See ’round and about:
“Muslim immigrants should not be judged based on the actions of others who say they share their faith.”
Sure, I can buy that. They should only be held accountable for what they say and do. but since they SAY they adhere to the hate cult founded by The Butcher of Medina whom they SAY was perfect in every way (basic, universal assertion of Islam) and whose proclamations they SAY must be adhered to, then they support, either overtly or covertly, the directives from Mohamed to subjugate, enslave, or slay the “unbelievers.”
Either they adhere to that, or they are fundamentally dishonest at their core when they say they are Muslim, which means, since they lie about that they are not to be trusted in any way about anything else they say.
“Moderate” or “peaceful” Muslims are either practicing taqiyyah (“holy deception” of unbelievers) or are apostates from the religion they profess. Irrefutable fact, based entirely on the founding teachings/documents of Islam, which ALL Muslims claim are to be followed as the perfect revelation of their “god”.
Open, forthright disciples of Mohamed are at least more honest about the lies they follow. The open, faithful followers who actually do what Mohamed says Muslims MUST do to BE Muslim (that is, submitted to the commands issued by Mohamed in the name of his “god”) are acting out Mohamed’s lies. The rest are just liars, whether practicing taqiyyah or lying about being Muslim.
So, whether overtly “peaceful” or not, I refuse to trust anyone who says they are Muslim. Ever.
A brief rant: I’ve already seen on FarceBook a number of moral equivalency arguments made for the faithful follower of Islam who committed the Orlando shootings. One particularly egregious lie paints Christianity and Islam as equivalent: “equally bad” (as well as “equally good”–essentially, no differences) in what they teach. Really? _Obedient_ Muslims (“muslim” means submitted–short form: to the word of “Allah” as revealed by Mohamed) can, within the constraints of normative Islam, as defined by the words of Mohamed, legitimately emulate Mohamed and follow his clear teachings in committing acts of mass murder, rape, pillage, torture, slavery of unbelievers, etc. Being a true “moderate Muslim” (not committed to doing such things or supporting those who do) means disobeying Mohamed’s commands and disrespecting his life example.
OTOH, those who claim to be Christians and engage in acts that emulate the life of Mohamed (mass murder of unbelievers, etc.), NOT Christ, must do so in direct contradiction of the teachings and life of the founder of Christianity. Obeying Christ’s teachings about the treatment of others–unbelievers included–requires acting in a way that is completely antithetical to Mohamed’s teachings.
Christianity and Islam are in no way, shape, fashion, or form equivalent. Anyone who claims differently is either ignorant or a liar. Since the truth of the issue is quite easy to come by, anyone who is ignorant of it is either dishonestly avoiding the truth or butt lazy. Or both.
Well, we certainly shouldn’t point our fingers at Islam, Religion of Peace™. Although one might blame The Butcher of Medina (Mohamed) and his faithful followers for hijacking Islam. Before him, it was perfectly peaceful. . . Muslims should gang up on the guy and drum him and his heretical teachings out of Islam.
Oh, wait. What’s that you say? Islam is those who faithfully follow the teachings of its founder, Mohamed, the Butcher of Medina? Oh, well, then ignore what I said earlier.
It seems that Euro-weenies may finally be tumbling to a fact that Charles Martel or Jan II Sobieski would have taught them, had they bothered to do their homework, learn the lessons of history, and stop listening to the “philosophy of consolation for western civilization as it commits suicide.”
Yeh, it’s war, and as long as the rest of the world blindly and foolishly heeds the lies about Islam’s peacefulness, Islam will continue its march through our societies virtually unopposed.
As Santayana’s Axiom states, “Those who do not know history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them.”
It’s past time we begin to learn from the mistakes of history.
“Police Baffled After Some Guy Named Mohamed Goes On Machete Rampage. . . “
Of course it has nothing to do with a hate cult founded by The Butcher of Medina. . .
Especially someone who’s supposedly “educated.” (Ah, but it was a British “education,” possibly the only system that can beat an Ivy League “education” for for sheer empty-headed, contrafactual numb-skullery when it comes to Islam.) Read this in the prologue of a novel:
“Years later, working in an uneasy alliance with the House of Saud, the Wahhabists returned to Mecca, shattering years of history and destroying the remains of the core of debate, of intellect, that had lit the fuse of Islam. Since then, Islamic thought has declined into madness, falling ever further into an abyss that can only result in destruction.”
Oh, utter, complete and absolute bullshit. Islam has always been just as it was started by that mass-murdering, slaving, thieving, raping, illiterate bullshit artist, The Butcher of Medina. At least 20-25% of the Koran is utter nonsense, gibberish, and 75% — the 75% or so that abrogates the Koran’s so-called “peaceful verses — or so is raging hate, instructing faithful Muslims to oppress or kill “unbelievers.” I throw the bullshit flag on this entire premise. Any so-called “core of debate, of intellect” existed either as weak rationalization for practices that denied Mohamed’s teachings or as making nearly useless gobbledegook of the genuine intellectual advances made by people savage Muslims had conquered.
The moral is “Pay no attention to the Taqiyya spread by Muslims and their co-conspirators, enablers and fellow travellers.” Islam is and always has been nothing but a brutal hate cult, with an occasional, very phony, veneer of civilized behavior. Scratch a Muslim and get a Mohamed analog: brutal, nasty, hateful and utterly savage.
Crane Collapse in Mecca
The tragic thing is that workers were killed, and the population of genuine workers in Saudi Arabia is comprised largely of foreigners, many of whom are, de facto, slaves. (Imports from poverty-stricken third world countries who have had their papers seized and are stranded and forced to work or just. . . die).
The deaths of any such would truly be a tragedy.
Were any “non-slave” foreign workers killed, that too would be a tragedy.
Were any faithful Muslims killed, that would be. . . a mixed bag. Yes, tragedy that such might have died before repenting of their devotion to a Satanic hate cult and embracing the free gift of salvation in Christ. But still. . . devotees of a Satanic hate cult going to their just reward. . . OK, so I’m ambivalent.
Irony? Not only did this event happen on the anniversary of 9-11-2001 but the crane and the company using it are owned by Osama bin Laden’s father.
So, yes, tragedy and irony.
But. A part of me does wish this had happened during the culminating celebrations of the hajj, when the only ones injured would have been the most faithful devotees of The Butcher of Medina’s Satanic hate cult.
The proper response to any Muslims willing to die to defend the *cough* “honor” *cough* of their favorite mass murderer, rapist, pedophile, slaver and brigand, Mohamed, the Butcher of Medina, is to say, “Let me give you a hand with that, Cupcake.”
As Ted Cruz said of The Garland Two,
“Thankfully, one police officer helped those terrorists meet their virgins.”
Now, that’s showing proper respect for the genuinely faithful members of Islam, Mohamed’s hate cult.
. . . finds the occasional acorn. And even a Muslim “cleric” occasionally speaks truth in the presence of “unbelievers”.
“Contrary to popular misconception, Islam does not mean peace but rather means submission to the commands of Allah alone.” — Muslim cleric Anjem Choudary
But, of course, even there, Choudary can’t keep himself from being a wee tad deceptive about some major facts. First, the “Allah” he speaks of claims only two characteristics in common with the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus: omnipotence and omniscience. The character of “Allah” as described by Muslim religious texts is that of a brutal version of the childish, capricious gods of other ancient civilizations–Greece, Babylon, Egypt, etc. Hey! Don’t take my word for it. Read their texts.
The other little twist is that “the commands of Allah” come to the Muslim from the mouth of a murderous, sadistic, brutal thug, Mohamed, the Butcher of Medina (et al). As a result, the “commands of Allah” reflect exactly the mass murderer, rapist, slaver, thief and pedophile that uttered them.
Just keep that in mind when some jackass speaks of Islam as “the religion of peace,” eh?
Better to say, IMO, “The Café au Lait House Is a Terrorist Sleeper Cell,” the way King Putz and his minions seem to do every little thing they can to advance jihad.
Roger L Simon asks the question. . . and he’s not kidding around.
One would think the answer obvious enough to make the question merely a rhetorical device, eh?