Posted on 12/08/2024 5:44:57 AM PST by MtnClimber
The global rise of antisemitism, particularly in Canada, is fueled by the expanding influence of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation’s (OIC) Sharia-driven agenda, which seeks to suppress dissent, restrict freedom of expression, and ultimately advance the Islamization of Western societies.
As Islamophobia Awareness Month recently concluded, the world has witnessed an unprecedented surge in antisemitic aggression, unmatched since the October 7 massacre in Israel. November began with a coordinated wave of antisemitic Islamic violence sweeping Europe eerily reminiscent of Kristallnacht, the Nazi pogrom of 86 years ago.
This destructive pattern is mirrored in Canada, with Jewish schools and synagogues struck by gunfire and firebombs, Jewish-owned businesses subjected to arson and vandalism, and visibly Jewish individuals targeted in streets, malls, and outside synagogues. Nowhere is this hatred more pronounced in Canada than in Montreal, where antisemitism has reached unprecedented levels, earning it the title “Jihadi Capital of Canada.”
Tens of thousands of immigrants from Muslim-majority countries worldwide settled in Montreal since the Arab Spring and the Syrian Civil War in 2011. Many bring with them deeply ingrained antisemitic ideology and a Koranic mandate to spread Islam and wage jihad, beliefs that fundamentally conflict with Western values.
Recent events in Montreal underscore this crisis, where each weekend pro-Hamas mobs, bolstered by the woke ultra-left, organize increasingly aggressive protests expressing fierce animosity towards Jews. Canadian mainstream media outlets, as well as Montreal’s mayor and police chief, avoid explicitly addressing antisemitism or acknowledging connections to Hamas. The refusal to acknowledge the Islamist elements in these antisemitic demonstrations, fuels hatred and emboldens perpetrators to commit increasingly violent acts.
This reluctance stems from fear of being criminalized for Islamophobia, a result of coordinated efforts by the OIC and its countless affiliates. The OIC, representing 57 Muslim-majority states, wields significant influence in international politics, shaping narratives
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
We fail to realize that we are in a worldwide war with islam.
.
Agree totally. The inverse is also true. Islam is -- and has been -- at war with the Judeo-Christian West, as with Hinduism and Buddhism, and even its own schismatic groups.
It rankled much when GWB pushed the LIE of 'Islam means peace." In Biden's lies while campaigning, he said much the same.
Islam means submission, and jihad means struggle in the same way Hitler meant it.... Time for the world to awaken to this.
p
People forget Islam commands followers to invade, not migrate, to countries all over the world and not assimilate but conquer and form a worldwide Caliphate under Sharia Law. For example:
“Hamas Leaders: Our Goal Is Establishment Of Global Islamic Caliphate, Not Just Liberation Of Palestine”
Islam was a war against the whole world from day one.
WE WERE WARNED. NO ONE LUSTENED.
What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an
William Federer talked about his book, What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an: A History of Islam and the United States. He used slides as he talked about the political and military aspects of the life of Muhammad and how they inform Islam. He also responded to questions from students in the audience at the 20th annual Eagle Forum Collegians Leadership Summit from the Allison Auditorium of the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?314071-10/what-american-quran&buy#
Sharia is a weapon against everyone especially Infidels. Sharia has one goal; to rule the World no matter how many people muslims have to kill.
Basically, he said we didn't want to go on a crusade in the Middle East.
With respect for your opinion, President Bush said what he said. Here is the reference for you:
"Islam is Peace" Says President Remarks by the President at Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., 17 September 2001.His speech, in toto, is recommended for your reading.
I do not see anything wrong with his remarks. His goal was to topple the Taliban and their Al-Qaeda backers in Afghanistan. And he did just that. He wasn’t going to galvanize the Islamic population in the Middle East to go on a jihad to fight the infidels in Afghanistan. That would have been bad strategy in 2001.
Bush in his address: "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."
Mohammad in Bukhari Hadith 2977: "I have been made victorious with terror."
Compare and contrast.
You could frame the argument that you didn't appreciate him for being "PC". But sometimes that's the requirement of the job. It's possible that Trump would have said the same thing if he was the President on 9/11. Because his goal would have been to go in Afghanistan, take out the Taliban/Al-Qaeda. Then go home.
I "propose" nothing, and "frame" nothing. I stated GWB was wrong when he said "Islam is peace." It remains a verbatim quote, and on the White House web site to this day.
Why disagree or make more complex this discussion?
Let's be plain. "Islam is peace" or it isn't. I state the latter. You say.....
I think it helps to understand the political climate at the time. Shortly after 9/11, America wanted revenge. So that's why Dubya made that "Islam is peace" speech.
So was he correct in his statement, or incorrect? Or is the answer, "it depends?"
My view (as a Bush voter in that time) remains. He was and is incorrect.
“Islam is a religion of peace” was diplomatic cant that we weren’t at war with the religion. It was a public statement aimed at Islamic countries where the battle would have to be fought. It was not for domestic but for foreign ears. Reality and diplomatic language don’t necessarily intersect. People here for personal political reasons have deliberately misinterpreted it. They use that misinterpretation to drown out the statement’s real intent. In hindsight poor choice of words by Jr or his speech writers though I doubt if they thought segments of conservative domestic politics would interpret it that way. Again, in hindsight it would have been better to have said nothing.
The above should not be interpreted as blanket approval of Bush Jr nor approval as to how WOT was and is conducted. It’s simply an acknowledgement of the intent of the statement.
And yes, I know Islam has been more or less at war with the West for some 1600 years. It was dying a well-deserved death until a certain 1970s era President coupled with Western weakness made stupid decisions and breathed new life into it. (And Western weakness continues to weaken every year exponentially!)
"...more or less at war" and "weren't at war" are your words.
That's a tad too doublespeak for me. But you are entitled to your opinion, as am I to mine.
I’ve been around diplomats I know how they communicate. They make lawyers look direct!
‘At war’ and simultaneously ‘not at war’ - You must have missed the Cold War (or every other long term historical\ideological conflict between great powers!) if you don’t understand that!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.