Sunday, November 29, 2015

The other day I was talking to an acquaintance of mine at the gun range about the Paris terrorist attacks. What he surmised was the root cause of that senseless slaughter by Islamic radicals nearly made me drop my Sig Sauer on the range floor.

The Texan told me that he believes Islam wouldn’t be killing innocent peeps as they ate their dinner or enjoyed a death metal concert or watched a soccer game if said nutters had more “job opportunities”.

What he said was shocking to me because of two primary things:

1). A frickin’ Texan said that crap.

2). Someone really thinks if Ahmed was a barista at a Starbucks in Babbila that alone would make someone stoked on the 7th century murderous ramblings of a pedophile who believed God personally talked to him chill out regarding ill-will towards us “infidels”.

I think not.

Matter of fact, I think that particular job would actually make things much worse because he’d be all jacked up on caffeine and everyone would make fun of him for working at a Starbucks which would lead to … well … um … uh … more … ka-boom!

Indeed, many on the Left are still left wondering:

1). Why is Islam attacking Europe and America?

2). Is it because they feel unloved and so lonely?

3). Is Islam getting really tired of seeing Katy Perry’s constant display of her ample assets?

4). Is Islam enraged at Ryan Seacrest’s overuse of American Crew’s Molding Clay?

5). Is Islam not actually attacking us and it’s merely a few rogue scalawags that have hijacked what Obama calls a 'beautiful religion?'

Are one or more of the aforementioned the reason(s) why they're out of sorts with the West?

Many Europeans think that in order to get Islam to stop killing them they should open their borders even wider to their “refugees”, stop eating bangers and mash, tell Katy P to cool it with the cleavage and ban all male hair pomades. Especially those with the satanic “high shine” and “heavy hold”.

While a lot of Leftists, primarily, are getting wrapped around the angst axle wondering why Islam is in defcon mode with The West, and are thus changing their laws to accommodate Islam, being politically correct, banning Jello and the smell of BBQ, hoping that such concessions will get radical Muslims to calm down, I say we examine why they say they hate the West and are out to kill us.

Wes Walker, my buddy and religious editor over at my website ClashDaily.com, did a little poking around after the Paris attacks and found out that the reason why the Islamic State killed 100-plus and wounded hundreds of others was not because of political, economic or cultural reasons but were, instead, explicitly religious reasons.

Here’s Walker’s findings and his comments. Check it out:

When claiming responsibility for the Paris attacks IS said: “In a blessed battle … believers … set out targeting the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe — Paris” (Quote in context here).

Two very specific points are made. They are attacking what they see as moral corruption, and they are attacking a city that — however untrue it may be today — historically, was very much associated with Christianity.

We love to point fingers at the Crusades, that they were a great historical evil, but neglect the wider context that Western armies were called upon in response to Islam’s aggressive Empire-building, militarily swallowing up of areas that were the seedbed of Christianity.

In previous generations, Europe was the breakwater that the waves of Islamic expansion crashed against before being turned away. Not so now. And that statement by the attackers sheds some light in it.

Previously, Europe resisted two pitfalls. We were not fully conquered — even when their military held the advantage — and more importantly, we were not assimilated. We were not, despite the fact that Islam’s dhimmi laws echo Secularism’s approach to rival religion in the public square -- suppression of traditional belief, and actively inviting, and rewarding its abandonment.

We were able to resist, because we held to something that defined us, called us to virtue, courage, endurance and hope. That same “something” was actively undermined by Enlightenment philosophers, and -- in Paris itself — saw a bloody purge during the Reign of Terror.

That “something” (historical Christian faith) was replaced with a variety of -isms, some of them religious, some of them political, others a more basically hedonistic grasping for money, pleasure or power.

So, when reporters gloss over the song that was playing when the slaughter began — “Kiss the Devil” — they overlook the very impetus of the attackers.

They believed themselves the righteous, purging the world of evildoers. They do not distinguish between the paganism or the Christianity of the West, believing the former to be part of the latter.

They attack us, because they still see us as the Great Enemy we once were, the same one that pushed back their empire, retaking Spain and Southeast Europe.

Our resistance is now feeble, in part, because we no longer know who we are, or for what we stand. We’ve jettisoned our values, and replaced them with Politically Correct platitudes.

And so, now that we’ve identified the moral vacuum, what will we do about it?

So, after reading Wes’s assessment and the killers’ own admissions of their motivations for the massacre in Paris, do you guys still think that more jobs, being PC with our beliefs and speech, and opening wide our borders to their hordes will get them to chill with their Islamic ill-will?

6 comments:

  1. Islam is attacking western civilization, jews, christians,and others because it teaches a fundamental duty to God to wage unending jihad against non believers who are to be converted, killed or enslaved or forced to pay special taxes and sometimes wear special clothing under laws of dhimmitude And along the way the attackers always enrich themselves by what they have stolen from their victims.
    Islam thinks God loves only muslims, those who have surrendered to Islam, and wants all others dominated by musiims. This is a terribilly wrong view of God . The fact is that God loves all humanity unconditionally and has given us all free will, as our Declaration proclaims, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
    It is very hard for those raised in judeo christian societies to believe that Islam actually teaches such an erroneous view of God, but it does exactly that.
    Islam is the enemy of our constitutional rights and will destroy them if it can.
    I am not advocating any hostility toward muslms. But I am advocating that we not grant any concessions whatsoever to islam, or to sharia law, which is directly opposed to our constitution. If fact I believe that because Islam is a political ideology intertwined with a religion , it should not be recognized as being entitled to any protection under the constitution or law of the U S or any state thereof. And, since we cannot count on our courts to reach this conclusion at present, I think that
    we should consider and probably adopt a constitutional amendment along those lines. I say this with a heavy heart, because I know that if such an amendment is proposed by lawmakers it may generate strife and conflict, but I think such would be much less than the strife and conflict we are going to experience from the followers of Islam who are taught a religious duty to wage unending jihad , by overt attack and by deceipt, until all the world is dominated by Islam.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Strife and conflict is an understatement. You are talking about amending article 3 of the bill of rights. However, the proper way to handle this is to confirm through debate with the CAIR, that indeed the Quran, and Sharia Law, are in contradiction of the United States Constitution. Once that is established, then a law can be passed acknowledging that Islam is not to be practiced in the US. If any individual is caught, they are tried for treason.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No, Daniel. CAIR is immaterial, because they have proved themselves to be untrustworthy, and tools of the Muslim Brotherhood, which Egypt has been honest enough to label a terrorist organization, and which sided with Hitler in WWII and cheered the murder of millions of jews.
    But before I go further , I want to clarify something I am not saying that Islam should be made illegal. I am saying that it is a political ideology intertwined with a religion so that they cannot be separated and therefore Islam should be denied the protections afforded to religion by the constitution and laws of the United States and of any state thereof. And sharia law should likewise not be recognized as a valid law by any court of the United States or any state thereof.
    To evaluate Islam it is necessary to look at its fundamental documents, the Koran, the Sira ( the biography of Muhammad) and the Hadith (the tradiions of Muhammad). And these show that Islam's fundamental principles include the following:
    unending jihad against all non believers , by overt act and by deceipt , until all are killed, or enslaved, or converted, or made second class citizens and forced to live under the laws of dhimmitude whereby they pay extra taxes and wear special clothing if required
    subjugation of women
    death to any muslim who leaves islam
    death to anyone who insults islam or Muhammad
    death to gays
    imposition of 7th century sharia law on everyone
    Muhammad was a 7th century warrior and trader in a very poor set of people who were likewise 7th century warrior traders. I do not judge Muhammad the man. Only God knows why he was what he was, and I am sure when his soul had its life review after his death, he suffered much as he felt the pain of all the people whose death he had caused.
    Be that as it may, it is obvious to us of the 21st century that murder and war to force a certain belief on other people is wrong, and cannot be the will of God. But it is what Islam in its basic documents teaches. Muslims are still murdering people who "insult" Muhammad or Islam,as the French found out.
    The Center for Security Policy has published a comparison of sharia law with the constitution, which clearly shows that they are diametrically opposed on many points, such as free speech, freedom of religion, and equality of all before the law.
    Where are the muslims who say that Muhammad was wrong when he committed mass murder of about 800 men and boys of the Qurayza Jewish tribe after they had surrendered, cutting off their heads in groups of 4 or 5 for many hours, while he and his 12 year old wife sat and observed? Where are the muslims who say this was unislamic, or that it was unislamic to enslave all of the women and children. Or that it was unislamic for Muhammad to rape women after his forces had killed their husbands. And if it was unislamic, how can that be, since islam teaches that Muhammad was the perfect example of what man should be.
    It is no accident that there have been more than 27,345 deadly islamic terroris attacks since 911. Nor is it an accident that the head of ISIS , who has a Ph D in Islamic studies, says that ISIS is Islam.
    There is no question that sharia law and the constitution are in direct conflict. The only question is whether our people and our politicians are courageous enough to say so, and honest and public spirited enough to take the appropriate action instead of trying to buy votes by pretending that islam is just another peace loving religion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess that's where you and I differ. I actually believe Islam should be illegal, being that it contradicts the United States Constitution. It would take about 10-15 minutes of a debate, to prove this.

      You can practice any religion, based on the 3rd ammendment, but if that religion is in contradiction to the United States Constitution, it is illegal to practice.

      Not sure what your solution is, can you clarify?

      Delete
    2. Daniel: Nothing is illegal, i.e. a crime, unless it violates a criminal law. I am not suggesting that Islam be made illegal. There are plenty of laws against plotting attacks, attempting attack, conducting attacks, and concealing guilty parties to such.
      What I am suggesting is depriving Islam of any protection afforded to religions, since it is a political ideology/religion that is opposed to our constitution . One of the benefits of being a religion is to be tax exempt and there may be others , such as claiming special privileges because something violates your religious beliefs. if a constitutional amendment was passed to say that islam is not and will not be recognized as a religion withing the meaning of the constitution and laws of the United States or of any state thereof, and that no court of the United States or of any state thereof shall recognize or apply sharia law, it would, in my opinion, greatly reduce ability of those who follow basic Islam , as taught and lived by Muhammad, to undermine our constitutional rights and our laws. Their property would be taxed their earnings would be taxed, and they would not be able to claim that certain of our institutions and customs, such as eating port, offended or interfered with their religious views. And when we kept muslilms from immigrating into this country, the left could not sing its religious discrimination song.
      Trying to make Islam illegal would , I think be impossible to do or to enforce. But depriving it of any protection as a "religion" is , I think, doable and would be effective in reducing its ability to support Islamic terror and influence here and abroad.

      Delete
    3. Interesting, thank you for your clarification.

      Delete