The Crusades: A Response to the Imperialism of Islam

 This post is actually a comment to another commenter, gringoman, in a thread from All Things Beautiful .  gringoman gave a link to an American Thinker article, The Truth About Islamic Crusades and Imperialism, that, imho, turned out to be a gold mine of information that will never be seen in the antique media, so I decided to do a bibliographical listing of the links in the article.  Long story short, the gatekeeper program kept kicking me out as a spammer, so, if anyone is interested, here is the listing, including, last but not least, Jihad begot the Crusades, by the great Andrew Bostom.

My response that made me a spammer 😉  : 

gringoman:  What an absolutely wonderful reference to a great article by James Arlandson with an excellent set of reference links.  I have been on this “crusade” with GD, i.e., that there was a lot of conquering, pillaging, raping and slaughtering going on long before the Christian crusaders got started.  And here you are with Mr. Arlandson’s and Andrew Bostom’s proof that the crusades were a response to islam.  BTW, your link didn’t work- it had an extra backslash in it.  Here’s the working link, and I hope you don’t mind if I do a major cut and paste here because Mr. Arlandson does a much better job than I could hope to do of tying it all together, and the article is from 2005, so it has been a while.  I have never seen it before.  I encourage everyone interested in this to save this article and the references mentioned in it.

The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism, By James Arlandson

Historical facts say that Islam, including Muhammad, launched their own Crusades against Christianity long before the European Crusades.

Westerners—even academics—accept the notion that the West alone was aggressive. It seems that Islam is always innocent and passive. It is difficult to uncover the source of this Western self—loathing. It is, however, a pathology that seems to strike Westerners more than other people around the globe.  This anti—West pathology shows up in Westerners’ hatred for the European Crusades in the Medieval Age

Muslims seem to forget that they had their own, for several centuries before the Europeans launched theirs as a defense against the Islamic expansion.

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.
641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.
644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.
710—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.
711—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.
831 Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy
1050 Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.

1075 Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia
1086 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca
1094 Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970

1095 Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099

So it is only after all of the Islamic aggressive invasions that Western Christendom launches its first Crusades.

It must be noted that Islamic expansion continues until well into the seventeenth century. For example, the Muslims Crusaders conquer Constantinople in 1453 and unsuccessfully besiege Vienna for the second time in 1683 (earlier in 1529). By the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Islamic Crusades receded, due to Western resistance. Since that time until the present, Islamic civilization has not advanced very far.

Khalid al—Walid (d. 642), a bloodthirsty but superior commander of the Muslim armies at the time, also answers the question as to why the Muslims stormed out of Arabia…’I call you to God and to Islam. If you respond to the call, you are Muslims: You obtain the benefits they enjoy and take up the responsibilities they bear. If you refuse, then [you must pay] the jizyah. If you refuse the jizyah, I will bring against you tribes of people who are more eager for death than you are for life. We will fight you until God decides between us and you.’
When the Islamic Crusaders go out to conquer, carrying an Islamic banner inscribed in Arabic of the glory and the truth of their prophet, Ibn Khaldun would not deny that the army’s mission, besides the material reasons of conquest, is to convert the inhabitants. Islam is a ‘universalizing’ religion, and if its converts enter its fold either by persuasion or force, then that is the nature of Islam.

Moreover, Ibn Khaldun explains why a dynasty rarely establishes itself firmly in lands of many different tribes and groups. But it can be done after a long time and employing the following tactics, as seen in the Maghrib (N and NW Africa) from the beginning of Islam to Ibn Khaldun’s own time:

The first (Muslim) victory over them and the European Christians (in the Maghrib) was of no avail. They continued to rebel and apostatized time after time. The Muslims massacred many of them. After the Muslim religion had been established among them, they went on revolting and seceding, and they adopted dissident religious opinions many times. They remained disobedient and unmanageable . . . . Therefore, it has taken the Arabs a long time to establish their dynasty in the . . . Maghrib. (p. 131)

It is only natural that the Quran would be filled with references to jihad and qital, the latter word meaning only fighting, killing, warring, and slaughtering. Textual reality matches historical reality in the time of Muhammad. And after.

But this means that the Church had to fight back or be swallowed up by an aggressive religion over the centuries. Thus, the Church did not go out and conquer in a mindless, bloodthirsty, and irrational way—though the Christian Crusades were far from perfect.

Islam was the aggressor in its own Crusades, long before the Europeans responded with their own.”</i>

 Ten reasons why sharia is bad for all societies, By James Arlandson

Martyrdom? What a bargain!  By James Arlandson

The Echo Effect:  For Muslim zealots little has changed since the seventh century, BY ERIC ORMSBY

The  Jews should own the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’, By James Arlandson

 Slave-Girls  as sexual property in the Quran, By James Arlandson

The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, by Andrew Bostom

The Legacy of Jihad in Historical Palestine (Part I), By Andrew G. Bostom

The Legacy of Jihad in Historial Palestine (Part II), By Andrew G. Bostom

 Jihad begot the Crusades (1), By Andrew G. Bostom

Jihad begot the Crusades (2), By Andrew G. Bostom

gringoman, in answer to your last question,  psychopathology, and delusion.

Update:  I am in the process of adding these references and others, along with short pull-quotes, to the “Islamofascism” category of the In Context References section of the blog.

Published in: on April 9, 2007 at 3:12 am  Leave a Comment  

Welcome to the Hotel Gitmo

Just in case you believe “Convert or Die” is too strong and inflammatory, check this out at Richard Miniter’s blog (a quote from Mukhlas, the commander of the islamofascist cell that carried out the Bali bombings):

“You who still have a shred of faith in your hearts, have you forgotten that to kill infidels and the enemies of Islam is a deed that has a reward above no other… Aren’t you aware that the model for us all, the Prophet Mohammed and the four rightful caliphs, undertook to murder infidels as one of their primary activities, and that the Prophet waged jihad operations 77 times in the first 10 years as head of the Muslim community in Medina?”

And we are the ones who need to moderate our language when referring to people of Islam? In Gitmo, there are world_trade_center_second_jet_impact.jpg” Some 20 current detainees have direct personal knowledge of the 9/11 attacks and nearly everyone of the current 440 say they would honored to attack America again”, according to Miniter, who reports on a trip he took to Gitmo, in a NY Post article. Other than the fact that they are detained by fences with barbed wire, these murdering islamofascist thugs are essentially staying at a hotel for terrorists!

…Detainees are entitled to a full eight hours sleep and can’t be woken up for interrogations… Food is strictly halal and averages 4,200 calories per day. (The guards eat the same chow as the detainees, unless they venture to one of the on-base fast-food joints.) Most prisoners have gained weight…They enjoy three meals and five prayers per day, without interruption. They are entitled to a minimum of two hours of outdoor recreation per day…

Oh, and those interrogations that prisoners can’t be awakened for? Don’t worry, they won’t disturb the poor prisoners too much:

Interrogations are not video or audio taped, perhaps to preserve detainee privacy…

If you are concerned that interrogations will interfere with the prisoners prayers, don’t be:

interrogations are limited to four hours, usually running two – and (of course) are interrupted for prayers. One interrogator actually bakes cookies for detainees, while another serves them Subway or McDonald’s sandwiches. Both are available on base. (Filet o’ Fish is an al Qaeda favorite.)

And don’t worry about the prisoner’s ability to communicate with their fellow murdering islamofascist thugs:

…a multi-cell al Qaeda network has developed in the camp…Detainees use the envelopes sent to them by their attorneys to pass messages. (Some 1,000 lawyers represent 440 prisoners, all on a pro bono basis…

flagand-salutingsoldier.jpgHeavily involved in the “lawyering up” of the Hotel Gitmo prisoners is a group called the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), whose president is Michael Ratner:

Ratner has been heavily involved in opposing Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse and the Iraq War. In January, 2006, he served as an expert witness at a ‘tribunal‘ staged by the Bush Crimes Commission at Columbia University. He owns a baseball cap with the words “Guantanamo Bay Bar Association,” emblazoned on it; if such an association actually existed, according to the Washington Post, Ratner would be its dean.

We are also proteting their self-esteem:

The military isn’t allowed to call them “prisoners.” !!! (my exclamations)

Unbelievable, but absolutely true. But according to Senator (just not yet elected) President John McCain, we are being too harsh on the prisoners and must ease their life of pain. Gimme a break! The backstabbing Colin Powell is right there offering his condolences to the prisoner’s treatment. Whatever it takes to undermine George Bush, nevermind that they are step by step handing the country over to the islamofascists, just as the Neville Chamberlain led appeasers pre-WWII did.


Update to Convert or Die and Found in my Inbox: Found at Wikipedia, an article on the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammad Amin al-Husayni. I’m going to get this stuff on separate reference pages soon, just in case it “disappears” on us.

Published in: on September 18, 2006 at 1:22 pm  Comments (6)  

Convert or Die

Here we go again. The Pope quotes the words of a 14th century Byzantine ruler to his “interlocutor”. When Manuel II composed the Dialogue (which Pope Benedict excerpted), the Byzantine ruler was little more than a glorified dhimmi vassal of the Ottoman Sultan Bayezid, forced to accompany the latter on a campaign through Anatolia. Earlier, Bayezid had compelled the Byzantines under Manuel II to submit to additional humiliations and impositions—heavier tribute, which was already onerous—as well as the establishment of a special quarter in Constantinople devoted to Turkish merchants, and the admission of an Ottoman kadi to arbitrate the affairs of these Muslims. So he was answering a question of a theologian of a religion that had conquered and enslaved his world. A religion that, from it’s earliest beginnings has advocated the conversion of non-muslims by the sword, i.e. convert or die.

We have fallen down the rabbit hole. What is, is not, and what is not, is. A false story of muslim bibles being flushed down toilets results in riots and death. A series of cartoons, that initially went by unnoticed, but were fanned into incandescence, again result in riots and death, and threats against the Danish publisher. And now the Pope. This requires more background than I posses, but I have some good reading to help try to explain what is essentially a temper tantrum by a LOT (about a billion) of people. While ridiculous, it is also dangerous. They are acting like the Mafia writ large. Say anything, especially the truth, that they don’t like and you will be subject to their ire. As already discussed previously, we know that the goal is our subjugation, and this is just one more step in the process. Read and pass on to all that will listen and learn:

First, the most important piece of this puzzle: Faith, Reason, and the University, the speech by Pope Benedict XVI that had two or three sentences taken out of context and used by the islamofascist puppetmasters to further their own ends.

From The American Thinker: The Pope, Jihad, and “Dialogue”, September 17th, 2006, by Andrew Bostom. Bostom is the writer that opened my eyes to what radical islam is really all about, and the historical context that is so important to today’s world in a series of articles from Frontpage mag: here, here, here (where it is explained the connections of modern day islamofascism and 20th century nazism), and here. Bostom has written a number of articles explaining the historical context behind what is currently happening, as in Muhammad’s Willing Executioners: “Notwithstanding that he may never have encountered an actual Jew, the 17th century Indian Sufi jurist Sirhindi (d. 1621) expressed an (archetypal) sentiment, whose ultimate origins can be traced to the sacralized behaviors of the Muslim prophet Muhammad himself. Sirhindi wrote: Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam.” Sadly, this ugly belief retains widespread legitimacy amongst contemporary Muslims.

All Things Beautiful has a take on this, The apoplectic reaction of the Muslim world, which is barely in first gear of course, couldn’t be a better testament to the continuing verity of the Byzantine Emperor’s observations; no matter whether 1,500 years ago, 700 years ago or at the present day. Lost is the Pope’s powerful call for an urgently needed dialogue between the religions of peace and Islam, and also sends me to Captain’s Quarters, who points out, in An Open Letter to Pope Benedict XVI,

If Islam is ever to peacefully co-exist with other faiths in the manner that Christendom finally learned how to do, then it has to start abiding questions and criticisms without resorting to violence. Islam has to learn to persuade and to attract people through reason, not through forced conversions and coexistence through violent supremacy. Muslim leaders around the world still believe that our faith can only exist at their sufferance, and any question of their doctrinal beliefs has to be met with violence or demands for apologies, not with rhetoric, facts, and reason.

In another post, The Pope’s Real Threat, he explains what the islamofascists and even everyday muslims fail to see:

All this has shown is that Muslims missed the point of the speech, and in fact have endeavored to fulfill Benedict’s warnings rather than prove him wrong. If one reads the speech at Regensburg, the entire speech, one understands that the entire point was to reject violence in pursuing religion in any form, be it Islam, Christianity, Judaism, or Bahai. The focal point of the speech was not the recounting of the debate between Manuel II and the unnamed Persian, but rather the rejection of reason and of God that violence brings…

…This is really the crux of the argument, which is that argument, debate, and rhetoric are absolutely essential in forming any kind of philosophy, including religious doctrine…requires the ability to challenge and to criticize without fear of retribution, a difficulty that most faiths struggle to overcome. Islam, on the other hand, doesn’t bother to try…Islam practices a form of supremacy that insists on unquestioned obedience or at least silence of all criticism, especially from outsiders, and creates a violent reaction against it when it occurs.

And, in an article in Frontpagemag, Khatami Comes to National Cathedral, this from the “moderate” successor to the Ayatollah Khomeini, Mohammad Khatami: world_trade_center_second_jet_impact.jpgWithout any sense of irony, by him or the cathedral’s Episcopalian masters, Khatami will talk about how the three “Abrahamic faiths” can build peace in the world.

That would be by converting to islam, the “religion of peace”, if you are muslim.

Liberal Christian clerics like Canon Peterson and Dean Lloyd would be roasted on a spit and flayed until crispy brown if they lived under the reign of the Iranian mullahs, few of whom have much time for “dialogue” and “open discussion.” Indeed, Christian clerics have been murdered in Iran, and Christians there, along with other religious minorities, stick to the shadows, lest they gain the unwanted attention of Iran’s religious police. But the National Cathedral has rarely if ever expressed interest in the plight of Christians living under Islamic regimes, in Iran or elsewhere, even though there are even fellow Anglicans struggling to survive under President Khatami’s friends and successors.

NEVER Forget!


Published in: on September 18, 2006 at 12:29 am  Leave a Comment  


The last 48 hours or so have seen a profound lack of interest by the antique media in the running down of pedestrians in a small Jewish neighborhood in San Francisco by a muslim. They have been quick to dismiss the incident as having anything to do with islamofascism and everything to do with the young man in question being crazy. Right. Here is where I ran across the story, and through the links and updates, have been following it: Horror On San Francisco Streets.

The followup on that story led to a tag search here on WordPress on “Islamofascism” and a link to a thinkpiece at The Bos’un Locker called Know The Enemy and all about the underpinning philosophy of the current Al Qaida types. I commented that, if my understanding of my reading so far is correct, that these guys are Sunni types. Added some additional references that I have run across that show the evolution of the Shi’ite branch, which were outlined in a previous post, Found In My Inbox. Bos’un then sent me back another fascinating and eye opening link about the hezbo’s activities in the Americas, Does Hezbollah have the ability to strike the US?. Good Reading.

It is five years after 9-11 and we all need to learn as much as we can about this enemy. He is long term, and no matter what party is in office, he is going to be there. We cannot wish him away, or ignore him. As this weblog continues, it becomes clear to me that part of my evolving mission is to point as many people as possible to original sources or sources that reference the originals, online, so that we can get beyond the media “story of the moment” mentality. I hope these links help.


The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make.

Published in: on August 31, 2006 at 1:40 pm  Comments (1)  

Found In My Inbox

I just got this in my e-mail.  It is an eye opening piece of writing, but I do not know the author.  It arrived as a forwarded letter with no named writer.


This WAR is for REAL! To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means.

First, let’s examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;

* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;

* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;

* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;

* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;

* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;

* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;

* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;

* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;

* New York World Trade Center 2001;

* Pentagon 2001.

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).

2 Why were we attacked? Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush

1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

3. Who were the attackers? In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4 What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.

5. Isn’t the Muslim Religion peaceful? Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also “Christian”), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world – German, Christian or any others. 

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way — their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing — by their own pronouncements — killing all of us “infidels.” I don’t blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with? There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don’t clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?

2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question – What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get What losing really means is:

We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly, for terrorist to attack us, until we were neutered and submissive to them. We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see, we are impotent and cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn’t matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished. 

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don’t win, they are finished too, in that they can’t resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims.

If we can’t stop the Muslims, how could anyone else? 

The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put

100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?

Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by “imploding.” That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don’t comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don’t worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn’t because they are disloyal. It is because they just don’t recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause. 

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq.

And still more recently, the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the “humiliating” of some Muslim prisoners — not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but “humiliating” them.

Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn’t show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned — totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL non-Muslims — not just in the United States, but throughout the world.

We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being ‘arrogant..’ That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!

We can’t!

If we don’t recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone — let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

If we don’t win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn’t that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don’t have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. 

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the “peaceful Muslims”?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.

After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world.

Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!

——————————————————————————————-Please forward this to any one you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our “leaders” in Congress ought to read it, too.

End e-mail.




Not educating our people and losing this battle would be devastating in the extreme, not just in blood, but in future oppression of surviving generations.  From the e-mail:

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone — let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.  This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

There is clearly a lack of information as to what the enemy is like and what he is up to.  In The American Thinker, Andrew Bostom points out:   

We have a moral obligation to oppose Shari’a, which is antithetical to the core beliefs for which hundreds of thousands of brave Americans have died, including, ostensibly, 3000 in Iraq itself. There has never been a Shari’a state in history that has not discriminated (often violently) against the non-Muslims (and Muslim women) under its suzerainty. Moreover such states have invariably taught (starting with Muslim children) the aggressive jihad ideology which leads to predatory jihad “razzias” on neighboring “infidels”—even when certain of those “infidels” happened to consider themselves Muslims, let alone if those infidels were clearly non-Muslims

 The mainstream media maintain the politically correct fantasy that  Sharia, which etymologically means “way” or “path”, is the legal framework within which the public aspects and some private aspects of life are ruled for those living within the state and who belongs to the islamic community (“al oumma islamiya”). Non-muslims in a sharia-abiding country follow the rules of their own community. 

The reality is far different, dating back to the founding of Islam: 

..[Muhammad] did at least propose that all Arabia should be the land of Allah and planned vigorous measures to insure that within its borders the religion of Allah should be supreme. Communities of the People of the Book [Book= Bible; thus referring primarily to Jews and Christians] might remain within the land, but they must be in subjection….deriving their rights from the supreme Muslim community, not from any recognized rights of their own. As [they]  did not accept this without struggle, it had to be forced on them, and that meant war. But war in the cause of Allah is Holy War, and so even in the Prophet’s lifetime we have the question of Jihad… 2  The muslims have been in a conquering frame of mind since the founding:  Indeed, even al-Ghazali (d. 1111), the famous theologian, philosopher, and paragon of mystical Sufism, (who, as noted by the great scholar of Islam W.M. Watt, has been “…acclaimed in both the East and West as the greatest Muslim after Muhammad…” 19, wrote the following about jihad: one must go on jihad (i.e., warlike razzias or raids) at least once a year…one may use a catapult against them [non-Muslims] when they are in a fortress, even if among them are women and children. One may set fire to them and/or drown them…If a person of the Ahl  al-Kitab [People of The Book – Jews and Christians, typically] is enslaved, his marriage is [automatically] revoked…One may cut down their trees…One must destroy their useless books. Jihadists may take as booty whatever they decide…they may steal as much food as they need… 20  By the time of the classical Muslim historian al-Tabari’s death  in 923,  jihad wars had expanded the Muslim empire from the Iberian peninsula to the Indian subcontinent. Subsequent Muslim conquests continued in Asia, as well as on Christian eastern European lands. The Christian kingdoms of Armenia, Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania, in addition to parts of Poland and Hungary, were also conquered and Islamized. When the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a millennium of jihad had transpired 21.  These tremendous military successes spawned a triumphalist  jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of infidels slain or enslaved, the cities and villages which were pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized. Christian (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav, etc.), as well as Hebrew sources, and even the scant Hindu and Buddhist writings which survived the ravages of the Muslim conquests, independently validate this narrative, and complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering of the non-Muslim victims of jihad wars 22As for the politically correct antique media:  Non-muslims in a sharia-abiding country follow the rules of their own community.  Really?   According to the same article referenced previously by Andrew Bostom,  The “contract of the “jizya”, or “dhimma” encompassed other obligatory and recommended obligations for the conquered non-Muslim “dhimmi” peoples. 28 Collectively, these “obligations” formed the discriminatory system of dhimmitude imposed upon non-Muslims- Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists- subjugated by jihad. Some of the more salient features of dhimmitude include: the prohibition of arms for the vanquished non-Muslims (dhimmis), and of church bells; restrictions concerning the building and restoration of churches, synagogues, and temples; inequality between Muslims and non-Muslims with regard to taxes and penal law; the refusal of dhimmi testimony by Muslim courts; a requirement that Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims, including Zoroastrians and Hindus, wear special clothes; and the overall humiliation and abasement of non-Muslims. It is important to note that these regulations and attitudes were institutionalized as permanent features of the sacred Islamic law, or Shari’a. Again, the writings of the much lionized Sufi theologian and jurist al-Ghazali highlight how the institution of dhimmitude was simply a normative, and prominent feature of the Shari’a: …the dhimmi is obliged not to mention Allah or His Apostle…Jews, Christians, and Majians must pay the jizya [poll tax on non-Muslims]…on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits [the dhimmi] on the protruberant bone beneath his ear [i.e., the mandible]… They are not permitted to ostentatiously display their wine or church bells…their houses may not be higher than the Muslim’s, no matter how low that is. The dhimmi may not ride an elegant horse or mule; he may ride a donkey only if the saddle[-work] is of wood. He may not walk on the good part of the road. They [the dhimmis] have to wear [an identifying] patch [on their clothing], even women, and even in the [public] baths…[dhimmis] must hold their tongue….29 (Emphasis added.) 

My guess is the antique media would be the non-existent media under muslim rule, as well as those of us in the new media trying to inform our blindered brethren in the form of e-mail and blogosphere media. While antique media publications continue to pooh-pooh the word “islamofascism” as de-riguer, “But like “terror,” and “evil” before it, “Islamic fascism” has the effect of reducing a complex story to a simple fable. It effaces the differences among ex-Baathists, Al Qaeda and Shiite mullahs; Chechens and Kashmiris; Hezbollah, Hamas and British-born Asians allegedly making bombs in a London suburb.”. Here we extreme right wingnuts go again, not seeing the nuance in the situation.  I don’t care what the antiques think. The thugs are all islamists, wether Chechen, Kashmiri, or any radical jihadist group, and the “good” muslims of the world cannot protect the rest of humanity from their fellow fanatical islamofascist muslim brothers.  There is nothining nuanced or “complex” in the fact that they wish to kill us to achieve their goals.  It is a simple fact.  And the anti-christian and ingrained, from childhood, anti-semitism, is the reason they are called islamofascists, not because they are a “fable”.  They are absolutely real, and their similarity to the fascism of the nazis is striking, so much so that it is almost a question of the chicken and the egg:  the European nazis just put the whole thing on a horrible production line.  And the islamofascists paid attention, too. 

THE JEWS everywhere are “the Muslim’s bitter enemies,” said a prominent Islamic leader. Throughout history, the “irreconcilable enemy of Islam” has conspired and schemed and “oppressed and persecuted 40 million Muslims,” he said. In Palestine, the Jews are establishing “a base from which to extend their power over neighboring Islamic countries.” And, he proclaimed, “this war, which was unleashed by the world Jewry,” provided “Muslims the best opportunity to free themselves from these instances of persecution and oppression.”
Sound like Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah? Or perhaps Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Nope. It was the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Husseini, in 1942. An ardent Nazi supporter, Husseini delivered his speech at the opening of the Islamic Institute in Berlin, one day after the Allies denounced the Nazis for “carrying into effect Hitler’s oft-repeated intention to exterminate the Jewish people in Europe.” Husseini’s address was approved by Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, and Joseph Goebbels was in attendance. The Reich press office widely distributed the comments. 

Here is more historical context that takes up with Haj Amin Husseini, although the line of mentors goes way back into history, and is dealt with and documented by Mr. Bostom: 

Hajj Amin el-Husseini was appointed Mufti of Jerusalem by the British High Commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life. 101 Throughout his public career, the Mufti relied upon traditional Qur’anic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street….With the ascent of Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, the Mufti and his coterie intensified their anti-Semitic activities to secure support from Hitler’s Germany (and later Bosnian Muslims, as well as the overall Arab Muslim world), for a jihad to annihilate the Jews of Palestin….he provided active support for the Germans by recruiting Bosnian Muslims, in addition to Muslim minorities from the Caucasus, for dedicated Nazi SS units. 104 The Mufti’s objectives for these recruits, and Muslims in general, were made explicit during his multiple wartime radio broadcasts from Berlin, heard throughout the Arab world: an international campaign of genocide against the Jews. For example, during his March 1, 1944 broadcast he stated: “Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion.”….Hajj Amin made an especially important contribution to the German war effort in Yugoslovia where the Bosnian Muslim SS units he recruited (in particular the Handzar Division) brutally suppressed local Nazi resistance movements. The Mufti’s pamphlet entitled, “Islam and the Jews”, was published by the Nazis in Croatian and German for distribution during the war to these Bosnian Muslim SS units. 106 This hateful propaganda served to incite the slaughter of Jews, and (Serb) Christians as well. Indeed, the Bosnian Muslim Handzar SS Division was responsible for the destruction of whole Bosnian Jewish and Serbian communities, including the massacre of Jews and Serbs, and the deportation of survivors to Auschwitz for extermination. However, these heinous crimes, for which the Mufti bears direct responsibility, had only a limited impact on the overall destruction of European Jewry when compared with his nefarious wartime campaign to prevent Jewish emigration from Europe to Palestine. Jan Wanner, in his 1986 analysis of the Mufti’s collaboration with Nazi Germany during World War II, concluded,  …the darkest aspect of the Mufti’s activities in the final stage of the war was undoubtedly his personal share in the extermination of Europe’s Jewish population. On May 17, 1943, he wrote a personal letter to Ribbentrop, asking him to prevent the transfer of 4500 Bulgarian Jews, 4000 of them children, to Palestine. In May and June of the same year, he sent a number of letters to the governments of Bulgaria, Italy, Rumania, and Hungary, with the request not to permit even individual Jewish emigration and to allow the transfer of Jews to Poland where, he claimed they would be ‘under active supervision’. The trials of Eichmann’s henchmen, including Dieter Wislicency who was executed in Bratislava, Czechoslovakia, confirmed that this was not an isolated act by the Mufti.  107  Invoking the personal support of such prominent Nazis as Himmler and Eichmann108, the Mufti’s relentless hectoring of German, Rumanian, and Hungarian government officials caused the cancellation of an estimated 480,000 exit visas which had been granted to Jews (80,000 from Rumania, and 400,000 from Hungary). As a result, these hapless individuals were deported to Polish concentration camps. A United Nations Assembly document presented in 1947 which contained the Mufti’s June 28, 1943 letter to the Hungarian Foreign Minister requesting the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Poland, includes this stark, telling annotation: “As a Sequel to This Request 400,000 Jews Were Subsequently Killed”. The Mufti escaped to the Middle East after the war to avoid capture and possible prosecution for war crimes…..His hatred for Jews was instinctive, tribal; he wished to cut them down, declaring to their face, ‘..Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country……….It is undeniable that the Mufti’s virulent anti-Semitism continues to influence Arab policy toward Israel. Not surprisingly, Yasser Arafat, beginning at the age of 16, worked for the Mufti performing terrorist operations. Arafat always characterized the Mufti as his primary spiritual and political mentor…..….Upon Khomeini’s ascension to power in Iran, Arafat immediately cabled the Ayatollah relaying these shared jihadist sentiments (February 13, 1979):  I pray Allah to guide your step along the path of faith and Holy War (Jihad) in Iran, continuing the combat until we arrive at the walls of Jerusalem, where we shall raise the flags of our two revolutions….  And even after the Oslo accords, literally within a week of signing the specific Gaza-Jericho agreements, Arafat issued a brazen pronouncement (at a meeting of South African Muslim leaders) reflecting his unchanged jihadist views:The jihad will continue and Jerusalem is not for the Palestinian people alone…It is for the entire Muslim umma. You are responsible for Palestine and Jerusalem before me…No, it is not their capital, it is our capital….throughout Arafat’s tenure as the major Palestinian Arab leader, his efforts to destroy Israel and replace it with an Arab Muslim sharia-based entity were integrated into the larger Islamic umma’s jihad against the Jewish State….…From Cairo, 1968, The Fourth Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research : 118   Jihad is legislated in order to be one of the means of propagating Islam.  Consequently Non-Muslims ought to embrace Islam either willingly or through wisdom and good advice or unwillingly through fight and Jihad…It is unlawful to give up Jihad and adopt peace and weakness instead of it, unless the purpose of giving up Jihad is for preparation, whenever there is something weak among Muslims, and their opponents are, on the other hand, strong…War is the basis of the relationship between Muslims and their opponents unless there are justifiable reason for peace, such as adopting Islam or making an agreement with them to keep peaceful. [Shaikh Abdullah Ghoshah, Chief Judge of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan]….….Throughout the long ages of Muslim history, the Jews had been quite powerless under the rule of Islam.  But in Modern times the Colonialist Powers could put into effect their designs.  Once Muslim Jurisprudence had been discarded as a rule of life, the Jews could establish a State of their own in the heart of the Muslim World, to defy Muslims, and to gain victory over the Arabs in three consecutive battles…Hence present-day Muslims should never treat with them for peace, since it has been proved beyond doubt that they  [the Jews] are a mere gang of robbers and criminals, to whom trust, faith and conscience mean nothing…Our return to (the true teachings of) Islam would restore to the Muslin Community its vital principles, the force of which would realized endurance and steadfastness, confidence, and will, courage and faith.  Thus could be established the equitable power that would be a factor in promoting peace and prosperity for the world at large…There would be built up inside the World of Islam armament plants, so that Muslims might be in no need of importing them from enemy countries, which would certainly make a band on such exports for fear of their possible use against them. [Sheikh Abdu-Hamid Attiyah Al-Dibani, Rector of the Islamic University of Libya]….. ….From the Putrajaya Islamic Summit, 2003, Speech by Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathier Mohammad at the opening of the 10th Session of the Islamic Summit Conference on Oct 16, 2003: 121   To begin with, the governments of all the Muslim countries can close ranks and have a common stand if not on all issues, at least on some major ones, such as on Palestine.  We are all Muslims…Over the centuries the ummah and the Muslim civilization became so weak that at one time there was not a single Muslim country which was not colonized or hegemonized by the Europeans…The Europeans could do what they liked with Muslim territories.  It is not surprising that they should excise Muslim land to create the state of Israel to solve their Jewish problem.  Divided, the Muslims could do nothing effective to stop the Balfour and Zionist transgression… We are now 1.3 billion strong.  We have the biggest oil reserve in the world.  We have great wealth.  We are not as ignorant as the Jahilliah who embraced Islam.  We are familiar with the workings of the world’s economy and finances.  We control 50 out of the 180 countries in the world…We need guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships…We may want to recreate the first century of the Hijrah, the way of life in those times, in order to practice what we think to be the true Islamic way of life….1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews.  There must be a way.  And we can only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to strategize and then to counter-attack.  As Muslims, we must seek guidance from the Al-Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet.  Surely the 23 years’ struggle of the Prophet can provide us with some guidance as to what we can and should do…We are actually very strong.  1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out.  The Europeans killed six million Jews out of 12 million.  But today the Jews rule this world by proxy.  They get others to fight and die for them…We are up against a people who think.  They survived 2000 years of pogroms not by hitting back, but by thinking.  They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy rights with others.  With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and they, this tiny community, have become a world power.  We cannot fight them through brawn alone.  We must use our brains also…Of late because of their power and their apparent success they have become arrogant.  And arrogant people, like angry people will make mistakes, will forget to think. They are already beginning to make mistakes.  And they will make more mistakes.  There may be windows of opportunity for us now and in the future.(Note:  all superscripted reference notes in Mr. Bostom’s article can be found here.) 

Does this sound as if they are ready to meet us with open arms, sing Kum-by-yah and just get along?The unfortunate truth about the antique media, the John F’ng Kerry/Nancy Pelosi/Harry Reid left wing of congress, the Hollywood and radical anti-war movement, and the kook democratic faithful, is that they are Islam’s Useful Idiots:  

 ….The “moderate” mainstream of Islam has been outright genocidal from inception. Their own historians record that Ali, the first imam of the Shiite and the son-in-law of Muhammad, with the help of another man, beheaded 700 Jewish men in the presence of the Prophet himself. The Prophet of Allah and his disciples took the murdered men’s women and children in slavery. Muslims have been, and continue to be, the most vicious and shameless practitioners of slavery. The slave trade, even today, is a thriving business in some Islamic lands where wealthy, perverted sheikhs purchase children of the poor from traffickers for their sadistic gratification. Muslims are taught deception and lying in the Quran itself—something that Muhammad practiced during his life whenever he found it expedient. Successive Islamic rulers and leaders have done the same. Khomeini, the founder of the 1979 Iranian Revolution, for instance, rallied the people under the banner of democracy. All along his support for democracy was not a commitment of an honest man, but a ruse. As soon as he gathered the reins of power, Khomeini went after the Useful Idiots of his time with vengeance. These best children of Iran, having been thoroughly deceived and used by the crafty phony populist-religionist, had to flee the country to avoid the fate of tens of thousands who were imprisoned or executed by the double-crossing imam.  Almost three decades after the tragic Islamic Revolution of 1979, the suffocating rule of Islam casts its death-bearing pal over Iranians. A proud people with enviable heritage is being systematically purged of its sense of identity and forced to think and behave like the barbaric and intolerant Muslims. Iranians who had always treated women with equality, for instance, have seen them reduced by the stone-age clergy to sub-human status of Islamic teaching. Any attempt by the women of Iran to counter the misogynist rule of Muhammad’s mullahs is mercilessly suppressed. Women are beaten, imprisoned, raped and killed just as men are slaughtered without due process or mercy. The lesson is clear. Beware of the Useful Idiots who live in liberal democracies. Knowingly or unknowingly, they serve as the greatest volunteer and effective soldiers of Islam. They pave the way for the advancement of Islam and they will assuredly be among the very first victims of Islam as soon as it assumes power.    

If the islamofascists are allowed to eventually win out, the left will be tossed out just as quickly as any of the courageous fighters who resisted the advance of a dark and death oriented philosophy.

Another lesson is clear also:  

Thug-In-Chief Ahmadinejad with his co-conspirators in tow is gearing up to issue tactical nuclear arms to his proxy army Hezbollah to annihilate Israel, thus being able to evade direct responsibility and holding up innocent Lebanese civilians as human shields against any nuclear retaliation.  The lines in the sand have been drawn…We are all Jews now. 

We are facing a “hinge of history”: 

The crisis in the Middle East has shown us that the enemy is playing for keeps. And if we are to safely cross the threshold of this doorway to a new world, we are going to have to remember that one salient fact. Otherwise, our enemy will remind us of it in ways that are too horrible to contemplate. 

Unless we can face up to the fact that it is going to take a total commitment, i.e. total war, and annihilation of the enemy including the inevitable loss of civilian life, the islamofascists are going to slowly, in small steps, wear us down, hopefully (in their view), until it is too late (for us).   

…The war in the Middle East could be a hinge of history that opens a door to reveal an entirely different world than the one in which we are living now. It could be that the confluence of a perceived Israeli defeat at the hands of Hizb’allah and the defeat of Republicans in November (thanks in no small part to what is happening in Iraq) could presage a much more cautious approach to dealing with our enemies.I can think of nothing more disastrous. Our foe will not vouchsafe us breathing room to try and figure out what to do next. He will in fact redouble his efforts in Iraq and elsewhere, going for the kill, believing quite rightly that he has us on the ropes. What we will congratulate ourselves for – our forbearance and “understanding” – will be seen as weakness and a lack of resolve by the enemy. It will do nothing to deter him and will in fact embolden him in ways we can only dimly perceive. 

The e-mail I received, was “under the radar” of the antique media.  Even if they notice it, they will probably refuse to acknowledge it, even as they refuse to acknowledge prominent members of their own.

 Is the Media Ignoring Captured FNC Reporters’ Plight? 

The Palestinian kidnapping of Fox news correspondent Steve Centanni and camerman Olaf Wing is now in its fifth day, and it’s interesting to note the flabby response from both the media and so-called journalism “protection” organizations — which are usually quick to condemn Israel and the U.S. authorities in Iraq.

And, adding to the Newsbusters mention, Medacrity continues:  

Another big problem with the kidnapping, from the standpoint of pro-Palestinian mouthpieces like the Times, is that it is part of a pattern of Palestinian intimidation of journalists, as noted in an excellent FrontPage Magazine article yesterday.The media has ignored that aspect of the kidnappings, and instead has even used the kidnappings to give a publicity plug to terrorists, such as in this ludicrous AP story today quoting an Islamic Jihad terorist saying what a terrible thing it is to kidnap people. 

From Hollywood, comes the news of a full page ad signed by 85 entertainment media types, some very high powered.  You haven’t heard of this?  No surprise because it was signed by those supporting the war on terror: 

Media Ignore Celebs Against Terrorism

Have you heard the news of the latest celebrity political pronouncement?For those living in a cave, Bernie Mac, Nicole Kidman, Michael Douglas, Danny De Vito, Bruce Willis, and a host of other celebs recently signed an issue ad taking a stand…against terrorism.Didn’t hear about it? That’s no surprise. According to Nexis, not a single American news organization other than Fox News Channel has covered it.  

People are getting the message, through networks ignored by the antique media.  The forwarding list attached to my e-mail was over 100 names, both business and private.  Feel free to send the e-mail to everyone you know, irregardless of their political leanings.  Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, it doesn’t matter because unless we all start pulling together and stop using politically correct idiocy to apologize for the abhorrent behaviour of these islamofascist thugs, we are all going to be dead, or possibley worse, in subjugation.  I repeat, the United States of America will be a nation of slaves if we don’t get our collective stuff together. 

America:  Home of the free because of the brave. 


The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves.

Update:  8-20-06, 10:20 A.M.:  Opion Jornal has an article by Roger Scruton titled “Islamofascism“.  He does a much better job of explaing the evolution of the word than I have found so far, certainly much better than the la-la-times article mentioned earlier.

And although the Koran tells us that there shall be no compulsion in matters of religion, it does not overflow with kindness toward those who refuse to submit to God’s will. The best they can hope for is to be protected by a treaty (dhimmah), and the privileges of the dhimmi are purchased by onerous taxation and humiliating rites of subservience.

Christians and Jews are heirs to a long tradition of secular government, which began under the Roman Empire and was renewed at the Enlightenment: Human societies should be governed by human laws, and these laws must take precedence over religious edicts. The primary duty of citizens is to obey the state; what they do with their souls is a matter between themselves and God, and all religions must bow down to the sovereign authority if they are to exist within its jurisdiction.

The Egyptian writer and leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Sayyid Qutb, went so far as to denounce all secular law as blasphemy. Mortals who make laws for their own government, he argued, usurp a power which is God’s alone. And although few Muslim leaders will publicly endorse Qutb’s argument, few will publicly condemn it either. What to us is a proof of Qutb’s fanaticism and egomania is, for many Muslims, a proof of his piety.

Update:  8-20-06, 14:40 P.M.:  More on Useful Idiots from Amil Imani writing @ FrontPageMagazine:

Useful Idiots are naïve, foolish, ignorant of facts, unrealistically idealistic, dreamers, willfully in denial or deceptive. They hail from the ranks of the chronically unhappy, the anarchists, the aspiring revolutionaries, the neurotics who are at war with life, the disaffected alienated from government, corporations, and just about any and all institutions of society. The Useful Idiot can be a billionaire, a movie star, an academe of renown, a politician, or from any other segment of the population.
Arguably, the most dangerous Useful Idiot is the “Politically Correct.” He is the master practitioner of euphemism, hedging, doubletalk, and outright deception.

Must reading for liberals, although most will not see themselves in the mirror.

Update:  8-20-06, 1522 P.M.:  More on Useful Idiots from George de Poor Handlery @  Intellectual Conservative

The Nazis, Communists, Fascists and Islamists share defining mutual dislikes. Beyond that, while they use a different vocabulary, the catch-words that express their hates are, once “translated,” identical. These movements share a common “enemy-of-the-moment.”…
…The role played by these sympathetic empathizers — insightfully Lenin called them useful idiots – is manifold. For one thing, undaunted by the atrocities they pooh-pooh, it is suggested that a compromise with forces that regard giving an inch to gain a foot as unprincipled, is possible. If effectively presented this prevents prophylactic action against extremist threats. Once the menace is muted into action, one-sided empathy “explains” the motives by putting the blame on the injured party. On the heels of such admonitions follows the warning that restraint is to be used in responding to the tort.

An old, old song, still being recycled and bought by the antique media, hollywood, leftist politicians, and kook fringe believers, paid for in the blood of innocents.  Keep the change, idiots.  We’re not interested in what they’re selling and we can’t believe you’re buying it.

Published in: on August 19, 2006 at 5:35 pm  Comments (1)