Saturday, August 14, 2010

Who was that mosqued man, anyway?

Why, that was Barack Inssein Obama, America's sick salvation.

Quoth the New York Times:
WASHINGTON — President Obama delivered a strong defense on Friday night of a proposed Muslim community center and mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, using a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan to proclaim that “as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.” ...

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

Well, Imam Inssein, that depends on what you mean by religion. Muslims certainly do not mean the same thing by the words that you and I do ... wait, strike that "you."

Islam is more than a set of beliefs and practices for worship. It is a world view that encompasses everything a Muslim does, 24/7, and admits of no degrees or modifications. There are Baptists who get legless in the bar on Saturday night, Catholics who take birth control pills, Episcopalians who go to church only at Easter and Christmas, and Jews who commit adultery. All of these may meet with some disapproval from their co-religionists, but no one denies that they are Baptists, Catholics, etc. Nor need they fear being awarded an "honor killing" for their apostasy.

Photobucket

However much Muzsymps like Imam Inssein want to obscure it, Islam is not "just another faith," any more than it is a "religion of peace," as our previous ignoramus of a president declared. It is an absolutist system in which there is no room for infidels (except as oppressed dhimmis), and no distinction between the religious and secular. There are individual Muslims who do not buy the whole package, but they generally have sense enough not to say so openly.

The big flap about the Ground Zero mosque once again makes clear that we should not have Muslim immigration. Because once you "naturalize" (legally speaking) Muslims, Inssein has a point: you can't welcome a group and then restrict them from following their faith to the nth degree.

Photobucket

Public foot baths, taxi drivers who won't accept passengers who offend their religious preferences, women covered head to toe, polygamy, halal food in school cafeterias, recognizing Ramadan as a national holiday, and ultimately sharia law ... we have given up any political or moral basis for stopping or opposing any of this when we declare, "The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are."

When Muslims decide collectively that their faith applies only to them, and that they have absolutely no claim on the rest of society to recognize their norms in any way, maybe we can talk about Muslim immigration. Until then, no. A thousand times no.

Photobucket

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interesting that the president didn't offer any observations about the muslims "clinging to their religion and their suicide vests." But then, I suppose he was tired.

-Jas

DP111 said...

Democracy is not a suicide pact. People or ideologies that are inherently intolerant, cannot expect that the principle tolerance is applicable to them. Staying true to our core values means confronting, fighting and defeating this most intolerant, nay murderous ideology - it does not mean that we should be tolerant to it, as that would be a betrayal.

Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.

Yet again we see a Muslim purloining the command of Jesus to excuse Islam and Muslims (Devil quoting scripture). We know exactly what Muslims want to do to Infidels – slay them or make them pay the Jizya, as they have been doing consistently for 1400 years. Is this president asking us to do the same to Muslims? Ofcourse not. What he wants is that the Christian West continue to tolerate Islam and its Jihad, while Islam continues to wage war.

DP111 said...

Anin wrote: Interesting that the president didn't offer any observations about the muslims "clinging to their religion and their suicide vests."

Brilliant.

Rick Darby said...

DP111,

Yes, the Failed Messiah asks for one-way tolerance. We must show an "unshakable" commitment to religious freedom; Islam is under no such requirement.

Jas,

I agree with DP111. Very clever comment on your part.

DP111 said...

At the time of 9/11, I wrote that 9/11, far from being a disaster for Islam, would turn out to be a publicity coup for it. So it turned out.

We are now in a similar situation. If the GZM proponents win their case, and build the mosque, it would be seen in the wider Islamic world, that allah had yet again granted a tremendous victory to Muslims. If OTH, the said mosque has to shift its location, or is cancelled altogether, then CAIR and all the other Islamic groups will be crying "foul", and seeking sympathy - Islam is being victimized.

Either way, this crisis is going to be milked for all it’s got.
The real aim of the controversy though, like 9/11 itself, is to keep Islam right up there on the national and international agenda, i.e., making Islam pre-eminent, and the focus for all attention. Obama, willingly or unwittingly, has made this objective a reality, turning a NY city issue to an international one.

The more this controversy rages and polarises the America people, the greater a publicity disaster for the West this is, and great propaganda boost for Islam.

It would appear that we are going to lose this battle either way. Not necessarily so. What some of the opponents have to do, is to seize this opportunity to tell the truth about Islam. That is, use the propaganda opportunity that has been created by Islamists to defeat their real purpose, of publicising for Islam – not just stop it but turn it against Islam. If some of the opponents can do this, the GZM proponents will themselves halt the controversy.

Repeat. The GMZ controversy is not about the GMZ mosque, or even the triumphalist proclamation of Islam on the site of its first North American victory, but an opportunity for keeping Islam preeminent in the public eye. That is always the objective for all Muslims, Always. Obama may backtrack now, but that is not the point. He has succeeded in raising the profile of Islam to the highest international level, which was never there in the first place. He can now withdraw his comments, as his main purpose has been accomplished.

The best way forward is to seize the opportunity that the GMZ proponents have created to raise Islam, and use it to expose the reality of Islam. As they say, "never let a crisis go to waste".

DP111 said...

A great speech

BILL WHITTLE: IN UNDERSTANDING THE GROUND ZERO MOSQUE ONE MUST UNDERSTAND APPEASEMENT ENCOURAGES OUR ENEMIES .......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg_iDPRud_c&feature=player_embedded#at=602

See it and post it elsewhere

Anonymous said...

Quote DP111 Democracy is not a suicide pact. People or ideologies that are inherently intolerant, cannot expect that the principle tolerance is applicable to them. Staying true to our core values means confronting, fighting and defeating this most intolerant, nay murderous ideology - it does not mean that we should be tolerant to it, as that would be a betrayal.

I WONDER WHO IS THE INTOLERANT ONE HERE....? THIS IS A RHETORICAL QUESTION.