aaron Byrnes? It may be all well and good that many Muslims home school, but that evades the point Mr. Levavi was trying to make. Rogers claim that Islam embraces misogyny, homophobia, theocratic rule, etc. is well documented (Can we get a Muslim in here to refute that?). So why is it somehow Islamophobic to be opposed to the establishment of any edifice so antithetical to our basic American freedoms? Good men and women have paid the ultimate price to protect these freedoms, so how can opposing mosques anywhere they are proposed in a free country be called phobic? !
I would add that around the world in Mosques everywhere, those who planned and carried out 9/11 are seen as heroes. Excuse me but we have a right to this perfectly reasonable fear.
Furthermore, there are all sorts of crazy zoning decisions and arbitrary eminent domain violations of property rights by the US government that are far more egregious violations of American’s rights. Based on the way our system really works, requiring that they build this Mosque somewhere else is a “restriction” not a violation of their right to practice their religion here.
Got some data? A poll or study?
‘Cuz knowing what I know about the subject, that doesn’t hold water.
Moslem’s are not able to make those decisions for themselves. It’s not allowed.
They submit.
They go to the mosque.
Or they’re not very good moslems.
i oppose mosques generally, and whenever i hear about one in particular, i oppose that one in particular. perhaps the reason is i oppose moslems is because, they are retarded knuckle dragging no frontal cortex murderous skank make believe religionists that disguises their nazi fascist goals.
so yes, i am phobic about moslems. and roaches.
Yeah, it’s all Islamophobia. But I wonder how many of the bozos saying this hit the deck every time a plane comes low over their building (or at least, start shaking in their overpriced shoes?) I wonder if Zakaria or Egan or Mayor Bloomers will walk by an unattended suitcase at the airport and say to themselves, “Gee, somebody left their luggage? Maybe I should turn it in to Lost and Found?” Or do they start moving quicker to put some distance (and somebody else’s body) between them and the bag? And if the latter, who the hell is it they are thinking might be out to kill a bunch of people indiscriminantly? The Little Sisters of Charity? Disgruntled Bernie Madoff clients? Yeah, phobias are an IRRATIONAL fear of something. Only an idiot (or a liberal) would say that fear of some organization that has pledged to and carried out threats to kill your fellow countrymen is “irrational”.
well said Buck. I agree 110%. why those IDIOTS can’t get it in their heads those people want to destroy us is beyond me,
EXACTLY. Thumbs up, my friend.
I think people should be PROUD to be called Islamophobic – it means you’re sane.
To the extent that a phobia is an irrational fear, I am not phobic. However, I definitely do fear Islam. How could I fail to do so? Their history and “holy” writings compel me to fear them.
The stated aims of Islam are to take over the entire world. Based on its track record it has been essentially unrelenting–and dismayingly successful–in its efforts to do so, in the past by sword, nowadays by immigration and abuse of the rule of law in those countries it chooses to infect by its noxious presence. We in the west have our own share of useful idiots who defend the rights of Islam, which rights if extended to their final conclusion would result in the useful idiots being the first to be stoned or put to the sword.
We should never encourage hegemony by Sunni or Shia–anywhere. I am willing to cut a little slack to the Sufi because they seem to be the “nice guys” of Islam. I should also mention that Sufi are roundly hated and reviled by the Sunni and Sufi–nuff said.
Bell, your observations may indicate a crack in the armor of one of many enemies of our republic. But like all others let them clean their own house before attempting to smear others with the fatally flawed ideology assembled from the spoils of 500 years of repetitious self proclaimed garbage punctuated with the logic that the ends justifies the means. Only when history has recorded over 200 years of success in a single country judged not by their own with fear from within but by others with joy from without can their doctrine be considered anything less than a fragmented copy of those that dictated the destruction of all short lived failed nations recorded in the Old Testament Bible. Practice diligence with any judicial interpretations that may give more slack than that which has allowed the country to descend to it’s present precipice. Media rats beginning to abandon their ship of denial indicate that even they have begun to feel the cold rising from the hull damage and are ready to sacrifice the chosen one while continuing to defend “the rest of the story” by omission of their treasonable history and obvious influence in the shallowed halls of congress.
I agree totally, but, I have one ‘pick to nit’ with the premise of the article: Islamophobia, would be a form of Paranoia…since when is it Paranoia if they’re really out to get ya (to apply equally to -phobia addendi, as well).
Sitting here in the middle of 50,000,000 Iraqi’s I never think about it. I’ve got Iraqi friends from one end of Iraq to the other (in Saudi, Syria, Algeria, and, Indonesia, as well), but, I wouldn’t trust a single one that I don’t know personally. Which, is pretty much the same as I feel about the respected ‘Journalists’ at the New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc.
I think you meant to say, “I should also mention that Sufi are roundly hated and reviled by the Sunni and SHIA–nuff said. No biggie..
“Islamophobic” is the new “racist.”
Although it took about two decades for the latter term to become a joke. The former arrived fully laugh-worthy.
A substantial proportion of those who throw around “Islamophobia” or “Islamophobic” have an absolute horror of Bible-thumpers. “Christian-phobic” or “Evangelicalphobic” or “SouthernBaptistphobic” or “Christianfundanmentalistphobic” would describe many of them. From their POV, it is horrible to be “Islamophobic,” yet they consider “Christian-phobic” or “Evangelicalphobic” or “SouthernBaptistphobic” or “Christianfundanmentalistphobic” to be badges of honor.
Disclaimer: I am an agnostic.
If you missed it, you should see if a tape is available. The O’Reilly show (With Laura Ingraham) had the professional anti-Christian guy who runs what he calls “Americans United for Separation of Church and State” in a debate last night with Walid Shoebat. Shoebat is a real authority who spends a lot of time translating from Arabic the rants of people like the GZM imam when he is talking to Muslims.
The “Reverend” spent the whole session in non sequiturs about how the mosque (A church-state violation if I ever saw one) was a great idea and those opposed were bigots. This is a guy who does not want Christmas scenes on public property and he is defending the one major religion that has NO separation of church and state. The first thought I had was how big the donation to his outfit was from the Wahabbis. After that, I was laughing to hard to think.
This is a guy who does not want Christmas scenes on public property and he is defending the one major religion that has NO separation of church and state.
Yes, you would think that he might have pondered that issue.
He is apparently of the enemy of the enemy is my friend approach. As he is an enemy of the Bible-thumpers, and as the Bible-thumpers are enemies of Islam, Islam must be his friend. I wonder what he has to say about the Greek Orthodox church destroyed in 9/11 which has not yet been rebuilt, yet the STATE wants to fast-track the Ground Zero Mosque? [Since part of the plane fell on the site of the proposed mosque, I consider it part of Ground Zero.]
Thanks for the suggestion on the show. I will look for that.
That dope defending the GZ mosque on Laura Ingraham’s (really Bill O/Reilly’s ) show is Barry Lynn or Lynd; yes, he’s been around for years, deploring the Nativity scenes and Christmas carols in the public square and other outrages. I’m sure he thinks having “in God we trust” on our coinage is some kind of hate crime.
Mr. Walid Shoebat was marvelous–he was trying to explain what the execrable Imam Rauf had said and written in Arabic, which Mr. Shoebat is in a position to translate for us.
Check out anything and everything by Andrew McCarthy, who’s first-rate on explaining how and why the sharia-defending type of Moslem (who can hardly be considered moderate, for that reason)engages in religiously-sponsored and condoned lying to infidels, what they call taqqiyah. Or however you spell it.
Suzanne, right on.
There’s a very good article, “Why They Can’t Condemn Hamas” by Andrew McCarthy, over at National Review, about the Muslim Brotherhood’s “up to its eyeballs” involvement in the GZM.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/245004/why-they-can-t-condemn-hamas-andrew-c-mccarthy
People–not most here–wake up!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR9LVf_KMO0
The myth of Islamophobia
Doesn’t Pat Condell do a great job on this kind of thing?
Yes, Wayne, doesn’t he? (Boris, take note.)
Why are Dhimmi prog pols, JournOlistas and assorted fellow travelers calling me Islamophobic when they’re the ones who are soiling themselves in fear whenever an opportunity arises to publish Prophet Muhammed cartoons vis-a-vis this or that news story as supporting material? Are they AFRAID of Muslim backlash against them, e.g., perhaps they’d be murdered in the street like Theo van Gogh? If they preach to us about being Islamophobic, they imply that they are not Islamophobic but their actions/inactions suggest otherwise.
We need to start pointing this out and asking them a few questions. If they’re not Islamophobic why don’t they publish things that would be the Muslim equivalent of the “vaulted” Mapplethorpe “Piss Christ” photograph or Larry David pissing on the Jesus painting in one of his TV shows? The closest they came (and this was a solidly lame attempt) was the depiction of Muhammed in the South Park episode and they had to burqa him up in a bear costume.
So, who’s really afraid of Muslims? Patriotic Americans who march in the street to protest “The Ground Zero Victory Mosque dedicated to the 19 Glorious Martyrs” or milquetoast Dhimmi progs who don’t want to offend backward adherents to a faith that would dictate that they be beheaded, hanged, stoned, imprisoned, etc. for any number of reasons?
I have asked many people why they object to depictions of Mohammed, and every single one of them says that it is out of consideration for Muslims’ delicate feelings. Imagine if people who profess to be Christian or Jewish took the first four Commandments as seriously as some Islamic people take the Qur’an, except that the Qur’an says absolutely nothing about depictions of Mohammed. That comes later, in the Hadith, and the injunctions there are ambiguous to say the least.
On a point of information, from Wikipedia: “Piss Christ is a 1987 photograph by photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist’s urine. The piece was a winner of the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art’s ‘Awards in the Visual Arts’ competition,[1] which is sponsored in part by the National Endowment for the Arts [NEA], a United States Government agency that offers support and funding for artistic projects.”
The discerning Islamaphobes here—count me in!—might be aware that the NEA put out a directive last year, encouraging artists to use NEA funds to produce pro-Obama propaganda.
The lefties really scare me!
Thanks for the clarification. I was in graduate school in Chapel Hill when the whole Mapplethorpe thing went down… liberals, thinking themselves brave, were falling all over themselves to find ways to display this photograph (or one like it by Mapplethorpe) to offend local Christians. Can’t find them now when it comes to Muslim analogues, though…
Great points. Remember how Comedy Central nearly prostrated themselves in fear over South Park’s creator’s attempts to show Muhammad in a bear suit. They censored a good 20% of the episode. Then, the network turns around, almost surreally, and announces a show called “JC” which mocks Jesus.
Seth McFarlane, who regular lampoons Christianity in the most vile, condescending fashion on Family Guy tells a late night talk show that he would never joke about Islam, because it wasn’t worth losing your life over. Only Pen Gillette had the guts to stand up for the Trey and Matt.
By the way. The proposed Comedy Central show “JC” features cartoon Jesus deficating on Bush, cartoon Mary menstrating, and other such wonderfuly sophmoric and in your face quote-unquote humor.
“Okay, I’m an Islamophobe. Bleh.” … Homophobe. Bleh. Racist. Bleh. Sexist Bleh. Warming Denier. Bleh. Deist Bleh. … Actually, these are becoming pretty common.
Scientist bleh. Athiest bleh. Agnostic bleh. Nihilist bleh.
….birther bleh…
But you haven’t been to Altair IV recently, I would have known?
“Scientist bleh. Athiest bleh. Agnostic bleh. Nihilist bleh.”
One of these things is not like the others. Mark on your answer sheets which one is different. For extra credit correct the spelling of the misspelled word.
Are you really the athiest, or are you just more athier than others?
“Clearly I see it as ideological battle with the word “Islamophobia” itself a weapon in that battle. It is an obvious way of avoiding debate by tarnishing the opposition.”
Yes. Islamophobiaphobic — and Totalitario-phobic.
My biggest fear of the moon-god worshipers is their tendency for over-breeding. Muslims = ECOLOGICALLY INSANE PLANET EATERS :X
Who, pray tell, is the great arbiter? The one who decides whether the ‘fear’ is rational or irrational? Do we rely upon simple democratic majority rule as when the American Psychiatric Association held a vote to reclassify homosexuality from personality disorder to alternative life style? Or perhaps some wise solon such as the federal judge who recently redefined marriage should decide. Should the arbiter(s) have any special qualifications? Or just be popular, or rich or powerful? Over and over again I have heard the phrase ‘….the great majority of Muslims are peaceful, friendly, moderate, blah, blah, blah…”. Really? Says who, and based on what? There’s an awful lot of bullshit out there. And it is endlessly repeated by the liberal elites and pols. Like a mantra. As if repeating it will protect us. It won’t. Time to wake up, guys. The truth shall set you free.
I’m fed up with tolerating the ridiculous ‘phobia’ mania in which the multicultural high priests are demanding that we must forfeit our identity, take no pride in it, ignore our heritage, and mock and demean our traditions.
What the Leftist relativists are demanding is unilateral surrender to the lowest common denominator. That’s a horrible and terrifying prospect when one takes inventory of the human condition. That’s insanity.
If they want to call me a ‘phobic’ for refusing to do that, fine. That’s their problem, not mine. Because what it means is that I stand for something, have principles, have discernment, will defend certain things over others, and I am proud of my tribe. I’m really quite done with the Leftist intellectual, cultural, moral, and physical cowardice that enables evil to flourish in this world.
Enough is enough. It’s time to turn the battleship around and end this nonsense.
RJE, a fine post: many thanks!
You write, “What the Leftist relativists are demanding is unilateral surrender to the lowest common denominator.” Bull’s Eye! As a teacher in the public school system, this began in Canada, in about 1990, when the first case law of our new Charter—via OUR Marxist, Pierre Elliot Trudeau—came down. Lo and behold, we found that the Charter was being used by our appointed, left-wing judiciary to favour only victims. That was the end of personal responsibility.
The lowest common denominator inmates now run the asylum. Disciplining a member of the “victim” class—they all know who they are because they’re “taught” all about it—is risky business: the teacher’s the one most likely to be raked over the coals by administration. The miscreant? S/he gets a free pass. (Among the worst students I’ve taught have been hijabbed, horror, drama queens: they’re the rudest, most arrogant students imaginable. Are they thankful that the Canadian taxpayer provides a pretty cushy existence for them and that they’re no longer in the hell holes they came from? Not on your life. They just want more entitlements—and to let us infidels know how little value we have. And. They. Get. Away. With. It. Teachers talk about this, carefully and very quietly, among themselves. Stating it out loud would jeopardize their jobs. Really.)
I’m sick and tired of the complete moral inversion we’re seeing in our generous—and stupid—countries. The hour is late—I hope not too late to really PUSH BACK.
Islamaphobia, homophobia, whatever. True, Soviet, psychiatry knows that opposition to the progressive goals of the party and state are class-based mental illness, treatable by interment camps. Users of -phobias know which side they’re on.
Roger,
Excellent article. You can not believe in the Constitution and believe Sharia law can be part of our government or culture, it is no more complex than that. If you disagree, please read the 1st and 14th amendments and get a grip on what the words mean.
Islam is about two things, submission and conquest. The GZM is a victory mosque, and if you can’t see that you need to study Islam. The Obama and Clinton State Dept funded the Imam Rauf’s trip to the middle east to the tune of 16k. That’s your tax dollars, folks! It is a complete outrage.
It is time to stand up to the bully Islamists and tell them that if they wish to live in this country they will live in accordance with the Constitution. It is as simple as that. They have a right to practice their religon in accordance with our law, nothing more. It is high time that citizens who believe in our Constitution stand up and assert their 1st Amendment right to demand that the government abide by it’s terms and govern accordingly.
Oh, and by the way,the pontificating Mayor Bloomberg defines the term “A$$ Hat”. There’s no fool like an old fool.
Having lost the argument and facing burial in November, the left falls back on all that remains: scorn and abuse. America has not lived up to its ideal of secular tolerance for those who would liquidate us. Therefore, it follows that we are an abomination in the eyes of atheism and humanism; both of which, it occurs to me now, were the professed goals of Marxism. Maybe it didn’t work out in the Soviet Union, but flourishes as never before in the academy and media, handmaidens both to the Democratic Party.
Wait a minute. Don’t paint the actual atheists with the broad brush of hate just because most who profess it don’t really believe it. I am one who really believes it and I support my wife in her christianity because I really like the ideals it professes to have. I suspect (believe) that most so called atheists no more believe there is no god but are afraid to admit they might be wrong and they are so fearful of that idea, that they feel the need to attack religion. But there are some out here who really are atheists, just like there are a few out there who really are christians. Most people I see, who profess to almost any religion, aren’t really believers, they are simply afraid to admit what they really believe even to themselves. So don’t stereotype me, and I won’t stereotype you. Thanks
Islam is a cult – not a religion.
What’s the difference Tomp?
I am going to concur with study conducted by the US Navy captain about islam.
It is the problem. It is an ideology concocted by a vile and evil man. Nothing more, nothing less.
Once having crossed that line, one must conclude islam must be dealt with. I therefore oppose all things muslim.
Because I oppose Nazis does not mean I oppose Germans.
Because I oppose islam, does not mean I oppose those peoples, merely their ideology.
But oppose it I do in a most strenuous way.
So yes, no mosques anytime, any place.
Precisely Roger. Watching CBC news last night, the coverage of the latest terror suspects arrested in the Ottawa and London areas, was exactly how you describe. No one can understand how such nice boys could do something like this. Talk to muslims? They don’t believe it. It’s a mystery what could have gotten in to them. Although one of them mentioned all the muslims being killed by American and Canadian soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Talk to the imam. Can’t imagine what could have occurred. Do they ask even one tough question? Could it be jihad? Are you kidding?
The good news is that more and more people are seeing through this stuff and speaking up. They’ve overplayed every card in the multicultural hand. We’re not buying it anymore. Even my very liberal girlfriend is beginning to see through the smokescreen they put up to cover fellow travellers.
Thomas_I,
I couldn’t agree more. Glad to hear from a Canadian who fully understands. Can conservatives in Canada get a hold of the CBC and shake it up? It produces excellent sports and some good cultural programs, but news and commentary are pathetic.
Shake the CBC up? What a quaint idea! Good point, Samizdat, but the CBC is so “open minded”, its brains have fallen out. I’m a conservative Canadian who’s written the CBC Ombudsman—Ombuds-toady—who’s actually a CBC employee, about two dozen times in the past three decades, to no avail.
Chapter and verse of the many ways the CBC has failed to provide balanced coverage and follow its own professional code are met with the most one-sided and unintelligent, lefty gibberish. A relative gave up the CBC for Lent one year: his blood pressure improved dramatically! I followed suit soon after: my husband and I now watch FOX News and are eagerly awaiting the start of Sun Media’s Canadian version.
CBC is in bed, figuratively and literally, with the Liberals—our version of the Democrats—and is as subversive as the American MSM. To add insult to injury, the CBC receives $ ONE BILLION from the taxpayers every year to lie and misinform. That their LIEberal buddies—as underhanded and corrupt as the DHIMMIcrats—are no longer in power has left them gobsmacked. The Liberals believe they’re “the natural governing party” of Canada. That the Conservatives are now in power—a minority government, unfortunately—has infuriated them and their camp followers at the CBC. (The CBC suffers from Islamophilia: e.g., Omar Khadr has been treated like a long, lost, beloved Canadian son, instead of the traitorous vermin he really is: his duplicitous, freeloading-on-the-taxpayer family too. The latest news from the American judge was music to my ears: the CBC’s chagrin? Schadenfreude, guys!)
The CBC is an entirely lost cause. Hopefully, the Conservatives will gain a majority government one of these days. Then, I hope that PM Stephen Harper—who is given the same treatment as President Bush 43 was given by your MSM—will defund the CBC. Its audience share is so low, no one but the trendy elites here would miss it.
Stephen Harper will never defund the CBC. If the Conservatives ever get a majority, they will be tempted to usurp the Liberal message and use it as their mouthpiece. I’m against a Pravda like news organ, regardless of which side controls it. Anyway, I’d be happy if they just stopped doing the news.
Thomas_L writes, “I’m against a Pravda like news organ, regardless of which side controls it.” I totally agree. The CBC is an anachronism and a left-wing abomination.
I’m not sure what a Harper majority would do to the CBC, but it would look pretty different from what it is now, that’s for sure. If the Sun News (Canadian FOX) network’s up and running, getting rid of CBC “news” altogether might just be in the cards.
i am an atheist and islamophobic and i am proud to be called both
How do you tell who is a moderate Muslim? In a combat zone he’s the guy who ran out of ammunition or stashed his AK. In the West he’s the guy who says Sharia really sucks and means it.
Phobia, meaning fear, is the wrong ending. I believe (subject to correction from someone who knows) the better coinage is “islamoantipatheia,” meaning opposition, aversion or antipathy towards islam.
There are other endings possible, each with some meaning of hate, and some shorter, hence more effective.
Some Greek speaker may help us.
Miseo is the Greek word for hate–thus misanthrope, misogyny, misandry.
I have no irrational fear, but I am becoming misislamic.
No fancy name needed for this phenomenon: you simply don’t suffer fools gladly.
— notably its heinous treatment of women and homosexuals and …
women and homosexuals, is this the new “women and minorities” now that center and center-right America seem to have agreed racism isn’t whites problem anymore?
No Kirk (#25), it is an attempt to get the idea across to liberals and leftists that the jihadists and the advocates of imposing Sharia do really bad things to those who have the misfortune to live under their rule, and we do so by pointing out the persecution by Shariah-loving Muslims of two of the liberals’ favorite mascot groups. We hope that if liberals and leftists manage to understand that their favorite mascot groups will be badly hurt by the toadying approach to militant Islam they have taken, then the leftists and liberals will join we conservatives in defense of freedom and Western Civilization. I fear our hope is misplaced. From what I have observed for many years, leftists and liberals hate freedom and Western Civilization, and their alliance with radical Muslims is based on the notion that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” It won’t work, the radical Muslims will prove to be smarter than the leftists and liberals and will outfox them in the end. That’s what happened in Iran with the revolution that overthrew the Shah, and I don’t think the left side of the political spectrum has grown any smarter since then; quite the contrary in fact.
Am I supposed to be insulted when a liberal calls me
an Islamaphobe? I wear the badge proudly. Watching
fellow Americans jump off skyscrapers to avoid
being consumed by the fires of Islamic ‘tolerance’
will do that to you.
Why does anyone feel the need to be tolerant of the
most extreme and intolerant religion on this planet?
The progressive left/democrats are like rebellious teenagers that never grew up. They seek only to be cool and shocking and lack the ability to forsee consequences of any description. The “cool ones” rush in chasing instant gratification, lack commonsense and the ability to sense real danger is totally absent. In their twisted little minds it’s still “all about me” and “I want it, because I want it”.
Count me in as one who considers the word “islamaphobe” a compliment
Somewhere in my readings I saw a most appropriate comment about the left/democrats pushing for islam and sharia in America:
It was something along the lines of “Keep on feeding that beast, it will turn around and devour you”.
“Well, not just because we break out in a rash when touching the editorial page of the New York Times…”. My cat LOVES the editorial page and MoDo, I always make sure Maureen’s picture is face up, when I put down new paper under the litter box. Like Daddy always said, it’s best to use gloves when handling the NYT, and then wash thoroughly with Dial soap.
For all the pols who enthusiastically support the building of GZM, does their enthusiasm extend to sharia law? Hint Dem-Femmes, you might want to know where the mosque cheerleaders are going to draw the line…
“islamophobia” like the left’s other words of hatred are simply ad hominem attacks, which are the refuge of the incompetent when they run out of, or never had, any rational argument or evidence on their side.
Excellent post Roger!
Does any sane and honest individual really believe had Israel been blessed in abundance with the world’s largest petroleum reserves, they would have nothing more to show for it than say the Sauds – cradle to Islam? Israel can make a desert bloom starting with little or nothing. Saudi Arabia can take a desert with huge resource advantage and make hell on earth. The truth speaks for itself.
If labeling me Islamophobic means I summarily reject all facets of Islam not only because of its lack of beauty, wisdom and truth, but it’s horrid historical results and dismal failures, then I can live with that badge.
I think Islamophobiaphobia sounds a lot like stating the obvious truth. I’m on the team.
Well, actually Roger…for myself, I am simply rejecting Islamomania. I have come to the conclusion that the vast majority of leftists suffer from Monomania.
Monomania is a type of paranoia in which the patient has only one idea or type of ideas. Emotional monomania is that in which the patient is obsessed with only one emotion or several related to it; intellectual monomania is that which is related to only one kind of delirious idea or ideas.
In colloquial terms, monomania is often attached to subcultures that to the general public appear esoteric
Hard leftists suffer from this particularly annoying disorder, and resort to Social manias are mass movements which periodically sweep through society, sometimes on a world-wide basis. They are characterized by an outpouring of enthusiasm, mass involvement and millennialist goals. Social manias are contagious social epidemics, and as such they should be differentiated from mania in individuals.
Social manias come in different sizes and strengths. Some social manias fail to ‘catch fire’, while others persist for hundreds of years (although sometimes in severely attenuated form). Common to all is a vision of salvation, a new way of life, which if realized would radically change everyday life, ushering in a new world of freedom and justice.
Such people are likely to exhibit behavioral traits of the DSM-IV Axis II Cluster B personality disorders including BPD,(Borderline Personality Disorder) NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder), HPD (Histrionic Personality Disorder), and ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder) and related conditions such as PPD (Paranoid Personality Disorder).
The common traits are these: They will focus on a single person as the object of their frothing hate (Bush Derangement Syndrome) and will attach to him all sorts of “evil” qualities, making him a “monster” who must be overcome. They fantasize about his assassination, will not stop obsessing about him, even after he is gone, and blame him for all of their own shortcomings.
They resort to puerile name calling. They assign “evil” intent in EVERYONE who does not agree with them, even in the slightest bit. They take ANY disagreement as an affront to their identity and often fly into uncontrollable rage, fantasizing about throwing people who disagree through plate glass windows and finding like minded others to conspire with to hang labels of “evil intent” upon…whether or not those individuals have done anything to deserve the label or not. (Fred Barnes or Karl Rove, “let’s get together and call them racist”)
They often exhibit delusions about becoming “a sort of god”, who can make the seas rise and fall and can perform miracles. The hyper-euphoria can have physical manifestations, such as spontaneous fainting, orgasm, or leg tingling episodes.
Of course, they can come crashing down from the bouts of displaced euphoria. Usually in early November. Must be something to do with the change in seasons.
So, you see Roger…I don’t suffer from Islamophobiaphobia, I suffer from being the target of DSM-IV Axis II Cluster B mental defectives…commonly known as leftist Democrats…or, based upon our current economy, foreign affairs, sieve-like borders, and abject disregard for our Constitution…The Giant ClusterFlock.
Tossing out the term Islamophobe for opposers of the nefarious project planned for lower Manhattan is as stupid as tossing out racist for all who find Barack Obama’s governance (rather, stabs at governance) dangerous & threatening to the survival of the Republic.
It is typical of the argumentation of a Leftoid (if we’re going to toss “progressive”, I suggest “hemorrhoid” as a substitute) to simply throw a term at something he doesn’t like. Calling people islamophobe, racist, homophobe etc. is used regularly as a tactic of intimidation to shut them up.
This is as good as it gets with all the newspeople and spokespeople who employ this ploy. Name calling & aspersion casting are the best they’ve got, intellectually.
A very sad state of affairs for the survival of intelligent life on the planet. And sad, too, when the people against whom the “phobe” aspersions have been cast go to great lengths to defend themselves, i.e., waste time in the Left’s “gotcha” game.
The Obama administration was very focused on shutting up its detractors during the first 15 months or so…still trying hard (net neutrality, some kind of new (un)Fairness Doctrine) but seems to have realized it doesn’t (yet) quite have the power to completely control the airwaves and the printwaves.
Am i dreaming this? this could not be for real. an incompetent islamic president who hates america. a mosque on ground zero. a mayor with a sudden affinity for moslems, who has financial interests in dubai. and, moslem trolls in the guise of progressives who cheer for the murderers of 3,000 innocents.
Proud to be an islamophobe. I have been one for quite some time. i have to say, however, since this notion of building an abomination got started, i do loathe and despise them with even greater dismay and would be happy to vomit on their shoes.
in my dream, 70% of americans are yelling and the politicians won’t hear them. so we all go into their offices and pull them out by their hair. in my dream.
Why should any of us fear “islam” i.e. “submission”? We need but call this “fitna” (mischief) bluff for what it is- install a victory monument cloaked, not in the name of “islam”, but in fact in the name of “religious tolerance”.
It is a Trojan horse indeed. All the Alinsky tactics are in play as our own practice of religious tolerance, of buddhists, hindi, various denominations of protestant and catholic, and greek and russian orthodox christianity, Hebraic Judaism is expected for this phony “religion” “islam” as well, complete with all the equally phony straw men associated with freedom of religious worship. etc.
The above mentioned religions don’t bedevil us with making themselves exceptions to our laws based on their “religious” principles. Muslims do. For “islam” is a phony “religion”. It is a political ideology of armed conquest and death. Thomas Mann said “It becomes a crime to tolerate evil“.
Furthermore, “islam”, i.e. “submission” to the will of “the prophet” is absolutely unacceptable by any credible standard based on it’s treatment of females, both young and adult, as property, as slaves, and victims of female genital mutilation (called “female circumcision” by politically correct “news” organisations, if at all, to mitigate it’s barbarity), polygamous marriages with multiple wives in arranged marriages, public stonings (with the victim buried up to their necks and executed by an agonizing series of head wounds from stones thrown by men) based on the crime of “adultery” which is assigned always to the women, and absolves men who rape her, from the crime of murdering her for “having provoked the arousal of men”), child brides, arranged marriages, domestic abuse and daily violence, which can include the punishment of cutting off a woman’s nose and ears for attempting to flee the physical abuse and beatings she receives on a daily basis at home. [see cover of latest Time™ magazine.]
If there is a clash between “islam” i.e. “submission” to the will of “the prophet”, and there most certainly is, it primarily centers on how women will to be treated in this world, and their status as human beings, with individual rights, or as private property, slaves, and objects of anger and resentment. Treated as either animals (dogs, another despised being in “islam” i.e. “submission”, or as individuals, protected by law and custom. In this clash their will will only be one winner, and one loser.
The subject of “islam” i.e. “submission” to the will of “the prophet”, is always discussed in the abstract, usually by men (bloomberg) with no mention of the savage barbarity inflicted on women and girls by vitue of sharia “law”, as though it shares an equal footing with the peaceful practice of other religions listed above. “Islam” is not to be included in the tolerable religions engaged in the peaceful practice of their respective religions. “Islam” i.e. “submission” to the laws of “the prophet”. i.e. “sharia law” is not a religion at all, but a political ideology, with stated aims no different with japanese shinto, and Marxist Leninism. Specifically, the rule and domination over others, through slavery, murder or conversion, and the obliteration of all other faiths, their shrines and churches converted to offices for the the practice of the political ideology of “islam” i.e. “submission” to the will of “the prophet”. Sharia law for all. N0 “diversity” or tolerance” here, except on our part, to tolerate the intolerable, as bloomberg dictates. There is no “moderate muslim” in a position to “reform” islam, nor mitigate it’s atrocities, and the actions of some (but not all) “moderate moslems” is highly suspect in the first place, hence the interminable references to “moderate” muslim Imam Rauf as “a bridge builder”.
What do I fear? What I fear is abject and cowardly weakness, displayed and projected by our “leadership”, i.e bloomberg, jimmie carter, and so on), that pre-empts any hope of a “moderate” (by our standards) form of “islam” (i.e. submission) from ever emerging in the “whirled” of orthodox “islam” i.e. submission to “the will of the prophet”.
Whirled peas indeed.
“moderate” “islam” i.e. “Fitna” (islamic “mischief”) can only hope to succeed on this level with the complicity of “tolerant”, i.e. weak leaders here in the infidel west. “Islam” i.e. “submission” to the “will” of “the prophet”, cannot hope to take advantage of the United States militarily, so it must, as in accordance with “the recitation”, seek capitulation from weak, easily persuaded “leaders” such as bloomberg and the new york city council to do the work it, “islam” i.e. “submission” to “the will of “the prophet”" , cannot hope to otherwise hope to complete, that is, the “toleration” of new offices of operation, that serve as victory monuments to “islam” i.e. “submission” to the will of “the prophet”. All so-called “mosks” are such offices of operation.
And should not be tolerated under any circumstances, least of all a victory monument constructed within sight of the world trade center attacks and the murders of nearly 3000 people on February 28, 1993, and then September 11, 2001.
“Islam” i.e. “submission” to the “will” of “the prophet”. No, thank you. That is as tolerant as I will be, in the face of the barbarity against women perpetrated in the name of “islam” i.e. “submission” to the “will of the prophet”.
Now be gone with you.
Yes, pop culture has addressed the misplaced liberal tenderness for dangerous ideologies. Al Wilson, The Snake:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJNqhHcjBKw
Appropriate theme song
As I’ve said before, the snake at home is even more slithery and duplicitous than the one abroad.
State department spokesman PJ Crowley, National Security Advisor James Jones, Deputy National Security Adviser for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, John Brennan, the Department of Justice…all, apparently, in the throes of the same Islamophilia as their boss.
It’s hard to believe that so many gullible Useful Idiots could be so highly placed.
Imam Rauf and the whole crowd are thrilled with their American enablers (Mayor Bloomberg is currently at the top of my list of weak-in-the-head Useful Idiots)and their hopes for the Brotherhood’s Shari’ah Index Project & Shari’ah taking root on the North American continent.
Imam Rauf and his friends get so tongue-tied when it comes to Hamas
I’ve seen the mass demonstrations of Muslims in different European cities, probably most notably in London, proudly announcing their intention to convert Europe into an Islamic continent, holding up placards “Islam Will Dominate The World” (and some much more vile than that). Already in the UK some local councils have a version of these Sharia courts setup, at the behest of the local Muslim population.
They clearly announce their goals, demonstrate a willingness to see those goals are met by any means necessary, and already have the feckless West caving in to their demands. This is while a minority population, too. What will we be dealing with when they are a significant, perhaps even majority, population? Yeah there’s some “phobia” going around alright, but it’s our pusillanimous liberals who embody the phobia – a fear of confronting an existential threat that couldn’t be more clear about its intent to subjugate our civilization.
As much as I read, I have not seen the assertion that, if any “percent of the nation’s mosques were under radical influence or outright control,” then it should be both rational and required to demand examination of sponsorship and management of proposed mosques, if not oppose them outright.
Given the mission of any percentage of them being havens of radical propaganda, they are NOT houses of worship and, therefore, enjoy Constitutional protection.
The Left is desperately and clumsily trying to apply the protective halo of political correctness to Islam. It is hard since they have to wear super blinders to avoid seeing Islamic evil. The gyrations the news media are going through to get people’s heads right vis a vis the GZM are highly entertaining. Only jihadists are laughing more than I am.
Imam Rauf prattles about teaching infidels the spiritual aspects of Islam (cough).
Barack Obama ended his Iftar/Ramadan dinner saying… “The writ of the Founders must endure” (n.b., Obama trots out respect for founding principles when it’s expedient)
Here is what John Quincy Adams wrote on the subject of the Illustrious Prophet yea ! lo ! all those many years ago.
The essence of (Mohammed’s) doctrine was violence and lust; to exalt the brutal over the spiritual part of human nature
tanstaafl
The “spiritual aspects”, of course, are not any different from the jihadist aspects, they are not two peas in a pod, they are the pod itself.
What leftists try to gloss over, is that the imposition of sharia laws and mores is the DUTY of the imam and his followers.
And by practicing that “religion”, they are attempting to overthrow our system of laws and governance. We ALREADY allow it. There are numerous mosques inside the system…just none having sough to be built as a specific shrine to the violent overthrow of our government…until now.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/245004/why-they-can-t-condemn-hamas-andrew-c-mccarthy
What leftists try to gloss over, is that the imposition of sharia laws and mores is the DUTY of the imam and his followers.
I don’t think the Left understands that or is so caught up in the gobbleygook with which their heads have been stuffed and their vision of themselves as the “in” crowd can understand that. (the Olbermanns, the Matthews, the Joe Kleins, Bloomberg et al.)
That’s what I think on a good day.
On a bad day, I think other Leftists are as intent on destroying this country as Barack Obama and his minions appear to be, thus explaining their unholy alliance with and support of some of the worst Islamists. (the Soros contingent)
And that the real goal of “redistributive change” is what Winston Churchill called “the equal sharing of the misery”. (ruling élites excepted, of course)
at some point, the war in America will be between dog-lovers and Islam.
The canine companions will win.
One of the things I really hate are people who believe that a woman’s place is in the home, that women should dress modestly, and should be relegated to second class citizenship. You know, it is just straight out of the 1950s. (Could I be talking about male sexist pigs who are against the lofty goals of feminism?)
Oh, and those darned ultra-conservative religious groups who believe that arranged marriages are better than marriages formed on the basis of love. They even believe in taking multiple wives! Especially, annoying are those groups who feel that sex outside of marriage is wrong and should be severely punished. (Could I be talking about those polygamist sects of Mormons?)
The one’s who really get my goat are the older men who own young men as their sexual slaves, but otherwise consider themselves to be upstanding men of the community. (Could I be talking about nominally upright Christian men who live a double life?)
Even though I am descended from Massachusetts Pilgrim ancestors, I cannot understand how they came to America and established a theocracy. Imagine the tyranny of living under a combination of a church and state in which every aspect of our lives was regulated. (Could I be talking about the modern regulatory Leviathan state run by true believers in their enlightened Environmentalism?)
OR, COULD I BE TALKING ABOUT VARIOUS ASPECTS OF ISLAM OF WHICH WE SHOULD BE VERY MUCH AFRAID?
Roger Simon,not bad.But you fall short in your writings here,when you utter the defensive line:”just because you oppose a mosque being built at ground zero doesn’t mean you oppose mosques in general”,as if to make it plain that you are not an Islamaphobe,and only oppose it because it is insensitive to build it so close to the spot where so many innocent Americans died.It is not wrong to oppose mosques being built anywhere in this country.We Americans look around on a daily basis and see the murder and mahem created in the name of this awful so called religion,and we are afraid,and we are angry.If it was obvious that all of this worldwide death and destruction was brought about by the more militant,and that the average Muslim was sickened by it, and was fighting it tooth and nail at every opprotunity,we would most certainly feel differently about things.But that is not the case,and we know it.You can,therefore,place me,and I suspect a goodly number of Americans in the camp that not only does not want ANY mosques on American soil,but doesn’t want any muslims on our soil either.This is not bigotry or intolerence,it is called self preservation,and if someone doesn’t like it,I really don’t care.T.
So, the point is that the religionophobes, and especially the Christianitophobes, have now been treated by their familyophobe shrink and have discovered that they can have an ally in the islamophiles, that are as Freedomophobes as they are. So we are witnessing the great alliance of the cristianitophobes, the capitalismophobes, and the Freedomophobes.
We can call them the WESTOPHOBES.
I wonder what Freud would say.
Stay phobiaphobes, my friends.
The word you are looking for is “hesperophobes.”
The people who hate the West and want it destroyed are indeed consciously allying themselves with radical Muslims to bring down the objects of their hate: the USA, capitalism (“or the system of natural freedom” in economics), and ordered liberty. Carlos the Jackal, that famous old Commie terrorist (well he was once famous), realized that islam was the only remaining viable opponent of those things and converted (in prison) to Islam for that reason during the middle 1990s.
But…
could I be stoningphobe ?
I am certainly honorkillingphobe and clitorectomyphobe.
Questions, questions…
But let’s not be answerophobes.
Of course the fears about Muslims in this country–and this especially true of the “Ground Zero” mosque–are entirely irrational. Muslims are all terrorists in the minds of the right wing–or at least terrorist sympathizers. If they don’t outwardly support terrorism, you know deep down inside they just LOVE it. There is no danger of the United States falling under Sharia Law–It simply cannot happen without some armed takeover of the country.
But most of these irrational fears are stoked by a fear of the other. I doubt people on the right seriously know any Muslims and, therefore, the become easy to dehumanize.
The fact that 70% of Americans have these irrational fears to one degree or another may be comforting to you, but I take no comfort in it. Only shame.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com
But of course those are merely numbers, an Enlightened Being like you doesn’t care about arid numbers.
And you are right, we must help islam in its worldwide expansion, until it can explain its wonderful philosophy to everybody.
Well, at least you do.
I don’t blame religions for the acts of a minority of their adherents. If I did, I would think that all Catholics were child rapists. That would be a pretty unreasonable position, don’t you think?
Boris,
You make some good points and I’m glad to see you on here. However, as someone who was raised Catholic I believe we do have a responsibility to hold our Pedophile Priests to account. And it reflects poorly on all of us when we don’t. And, by the way, we haven’t, at least not to my satisfaction. So holding ALL Muslims to account at least to some degree, is not all that unreasonable a position as far as I’m concerned. At least it should be incumbent upon them to accurately describe their own religion. And so far the billion and a half (mostly moderate) Muslims have done a miserable job of it. In fact, as it’s been said many times before, “their silence is deafening”. And I don’t believe Christians want to control Govt or the Constitution as much as Muslims do. Islam is Theocratic. Few Christian religions (and no Christian religions of any merit) are.
Wayne,
Thanks for your thoughtful comment. I agree that moderate Muslims have not spoken out against violence enough, although this is a dangerous prospect. I think we can agree that extremists want to destroy the moderate wing of Islam. I just think we should support those moderate Muslims and encourage them to denounce violence rather than confuse them with the extreme jihadists that we should rightly fear.
Typical mealy mouthed equivalency that is getting really tiring to the rest of the world. Those priests were raked over the coals. Those perishes that attempted to sweep it under the rug were nearly torn down by angry mobs with pitchforks, and they faced a flurry of lawsuits. Christian leaders were quick to angrily condemn them.
NO such condemnation exists in Islamic circles, anywhere, not in westernized Islam, nor in the Middle East. Imam Ruaf cannot even condemn terrorist groups like Hezbollah. Muslim students angrily and rudely attack Jewish speakers and likewise refuse to condemn terrorist groups.
There is no equivalency. When I see Imams in Mosques around this country start opening condemning the radical actions of the most visible element of the ultimate Jihad, then I will reconsider my position on Islam. Until then, I view it as a conquering dogma, and its adherents either culpable, or frightened to the point of ineptitude.
No fear Boris. Disgust.
Any intelligent person knows that the majority of Muslims in America don’t, at least currently and outwardly, accept the radical version.
If they follow the dictates of the Koran literally, however, all “good Muslims” must engage in jihad, soft and hard.
Aside from the question of whether or not the imposition of Shari’ah could become a reality in North America, if you don’t think the Muslim Brotherhood is actively intent on “…destroying the miserable house of the unbelievers from within” and is preaching same in mosques across America as we speak, then you’re living in lalaland.
But, then, I think you’re probably in lalaland anyway.
Here is a sample of your new rules for daily living
(over and out)
Excuse me if I don’t trust people who don’t like Muslims to accurately describe the religion they despise.
I’m sure Muslims want to control government just as much as Christians do and I (and the Constitution) am dead set against letting them. However, they may worship how they please. And they may build a mosque two blocks from ground zero.
And I’m sure you’re brain dead.
(nothing personal)
Boris,
Islam/Muslims are the fastest growing demographic on the face of the earth. Once they get majority control of the liberal democracies of Europe and the UK, Shariah will be imposed. The groundwork for it is being laid as we debate. There are growing enclaves in portions of Detroit where Shariah is practiced…… and where some courts support Shariah…. so don’t be so sure that it can’t happen here…. because it already is. Do I sound phobic?
Maybe a tad.
Look, I don’t want Sharia law either. And I am very critical of the way Islamist states treat women and homosexuals. I find it morally repugnant.
We have protections in the US that serve to keep religious law separate from state law. I don’t think a majority of Muslims can overcome these protections, though I do understand being wary of such problems and vigilant in making sure this doesn’t happen.
So the proper attitude, in my opinion, is welcoming Muslims to practice their faith, but making it crystal clear that they cannot impose their rules on others.
I would go a little further. I don’t think they should be allowed to impose their rules on their women. Yet that is happening every day in the American Muslim world. Many, if not most, Muslim marriages are arranged. Many Muslim women are required to cover themselves from view. Even though it’s illegal, polygamy is practiced by some Muslims (and, to be fair, some Christians) in America… and they get away with it. Honor killings are occurring here in America. Muslim men can beat or rape their wives here in America and some judges will rule in favor of it. As their numbers grow and they achieve majorities in more and more places, Shariah law will, more and more, become the law of the land. When can we expect the stonings to commence? 50% of the Muslim population is already being subjected to the morally repugnant domination you say you are against. For 50% of the Muslim population the state law is already not protecting them form the religious law. Our tolerance, our respect for freedom of religion, is being abused and has become complicit in this great travesty that is occurring frequently, right here in America. As Americans who want to preserve the good that America has always stood for, we must demand that it stop.
“Muslim men can beat or rape their wives here in America and some judges will rule in favor of it.”
This simply isn’t true.
“As their numbers grow and they achieve majorities in more and more places, Shariah law will, more and more, become the law of the land. When can we expect the stonings to commence? 50% of the Muslim population is already being subjected to the morally repugnant domination you say you are against.”
And this is just fear mongering. That’s the whole point of separation of church and state: these laws would be struck down immediately (assuming they actually get passed int he first place). I know that there are some laws pandering to Christians on the books, but even those are mere annoyances (I can’t buy liquor today, for example). The idea that stonings will become law or honor killings will be allowed is ridiculous. And if any Muslim woman doesn’t want to get married, she doesn’t have to. If you want to pass laws that help protect her freedoms, I’m all for it. I am and will always be against laws that restrict an individual’s religious freedom, however.
Boris,
Sharia In NJ. Judge Rules that If A Muslim Husband Rapes His Wife, It’s Not Really Rape
by governmentrico on August 12, 2010
Sharia in New Jersey: Muslim husband rapes wife, judge sees no sexual assault because Islam forbids wives to refuse sex.
Muhammad said: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460).
He also said: “By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel’s saddle” (Ibn Majah 1854).
And now a New Jersey judge sees no evidence that a Muslim committed sexual assault of his wife — not because he didn’t do it, but because he was acting on his Islamic beliefs: “This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The 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.”
This decision was later overturned by an appellate court… but you can bet the husband continued to rape his wife until she could achieve this legal overturn. This is the kind of Islamic creep that will bring about what you do not believe possible. As you see, it simply is true. There is a fine line between saying someone is fear mongering vs calling them an islamophobe.
I appreciate you willingness to engage in civil debate with me. But I would ask you to take a serious look at the Islamists you would defend.
Boris, you say:
“We have protections in the US that serve to keep religious law separate from state law. I don’t think a majority of Muslims can overcome these protections, though I do understand being wary of such problems and vigilant in making sure this doesn’t happen.”
Do you think Dearborn, MI police arresting Christian missionaries for handing out Christian literature outside a Muslim meeting is an example of “protections in the US that serve to keep religious law separate from state law.”? That was right here in the US, the Christian folks were peaceful and it is all on video. Here it is.
I’m sorry but I am not as confident as you are.
This whole bit (tossing about the accusation of being an ‘islamophobe’) is, like lobbing the race card, a feeble attempt to win the argument. Just ain’t gonna fly. Damn libs need to sit down and shaddup. People are getting sick & tired of being pushed around by judgemental elites who think theirs doesn’t stink.
“I don’t blame religions for the acts of a minority of their adherents.”
Well, that’s up to you, pal.
Personally, I blame Nazism for what Nazis did, and I really couldn’t care less whether only a small percentage of Nazis actually worked at Auschwitz.
Same for Muslims and same for “liberal” Democrats.
They all do unspeakable things because of their unspeakable belief systems.
How in the world is being proud of being called islamophobe going to keep a mosque from being built. Open your eyes, cut out the blogging. Just as the majority oppossed the insurance bill, and just as the majority opposed the bailout you’re(insert that we) are going to get a mosque at ground zero. Our government is run by the greedy and immoral on one hand and the pinko faggot commies on the other and they all get their orders from the caliph!!
The 19 martyrs weren’t only sent to show that America was arrogant or to strike a blow for past injustice. They were sent to clear the land in the middle of the financial district for the greatest mosque of all time.
Greater than when they took Constantinoble, greater even than the taking of jerusalem and building on the temple mount.
Islam0phobe? This ought to scare the Hell out of the whole world. I know I’m scared and ready to fight.
Don’t call me IslamOphobe!!! Call me when you’re Ready.
Guns, knives, or clubs.
that’s all
I don’t blame religions for what a small minority of their adherents do either. I do believe that when people act in OPPOSITION to the teachings of the religion, then the religion has a responsibility to address and denounce those activities.
When a “religion” espouses the acts of hatred, when it advances an “abuse” of women, gays, converts…then it ceases to be acting in a manner consistent with ANYTHING that can be supported by this nation.
Any “religion” that does so openly as part of their “teachings”, is no religion at all. It’s a cult, promoting violence and hatred does not qualify under the protections of “freedom of religion”.
Abuse, violence, death warrants…are not “religious” in nature. Sorry. No matter how PC you want to be…if a basic tenet of your belief system is to put a death warrant out on someone, you may make a great mafia…but, you aren’t a religion.
If you go to Chuck Schumer’s senate website, you’ll see that, in 2005, he called for a DOJ investigation into the funding of the Islamic Saudi Academy.
The title of Schumer’s old posting is: Is Saudi Academy In Virginia Another MADRASSA?
http://schumer.senate.gov/new_website/record_print.cfm?id=260754
I wish Schumer would call for a DOJ investigation of the Ground Zero Mosque. Maybe it’s a Madrassa, too.
BTW, We don’t hear the word “Madrassa” being used in the US media lately.
Is that due to political correctness? Or due to fears about reviving Hillary’s “madrassa smear” of Obama? Or what?
This is a truly fine piece, along the lines of “If this be treason, make the most of it!”
Well done.
LOL!
Jeff, I didn’t think Roger’s column could be improved upon until I read your addition!
To make a point, most religions are Sociopolitical devices…
Save that, over time the membership drives have beome more polite..
Not so with Islam. The concept of Civilization is a one sided argument for these folk.
Simply put with their take, It is my way or the highway, short trip at best there.
Attaching labels makes for easy namecalling, solves nothing.
Recall this one ? The squeaky wheel gets the grease !!!
To be blunt, another old saying applies..
You cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear…
That is meant to include government current policy and largess..
Just say No, the gird your loins, for this will last far beyond November elections..
Islam as a threat to western civilization is no doubt only a recently awakened concept to some but to those who’ve been reading regularly at the Jihad Watch and Atlas Shrugs web sites for the past few years and, as a result, have long ago become familiar with Bat Ye’or, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Walid Shoebat, Nonie Darwish, Mark Steyn, Geert Wilders, Steven Emerson, Daniel Pipes, Hugh Fitzgerald, etc., etc., have become increasingly aware of the very real danger posed by this enigma hiding behind a religious mask.
We sit amazed at and disturbed by the absolute determination of a very large number of Americans to refuse to believe, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Islam is anything but a religion of peace. Last night with Laura Ingraham hosting the Orielly Factor, Walhid Shoebat debated a Reverend Barry Lynn about Feisal Abdul Rauf, the leading proponent of the Ground Zero Mosque. Despite Shoebat offering numerous factual references in the form of verbatim quotes from Rauf’s writings and speeches expressing his views on Islam, Jihad, Hamas, etc. this Reverend, well spoken and I suspect of at least average intelligence, refused to accept any notion other than his own for which he offered absolutely no evidence, just conjecture, that the whole GZM flap was just Islamaphobia in the extreme and that the characterization of Rauf as a radical was totally unwarranted.
This is the dilemma faced by anyone who dares to suggest that terrorism is not a high jacked version of Islam but a religiously sanctioned edict taken directly from the Koran to engage in Jihad. According to Daniel Pipes, director of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum and an expert on Islam, Jihad “means the legal, compulsory, communal effort to expand the territories ruled by Muslims at the expense of territories ruled by non-Muslims………………Jihad is thus unabashedly offensive in nature, with the eventual goal of achieving Muslim dominion over the entire globe.” Not always violent but the goals are the same…….conquest; domination, reversion (since we are all considered Muslim at birth), subjugation or death.
If it is Islamaphobia to be fearful of this threat then I willingly confess to be afflicted and would encourage all Americans to take off their politically correct blinders, drop all their preconceived notions and temporarily suspend their American attitude concerning freedom of religion (Islam is much more than a religion) and do some serious research before dismissing this as a benign, inconsequential bogeyman, a hoax perpetrated by some unhinged, religious, right wing bigots.
Well said Geppetto.
You are absolutely correct.
I used to have a great fondness for the Islamic culture, okay, for the more romanticised, softened version, but of people who held to what they believed, in truth. Not just as some kind of a fairy tale story book routine, but as reality. I admired that. And I also admired the atmosphere and emotional honesty of the society it produced. (I can still feel more comfortable with aspects of Islamic society than with the West.)
But this mind manipulation of the West, by itself in large part, so that it should believe lies to be the truth, or pretend not to see horrors where there are horrors, is sick and profoundly destructive.
It is a suicidal bent being encouraged by an elite that has some agenda hostile to western interests I can’t quite fathom at the moment.
I hate to reveal my own cognitive dissonance, but what the heck is a “soi-disant” anyway?
Some kind of obscure reference to soybeans far away in southern Illinois? So, an allusion to Carl Sandburg? Hemingway? Bueller?
No allusion, x contra, or soy beans (although that could make for a funny pun). Just one of my favorite French expressions. Have a look here…
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/soi-disant
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.
Lincoln was right, and that applies to Islam as well. Islam is not a religion of peace. There are peaceful muslims, and I wonder at how they can stand to belong to a religion that demands the murder, torture, slavery and subjugation of others. Must be that Sharia law that sentences apostates to death.
I do not fear Islam. I appose it. I think I do know who fears Islam, muslim women and homosexuals.
http://prophetofdoom.net/Prophet_of_Doom_Prologue.Islam
The proof is in the prophet’s own words. Radical Islamic terrorists are relying on the west’s ignorance of their religion. They forget… we can read.
Well of COURSE GZM critics are worse than Hezbollah! Hezbollah only kills infidels. The critics are actually EVIL!
/sarcasm
I use the term Misomuhammadan. Hatred of Muhammadans.
Yeah…Islamophobia….an irrational fear of Islam. Totally irrational…it’s a religion of peace….we all know that.
Umm….but….what about:
Islam against:
- the Catholics in the Philippines (routine slaughter & beheadings)
- the Christians in Indonesia (routine slaughter & beheadings)
- Australian tourists in Bali (blown up…twice)
- the Buddhists in Thailand (routine slaughter & beheadings)
- the Hindus & Sikhs in India (hundreds of years battling the Islamic Jihad)
- the Jews in Mumbai (slaughtered)
- the Zoroastrians & Baha’i in Iran (virtually exterminated)
- Islamic converts to Christianity in Afghanistan (death fatwa)
- ancient Buddhist statues in Bamiyan, Afghanistan (blown up)
- the Chaldean Christians in Iraq (routine persecution, slaughter & church burnings)
- the Jews in Israel (routine attacks against civilians, threat of 2nd genocide)
- the Jews in Yemen (nearly exterminated)
- S. Korean & German tourists in Yemen (blown up)
- the Coptic Christians in Egypt (routine persecution, slaughter & church attacks)
- the Christians & animists in Sudan (genocide)
- the Christians in Kenya (constant Jihadist threat from Obama’s homies)
- the Christians in Nigeria (routine Jihadist attacks)
- U.S. embassies in Tanzania & Kenya (blown up)
- the athiests in Europe (the prime target)
- the native French in Paris (torched car terrorism)
- Jews in Paris (read the grisly story of Ilan Halimi, a Jewish shop clerk who was kidnapped, tortured and killed in 2006 by Mohammedan Islamists)
- the native Swedes in Malmo (Islamic rape brigades)
- the native Dutch in Amsterdam (routinely terrorized)
- Dutch politicians (Geert Wilders & Ayyan Hirsi Ali – Islamic death fatwa)
- Dutch cinematographers (Theo vanGogh savagely murdered by a Mohammedan Islamist in broad daylight)
- Dutch cartoonists (Kurt Westergaard – Islamic death fatwa)
- Dutch newspaper editors (Flemming Rose, Jyllands-Posten’s culture editor – Islamic death fatwa)
- Train commuters in Spain (blown up by Islamic Jihadists)
- Tube commuters in London (blown up by Islamic Jihadists)
- Airports in Scotland (blown up by Islamic Jihadists)
- Jews in Argentina (attacked up by Islamic Jihadists)
- Jews in Caracas (attacked by Islamic Jihadists)
- Twin Tower office workers in N.Y. (blown up by Islamic Jihadists – twice)
- Defense workers in the Pentagon (blown up – airliner jihad)
- Army/Navy military recruiters in Little Rock (gunned down by an Islamic Jihadists)
- Soldiers in Ft. Hood Texas (gunned down by an Islamic Jihadists)
- Pedestrians at the U. of N. Carolina (run down with an SUV by Islamic Jihadist)
- Journalists like Daniel Pearl (savagely decapitated by Islamic Jihadists)
- Nick Berg, Kim Sung-il, Piotr Stanczyk, Jack Hensley, Eugene Armstrong, Paul Johnson (savagely decapitated by Islamic Jihadists)
- Jewish centers in Seattle (slaughtered by Islamic Jihadists)
- Jewish centers in Toronto (slaughtered by Islamic Jihadist)
- Infidel Delta Airlines passengers (underwear bomber Islamic Jihadists)
- Times Square pedestrians (SUV bomber Islamic Jihadist)
- Soccer fans in Uganda (Blown up while watching the world cup by Islamic Jihadists)
- Christian doctors in Afghanistan (savagely slaughtered by Taliban Islamic Jihadists)
And on, and on, and on………
It is Islam against everyone, everything, everywhere that is not Islamic.
It is Dar al-Islam against Dar al-Harb. Islam against us, not us against them.
It is not a ‘War on Terror’ against a few ragtag misunderstanders of Islam. It is nothing less than: THE ISLAMIC WORLD WAR.
THE ISLAMIC WORLD WAR – Muhammed’s legacy.
But we have nothing to fear. Stop being so irrational!!
~ The Infidel Alliance
A few good phobias to have:
Islamophobia
Lohanaphobia
Hiltonaphobia
Obamaphobia
That’s most of them, anyhow.
If to dread the ascendancy of Sharia in the West is Islamaphobic, count me in
If to be willing to fight to prevent the imposition of rule by the likes of Rauf is Islamaphobic, count me in
We’ve got 4 Muslims up here in Canada who have just been arrested and are under investigation for terrorist activities they were planning.
There is a Muslim Web site in Montreal called “Montreal Muslims” with a form to be filled out ” … to report any discrimination you may have experienced. We will help you by giving you advice. …”
I don’t know of a similar site where I can go to point out that I’m being asked, like the rest of non-Muslim North Americans, to
suspend our survival instincts because a group of recent immigrants have their feelings hurt when we point out that some of their members are violently disrupting our way of life AND WE DON’T LIKE IT.
What form can I fill out to say that my sensibilities are being offended and hurt by Muslim terrorism and shari’a law? Murdering people, or planning on murdering people, is a far cry from Muslim feelings that some of us may have hurt because we object to terrorism and shari’a law.
The world is, indeed, inside out and upside down.
They work the guilt; as Terry says, Western societies are guilt-based. Throw in decades of identity self-denial and you get liberals rushing to assist them in their efforts to destroy the West. It’s a fun game, and soon will be played by all.
Islamophobia is a made-up word to describe a fictional concept. they needed something to balance “anti-Semitism” (which is all too real). so now we have yet another thing we bitter gun-clingers can feel guilty about.
here are some FBI hate crimes stats (2008):
Anti-Jewish 1,013
Anti-Islam – 105
Anti-Christian – 101
that’s 105 incidents in the whole country of how many million people? I’d say that’s pretty darn good. anti-Jewish crimes are routinely much higher, but nobody seems to think that calls for a TIME Magazine cover.
The attacks on the World Trade Center in September 2001 are not listed in the national records of hate crimes compiled each year as a hate crime. So much for political correctness and the lefts fetish for islam.
Hmm.
You know what the problem is Mr . Simon? A desire to maintain an Upper Westside cool in a hot-war environment. All levels of the battlefield are experiencing this hot war. From the frontline soldier with the IED’s grinding away at their psych, right back to cook and bottle washer in a Greenzone kitchen, just desiring to go home. I definitely include the Pentagon and all the troops because of their status as active duty or reservist they can easily be called and be thrown into the cauldron of this hot war relative to American involvement in its shrinking or expanding (Iran? Potentially the geopolitical mega frying pan) role in conflicts around the globe. Only phobia I imagine a warrior possesses is bulletphobia or don’tknock onmyparentsdoorwithbadnewsphobia. I ignore the useful idiot types more and more. Rolling your eyes I don’t believe constitutes a psychological condition. Not yet.
Fire at Tenn. Mosque Building Site Ruled Arson: http://bit.ly/bUUVQM
Cowards, all of you.
What an odd post. Are you implying, Mick, that people on here are advocating arson or anything close? Please specify the post. If you can’t, here’s a question for you. Could arson occur – even an isolated case like this one – on a church or synagogue in Saudi Arabia? I await your answer. (Hint: churches and synagogues are against the law in Saudi Arabia.)
I am an Islamophobe. There, I confessed it. I am, I admit, afraid of Islam. In my case, being an Islamophobe is a rational choice, not some knee jerk reaction to the strange and different. My fear arises from reading the Koran, the Hadith and the Sunna, as well as many Islamic website in which the believers candidly discuss their views of this so-called religion. And I say “so called” because Islam is not just a religion. It is a political ideology with an explicit political doctrine and set of laws, the Sharia, that Muslims believe they are divinely instructed not only to live by themselves, but to impose on the world, whether the world wants to live under Islamic law or not. This ideology is anti-democratic, authoritarian, and intolerant. Islam seeks to order not only spiritual life, but all aspects of human existence: governmental, political, economic, and personal. No aspect of life according to this doctrine is beyond the reach of Sharia. Don’t take my word for it. Read the Koran yourself. I doubt any of the jerks on the MSM or our ruling elite like that idiot Bloomberg have bothered.
Well, consider that the Left’s neo-Marxism is woven through with the same sort of honor-shame dynamic of Arab culture, and the Left’s kissing up to Muslims makes sense. See my essay, “Honor, shame, the Middle East and the American left.”
I think we need a new word or two to help frame the debate.
Christian-aphobia – The irrational fear of Christianity and anything remotely connected including Christmas trees and the 10 Commandments. Actiually Anti-Christite would be better but.
Anti-Individualist – The irrational fear of the people making their own decisions, you know, because the masses are just unwashed and make the incorrect choices time and again. Let their betters decide these things.
America-phobe – Not because we question their patriotism but a fear of a strong America is evident in most progressives.
It’s not really Islamo “phobia” that I feel. A phobia is an irrational, intense and persistent fear. A fear that poses little or no actual danger, right? I’m not fearful of Islam. It’s more like Islamo “miseo”. Is that a word? Islamomiseo? I hate Islam. I’ve lived in the middle east. I’ve seen the ignorance and barbarity it breeds. I’ve seen it for the death cult that it is. I see what it’s doing to Dearborn MI, an hour from my home. I’ve witnessed the brutality and lies used to justify it’s ignorance. My hatred isn’t irrational. It’s VERY well thought out and reasoned. They kill or destroy , or twist and manipulate, what they can’t conquer with persuasion. I’ve lived it in Saudi, Jordan and Yemen. Sharia, creeping-sharia, and Islam in general, should be sent back to the deserts that spawned it. It has no place in the modern world. It cannot coexist with the US Constitution. IMAO.
Want to assess just who is a card carrying member of the ruling class?
Simply observe their speech patterns regarding Islam. If they dissemble they are at least afraid of the ruling elite. If they actually use the word ‘islamophobia’ they are with the ‘in-crowd’.
Any informed 12 year old can figure out that Islam is a death cult packed with potential sleeper cell activists. They only need their switches flipped by an imam and his cadre. Islam is naziism raised to an exponential level.
Yes we have westernized muslims but they are apostate. ‘Real’ muslims believe in conquering the earth for allah.
My word for explaining the logical and verbal abuse of the overused and meaningless term “islamophobia” is “infideliarrhea”
Infideliarrhea: (verb,noun, adj.) To treat infidels as disgusting blobs of excrement anytime they express concerns regarding Islam. The act of spewing from one’s mouth, hateful and politically motivated oppressive codewords intended to brand any criticism of Islam as unacceptable. The act/condition is generally diagnosed by the sane, as a projection of the sufferers own hate of infidels (when done by a Muslim) or as a unexplainable or ignorant self hatred for oneself (when done by an infidel).
Derived from “infidel”, “liar”, & “diarrhea”
Stan,
Your term wins first prize in my book.
Roger Simon,
You should reject the term Islamophobe, and embrace the term Anti Islam.
Im not a Communophobe…but an Anti Communist.
Be proud. The Leftist haters will always hate. Dont get caught up in their slanders and lies. It’s what they do.
a phobia is an irrational fear; I do not fear Islamists – I loathe them, and I am perfectly aware as to why.
SURA 109 AND ISLAMOPHOBIA
=========================
بَسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِي
SAY TO THEM: “Oh, Ye Unbelievers!
* I do not Worship that which you Worship
* Nor do You Worship that which I Worship
* And I shall not Worship that which you Worship
* Nor shall you Worship that which I Worship
* YOU HAVE YOUR RELIGION AND I HAVE MINE” (Koran 109)
======================================================
As far as I’m concerned, the “Prophet” said it all 1400 years ago in this early Meccan “sura” (chapter) of the Koran.
According to my interpretation, the “Prophet” clearly states that he recognizes other religions and you are perfectly free to choose and practice any of them as you please.
Of course, in my disputations with Moslems, they totally reject this reading of it and try to make it appear that the “Prophet” really meant the opposite…..hahahahaha.
(Nothing worse (for them) than a smart-ass Westerner who can quote the Koran backwards and forwards (in Arabic). Drives them up the wall.)
By the way, I propose this Sura should be etched in very clearly and distinctly on the entrance to the proposed mosque near Ground Zero. It’s from the Koran, after all, isn’t it?
Was this one of Muhammed’s lessons in Taquiya?
I think you really have Constitutional-phobia. The fear of living up to The United States Constitution. And most people are letting their resentment about not having their own building erected at ground zero, interfere with American standards of living.
Religion didn’t bring down the towers, hate did, money did.
We almost wiped out the American Indian, poisoned their blankets, killed their children, raped them, starved them.
Then we built churches on every corner of THEIR ground zero.
But you keep looking for a way to blame “progressives and “Libs” for your own lack of courage.
As an American I have a duty to uphold the Constitution and its tenants.
Why don’t you?
I don’t mean to sound callous but to the victor belong the spoils, which is why you are living in your house instead of Hiawatha. Which is why the Imam wants to build a mosque at ground zero, namely a victory mosque. And stop with your lefty lies already. We know the Constitution better than you do, and it’s not a document that “evolves” to match the times. We are not saying the Imam can’t build a mosque. We just don’t want him to build at ground zero because we don’t trust his intentions at that location. And for this the MSM are calling us “Islamophobes”.
“Then we built churches on every corner of THEIR ground zero.”
Funny, I don’t see anyone going to Sand Creek or the Washita River and building churches right next to massacre sites in order to “reach out” to Indians.
Don’t see Indians going to sites where white settlers were massacred and building shrines to the Great Spirit in order to “reach out” to palefaces either.
Probably because no one is actually doing that.
How about we do a Constitutional amendment giving lawmakers the authority to define the boundaries of religion using Basis Human Rights criteria as a foundation. Specifically:
1. Woman’s rights – would this include the right to abortion?
2. Homosexual rights – would this include right to marry?
3. Separation of church and state – How would you define this Western ideal? Is this actually necessary for peace. I would say no. Not in of itself. People should have the right to pick their leaders. Is it wrong for people of Tibet to follow the teachings of the Dalai Lama?
We may get there at some point. This Democrat would be willing to look at it.
Careful though, on numbers 1 + 2 above, you see the inherent contradiction don’t you? Religion is enmeshed in our society too, if you care to look.
I AM AN ISLAMOPHOBE
Fourteen centuries of brutal, relentless, murderous aggression from a religion that’s fallen from power and grace but’s determined to politically rejuvenate-to make a comeback on the world stage by any and all means-and the PC Left smears the Right that we’re all quite mad to take this seriously; that we’re being hysterical not historical; that Islam has learned its lesson over the years; that it has evolved into a religion of peace; that Moslems today are more civilized than their forebears; and that our fear of this faith is irrational and dangerous and could cause a civilizational disaster.
We are told that we’re Islamophobes and should feel ashamed for being so; ashamed for “demonizing” a mostly harmless religion of one billion souls because of a few, a misrable few (200 million or more), implacable, deranged, unyielding foes wanting to destroy us; wanting restoration of the past; believing that the world is theirs by God’s decree. Well if that is so then I’m an Islamophobe and will be one until the day the Moslem race accepts its fate that the time of the caliphate is past. Until the day they see that the prophet’s dream of a one world state is fantasy. Islamophobes will work like hell to kill this dream until Islam becomes a force for peace. SALAAM.
Click my name and read my piece Apollo vs Fareed Zakaria On Imam Rauf’s Sufism
You forced me to look up “progressive poker”, but they didn’t have a discussion of its pot odds.
“stay Islamophobiaphobic, my friends” not a problem. Call me xenophobic, ignorant or whatever it will not be effective in changing my behavior, beliefs with regard to Muslim practitioner of Islam. Until the Muslim stands up to the thugs of Islam, cleans up their own Muslim country’s I will ever be vigilant to raise my voice to protest their desire to pollute my country.
Roger,
I have been reading your posts going back to your old Roger Simon blog.
I appreciate your concise and accurate descriptions such as this one.
The more I learn about Islam, the more I recognize the oppressive threat Islam represents. It is a very rational fear – a fear I doubt the progressives understand because most have not taken the time to actually understand what Islam is.
Keep writing!
As with most other phobias, there is very little fear involved.
Everything I need to know about Islam, I learned on 9/11 – and it was reinforced at Ft Hood.
Another word that’s gotten entirely misunderstood is “hate”. Does anybody know offhand the definition of that word? Quick, look away for 30 seconds, come up with the definition, then look back.
“(transitive verb)
1. 1. To feel hostility or animosity toward.
2. To detest.
2. To feel dislike or distaste for: hates washing dishes.”
That’s it. Any other definition, any additions to that, are just agenda-promoting weaselness.
And I hate that.
I’m not afraid of mosques, or of ants. I just don’t want them in my kitchen.
I stronly agree with Roger Simon ,Gepetto,and Jack Vele. The Islamization of America is a great danger and can not be underestimated. I have read Geert Wilders article about Islam in Europe . He is a member of the Dutch Parliament.Beeing European myself I have experienced muslims in German and French cities. They do not come her to accept our laws but to infiltrate our society.Islam is in essence a political ideology .They do not believe in separation of church and government .How can we apply American Constitutional Rights to Sharia law when it exactly denies those to their moslem members. In England sharia courts are already officially part of the British legal systems. The war against Isreal is a war against the west and the infidels.The end of Israel would not mean that Muslims now accept our values but would start a World Domination .In recent month a mosque in Germany ,Hamburg, was forcefully closed by the German Government, because it was a meeting place for Islamic radicals .Their “cultural” association that ran it was banned as well. I am wondering where all the american ” Muslim Converts” happen, who later try to bomb us , if not in a local mosque. Unfortunately for america the Aclu and the current Administration would probably ban an investigation in the basement of such a local mosque here.( See the suit of Arizona law ) I live in america now since 14 years and hope that this country can learn from what happens in Europe. Israel needs to be supported and Iran needs to be seen for what it really is .Sometimes political correctnes is nothing more but cowardness and the unability to see things for what they are. If I hear Ahmedina-jihad speak I do not analyze or question it, but realize the goals he has. Our current administration is too weak to have a stand and will force us in a military strike through the next administration, just as it happened with Osama Bin Laden .