Friday, July 9, 2010

Re: Yes, we are at war with Islam. ...So why submit to a foe?

creative destruction - for Judeo-Christianity and oil.

On Jul 8, 3:40 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> do you remember who prompted Bush into war on the ME?
> the same Bush who campaigned on a no-nation building platform?
>
> no, the US is not in a war with the muzzies, but Israel is, and
> they're calling the shots
>
> some don't forget
>
> On Jul 8, 2:49 pm, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.michigandaily.com/content/bush-us-not-war-islam
>
> > On Jul 8, 9:11 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6644/pub_detail.asp
>
> > > July 3, 2010
> > > The Insidious Ground Zero Mosque
>
> > > Edward Cline<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.93/author_detail.asp>
>
> > > I will begin with a comparison between two buildings, because a question of
> > > property rights entered recent debates and disputations about the propriety
> > > of the Ground Zero mosque, the rightness or wrongness of opposing its
> > > construction, and the nature of Islam itself. This mosque, to be called
> > > "Cordoba House," is just a brief walk from Ground Zero in New York City. Its
> > > construction, to replace a private office building damaged on 9/11, has been
> > > approved by a city council. But, first allow me to discuss another building.
>
> > > Years ago Korean Sun Myung
> > > Moon<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,908807-2,00.html>,
> > > leader of the Unification Church, bought a defunct, former first-class hotel
> > > in Manhattan, the New
> > > Yorker<http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50812FD3458167493C1A...>,
> > > and turned it into a center for the propagation of his religion, and also as
> > > a dorm and office space for his local followers. Doubtless many readers
> > > remember the Moonies, converts who had to be "de-programmed" by their
> > > parents of the brainwashing these young adults had experienced in Moon's
> > > "madrassas."
>
> > > There were countless numbers of them all over the country, knocking on doors
> > > and spreading literature about the Unification Church. They were as annoying
> > > as Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, but as immune to reason as any Witness
> > > and Mormon traveling recruiter. And about as dangerous. They were squeaky
> > > clean, nicely dressed and well-behaved. One had the impression they were
> > > manufactured on an assembly line.
>
> > > But, when Moon bought the hotel, no one objected. It was private property. I
> > > am guessing that Moon got tax and zoning exemptions and the like from the
> > > city government because his was a religious organization, just as I am sure
> > > Faisal Abdul Rauf and his cohorts will get them for the Cordoba mosque, as
> > > well.
>
> > > It was inconceivable at the time that the Moonie elders were preaching
> > > anti-Americanism and Moonie jihad in the hotel. No one could imagine that
> > > they encouraged hate and called for conquest and replacing, with violence,
> > > if necessary, the Constitution of the United States with a Moonie Compact of
> > > Love and Peace. No one imagined that bombs and suicide vests were being
> > > assembled in the hotel basement, or that classes were being held on how to
> > > rig a vehicle to explode with the maximum number of casualties. Moonies who
> > > happened to live around town outside of the hotel were not regarded with
> > > suspicion by their neighbors or the authorities. No one contested Moon's
> > > right to turn the property into a center for his creed (which is an amalgam
> > > of pacifist tenets borrowed from other creeds, but especially the Christian).
>
> > > The idea that the Moonies were planning something awful and homicidal and
> > > destructive never occurred to anyone -- because no one had any reason to
> > > doubt the "benign" purposes of the hotel purchase. More often than not, Moon
> > > and his followers were the butt of jokes. (Try making a public joke about
> > > Islam, or Mohammad, or Allah today.) And, nothing happened. No car bombs
> > > exploded in Times Square, no massacres of commuters occurred in Grand
> > > Central Station. No planes were hijacked and flown into the Empire State
> > > Building.
>
> > > The Moonies have faded from memory. The Islamists, however, do not want us
> > > to forget Islam.
>
> > > Islam is not a Moonie religion. Moon's religion did not attempt to
> > > incorporate or integrate a political agenda with its theological agenda.
> > > Islam does. Moon did not declare war on America from South Korea. Islam's
> > > leading lights have, Shiite and Sunni, from all quarters where Islam reigns
> > > supreme. The religious and political elements of Islam are mutually
> > > supportive, complementary, and coextensive. They are based, in the Koran, on
> > > *action* -- by force or fraud or dissimulation -- with the sole object of
> > > conquest and anchoring Islam in the host, and soon-to-be vanquished country.
>
> > > Someone remarked to me: We are not at war with Islam. War is tanks and
> > > machine guns and going over the top. We cannot be at war with an ideology.
>
> > > Yes, we are at war with Islam. Just as we have been at war with Kant and his
> > > philosophical successors, and with John Dewey, and Marxism -- in short, with
> > > every anti-individual, anti-life, anti-rights, anti-mind philosophy. it is a
> > > war of ideas. "War" is not strictly a metaphor for the conflict that is
> > > raging right now under our noses. Islam is a body of ideas totalitarian in
> > > nature, designed to wipe out the individual and inculcate mindless obedience
> > > to irrational and arbitrary dictats spoken by an angel to a barbarian
> > > prophet. From a ghost. The "war" is a battle for men's minds.
>
> > > Reason seeks to enable men's minds. Islam seeks to cripple them. It is as
> > > simple as that.
>
> > > In this culture, it is irrelevant that neither President Bush nor President
> > > Obama (nor their immediate predecessors in the White House) ever declared
> > > "war" against Islam, or against states that sponsor terrorism. If by chance
> > > we declared war on Iran -- with full, but belated justification -- that
> > > would be perceived on the Muslim or Arab Street as a declaration of war on
> > > Islam. Fine, I would answer. Have it your way. You are a tribe of manqués
> > > and we are about to take down one of your kingpins. Send Allah your
> > > Imprecations to slay us. But do not take it out on your moral superiors if
> > > nothing happens.
>
> > > Many believe that opposing the Ground Zero mosque would be a violation of
> > > property rights. But where do property rights enter the picture? They do
> > > not, as least as far as mosque-building Muslims are concerned. Mosques are
> > > centers of indoctrination and propaganda, and of exhortations to wage war
> > > against the infidel -- us. Mosques are venues for spreading and entrenching
> > > Islam. They are field headquarters of conquest, and they have sprung up all
> > > over the country. The piety and good citizenship standing of the flocks of
> > > rank-and-file Muslims are irrelevant. They subscribe to the ideology, do not
> > > question it, and remain silent when their brethren blow up things and kill
> > > people. Their creed commands the silence, but it is still a matter of
> > > choice, of volition, and Muslims as a rule choose to remain silent. No man
> > > of reason should sympathize with them.
>
> > > Some have cited the 14th Amendment as an intrinsic good to be brought to the
> > > defense of the builders of the Ground Zero mosque, forgetting that, first,
> > > that Amendment has been violated countless ways by our own government, and
> > > second, that we are indeed at war with Islam and its advocates. To iterate:
> > > Just as we were at war with Nazism, another body of inimical ideas
> > > (Hitler<http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/>was its
> > > Mohammed, and he sought the help of Muslims to exterminate Jews in
> > > Palestine), we are at war with Islam. Islam respects neither individual
> > > rights, nor property rights, nor capitalism. It is a holistic vehicle for
> > > conquest and subjugation of all who do not subscribe to it. Period.
>
> > > Faisal Rauf may look like a kindly, gentle cleric, but that is the soft,
> > > friendly face of Islam. The Koran permits falsehoods, deception, and lies --
> > > *taqiya* -- in the name of Islam and Allah. The Grand Mufti of
> > > Jerusalemlooked harmless and well-meaning, too. Think again.
>
> > > Rauf, the leading light of the Cordoba mosque, has said publicly that the
> > > Cordoba mosque is intended, among other things, to be a venue for
> > > "interfaith dialogue."
>
> > > However, Walid Shoebat<http://thelastcrusade.org/2010/05/27/ground-zero-mosque-â??our-goal-is-to-establish-shariahâ? />,
> > > former terrorist but now a dedicated anti-Islamist, notes that, as a rule,
> > > public pronouncements by prominent Muslim spokesmen are consciously intended
> > > to say one thing for Western consumption, but these same spokesmen reveal
> > > their thoughts in Arabic. Rauf is a prime example:
>
> > > For that we searched Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf's own words – in the Arabic and
> > > not what he says in English to the western media. It should shock every
> > > American to find out that Faisal Abdul Rauf stated to the popular Islamic
> > > media Hadiyul-Islam on May 26th, 2010 in an article by Sa'da Abdul Maksoud.
>
> > > In it he states that an Islamic state can be established regardless of the
> > > government being a kingdom or democracy. In another article titled *"I do
> > > not believe in religious dialogue"* should alarm the ardent skeptic on the
> > > mindset of the Islamic visionary who advocates establishing Islamic lobbies
> > > throughout the West.
>
> > > The defenders of the mosque forget, or have never grasped as a first-hand
> > > understanding, that as we live in a mixed economy, we are also living in a
> > > culture of mixed epistemologies and metaphysics. The 14th Amendment is only
> > > as powerful as the culture that values and respects it, it is only
>
> ...
>
> read more »

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: British swimmers forced to swim in the dark to protect 'Muslim women's modesty'

Fuck the british
---
and the animals in the ME
and the animals in C&S America
include Afriaca and Asia

we owe them nothing

On Jul 7, 2:11 pm, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fuck the british, and their damned oil companies with them.
>
> On Jul 7, 1:57 pm, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I agree.
>
> > we should only take care of our own laws
> > we're not their keeper
>
> > On Jul 7, 11:02 am, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Their country, their problem.
>
> > > On Jul 7, 10:55 am, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > because the same kinds of laws are headed for the USA
>
> > > > know the enemy
>
> > > > On Jul 7, 10:42 am, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Why do you care what they do in Britain?
>
> > > > > On Jul 6, 10:05 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Would you like to be told that you ave to do your swimming in the dark just
> > > > > > because some muzzie bitches dont want to be seen wearing their bathing
> > > > > > burgas?  I dont give a shit what those fucking muzzie shits want,  if they
> > > > > > are going to live in western sociaty they can confom to our western values
> > > > > > or go back to their camel dung filled holes.
>
> > > > > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:02 PM, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > why do you care?
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 6, 5:21 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >   Muslims are disgusting
>
> > > > > > > > .
>
> > > > > > > >  British swimmers forced to swim in the dark to protect 'Muslim
> > > > > > > > women's modesty'<
> > > > > > >http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/british-swimmers-force...>
>
> > > > > > > > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/british-swimmers-force..
> > > > > > > .>Following
> > > > > > > > complaints from Muslim bagheads, council has sparked anger after
> > > > > > > officials
> > > > > > > > blacked out 250 windows on a glass-panelled swimming pool to protect the
> > > > > > > > modesty of Muslim women.
>
> > > > > > > > *But why would anyone want to look at  Muslim woman in a swimsuit?*
>
> > > > > > > > Darlaston Leisure Centre in the West Midlands' town of Walsall, was
> > > > > > > hailed
> > > > > > > > for its 'ultra-modern' design when it opened ten years ago*. But now
> > > > > > > council
> > > > > > > > staff have covered 250 windows with dark-tinted film following complaints
> > > > > > > > from Muslim swimmers.*
>
> > > > > > > > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/british-swimmers-force..
> > > > > > > .>
>
> > > > > > > > But other users say the move has plunged the pool into almost permanent
> > > > > > > > darkness and branded it 'political correctness gone stark-raving mad'.
>
> > > > > > > > Pauline Poole, 65, a retired legal secretary from Walsall, said: 'I
> > > > > > > returned
> > > > > > > > to swimming after having a cataracts operation some months ago and was
> > > > > > > > looking forward to looking out on some lovely trees while swimming. 'What
> > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > found was a situation that reminded me of how it felt like before my
> > > > > > > > operation, like looking at a horrible cloudy view.
>
> > > > > > > > *'If it was done for a minority of people, then why was there no vote on
> > > > > > > > it?'*
>
> > > > > > > > Retired building surveyor John Ewart, 63, from Walsall, added: '*I cannot
> > > > > > > > believe this council has agreed to something so loony. 'The whole thing
> > > > > > > > smacks of political correctness gone stark raving mad.*
>
> > > > > > > > *<
> > > > > > >http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/british-swimmers-force...>
> > > > > > > > *
>
> > > > > > > > *'A lot of the people who swim are elderly or retired and they now have
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > swim in the gloom.' *'Several customers complained it made the pool dark
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > dingy but we didn't have a choice.'
>
> > > > > > > > The council initially refused to replace the windows with frosted glass
> > > > > > > > because it was too expensive. *Today, the council defended the decision,
> > > > > > > > saying they had 'listened to the concerns of users'.*
>
> > > > > > > > Councillor Anthony Harris said: 'I'm pleased that we've been able to make
> > > > > > > > these modifications because not only does it show we're listening to the
> > > > > > > > views and concerns of our users but also because it enhances the privacy
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > swimmers.' *UK DAILY
> > > > > > >  > MAIL*<
> > > > > > >http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292128/Swimmers-forced-exerc...>
> > > > > > > > H/T
> > > > > > > > herr OYAL
>
> > > > > > > > <http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/07/05/british-swimmers-force..
> > > > > > > .>
>
> > > > > > > > July 5, 2010
>
> > > > > > > >  burquini-vi.png
> > > > > > > > 316KViewDownload
>
> > > > > > > >  article-1292128-0a543429000005dc-211_468x305.jpg
> > > > > > > > 42KViewDownload
>
> > > > > > > >  burqini460_1461189c-vi.jpg
> > > > > > > > 34KViewDownload
>
> > > > > > > >  birkini-vi.gif
> > > > > > > > 49KViewDownload
>
> > > > > > > >  wr-vi2.jpg
> > > > > > > > 22KViewDownload
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > > > > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > > > > > > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > > > > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > > > > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Lest we forget....9/11 video with Enya sound track

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzgs6KfmwnY

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Yes, we are at war with Islam. ...So why submit to a foe?

do you remember who prompted Bush into war on the ME?
the same Bush who campaigned on a no-nation building platform?

no, the US is not in a war with the muzzies, but Israel is, and
they're calling the shots

some don't forget

On Jul 8, 2:49 pm, euwe <machgie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.michigandaily.com/content/bush-us-not-war-islam
>
> On Jul 8, 9:11 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6644/pub_detail.asp
>
> > July 3, 2010
> > The Insidious Ground Zero Mosque
>
> > Edward Cline<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.93/author_detail.asp>
>
> > I will begin with a comparison between two buildings, because a question of
> > property rights entered recent debates and disputations about the propriety
> > of the Ground Zero mosque, the rightness or wrongness of opposing its
> > construction, and the nature of Islam itself. This mosque, to be called
> > "Cordoba House," is just a brief walk from Ground Zero in New York City. Its
> > construction, to replace a private office building damaged on 9/11, has been
> > approved by a city council. But, first allow me to discuss another building.
>
> > Years ago Korean Sun Myung
> > Moon<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,908807-2,00.html>,
> > leader of the Unification Church, bought a defunct, former first-class hotel
> > in Manhattan, the New
> > Yorker<http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50812FD3458167493C1A...>,
> > and turned it into a center for the propagation of his religion, and also as
> > a dorm and office space for his local followers. Doubtless many readers
> > remember the Moonies, converts who had to be "de-programmed" by their
> > parents of the brainwashing these young adults had experienced in Moon's
> > "madrassas."
>
> > There were countless numbers of them all over the country, knocking on doors
> > and spreading literature about the Unification Church. They were as annoying
> > as Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, but as immune to reason as any Witness
> > and Mormon traveling recruiter. And about as dangerous. They were squeaky
> > clean, nicely dressed and well-behaved. One had the impression they were
> > manufactured on an assembly line.
>
> > But, when Moon bought the hotel, no one objected. It was private property. I
> > am guessing that Moon got tax and zoning exemptions and the like from the
> > city government because his was a religious organization, just as I am sure
> > Faisal Abdul Rauf and his cohorts will get them for the Cordoba mosque, as
> > well.
>
> > It was inconceivable at the time that the Moonie elders were preaching
> > anti-Americanism and Moonie jihad in the hotel. No one could imagine that
> > they encouraged hate and called for conquest and replacing, with violence,
> > if necessary, the Constitution of the United States with a Moonie Compact of
> > Love and Peace. No one imagined that bombs and suicide vests were being
> > assembled in the hotel basement, or that classes were being held on how to
> > rig a vehicle to explode with the maximum number of casualties. Moonies who
> > happened to live around town outside of the hotel were not regarded with
> > suspicion by their neighbors or the authorities. No one contested Moon's
> > right to turn the property into a center for his creed (which is an amalgam
> > of pacifist tenets borrowed from other creeds, but especially the Christian).
>
> > The idea that the Moonies were planning something awful and homicidal and
> > destructive never occurred to anyone -- because no one had any reason to
> > doubt the "benign" purposes of the hotel purchase. More often than not, Moon
> > and his followers were the butt of jokes. (Try making a public joke about
> > Islam, or Mohammad, or Allah today.) And, nothing happened. No car bombs
> > exploded in Times Square, no massacres of commuters occurred in Grand
> > Central Station. No planes were hijacked and flown into the Empire State
> > Building.
>
> > The Moonies have faded from memory. The Islamists, however, do not want us
> > to forget Islam.
>
> > Islam is not a Moonie religion. Moon's religion did not attempt to
> > incorporate or integrate a political agenda with its theological agenda.
> > Islam does. Moon did not declare war on America from South Korea. Islam's
> > leading lights have, Shiite and Sunni, from all quarters where Islam reigns
> > supreme. The religious and political elements of Islam are mutually
> > supportive, complementary, and coextensive. They are based, in the Koran, on
> > *action* -- by force or fraud or dissimulation -- with the sole object of
> > conquest and anchoring Islam in the host, and soon-to-be vanquished country.
>
> > Someone remarked to me: We are not at war with Islam. War is tanks and
> > machine guns and going over the top. We cannot be at war with an ideology.
>
> > Yes, we are at war with Islam. Just as we have been at war with Kant and his
> > philosophical successors, and with John Dewey, and Marxism -- in short, with
> > every anti-individual, anti-life, anti-rights, anti-mind philosophy. it is a
> > war of ideas. "War" is not strictly a metaphor for the conflict that is
> > raging right now under our noses. Islam is a body of ideas totalitarian in
> > nature, designed to wipe out the individual and inculcate mindless obedience
> > to irrational and arbitrary dictats spoken by an angel to a barbarian
> > prophet. From a ghost. The "war" is a battle for men's minds.
>
> > Reason seeks to enable men's minds. Islam seeks to cripple them. It is as
> > simple as that.
>
> > In this culture, it is irrelevant that neither President Bush nor President
> > Obama (nor their immediate predecessors in the White House) ever declared
> > "war" against Islam, or against states that sponsor terrorism. If by chance
> > we declared war on Iran -- with full, but belated justification -- that
> > would be perceived on the Muslim or Arab Street as a declaration of war on
> > Islam. Fine, I would answer. Have it your way. You are a tribe of manqués
> > and we are about to take down one of your kingpins. Send Allah your
> > Imprecations to slay us. But do not take it out on your moral superiors if
> > nothing happens.
>
> > Many believe that opposing the Ground Zero mosque would be a violation of
> > property rights. But where do property rights enter the picture? They do
> > not, as least as far as mosque-building Muslims are concerned. Mosques are
> > centers of indoctrination and propaganda, and of exhortations to wage war
> > against the infidel -- us. Mosques are venues for spreading and entrenching
> > Islam. They are field headquarters of conquest, and they have sprung up all
> > over the country. The piety and good citizenship standing of the flocks of
> > rank-and-file Muslims are irrelevant. They subscribe to the ideology, do not
> > question it, and remain silent when their brethren blow up things and kill
> > people. Their creed commands the silence, but it is still a matter of
> > choice, of volition, and Muslims as a rule choose to remain silent. No man
> > of reason should sympathize with them.
>
> > Some have cited the 14th Amendment as an intrinsic good to be brought to the
> > defense of the builders of the Ground Zero mosque, forgetting that, first,
> > that Amendment has been violated countless ways by our own government, and
> > second, that we are indeed at war with Islam and its advocates. To iterate:
> > Just as we were at war with Nazism, another body of inimical ideas
> > (Hitler<http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/>was its
> > Mohammed, and he sought the help of Muslims to exterminate Jews in
> > Palestine), we are at war with Islam. Islam respects neither individual
> > rights, nor property rights, nor capitalism. It is a holistic vehicle for
> > conquest and subjugation of all who do not subscribe to it. Period.
>
> > Faisal Rauf may look like a kindly, gentle cleric, but that is the soft,
> > friendly face of Islam. The Koran permits falsehoods, deception, and lies --
> > *taqiya* -- in the name of Islam and Allah. The Grand Mufti of
> > Jerusalemlooked harmless and well-meaning, too. Think again.
>
> > Rauf, the leading light of the Cordoba mosque, has said publicly that the
> > Cordoba mosque is intended, among other things, to be a venue for
> > "interfaith dialogue."
>
> > However, Walid Shoebat<http://thelastcrusade.org/2010/05/27/ground-zero-mosque-â??our-goal-is-to-establish-shariahâ? />,
> > former terrorist but now a dedicated anti-Islamist, notes that, as a rule,
> > public pronouncements by prominent Muslim spokesmen are consciously intended
> > to say one thing for Western consumption, but these same spokesmen reveal
> > their thoughts in Arabic. Rauf is a prime example:
>
> > For that we searched Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf's own words – in the Arabic and
> > not what he says in English to the western media. It should shock every
> > American to find out that Faisal Abdul Rauf stated to the popular Islamic
> > media Hadiyul-Islam on May 26th, 2010 in an article by Sa'da Abdul Maksoud.
>
> > In it he states that an Islamic state can be established regardless of the
> > government being a kingdom or democracy. In another article titled *"I do
> > not believe in religious dialogue"* should alarm the ardent skeptic on the
> > mindset of the Islamic visionary who advocates establishing Islamic lobbies
> > throughout the West.
>
> > The defenders of the mosque forget, or have never grasped as a first-hand
> > understanding, that as we live in a mixed economy, we are also living in a
> > culture of mixed epistemologies and metaphysics. The 14th Amendment is only
> > as powerful as the culture that values and respects it, it is only as good
> > as the government that upholds it. So, how can one reconcile the "rights" of
> > the exponents of a religion that denies rights, in a deteriorating political
> > culture, in which individual rights are usurped daily everywhere one looks?
>
> > An argument in defense of the Cordoba mosque, based on the 14th Amendment,
> > is dependent on two conditions: that Islam is not an ideology inimical to
> > freedom, bent on conquest and subjugation, and that we are not at war with
> > it; and that our government, through the courts, is moved by an absolute
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Yes, we are at war with Islam. ...So why submit to a foe?

http://www.michigandaily.com/content/bush-us-not-war-islam

On Jul 8, 9:11 am, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6644/pub_detail.asp
>
> July 3, 2010
> The Insidious Ground Zero Mosque
>
> Edward Cline<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.93/author_detail.asp>
>
> I will begin with a comparison between two buildings, because a question of
> property rights entered recent debates and disputations about the propriety
> of the Ground Zero mosque, the rightness or wrongness of opposing its
> construction, and the nature of Islam itself. This mosque, to be called
> "Cordoba House," is just a brief walk from Ground Zero in New York City. Its
> construction, to replace a private office building damaged on 9/11, has been
> approved by a city council. But, first allow me to discuss another building.
>
> Years ago Korean Sun Myung
> Moon<http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,908807-2,00.html>,
> leader of the Unification Church, bought a defunct, former first-class hotel
> in Manhattan, the New
> Yorker<http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50812FD3458167493C1A...>,
> and turned it into a center for the propagation of his religion, and also as
> a dorm and office space for his local followers. Doubtless many readers
> remember the Moonies, converts who had to be "de-programmed" by their
> parents of the brainwashing these young adults had experienced in Moon's
> "madrassas."
>
> There were countless numbers of them all over the country, knocking on doors
> and spreading literature about the Unification Church. They were as annoying
> as Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons, but as immune to reason as any Witness
> and Mormon traveling recruiter. And about as dangerous. They were squeaky
> clean, nicely dressed and well-behaved. One had the impression they were
> manufactured on an assembly line.
>
> But, when Moon bought the hotel, no one objected. It was private property. I
> am guessing that Moon got tax and zoning exemptions and the like from the
> city government because his was a religious organization, just as I am sure
> Faisal Abdul Rauf and his cohorts will get them for the Cordoba mosque, as
> well.
>
> It was inconceivable at the time that the Moonie elders were preaching
> anti-Americanism and Moonie jihad in the hotel. No one could imagine that
> they encouraged hate and called for conquest and replacing, with violence,
> if necessary, the Constitution of the United States with a Moonie Compact of
> Love and Peace. No one imagined that bombs and suicide vests were being
> assembled in the hotel basement, or that classes were being held on how to
> rig a vehicle to explode with the maximum number of casualties. Moonies who
> happened to live around town outside of the hotel were not regarded with
> suspicion by their neighbors or the authorities. No one contested Moon's
> right to turn the property into a center for his creed (which is an amalgam
> of pacifist tenets borrowed from other creeds, but especially the Christian).
>
> The idea that the Moonies were planning something awful and homicidal and
> destructive never occurred to anyone -- because no one had any reason to
> doubt the "benign" purposes of the hotel purchase. More often than not, Moon
> and his followers were the butt of jokes. (Try making a public joke about
> Islam, or Mohammad, or Allah today.) And, nothing happened. No car bombs
> exploded in Times Square, no massacres of commuters occurred in Grand
> Central Station. No planes were hijacked and flown into the Empire State
> Building.
>
> The Moonies have faded from memory. The Islamists, however, do not want us
> to forget Islam.
>
> Islam is not a Moonie religion. Moon's religion did not attempt to
> incorporate or integrate a political agenda with its theological agenda.
> Islam does. Moon did not declare war on America from South Korea. Islam's
> leading lights have, Shiite and Sunni, from all quarters where Islam reigns
> supreme. The religious and political elements of Islam are mutually
> supportive, complementary, and coextensive. They are based, in the Koran, on
> *action* -- by force or fraud or dissimulation -- with the sole object of
> conquest and anchoring Islam in the host, and soon-to-be vanquished country.
>
> Someone remarked to me: We are not at war with Islam. War is tanks and
> machine guns and going over the top. We cannot be at war with an ideology.
>
> Yes, we are at war with Islam. Just as we have been at war with Kant and his
> philosophical successors, and with John Dewey, and Marxism -- in short, with
> every anti-individual, anti-life, anti-rights, anti-mind philosophy. it is a
> war of ideas. "War" is not strictly a metaphor for the conflict that is
> raging right now under our noses. Islam is a body of ideas totalitarian in
> nature, designed to wipe out the individual and inculcate mindless obedience
> to irrational and arbitrary dictats spoken by an angel to a barbarian
> prophet. From a ghost. The "war" is a battle for men's minds.
>
> Reason seeks to enable men's minds. Islam seeks to cripple them. It is as
> simple as that.
>
> In this culture, it is irrelevant that neither President Bush nor President
> Obama (nor their immediate predecessors in the White House) ever declared
> "war" against Islam, or against states that sponsor terrorism. If by chance
> we declared war on Iran -- with full, but belated justification -- that
> would be perceived on the Muslim or Arab Street as a declaration of war on
> Islam. Fine, I would answer. Have it your way. You are a tribe of manqués
> and we are about to take down one of your kingpins. Send Allah your
> Imprecations to slay us. But do not take it out on your moral superiors if
> nothing happens.
>
> Many believe that opposing the Ground Zero mosque would be a violation of
> property rights. But where do property rights enter the picture? They do
> not, as least as far as mosque-building Muslims are concerned. Mosques are
> centers of indoctrination and propaganda, and of exhortations to wage war
> against the infidel -- us. Mosques are venues for spreading and entrenching
> Islam. They are field headquarters of conquest, and they have sprung up all
> over the country. The piety and good citizenship standing of the flocks of
> rank-and-file Muslims are irrelevant. They subscribe to the ideology, do not
> question it, and remain silent when their brethren blow up things and kill
> people. Their creed commands the silence, but it is still a matter of
> choice, of volition, and Muslims as a rule choose to remain silent. No man
> of reason should sympathize with them.
>
> Some have cited the 14th Amendment as an intrinsic good to be brought to the
> defense of the builders of the Ground Zero mosque, forgetting that, first,
> that Amendment has been violated countless ways by our own government, and
> second, that we are indeed at war with Islam and its advocates. To iterate:
> Just as we were at war with Nazism, another body of inimical ideas
> (Hitler<http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/>was its
> Mohammed, and he sought the help of Muslims to exterminate Jews in
> Palestine), we are at war with Islam. Islam respects neither individual
> rights, nor property rights, nor capitalism. It is a holistic vehicle for
> conquest and subjugation of all who do not subscribe to it. Period.
>
> Faisal Rauf may look like a kindly, gentle cleric, but that is the soft,
> friendly face of Islam. The Koran permits falsehoods, deception, and lies --
> *taqiya* -- in the name of Islam and Allah. The Grand Mufti of
> Jerusalemlooked harmless and well-meaning, too. Think again.
>
> Rauf, the leading light of the Cordoba mosque, has said publicly that the
> Cordoba mosque is intended, among other things, to be a venue for
> "interfaith dialogue."
>
> However, Walid Shoebat<http://thelastcrusade.org/2010/05/27/ground-zero-mosque-â??our-goal-is-to-establish-shariahâ? />,
> former terrorist but now a dedicated anti-Islamist, notes that, as a rule,
> public pronouncements by prominent Muslim spokesmen are consciously intended
> to say one thing for Western consumption, but these same spokesmen reveal
> their thoughts in Arabic. Rauf is a prime example:
>
> For that we searched Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf's own words – in the Arabic and
> not what he says in English to the western media. It should shock every
> American to find out that Faisal Abdul Rauf stated to the popular Islamic
> media Hadiyul-Islam on May 26th, 2010 in an article by Sa'da Abdul Maksoud.
>
> In it he states that an Islamic state can be established regardless of the
> government being a kingdom or democracy. In another article titled *"I do
> not believe in religious dialogue"* should alarm the ardent skeptic on the
> mindset of the Islamic visionary who advocates establishing Islamic lobbies
> throughout the West.
>
> The defenders of the mosque forget, or have never grasped as a first-hand
> understanding, that as we live in a mixed economy, we are also living in a
> culture of mixed epistemologies and metaphysics. The 14th Amendment is only
> as powerful as the culture that values and respects it, it is only as good
> as the government that upholds it. So, how can one reconcile the "rights" of
> the exponents of a religion that denies rights, in a deteriorating political
> culture, in which individual rights are usurped daily everywhere one looks?
>
> An argument in defense of the Cordoba mosque, based on the 14th Amendment,
> is dependent on two conditions: that Islam is not an ideology inimical to
> freedom, bent on conquest and subjugation, and that we are not at war with
> it; and that our government, through the courts, is moved by an absolute
> fealty to reason, and so receptive to an argument based on the inviolability
> of property rights. Neither of these conditions exists today.
>
> Respecting the alleged rights of the mosque builders is not going to stall
> or reverse the statist trends of our own government. On the other hand,
> "violating" them is not going to accelerate our own government's "jihad"
> against reason and our freedoms. The Obama administration already has the
> pedal of power to the floor.
>
> It could be about "property rights" were trends reversed and we were on our
> way to a recognition of individual rights and the sanctity of the
> Constitution. If we were, Islamists would not bother trying to infiltrate
> and conquer us by stealth. But, that is not the trend. We are hurtling
> faster and faster in the direction of fascism. Upholding the "rights" of the
> mosque builders is pointless when neither our government nor Islam
> recognizes *individual* rights. Look at today's Supreme Court decision on
> guns and *Citizens United*. How do they jibe with its decision on Kelo and
> with its other decisions that nullify individual rights? The Supreme Court
> is an instance of our living in a culture of mixed moralities, mixed
> premises, mixed values. The irrational element in the culture is in the
> ascendant, despite the occasional semi-rational triumphs.
>
> I do not know any more how better to argue the case against the Ground Zero
> mosque, other than to refer people to Dr. Leonard Peikoff's
> podcast<http://www.peikoff.com/2010/06/28/what-do-you-think-of-the-plan-for-a...>on
> the issue.
>
> We are living in an unprecedented time, when this country is under attack by
> secular jihadists in the White House, and religious ones from Mecca and
> Medina, both sides demanding unquestioning obedience from Americans, and no
> one is doing much about it. This is the larger picture -- an aerial
> photograph of the battlefield, if you will -- that must be grasped. It is
> and it is not about "property rights."
>
> Abundant information exists on the means and ends of Islam, on Faisal Rauf's
> <http://senseofevents.blogspot.com/2010/06/ground-zero-mosque-sponsor....>double-think
> and purposes, on the record of Islam's
> depredations<http://muhammadimages.com/mayhem/php>.
> Read Robert Spencer's<http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/war-peace/islamic-jihad/6018-Big-Is...>article,
> orAlyssa Lappen's<http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-ground-zero-mosque-developer-muslim-...>,
> or go to Steve Emerson's Investigative
> Project<http://www.investigativeproject.org/blog/2010/06/saudi-textbooks-cont...>
>  site. These articles<http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/war-peace/sept-11th/6016-Why-There-...>were
> picked at random from a mountain of information open to anyone willing
> to think.
>
> We are engaged in a literal war, both physical and ideological, a war that
> has exceeded the time such a war should have been waged. A paramount example
> of it is Afghanistan. We went into that country looking for the Taliban,
> Al-Quada, and bin Laden. Seven or eight years later, we are still there --
> building roads and hospitals and community centers and handing out candy and
> good will, now and then taking out a group of killers with a drone. In the
> meantime we are dealing with an unreliable and reluctant ally, Pakistan, and
> propping up Karzi's corrupt and "open-to-a-deal" government. Is this war a
> hallmark of rationality?
>
> There's no reconciliation possible between reason and faith, between reason
> and Islam. So, even though it may seem futile, I am opposed to the Ground
> Zero mosque, because of its symbolic power, because it is evidence of an
> invasion of this country by an alien philosophy inimical to my life and
> limb, because its backers are necessarily linked to terrorism and the jihad
> being waged against this county, and because I refuse to grant Islam any
> semblance of respect or advantage.
>
> We are not battling Moonies here, but killers and enslavers who wish to
> offer Americans the choice of becoming Muslim Moonies -- or dhimmitude or
> death.
>
> Again, no one should be deceived by the kindly, grandfatherly demeanor ofFaisal
> Rauf <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2514305/posts>. He is
> just a front man -- one of many such front men -- of a larger phenomenon. As
> a friend remarked to me in the middle of the battle, "Toohey was impeccably
> dressed and drank Cointreau." Rauf looks like he would not hurt a fly,
> either. But, think again. Think twice. Take his assurances for what they are
> worth -- nothing -- and use his image as the portrait of our enemy. That kindly
> face
> <http://www.examiner.com/x-41853-Homeland-Security-Examiner~y2010m6d25...>hides
> a mind that subscribes to a philosophy that attacked this country on 9/11
> and continues to attack it.
>
> *FamilySecurityMatters.org <http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/>
> **Contributing
> Editor **Edward
> Cline<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/authors/id.93/author_detail.asp.>
> **is the author of a number of novels, and his essays, **books,
> reviews<http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.2749/pub_detail.asp>
> **, and other nonfiction have appeared in a number of high-profile
> periodicals.*

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.