The Battle of Tours

It seemed that Muhammed and his successors did not understand that “Jihad” meant internal struggle over oneself and that “Islam” meant “peace” and the meaning of “submission” was one’s own submission to Allah. They apparently thought “Jihad” meant real war against unbelievers, using real swords and spears, leaving real dead and mutilated bodies in its wake and the “submission” was forcing those not in Islam to submit to it. But what did they know? They only founded the religion or followed in the footsteps of the founder.

Need another Charles Martel to hammer the Moslem nail… hammer it all the way to Mecca.

Source: The Battle of Tours

Is Islam a Religion?

Short answer; no.

The standard rebuttal that all faiths have at one time or another shown themselves prone to violence and repression misses the essential point. All the major religions have reformed themselves, reducing or eliminating the all-too-human tendency to sanctimonious oppression—and none of these faiths, let us remember, endorsed oppression as a universal creedal or Divine imperative. Such is not the case with Islam, a communion that since its inception in the 7th century has seldom strayed from its sanguinary path of carnage and subdual.…

… The Founders, Bynum asserts, “clearly meant to define religion in a Judeo-Christian context.” Islam, however, “is self-segregating, fosters ideas of Muslim supremacy and thereby sows seeds of social discord.” What kind of religion, we might ask, degrades women as second-class citizens, approves anti-Semitism, preaches hatred against “infidels,” sponsors terrorist attacks on an almost daily basis with Koranic warrant, and wishes to impose Sharia, “a parallel legal system based on inequality,” on its Western host countries?

Furthermore, as we have seen, Islam insists on territorial sovereignty and does not distinguish between theology and politics, which is why its definitional status as a “religion” is or should be moot.

Source: Is Islam a Religion?

Sex and State Power

In the Muslim world, women are viewed as temptresses, and men as feeble creatures incapable of resisting feminine wiles. The only way to control the anarchy that this perceived sexual imbalance creates is for the State — and remember that Islam and the State are indistinguishable from each other — to exert total dominion over the women within its reach.

Source: Sex and State Power

Lessons for America From India’s War Against Muslim Illegal Migrants

What makes America’s border different from those of so many other countries isn’t the lack of fencing. Smugglers, traffickers, and assorted criminals can often find weak points in any security setup. In most countries, the defense of the border is seen as a national security issue backed by real firepower.

America’s Border Patrol has less than 20,000 people. India’s Border Security Force has 186 battalions and 257,363 people. It’s a paramilitary organization with an intelligence network, ten artillery units, air and marine wings, and canine and even camel units. And the weapons aren’t just there for show.

Over 1,000 illegal infiltrators have been killed trying to enter India from Bangladesh in over a decade.

BSF personnel are allowed to shoot on sight.

And that is what we need to be doing on our borders.

Source: Lessons for America From India’s War Against Muslim Illegal Migrants

Justifying “Islamophobia”

My assessment of Islam, conclusively supported by indisputable facts, is that it is a dangerous, destructive and death-bearing belief system of a long-ago savage people that has inflicted and continues to inflict misery and death to people.  According to Christopher Hitchens, Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.

Islam is a degenerate, hate-filled political ideology that should be banned in any civilized society. Its adherents should be expelled or executed. Its ‘mosques’ and other properties should be confiscated by the state.

Those who believe Islam is a ‘peaceful religion’ are deluded Islam-deniers who should be expelled also.

Source: Justifying “Islamophobia”

Et tu WordPress?

I can see that I will not be renewing my blog with WordPress. I do not support such deplatforming bullies. Notice that WordPress doesn’t actually mention what ‘terms of service’ justified the silencing of a perfectly decent blog. This is a violation of the 1st Amendment. But Islam and moslems don’t respect the Constitution. Neither does WordPress.

WordPress, thy name is ‘Dhimmitude.’

dhimmi

noun

dhim·​mi | \ ˈdimē\
variants: or less commonly zimmi
plural dhimmis or dhimmi also zimmis or zimmi

Definition of dhimmi

: a person living in a region overrun by Muslim conquest who was accorded a protected status and allowed to retain his or her original faith
Allowed to ‘retain’ but not allowed to practice his original faith. Or, as WordPress demonstrates, not allowed to engage in his original freedoms.
  • dhimmitude(Noun)

    appeasement towards Islamic demands

The WordPress ‘terms of service’ appear to include protecting the murderous followers of the pedophile prophet from criticism. WordPress demonstrates exactly the ‘creeping sharia’ documented by the blog they silenced. Well done, WordPress.