Muslim agitation and Western accommodation

Behead those who insult IslamMy cousin, the former prison chaplain, has some more interesting words about Islam:

Muslim agitators have us (meaning liberal democracies) over a barrel. We sincerely think that our proclamations of toleration, multi culturalism, free dialogue, and mutual understanding will bring cooperation and mutual respect.

Muslims have repeatedly told us: We will make your democracy work for our aims and against you. Now it is impossible for a liberal democratic society to conceive that its values are actually offensive to anyone.

Well, this Islam is a warrior creed. It has no ethics, only tactics. It is not a faith, a personal relationship to a deity. It is one word: submission. The whole goal of Islam is not some Buddhist enlightenment, or Christian redemption of sinners, or Jewish observance of the Law. Islam is interested in control by a ruthless elite who holds its opponents (especially other more tolerant Muslims, Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, etc.) in total contempt worthy of persecution, extortionary taxes, degrading dhimini status, and execution.

Within a democracy, a Muslim agitator has simply to be “offended” or “insulted” at the Infidel, and the whole democracy caves in. Well, there is psychology axiom: You are only insulted to the degree that you allow yourself to be insulted.”

In other words, if the core doctrine is war, with no comprehension of peace, the party advocating peace, with no comprehension of war, loses.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Kevin_B

    Your ex-prison chaplain cousin has very good insights into the nature of Islam, Bookworm. I completely agree with these insights and they are very important.
     
     
    I’m afraid any comment I could make here would merely be a repeat of previous criticism of and comments on Islam by many people in many places and through many different media. And while these criticism and comments are all very good, very necessary and very important, and repeating wouldn’t be harmful, I’d still like to add something. Probably someone has done this before, but I would to address, in brief, a piece of information that is often mentioned when writing or talking about Islam and it’s principles, and that is present in many writings about Islam. This piece of information regards something that is often represented as the foundation and core of Islam. I, however, find this to be dishonest and dangerous misinformation.
     
     
    I am talking here about the so-called “Five pillars of Islam”. I presume most readers at Bookworm are familiar enough with Islam to have heard about this, but just in case, here are the “Five pillars of Islam” that are often mentioned and represented as the core of Islamic religion and Muslim life.
     
    – Shahada – Islamic creed, “asjhadoe ʾan lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh(oe), wa asjhadoe anna moeḥammadan rasōēloe-llāh” in Arabic, English translation “I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”
    – Salat: ritual prayer five times per day
    – Zakat: giving to the poor and needy
    – Sawn: fasting and self-control during the month of Ramadan
    – Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca, at least once in a lifetime for every able Muslim
     
    Now, if there were to a belief system based upon a creed, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage, that wouldn’t really be problematic, I think, and it could be seen as just another belief system amongst the many that exist in the world. Creeds, prayer, charity, fasting and pilgrimage certainly are not inherently bad things and may be very good and worthy. However, the specific Islamic concepts and formulations of these concepts have very many bad elements and can be rightfully met with many scathing criticisms. I will not expand on this for now, though (although I possibly could and maybe should at an another time and place). Not only have these concepts been messed up in Islamic theology and tradition, I do not believe that the previous list is anywhere near an accurrate representation of the core of Islam. Yes, these concepts are part of the lives of Muslims (and can be a very controlling in those lives), but I believe they are merely means to the final and true ends of Islam, as well as tools for orthodoxy, orthopraxis, conformity and enforcement. I propose that the true ‘five pillars’ and ends of Islam are the following:
    – Submission and slavery
    – Hatred and intolerance
    – Misanthropy and misogyny
    – War and violence
    – Fear and terror
     
     
    I also propose that, these true five pillars being the true core and end of Islam, Islam negates itself as a religion, but rather reveals it’s true nature, which is that of a savage warrior creed and a cruel criminal organization seeking unlimited power, anywhere and everywhere. Islam cannot exist without it’s savage teachings and cruel tactics. Islam’s true nature is one of terror and war. I propose that Islam should not be regarded as a legitimate religious movement or a legitimate form of religious expression a person can choose, but as a cruel criminal organization and a virulent savage sect with an incredible potential for the gravest and most savage forms of harm. As such, it cannot and should not be contained within in our western freedom laws, and we ought to act against it.

  • http://bookwormroom.com Bookworm

    The five pillars are an instruction manual.  The five pillars you propose, Kevin_B, seem to be the underlying doctrinal reality.

    You’ve honed in onto something important, which is that other religions are, in one way or another, concerned with optimizing an individual’s well-being in this life or the last.  It’s almost a pleasant byproduct that these same concerns — justice, grace, enlightenment — if truly put into effect, lead to successfully-functioning societies.  Islam, however, has always been fundamentally about a medieval, misogynistic, misanthropic, homophobic, paranoid form of governance at home and about war abroad, with God’s name thrown in to justify the governing body’s demands.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    And how is Islamic Jihad different from the Left again?

  • Charles Martel

    I agree that Islam is a vile death cult, and that its ablest practitioners are evil men. (Women have no say in Islam.) One of the greatest problems it confronts us with is that fact that most Muslims are captives to the religion, much in the same way that blacks in the inner cities are captive to the Democratic machine.
     
    While they cannot conceive of any other political arrangement than the demeaning, manipulative one they have now, and they resent the dire circumstances of their lives, they cannot make the connection between the system and their own misery.
     
    So their natural resentment has to be displaced—onto white men, capitalism, education, the work ethic (the Jews, Christianity, the West, wanton women)—onto anything that makes them and the system they support look like failures.
     
    Because we understand human nature, and the fact that people will acquiesce to evil systems because violent men around them stand ready to punish or kill them for dissent, we have to provide a way and place out of the ghetto of Islam that offers escapees some level of safety and rationality. I used to think that that place was America, but I see too many people here cowering before Islam, the same way people cower before the Mob or PC.
     
    Kevin_B’s insight is a good one. It belongs to the calling a spade a spade school of thought. Would that people start loudly proclaiming that kowtowing to the grand criminal enterprise of Islam has to stop. 

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Islam is a strength based society. If a gang doesn’t get “respect” in Oakland, they start shooting people up, because the alternative is to look cowed and then everyone will be on them. If an Islamo doesn’t get “respect”, he starts killing kids, cutting the heads off infidels, and feels no guilt about it.
     
    Yet normal people can’t kill on a dime. They need to be prepared, conditioned for it. They need justifications for it on a personal level. They need a legitimate authority they trust in to obey orders to kill, if there are orders for such. That looks very much like weakness to the direct tribal societies of Islam and gangs.
     
    Until Americans are able to do things for themselves, by themselves, with no reference on Authority, much of America’s strength is diluted through the Left’s bureaucracy and the thought police.

  • Charles Martel

    The problem of Islam is one that we will have to deal with sooner or later. Right now, I think Islam is unassailable, given the academy and the media’s portrayal of it as a colored race and peaceful victim group that is sorely vexed by a teeny tiny minority of nutters (ISIS, Al Queda) who claim to work on its behalf.

    For me the question is when do we wake up? I don’t think it will all that soon, even in the aftermath of another dramatic Muslim attack on U.S. soil—an attack I think will happen before Obama leaves office. He lacks the balls or the willingness to deal with Islam, so he will address such an attack with his usual ill-conceived, half-hearted air attacks or Navy SEAL raids, all the while rushing to assure the peace-loving Muslims in our midst that he will protect them from harm.

    Since Obama generally means the opposite of what he says, he will hope for an over-reaction from disgusted Americans who may decide to start calling loudly for Muslims to account for their savage religion—all the more grist for an excuse to clamp down on dissent. You can be sure that the media and professoriate will clap in loud support.

    But let’s say that we’re somehow able to wrest governance of the country back from the current regime of anti-Semites. What can we then do to push back hard against Islam, especially here at home? Do we make an exception to the First Amendment and outlaw it? How do we get to that point? And if we succeed, have we created a slippery slope down which the left in a future situation would happily slide in order to assault its greatest enemy, the Catholic Church?

    Perhaps the intermediate tactic is to destroy Muslim military capability abroad in Iran (and Turkey if necessary), and close our borders to any immigrants from Muslim countries. We are under no moral or legal obligation to open our doors to groups that have established themselves as incubators of terrorism and hatred of women and queers. Internally, come down hard on Muslim honor killings and wife beatings, and absolutely forbid and punish even the hint of sharia law in any U.S. community.

    The first step in all of this is to start calling a spade a spade with the public. Quote the Qu’ran’s suras that call for the beheading of non-Muslims and the denigration of women. Point out Mohammed’s blood thirst and Jew hatred, his foppish love of perfume, and his deflowering of a nine-year-old girl who was first betrothed to him when she turned six. Acquaint people with the teaching that Mohammed was the “perfect man” that Muslims are encouraged to imitate. Introduce the Muslim concepts of taqiyya and abrogation to the public, those convenient devices for getting around the claim that the Qu’ran is the infallible word of Allah. Show how calls for Islam to moderate itself are doomed to failure since its own holy book forbids change and considers attempts to create it as executable offenses.