Posted on 05/28/2005 5:15:54 PM PDT by CHARLITE
What to do
I conclude from all of the above that we cannot rely on "moderate" Muslims to oppose jihadism. If the job is to be done, we have to do it. On the domestic front (as I have outlined previously at FrontPage), this means ceasing all mass immigration of Muslims, deporting all Muslim illegal aliens, deporting all Muslims associated with Islamic radicalism, and renouncing the leftist ideology of multiculturalism, which has led Muslims and other non-European immigrants to feel they have the right to remake America in their own image.
The totality of these steps would result in a steady net out-migration of Muslims from the United States, much of it voluntary, and thus a steady lessening of their power here, instead of the steady increase of their power that we are now enduring.
As I have mentioned here as well as in a previous article, one of the paradigms of Islamic conduct is Muhammed's earlier life in Mecca, where his message was rejected and he was helpless. When Muslims because of adverse external conditions are unable to wage jihad, they calmly accept the situation because it fits the pattern of Muhammed's own life; indeed, their laws explicitly accommodate them to that exigency.
It is no shame for a Muslim to accept defeat, because he views it as temporary, and so he waits patiently for future jihadist opportunities to arise. The wait can be very long—centuries, in fact. And that should be just fine with us.
Thus Islam itself has provided us with a satisfactory solution to the Islamic threat, which is to restore the Muslims to the relatively powerless condition of Muhammed prior to the hejira.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
"I admire your writings very much. I have rarely seen anyone write with such eloquence and candour about Islam. At least there are a few honorable men who are willing to speak the truth.
The fact is though, if Americans (and Europeans) wake up in time, they can put an end to this madness and stop further ingress. And as you correctly note, this is a reversible process. Look at Denmark. Its a classic example of what can be done if the political will is mustered within time.
Such candor as shown in your numerous superb articles on Islam would be impossible in India. The problem in India is that there is a physical menace in the form of a population of 150 million Muslims. An article such as the one you wrote would cause a riot or two. No major newspaper or website (associated with the so-called "Mainstream" or "respectable press") would dare print it for fear of their offices being bombed or being stoned to death.
But I guess French, Belgian and Italian "hate speech" laws already accomplish the death of free speech by the tyranny of law enforcement without even a single riot from Muslims. I don't know where I'd rank that in the history of collective insanity but it would have to be right up there with the best of them."
Lawrence Auster's website is at:
I highly recommend it. Auster says that it is "The passing scene and what it's about, viewed from the traditionalist politically incorrect Right."
For your interest.
LIBERALS like muslims only tolerate free speech when it suits them.. they are despicable!
I have read and copied every item that Auster writes over at Frontpage Magazine.com---whenever I post a comment about my fears of what al-queda and other islamofascists groups have accomplished, here in the USA, that we don't know about yet,,,
it is because Mr. Auster has spelled out how they plan on insidiously incorporating themselves into every aspect of American life, and taking over from within, using our "freedom" and "bill of rights" against us....then taking them all away and insert sha'ria law!
"The point is, we don't care what the Muslims do in their countries, just as long as they don't do anything that endangers us."
******
many people worldwide have not awakened to the reality that islam spares no one.
either you convert, or you die.
you may express your opinions as long as these are in conformity with islam.
Thanks for the ping.
Ok, this is the end of my conspiracy theory mode :)
cheers mates !!
Char - as ecver, good haul
lm - ping
Thnaks. Spot on target.
Thanks for posting.
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=120148&D=2005-05-27&HC=1#0000
#39 This entry at my website talks about an article, "The Key to Jihadist Ideology and Strategy", by Lawrence Auster. It is EXTREMEMLY enlightening when trying to untangle the Chameleon of Islam.
To summarize: The Entire life of mohammed (PTUI) is seen, not as a single template for behavior, but a set of templates, where any specific template is chosen based on the circumstances. Where Islam is weak, the early part of Mohammed's (PTUI) life is used. Where Islam is stronger, but still fighting the Infidel, the middle part of his life is followed. Where Islam has conquered, then the latter part of his life is emulated.
It's a big con game: they can point to one PART of Mohammed's life and protest that THAT is Islam, while hoping you don't notice that they are following a DIFFERENT part of Mohammed's life as they speak.
The Con works because Judaism and Christianity usually have only ONE template to apply (The Torah for the former, and Christ's life for the latter). The Torah is a fixed and finite document, and the record of Jesus' life, despite being written from different views and thus differing from each other in details, is so consistently peaceful and non-violent in itself that in "Carnage and Culture", Hanson himself blames Christianity, not for creating a huge invincible war machine, but the prime source for DISMANTLING it, and the prime advocate for not creating one.
It is a mistake to think that Islam takes the Koran as the sole source of teaching and authority: it is the SUPREME source, but there are a number of secondary historical works containing commentary that is followed as faithfully and passionately as the Koran. In this sense, it is like the PreReformation catholic church, which pushed "the writings of the fathers," and Tradition as authoritative sources for interpreting the Bible.
Don't be fooled by the "peaceful" Muslim: He'll not only switch templates on you the moment the situation changes, but will justify the switch as being fully Islamic.
And he'd be right, because MOHAMMED (PTUI), did EXACTLY what he had just done.
Posted by Ptah 2005-05-27 18:56|| Front Page|| Comment Top
Yes, a 'proper' Islamonazi refutes any argument with either a car bombing or a body-strapped bomb. Hard to argue with them over tea.
The Key to Jihadist Ideology and Strategy
By Lawrence Auster
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 16, 2004
When trying to explain the Islamists' global campaign of mass murder, both liberals and conservatives, despite their fierce mutual disagreements, make the same underlying mistake. People on the anti-war left believe that Al Qaeda attacked us because we're imperialist, or because we're racist, or because we don't do enough for Third-World hunger (yes, there are people who actually believe the hunger argument; most of them are Episcopalians). By contrast, many people on the pro-war right, especially President Bush, believe that the Islamists hate us for our freedoms, opportunities, and overall success as a society. In other words, the left believes that the Islamists hate us for our sins, and the right believes that they hate us for our virtues. Both sides commit the same narcissistic fallacy of thinking that the Islamist holy war against the West revolves solely around ourselves, around the moral drama of our goodness or our wickedness, rather than having something to do with Islam itself.
A very different perspective on the Islamist challenge comes from Mary Habeck, a military historian at Yale University. Speaking at the Heritage Foundation on August 13, Habeck said that the various jihadist groups base their war against non-Moslems on the Islamic sacred writings, particularly the Sira, which, unlike the Koran, tells the Prophet’s life in chronological sequence. Using Muhammed as their model, the jihadis live and think and act within paradigms provided by the stages of Muhammed’s political and military career. According to Habeck, this internally driven logic of Islam, and not any particular provocation, real or imagined, by some outside power, is the key to understanding why the jihadis do what they do.
The first stage or paradigm is Muhammed’s early life in Mecca, a non-Islamic society where no Islamic way of life is possible, and where Moslems are powerless and oppressed. The second paradigm is the hejira, the escape from Mecca to Medina, a new place that is more pure and where a true Islamic society and state can be founded. After this Islamic state is formed, the third paradigm kicks in. This is jihad, organized violence against non-Moslems for the purpose of building up the wealth and power of the Islamic community and bringing the world under a single Islamic state. Jihadists conceive and rationalize their own activities in terms of these paradigms. Thus when Osama bin Laden left Saudi Arabia for Sudan, and when he later left Sudan for Afghanistan, he saw those journeys as corresponding with the hejira, leaving a corrupt land, where he was powerless, for a more pure Islamic place from which jihad could be waged......
----SNIP--- read more at: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14660
It seems that the groups like the ACLU that are defending them, as well as the groups that enable them to do what they want, when they want---regardless of the rules of the community that they live in....are making in more and more likely that we have incidents like we have seen in Israel and the Chechen school incident...
and all of the while, the local, county, state, national political scene will be used as platforms as well---and I highly doubt they will be registered Republicans!!!
BTW, the Sami Al-Arian incident in Southern Florida is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the univesities and colleges in America....that is probably where I would start if I was made Queen for a Day---
cleaning out the tenured and otherwise, staffs of these schools---especially tax-payer funded schools---also, don't forget all of the madrassas they are opening up all over America....
This is a critical point, and it illustrates why the midterm elections AND the 2008 general elections are going to be so important. Can you imagine a "President Hillary Clinton" at any time whatsoever, but especially right now, when our country is in the gravest danger EVER, of being literally ceded to the United Nations, many of whom are Islamic dictatorships?!
Char
I have even seen liberal media people laugh at the right for getting upset at Justices Ginsberg, Kennedy, and O'Connor, (I think), for even reading foreign law, let alone applying it to us....
What in the heck do they think the constitution is for? and if they don't find the answer to a particular case in the Constitution, well, then perhaps the solution lies with the congress or a constitutional amendment...but NOT by what foreigners would do or not do, and certainly, like in Roe v. Wade, make it up as they go along....
Yes, the ACLU. The first thing to die if the IFs took over would be to the ACLU. And the morons would probably 'defend their right to chop our heads off'.
Actually most of the weasels would 'convert' before they would die.
Collective Bush hating by the Left has blinded them to the dangers of Islam. They don't want to bed the Muslim extremists, and they don't see their actions as resulting in that - but it is exactly what is happening.
They see Bush as being extreme, as being a fundamentalist, as being someone, and leading a movement, that is intolerant, bigoted, and closed-minded (it isn't the case, but that is how they see it).
His policies are against X,Y,Z of the leftist policies. So they make a battle line and say: "oh, if Bush says 'A', I must say 'not A', otherwise I am agreeing with Bush the neocons." The result is they are supporting a culture that is the actual antithesis of their views.
Despite dividing into camps of Left and Right in the civilized world, both sides are largely working off of the same world-view (ya, I think our differences with liberals are reconcilable). But Islam is barbarism; no room for discussion, no room for civility, no room for anything productive. And the lefties are inviting them here. They are extending a hand to terrorists who would dance in the streets if a handful of us died.
Rights of women, rights of gays (forget marriage - an open homosexual would be killed on the spot in Islamocrazy land), freedom of press, religion, expression - gone. They complain that women cannot be priests in most Christian faiths - and not a word about Islamic restrictions on basically everything for women.
Why am I ranting all of this here? Just venting. My family and most friends are pretty left. But instead of truly following their philosophy (which, for Islamonazi terrorism, liberals AND conservatives should be on the same page), they are following an anti-Bush, anti-American script shaped by collective delusion.
We are not going to change hearts, or strengthen a "moderate" Muslim core, by adopting Sharia law, letting evil regimes operate in the middle east, or by accommodating atrocities perpetuated in the name of Allah (ie. asking the UN to simply wag a limp finger when the Mullahs are bad). We should not change for them, and we should not permit terrorism and violent extremism in the name of "diversity". I am sure the left can be convinced of this. Most of the rest is fairly small potatoes in the grand scheme of things.
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.