Monday, August 16, 2010

Less Than Zero

Several people have sent copies of this picture, and no wonder. In a dark, here-be-evil manner it is a gripping reality. You don't have to visualize anymore how close Islam has landed again. That red rectangle marks the place where a new chapter in an ancient evil will open:

Too Near Zero

After looking at that image for a while, I tried to pick out the path where the Baron and I had wandered early in December 2001. It is hard now to retrace much of it. We were both benumbed, watching the wisps of smoke rising from that vaster-than-I-can-describe-crater, passing the hundreds of dead bouquets interspersed between plea after plea for missing loved ones, written by the survivors left behind on that beautiful September morning.

Does anyone else remember the deep blue perfection of that early Autumn day? How fathomless the September sky? How temperate the sun had become after the heat of August? Only the gum trees and sycamore had turned color; the Michaelmas daisies were in full bloom, sprawled under the fig tree. Those images would shortly be pierced by the horror of falling bodies and buildings, of determined heroism in the face of certain death .

Who would have believed then the hell hole created by Islam would still be there nine years later? Who could have conceived that Islam would be blatantly performing yet another “We Won” victory dance, a deceitful, time-worn choreography they have sadistically named “Cordoba”? This time we will experience the devastation in slow-motion, but it will be every bit as lethal as the original cataclysm on September 11th 2001.

Thus, we have Ground Zero now and appallingly close to it, there will be erected — despite our requests not to build — the disturbing “Less than Zero” edifice. Just in case we don't comprehend the depths of "Cordoba" they have been careful to plan this for September 11th, 2011. Yet another 9/11 of destruction. We must be softened up before we can be coaxed into going quietly. They are masters at this.

As sometimes happens when the banality of enormous evil seems overwhelming, I wandered over to the Belmont Club to catch up on Wretchard’s essays.
- - - - - - - - -
That is often good exercise; it clears the head and calms the mind to read Richard Fernandez’ thoughtful, moderate syntheses.

The top post (at the time) was titled “If I Had A Hammer”. As usual, Wretchard provided a perspective which permitted one to see the larger patterns.

Among other things in that essay, he said:

Pete Seeger wrote “If I Had a Hammer” to support the ‘progressive’ movement. Anyone who thinks the song is about bells, danger or hammers is missing the point. Most everyone who heard the lyrics ‘got it’. In the case of the Ground Zero mosque, one line of argument is that it is all about simple piety and innocent worship or even about a Green YMCA. But polls suggest that about 70% of the public ‘get it’.

The nice thing about parabolic speech is that its meta-meaning is deniable. You can shelter behind its literal words and that is precisely why it is so effective as a means of indirect discourse. The important thing to remember about allegorical discourse is that the arguments are transferred elsewhere.

Indeed. One has only to read the depredations of the Journolisters to grasp some of the latest transferences in which our professional progressives indulge. And one only has to note that the profound distaste of seventy per cent of the American people regarding this project will matter not a whit to those who are determined to push our faces into the supremacist reality of Islam-come-to-stay-and-to-reign.

In addition to Wretchard’s syntheses, there are his faithful commenters. I remember some of them from the old days.

One fellow I didn’t recognize, but his comment resonated. This is from cfbleachers (slightly edited; emphases mine):

…got me to thinking about what we should do with the separation of “church” and “state”…when the “church” is really an enemy “state” in disguise. What if we are looking is not at a mosque in Manhattan, but a shoe being beaten against the grave site of our innocents?

Do we, as Americans have a right to defend our nation from an enemy that is willing to hide behind hospitals to lob bombs, or behind a mosque to lob sharia bombs at our society?

[…]

We have lost our ability to distinguish…the preservation of the right to advance the well being of the nation as a whole. When we allow the destruction of the nation by subverting our defenses and protections, our very borders, against invaders bent on weakening us, softening us up, and beating us with our rolled-up Constitution.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in our Constitution that demands we sacrifice the defense of the nation to our enemies. When we stop defending the nation in order to glorify sanctimonious breast-beating, we are lost.

This administration and its progenitors — Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Noam Chomsky and George Soros — subscribe to a “tear-down-to-build-up” mentality. So do our sworn enemies, which is why they often [use] the same playbook. They only part ways when they dream of who will be left standing in the “build-up” stage.

Frankly, it reminds me of Manson’s Helter Skelter theory. I thought he was a madman. He may have been prescient.

For the moment, our would-be destroyers are joined in the battle against us. If they were to win, they would turn on one another and begin further rounds of destruction. Will we, to paraphrase Wylie’s prediction during the horrors in World War II, be reduced to two survivors, one ‘white’ and one ‘twenty per cent freckled’? Will one of them die from a blow to the head while the other languishes a few hours more and then dies from the poisoned soup his dead comrade fixed? Is that our ineluctable fate?

Wretchard says in a comment:

The Ground Zero mosque event is like one of those Soylent Green moments, when you suddenly understand how it works. Or it is like finding out that your local church is corrupt and perverted. All of a sudden all your memories get reinterpreted. But in this case it applies to the politicians who have sold their souls to accommodate not even Islam, but a perverted and oppressive form of it.

Unfortunately, it appears that the “perverted and oppressive form” of Islam is the real Islam. The original documents in all their confusion and incoherence are full of perversion and oppression and deception and death. Oh, so much death!

The gatekeepers should be free to approve of the mosque and even endorse it. And the voters should be free to vote them out. The curious thing about all these gatekeepers is that after ignoring the New Black Panthers, the corrupt voters’ lists, after suing Arizona to keep it from enforcing statute, after treating everything like their own they suddenly say “we are a nation of laws … we must respect private property” when it comes to a mosque built near Ground Zero.

It’s so fake you wonder why nobody noticed earlier that while they play “real rules” they insist everyone else should play the “formal rules”. They play one game and make you play another. Because you should be too good to “descend to their level”.

Absolutely. Why, we pride ourselves on not being “like them”. But the problem for us average folks is grasping the full picture. It’s as though we pray this is only a dream, that soon we’ll wake to find our country hasn’t been sold down the river and that Massa Barack isn’t really as mean-spirited and small-minded as he appears.

But there is no waking from this, and, to a large extent, we realize the slavery imposed on us while we weren’t paying attention.

Wretchard again:

Well, anyone who agrees to play at this shabby and crooked table deserves to lose. The first and essential decision is not to dance to their tune. The most important way to keep from getting took is to stay away from a clip joint.

But what if, increasingly, the only game in town is going on at the clip joint?

Go lateral. Create linkages in other spheres. Probably the most relevant linkage to conceive of right now is the elections. The mosque isn’t about “laws” or “private property”, it’s about the 2010 elections.

Other spheres? Ah, yes, the Tea Parties. No wonder it’s so vital to smash them. And how about Sarah Palin? There’s a woman who refuses to dance to any of their tunes and declines to show her cards.

No wonder average folks are so energized by Ms. Palin’s zest and zeal. No wonder the Political Class hates her. Hates her so much they needed to have one of their own move in next door to the Palin house and report the quotidian events of her life to anyone who’ll pay to listen.

Come to think of it, there are some parallels between the Zero Mosque builders (first they have to tear the building down) and the Sarah Palin Stalkers (first they have to destroy her). Both of them use the tactic of moving in for the kill.

Wretchard says:

It doesn’t have to make sense.

Mais oui, sir! It makes perfect sense. But the sense it makes is sleazy, duplicitous and soul-sucking.

Sometimes I am nostalgic for the days of Bill Clinton. The sleaze level should have had its own color-coded threat warnings, but it was the simple sex-lies-and-videotape sleaze. That was the kind of thing one came to expect of politicians, but done on a grander, more grandiose scale, a Clintonesque level.

This current sleaze is far darker. And, no, I am not referring to Obama’s black father. Our president’s past is a murk without a paper trail. His metric is divisive: “I won”. His “change” is a doom of debt that stretches so far past the horizon not even our grandchildren will see the end of it.

The top-down rot infecting our body politic is wormy with incompetence. Thus we will end not with a bang, but in a miasma of malevolent incoherence.

22 comments:

4Symbols said...

In hoc signo vinces

Mainstream BBC tv news in the UK used a similiar satellite image, even the newscasters of the BBC looked shocked by the audacity and disrespect of the proximity to Ground Zero - a very effective image.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

I haven't watched BBC news for over a year now. They actually used that image? They showed it? I wonder if any of them started to get a clue...

It scares me a little that people are still stuck on the idea that there's no fundamental difference between a mosque and a church (or any holy place - mosques don't count). Point out that islam has a habit of building mosques on the ruins of temples and churches and graveyards and they say "so does christianity". Whilst it might have been true in the past, the only "holy" place I've seen a church built recently was a local cinema. Yet in Manchester I see a church that has been torn in half, its tower cut and its roof demolished and left open to the elements while an "islamic centre" inhabits a pair of portacabins, the church offices and the vestry. It's been that way for nearly a decade.

They say, the church did it. Hindus did it. They say that christianity was more violent then than Islam is now (which is bull anyway). They can't seem to get that what happened in the past doesn't matter. What's happening now matters. Islam did those things then and is doing these things NOW.

Others here have pointed out that Islam plays that same game, holding us to standards it doesn't hold itself to. Islam and the left. Others here have predicted that it's only a matter of time before we "good people" reject the notion that we should be the better man. We are trying to save our lives and save face by not getting in to a fight but the bible tells us what happens when you try that (And yes, I'm quoting scripture, go me!)

"If you cling to your life, you will lose it, and if you let your life go, you will save it."

We cling to our lives. I know I do. Once I clung to my comfort and my precious honour, that I can never be accused of "racism". That I was always the better man. We cling to it and we're going to lose it. As many here have said, we have to let go of that. Become the fire that burns, plunge in to the abyss. There's no hiding from the fact that it will happen but I've finally reached the point, where I ask myself, will I do anything to try and moderate it? Will I accept the beating to hold on to my pride or will I turn the other cheek, turn to face death and stare it in the face with defiance? Will I try and cling to my civilised life?

Robert said...

Christians stopped destroying pagan temples in Europe when they ran out of temples to destroy.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

Wrong. There were and are plenty of pagan sites left unmolested. Some were used as churches by early converts but others were just abandoned. There were few, if any actual "temples", but there are extant thousands of shrines all over Europe, some of which are still in use to this day.

Zenster said...

Just in case we don't comprehend the depths of "Cordoba" they have been careful to plan this for September 11th, 2011.

Out of such a plethora of affronts to American sensibilities this one is the tipping point. As is so often the case, Islam simply cannot resist applauding itself. Like the proverbial "cock on the dunghill", Islam will try to crow over its psychological victory even as it crystallizes opposition that once might have been ambivalent. Some slights simply cannot be ignored and inaugurating their Ground Zero mosque on the 9-11 atrocity’s tenth anniversary transcends all insult and becomes full on desecration.

Few, if any, Americans can miss the meaning and it will only serve to harden the growing hostility of a constantly antagonized people.

This is where Islam’s deliberate policy of low intensity conflict will come back to haunt it. I have noted before that these outrages are, drop by drop, filling the vessel of America’s pooling wrath. Added in such small increments, a container can be made to hold an extra measure than if it is poured full.

So it is with Islam. Taken individually, these constant but seemingly minor abuses will see our nation’s ire filled brimful. It may be some rather innocuous antagonism that will serve as the well-known straw that breaks the camel’s back. What shall ensue will be a torrent of pent up anger and sheer grudge that brooks no compassion or mercy.

Like a metal that has been peened by repeated hammer blows, America’s opposition to Islam will continue hardening until all sympathy for Muslims collapses like the Twin Towers on that fateful September morning. When that time comes, and it most certainly is coming, Islam will finally learn the full depth and proportion of resentment that has gathered against it.

Only then will the 9-11 atrocity finally be recognized as the first of Islam’s own death knell. When the bell has finished tolling, those Muslims who survive will have learned to curse forever the name of Osama bin Laden.

Per cfbleachers: …got me to thinking about what we should do with the separation of “church” and “state”…when the “church” is really an enemy “state” in disguise.

If there is one central meme that needs to perish, it is the illusion of Islam as a religion.

IF THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, IT’S NOT A CHURCH … IT’S A STATE.

So long as Islam and shari’a are inseparable (and they are), Islam cannot be construed as anything but a political ideology that is wholly antagonistic to America’s Constitution and rule of law.

Unfortunately, it appears that the “perverted and oppressive form” of Islam is the real Islam. The original documents in all their confusion and incoherence are full of perversion and oppression and deception and death.

This is the other meme that must die alongside Islam’s religious camouflage; the persistent delusion that there is some notionally acceptable form of Islam.

Islam comes in only one flavor and it is called "shari'a".

No amount of pretending will change the fact that Islam is an ongoing crime against humanity and shari'a is one vast violation of human rights.

The tyrannous nature of shari’a is inextricable from its practice and content. Freedom and liberty are alien constructs that find no refuge in an Islamic world.

Robert: Christians stopped destroying pagan temples in Europe when they ran out of temples to destroy.

I know what you mean. That thirteen story chapel they erected at Stonehenge is such an eyesore.

While we're at it, do permit me to congratulate you upon drawing moral equivalence between events that happened centuries ago and a millennia-old pattern of tyrannous, domineering behavior that persists to this very day.

Just in case you didn't get the memo, Archonix said it rather well:

What's happening now matters. Islam did those things then and is doing these things NOW.

Rob said...

Oh, Robert, Robert, Robert. You are SO like President Sock Puppet Himself, no matter what the issue, blame Bush, blame the stinking christers, blame your own country for the lunatics that declared war on us. Make no mistake, we will fight them, Crusader to Jihadist. As the byline of this site states, this is just the latest battle in a very old war.

Graham Dawson (Archonix) said...

It's funny (going back to the topic at hand), I've found myself pining a little for the days of Clinton's presidency. We still had John Major, who was a duplicitious hack and an absolute scoundrel in his politics, but was a decent fellow in person and still held on to some basic ideas of wrong and right. The world seemed simpler. Brighter, perhaps. Sleaze was everywhere, but what then became headline news and caused a government to fall to its knees is now ignored - because it's overshadowed by things far worse. I suppose pining for the past is normal, but it really was better than. Or perhaps I was just asleep.

parabarbarian said...

How far away would it have to be to no longer be "too close"?

Zenster said...

parabarbarian: How far away would it have to be to no longer be "too close"?

Given this mosque's name, intended opening date and the track record of Feisal Abdul Rauf, I'd have to say; "the moon".

Old Atlantic Lighthouse said...

Zenster, great long comment above.

Dymphna said...

@parabarbarian--

"too close" would be, at a minimum, not any building that was damaged by the debris from 9/11. The reports I've read say that the old coat factory has lodged in it a piece of the wheel or landing gear from one of the planes that hit the Twin Towers. Thus, it has become a de facto reliquary.

That's too close for comfort for seventy per cent of Americans.

Just because it's legal to do someothing doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, or the wisest course.

Bad karma on this one all the way 'round.

Construction workers will balk at having to build there (even if they do so in order to feed their families). And I'd presume there would be a fair amount of passive-aggressive slow-downs, sabotage, endless picketing, etc.

The OIC is watching this one very carefully. If the Imam & Daisy succeed in getting Cordoba up and running it will go a long way toward easing the minds of the OIC leaders. Right now they're obsessing on the ban of minarets in Switzerland and the rise of Wilders in the Netherlands.

In their eyes, the first led directly to the second (no, I don't know why they believe thie).

However, the OIC doesn't 'get' referenda, free speech, etc. They are still pestering the federal Swiss govt to "do something" about the vote. They really believe if they pester long enough then the leaders in Switzerland will have to give in.

If Cordoba fails, it will really put the fear of Allah into them.

If Cordoba gets built, it will be an on-going sore spot for NYC. It will eat up monies required for police protection, mob control, etc. The Port Authority will be none too happy with what this will cost them, either.

Bloomberg has himself out on a limb here. Can't tell if it's a limb of his choosing or just a dumb move. But there he sits with the limb swaying...

Sean O'Brian said...

Premature but Haaretz is reporting that "insiders" have said Muslim leaders plan to back down and move the site of the mosque:

Muslim leaders to abandon plans for Ground Zero community center

Stephen said...

Can we build the Jan Sobieski Rib Joint next door to it? :-)

The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...

Dymphna, I'm not at all surprised by your views on this topic. I am surprised at the relatively little discussion Gates of Vienna has given to this topic. As you probably have guessed, I completely disagree with you, on the basic premise that Islam, as practiced by most Muslims, is a religion, not a cult or ideology or totalitarian evil or whatever you and your regular commenters choose to label it. As such, it is as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as any church, mosque, temple would be.

I'm going to be condescending to your European readers and suggest to them that, just as many Americans don't understand the cultural, ethnic, and religous homogeneity of Europe and its various nations, Europeans don't understand the U.S. and its vigilant protection and nourishment of diversity, both ethnic and religious. Based upon the poll you quote, Dymphna, I'm ashamed to note that 70 percent of all Americans don't understand it either.

Cyrus said...

Stephen: Will Jan's be serving pork ribs?

Zenster said...

Nodrog: I am surprised at the relatively little discussion Gates of Vienna has given to this topic.

I can only assume, then, that you are a functional illiterate. The quantity and depth of discussion at Gates of Vienna about Islam's ideological nature and lack of spirituality is voluminous.

As you probably have guessed, I completely disagree with you, on the basic premise that Islam, as practiced by most Muslims, is a religion, not a cult or ideology or totalitarian evil or whatever you and your regular commenters choose to label it.

Your statement demonstrates a distinct lack of appreciation for the core tenets of Islam.

The inseparable legal code of shari'a law requires that all Muslims strive to make it dominate around the world. To do this, it mandates a variety of methods which include outright sedition.

As such, it is as protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as any church, mosque, temple would be.

Sedition is a crime and this disqualifies Islam from all Constitutional protections that peaceable and genuinely spiritual faiths merit. Islam's congenital inability to reciprocate regarding religious freedom is yet another aspect that justifiably disincludes it from any candidacy for allowable practice in a free and civilized society.

You will need to provide cogent legal arguments as to why the foregoing is not applicable. Merely noting that Islam is currently allowed to be practiced within America's borders is insufficient. The ability of Muslims to worship in America is due to a dramatic legal oversight the proportions of which represent a serious breach of this nation's judicial code.

LAW Wells said...

With reference to Sean O'Brian's link to the Haaretz article, I should think that the Muslims are being quite savvy. They're building up the ire of the community, only to relent at the last minute and project an image of benevolence and reconciliation. This serves to further them even more, because "reasonable" people (ie progressives) can then say "Look, they're not so bad. You should be ashamed of yourself, you Islamophobe".

However, I'm not saying that Haaretz is on the ball there (I won't know until after they've announced it), but either way, Islam is playing a very dangerous game. The stakes are high, and if it fails, it will fail spectacularly.

Gordon - Europe is far from ethnically, culturally and religiously homogeneous. Austrians and Germans and the French and the Spanish and the Italians may all be Christian, but they have such different cultures (seriously, would you ever find a Frenchman yodelling in leiderhosen?) that to equate them all is utter hogwash. So don't be so condescending to us to declare Europeans a single culture and race.

And considering that Islam perpertrated the atrocity that was the September 11 attacks, putting a mosque a five minute stroll down the street from where the towers stood would be a big one-fingered salute to those who died, as Islam has never truly expanded except by the sword, or in this case, the plane. Allowing this mosque would be to further encourage them.

And Shariah is more totalitarian than any other totalitarian regime, because not only is there that famous epithet that some are more equal than others, but there's a sugar-candy mountain thrown into the mix as well. Body, mind and soul to the state, rather than just the first (and maybe the second).

Zenster said...

LAW Wells: … I should think that the Muslims are being quite savvy. They're building up the ire of the community, only to relent at the last minute and project an image of benevolence and reconciliation.

An excellent point which makes it all the more important to raise such a stink about it. Not just the mosque itself but the entire quiver of barbs it represents on the part of Islam.

All of the territorial imperatives and usurpation of Western decency needs to be dragged out into the disinfecting sunlight so that Islam cannot suddenly paint itself as the good guy.

The stakes are high, and if it fails, it will fail spectacularly.

Islam is like one of those crystals with so many tensile flaws that even just a slight but fundamental stress upon it will make it explode catastrophically.

The primary example of this is how Islam is foreordained to destruction. Be it through retaliation by antagonized external powers or just its usual internecine bloodshed, Islam's lust for nuclear weapons will spell its doom.

Islam is too irrational and overly dependent upon violence to ever survive possession of truly major weapons. A child playing with a loaded gun has better chances of survival.

IoshkaFutz said...

For liberals the mosque is a God-given right.

For Conservative-liberals it's a God-given right, but a matter of bad taste.

The very best enlightenment can do is call it bad taste. A breach of etiquette.

Nothing evil, dastardly. This is what happens when a country is no longer akin to an extended home and its people akin to an extended family, but merely a system.

If a country fiddles around with basic morality in the name of freedom, it really has no right to complain if someone fiddles back.

If the Imam decided to decorate the facade with a choice selection from the Holy Koran - and I'd suggest:

"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage..." (Surah 2:190)

...and if he decided to have those holy words done up in an arabesque frieze fashioned out of stylized box-cutters...

...Obama would have to come out and defend freedom and art in their broadest definitions (i.e. crucifixes in urine).

If Freedumb is sacred and not just a component, but truly THE N°1 thing,then voilà... cold blooded murder gets celebrated... and RIGHTFULLY so. Human life itself is just an opinion. We established that a long time ago.

An unwanted child is a bummer and barbarians celebrating their most successful slaughter of Americans is "bad taste"...

No sacred, no sacrosanct. Don't complain... but keep an eye on the mobs... they remember the very "good taste" of those heroic firemen who rushed back in. And they don't like them dying in vain whereas that "other hero" Mohammad Atta - thanks to Freedumb - not dying in vain. The same phrase he shouted before smacking into one of the towers will now be shouted, sung and creepily moaned, right there over the pulverized bones of his victims. And the same precepts that inspired him, i.e. "Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage..." (Surah 2:190) will be taught.

Bad taste... Yech!

Robert Marchenoir said...

Gordon said :

"I'm going to be condescending to your European readers and suggest to them that, just as many Americans don't understand the cultural, ethnic, and religous homogeneity of Europe and its various nations, Europeans don't understand the U.S. and its vigilant protection and nourishment of diversity, both ethnic and religious."

As a European, I'm going to be condescending to Gordon, and tell him that he understands nothing of the true nature of Islam.

I'll go one step further, be even more condescending, and tell him that he understands nothing of the true principles of America. In the American political model, "diversity" is subordinate to patriotism and to the acceptance of the core beliefs that made America.

"Diversity" is not a good by itself. If it works against the American ethos, if it is divisive and subversive, then it is certainly highly un-American.

Islam obviously falls into that category.

Being "diverse" is not a value. As Zenster somewhat abruptly put it, add a bit of excrement to vanilla icecream, and, presto, you have a "diverse" icecream.

Or, you could top your vanilla icecream with some grilled almonds, and, surprise, surprise, you get another "diverse" icecream.

Any preferences ?

The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...

Can a Muslim be an American patriot?

What is a good Muslim? “It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards East or West; but it is righteousness to believe in God and the Last Day and the Angels, and the Book, and the Messengers; to spend of your substance, out of love for Him, for your kin, for orphans for the needy, for the wayfarer, for those who ask; and for the freeing of captives; to be steadfast in prayers, and practice regular charity; to fulfill the contracts which you made; and to be firm and patient in pain (or suffering) and adversity and throughout all periods of panic. Such are the people of truth, the God-conscious.” (Qur’an 2:177)

Perhaps, Ioshkafutz, the good imam will put this quote from the Koran on the facade. There are many more of a similar nature to choose from.

In the Qur’an, we read that the earth in its entirety belongs to God, and humans can settle anywhere as long as they do not encroach on the rights of others to that piece of land where they will settle. As such, wherever Muslims live, they have the responsibility to defend the community and take care of the environment and other related matters for the good of all. “Patriotism”, in the sense of “love for a place where one lives and has a home and family” is part of one’s faith in Islam. Hence, “loyalty” and “patriotism” to one’s country of residence is an obligation that stems from one’s faith commitment.

The five pillars of Islam are: The declaration that there is no deity but the One God, and that Mohammad is a messenger of the One God; To perform daily prayers; To fast; To give regular charity; And to perform pilgrimage to Mecca once in lifetime. I wonder how these beliefs interfere with one’s good citizenship anymore than believing in Jesus or the Holy Sacrament or Trinity would contradict ones patriotism.

There's a lot more, but by now Zenster is probably plugging his ears and shouting "la la la la, I can't hear you!"

Zenster said...

Nodrog: As such, wherever Muslims live, they have the responsibility to defend the community and take care of the environment and other related matters for the good of all.

You just don't get it, do you? All this noble sounding rubbish only applies to Muslims. It is purposefully flogged about by Islam as appearing to be universal specifically in order to recruit gullible and "useful" i… i… individuals like yourself. The "good of all" is only what is good for the ummah and not for mankind, but that somehow manages to elude your delicate sensibilities despite being demonstrated throughout Islam's entire history. But, please, do not let facts interfere with your little fantasy world.

The five pillars of Islam are: The declaration that there is no deity but the One God, and that Mohammad is a messenger of the One God; To perform daily prayers; To fast; To give regular charity; And to perform pilgrimage to Mecca once in lifetime. I wonder how these beliefs interfere with one’s good citizenship anymore than believing in Jesus or the Holy Sacrament or Trinity would contradict ones patriotism.

They interfere when such charity, known as zakat, is specifically directed towards Muslims only and implicitly must be, in some part, used for the purposes of jihad.

There's a lot more, but by now Zenster is probably plugging his ears and shouting "la la la la, I can't hear you!"

Your lack of civility is far less impressive when compared to the towering ignorance you display regarding the role of ideologically sanctioned deceit (taqiyya), in Islam. Far be it from me to suggest that your parroting of Islam's propaganda makes you an accomplice in Muslim crimes against humanity.

Most hilarious of all is how, in a global caliphate, liberals such as yourself would the first to have your necks stretched out on Islam's chopping block.