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
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?
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
Source: Ace of Spades HQ
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.
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”
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 ‘
dhim·mi | \ ˈdimē\variants: or less commonly zimmiplural 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
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.
All other world religions make some significant peace claims, but Islam fails to do so. Failure to acknowledge this historical reality means that the Islamophile’s defensive response in support of Islam is not only disproportionate, but is deviant and disordered. Its main goal is to harass the Christians and to disabuse the West of the idea that its Christian and Jewish foundation is valid. Experiencing Christianity as a form of cultural abuse, they wish, in turn, to abuse Christians. Islam is intended as the instrument of that abuse by the non-Islamic Islamophiles.
Islam is NOT a religion. It is a totalitarian political system:
Religions don’t do that.
Once upon a time we referred to the doctrines that originated with Mohammed by calling them Mohammedanism, just as we do with Confucianism and Manicheism. Now we call them Islam, “submission.” It is rather as if Muslims started calling Christianity by the English word “charity.”
If this were not about power, then all we should have to do is explain that we sometimes use the names of founders of sects in the terms thereof, and our interlocutors should then say, “Oh, I see; OK, no problem then.” But if they are not willing to do this, then their insistence that we change our parochial behavior to suit them, despite the fact that their objection to our customary practice makes no sense, is, precisely, an exercise of power. It is the linguistic equivalent of their insistence that we not walk our dogs in parks where they are enjoying themselves, or exercise our right of free speech by evangelizing on the street in the vicinity of their public gatherings, or install footbaths in all public restrooms. If this goes on, then at some point, logically, they will be insisting that our women wear the burka, so as not to offend their sensibilities. I mention this absurd result only to demonstrate the absurdity of the premise from which it sprang.…
The question then becomes: ought we to understand our language as the Muslims wrongly understand it, just to coddle their feelings? If we do, we are effectually submitting to them, and the submission is a type of jizya.
The very same thing is proceeding, along a different vector, with the feminization of English. E.g., eliminating “waiter” and “chairman” in favor of “waitperson” and “chair,” bowdlerizing Scripture, rewriting poems and hymns, changing quotations of eminent thinkers, on and on.…
I have duly renamed my Islamic links to Mohammedanism links and will use the spellings ‘Moslem’ and ‘Koran’ from now on.
Source: PC is Jizya