Read on Jihad Watch about the women who had their hands (notice the “s” at the end; it means “both of them”) chopped off for some offence which was certainly not adultery, and might well have been (though the article does not confirm it as I write) the horrible, horrible crime of the use of a mobile phone.
Ah, the religion of peace! Always full of surprises…
It is not known how the husbands of the women reacted, seen as having a wife without hands around the house might be something of an inconvenience. On the other hand, the solution for the husband could be very easy: kick the woman on the street, and that was that. Divorce, Mohammed way.
I am trying to be sorry for the women; the treatment they received certainly goes against every sense of humanity, and should inspire compassion in us. At the same time, I cannot but wonder whether these women supported the ISIS in their heart, and approved of the local state of affair; in that not improbable case, I have great difficulties in seeing in the women the victims, rather the accomplices. You do not empathise much with gangsters killed by other gangster, either.
Go on, ladies! Enjoy the religion of peace!
Mohammed will always be with you, ready to give you a hand; or two, as the case may be.
It is not known to me that Hindus go around massacring their own, besides the others, in huge numbers. Never have I seen Buddhists instaurate a terror regime among their own correligionists. Sikh do not decapitate people on the public square for the “edification” of children and women.
No other religion I know has hundreds of idiots, of both sexes, leaving Europe and choosing to be willing accomplices of such unspeakable cruelty. Nor do they video poor people (of their own religion) as they burn them alive, once they have noticed beheadings do not cause massive shock anymore.
Sure, other religions have violent elements. When the mob explodes, no minority is safe. But the ISIS is on a different scale altogether. The ISIS is a true statual organisation, built on one thing and one thing only: Islam. Both the scope and ferociousness of their action is fueled by, and could never endure unless fueled by, their own religion. The violence and cruelty that is inherent in Islam finds in the ISIS not its aberration, but its completion. They practice what Mohammed preached, and there is no way to just wish away this brutal fact.
The fight against ISIS is a fight against Islam. They are more dangerous because they are more Muslim. The inherent evil of Islam finds in them an expression unhindered by the common sense of humanity.
Islam is inherently evil and violent. In the ISIS, Islam finds its most complete realisation seen in recent centuries.
So yes: the ISIS is a Muslim problem.
I am alarmed at reading around that our first enemy would be Western Atheism, or Secularism.
The first enemy is Islam. And the second. And the third.
Secularism might try to silence you. Islam will cut your head.
Secularism aborts its children. Islam produces a lot of them, and uses them as a way to power. Therefore, Secularism sits on its own time bomb, but helping Islam means importing a huge bomb within our shores,; and make no mistake, this bomb will be used against us.
Secularism still has, in the West, basic concepts of piety and respect. Islam will cut your throat and make a video of it, and make seven year old children execute you.
Secular democracies tend to revert or correct their wrong position after a while. Abortion is under attack after only one generation and a half. Islam becomes a nightmare that only… a Western power can take down, and it needs an awful lot of ass-kicking.
You can always try to reason with an Atheist. You can never reason with an Islamist. The first one’s attitude is one of wrong reasoning; the second one’s is refusal to reason.
Islam is a self-detonating bomb. Given enough traction, Islam leads to militant Islamism like twilight leads to dusk.
It is madness to think we may have more in common with a Muslim than with an Atheist. The Atheist is, when all is said and done, us minus the faith. The Muslim is the contrary of us. Even the most hardened Atheist can easily convert, when he start thinking with lucidity. He will find his place in the Western World without any problem. But the Islamist will be prevented by his very religion to do so. To him, the Western World will never be an option. to him, the West itself is the enemy.
In all this, niceness (or: the “good Muslims”) is neither here nor there. Islam tends to self-radicalisation. At some point, the “nice Muslims” are made to shut up, or die. You can bet your last shirt that their children won’t be so nice. It will need a Western Power to frighten them (Iran), keep them under control (Western Colonisation), or kick their ass altogether (Afghanistan, Iraq).
Compared to Islam, Secularism is a walk in the park. The French Revolution destroyed the Church in France, but after around a decade she was there again, tall and strong. The African Mediterranean coast conquered by the Mohammedans in the VII Century is largely Mohammedan to this very day.
There is no similarity whatever between Islam and Christianity. Islam is to Christianity what sodomy is to marital intercourse.
Similarly, there can be no identification between modern democracies and French Revolution. The American Colonies and the British Institutions were beautiful modern examples of the first, when no one even knew what the second is.
The first, second, and third enemy is Islam. Secularism is a problem, and it can be a threat to our freedom. But Islamists will cut your very throat, and let their many children watch.
We will deal with Secularism all right, as we always did. They are aborting themselves fast anyway. To defeat Secularism we only need sensible shepherds and functioning freedoms. To defeat the Muslims among us we might, at some point and if the blind attitude does not change, need a bloodbath of biblical proportions.
No Pope of the sane past has ever considered Mohammedans allied against Secularism.
The first, the second, and the third enemy is Islam.
Ah, the religion of peace! Once again, the cult has kept faithful to its name, sending 141 people to their eternal, more or less peaceful rest. And you will notice that on the BBC it is difficult to find a separate count, so after reading several contributions on the Buggers' site I still don't know whether the final count of 141 includes the seven butchers, or not.
Wait… what am I saying?! How can I be so insensitive?! These continuous massacres, this climate of inhuman violence in several Muslim Countries should not let us believe that there be anything wrong with Islam! Perish the thought! You naughty Taliban boys, you! You will not manage to damage the image of Islam for us liberals, because we will always, always want to believe in your innate goodness! But we will certainly not allow any Christian to go after you, because we are sure that they are out there, in all the major cities of Europe, yearning to see your blood! May I accompany you home, Adbullah? You never know what kind of people you may encounter, with all these fanatical Christians around…
There. I have said it. I had a bad start, and I apologise for that. But now, I feel again a full member of the Liberal Idiot Society.
It feels so good, I will never stop.
The press has reported that some young Muslim cretins have spread leaflets on London’s Oxford Street, informing their correligionist of peace that a new Caliphate is now ongoing, and the duties of the unfaithful are, among others, to give moolah and, possibly, to move there. All rather neutral, of course, and certainly reviewed by someone versed in law.
The cretins have, though, conveniently omitted to say the “caliphate” appears to be the worst example of mindless homicidal fury since Pol Pot, or the massacres in Rwanda and Burundi in 1994. Perhaps in their mind the locals aren’t dangerous, and – as the owner of the Rottweiler said – they only want to play.
Put down that head.
Those who read the leaflets, though, and were to decide to move there, are certainly in no doubt as to the nature of this new quasi-statual organisation born out of Obama’s senseless “peace and freedom” rhetoric. They are, therefore, moving there with the intention to take part to the jihad in some way or other (say: part-time beheader, or junior massacre operative).
I do not think anyone like that would live in the UK and renounce to give trouble. It is, in fact, very reasonable to think anyone moving to ISIS territory is already a full-blown terrorist mind, waiting for the occasion to spread death on our shores. This prompts in your truly some considerations and a heartfelt, half tongue-in-cheek, half deadly serious encouragement.
Move to Iraq, my violent Arabic friend. Do not stay here in the UK. The weather is horrible, the food mediocre, the cost of living far too high, and half the girls very fat or severely obese. The trains are often cancelled because of “signal failure”, (=copper theft?), the buses drive you to despair, and there’s a speed camera every three blocks. You can’t rape a little girl like your so-called “prophet” did, and the beer is excellent, which is a constant temptation. why live with all that?
Take the next plane to Jordan, my violent friend, and hence bring your sorry Muslim ass to Syria or Iraq. We will need no expensive trials with you; no damn human right lawyers fighting your extradition if you happen to be a foreign citizen; no costly investigations.
A guided bomb will take care of you all right. If will give you what you most crave: being stuffed in the backside, big time, for the sake of the child-raping prophet of yours. Don’t fret: it will all be very fast. You will barely have the time to think “I’m …..”, and you will be already in the next world, where 72 extremely hairy and extremely horny sodomites believe you are the male virgin they have been promised they will enjoy.
Make haste, my violent friend. Don’t delay! Think of how difficult, expensive, and time consuming would be to deal with you here in the UK, where decades of high-security detention would make you cost vast sums. Be a good Muslim, and make it easy for us and for you. I promise you: the end will be swift, and no beheading.
You want to be a martyr. Who are we to judge?
I was, like everyone else, glad to read this morning of the arrival in Rome of Meriam Yahia Ibrahim Ishag, the woman condemned to die by the usual stupid Islamic tribunal after having apostatised and converted to Christianity.
I was not worried for her destiny, as we all know that once these episodes of persecution reach the headlines it is only a matter of time before some face-saving solution for all parties involved is found. I was, nevertheless, relieved, because you can never know which headline-causing case will be used by the powers that be to, say, show a change of attitude.
The reality is, I think, that in the East you are at high risk of death and persecution and violence only as long as your story does not make it to the West, and you become a face with a name. Once you do (and lucky you) people in the West react to the “individual destiny” story sufficiently strongly to motivate the Western governments to deliver; and they generally do, discreetly and efficiently. But as long as you are one of the many women savagely beaten, or a part of the anonymous, faceless mass of people chased from Mosul, you are in deep trouble and high risk of being insulted, persecuted, forced to flee, raped, or beaten to death.
We all know this is how it works, and we all know the more stupid society becomes, the more it will become so. The proles reading their dirty, semi-pornographic “Metro” or “Evening Standard” newspaper on the underground do not get a concept like “Christians are persecuted on an unprecedented scale”. Not only it is too complicated for their simple minds; most importantly, it does not provide them with the cheap shot of intravenous feel-good fix they need to feel they have some “values”. When, though, the mob sees a face and a name and a story, its dim brain starts to work, and this is exactly the moment the politics start to move.
Matteo Renzi, the Italian Prime Minister, doesn't give a fig for Christianity. He even openly supports sodomy, which makes pretty much every Muslim more Christian than him. But like every smart politician he understands when it's the time to show the face of the protector of the oppressed. The mob likes these gestures, every now and then. Therefore, Renzi enters stage left, and has on his face the smile of a podgy Ivanhoe.
Today, Matteo Renzi got his well-calculated moment of glory, only partially shadowed by the fact that Francis did what he could to steal him the show.
But this is, in the end, only an episode in a huge noise and headline industry that lives of occasional trees, and stubbornly refuses to see the forest.
Everyone knew political necessity dictated that Meriam be (definitely) freed one day. Now that she has, countless others will be beaten, raped, or killed, without the West even noticing. Until the next poor woman manages to make headlines, that is; and Renzi & Co. (Pope always in the first line) run to the rescue in front of the cameras, whilst singing to us the beauties of the “religion of peace”.
It is very, very good that “Meriam”'s (note also here: the first name. The press makes of the individual person your own very friend. “Diana”, people say as if she had known them, or would have ever cared a shit for them if she had) ordeal is going to an end. But it is a drop in the ocean if episodes like this one do not wake up the West to the cruel reality of Islam. A reality which not even the events in Iraq are going to awaken and put in front of the consciousness of the lazy, torpid, fat, atheist, emasculated West. But they will wait for the next episodes the soft-porn train magazines put in front of them, and get another fix of feel-goodism.
The Western mobs crave instant satisfaction and easily digestible feel-good feelings. Their elected rulers know it, and throw them a headline-rich morsel every now and then to show the mob how very much they care.
After which, the persecution of Christians will continue unabated.
And now excuse me, I must prepare a blog post greeting my Muslim readers, and congratulating them for the start of Ramadan. This, though, only after I receive “Meriam” in front of the press.
It will be a hoot.
As the ISIS keeps consolidating its grasp on vast parts of Syria and Iraq and Boko Haram continues on its path of ruthless Christian extermination, we are now informed the Saudi government has sent some 30,000 soldiers at the frontier with Iraq, after the latter government has decided they need all the inefficiency and corruption they can muster again the advancing menace; or put in a different way, they need as many soldier as possible fleeing in front on the enemy.
Now, Iraq is Shia in the majority, and the government is certainly very much Shia oriented, which causes many Sunnis to, rather stupidly, support the ISIS (let the poor idiots enjoy the ISIS for a few years, and then we'll see whether they keep enjoying them). It is, therefore, understandable the Shia see in the ISIS a real menace.
But you see, the very Sunni Saudis also fear them; very probably, they fear them not one bit less! The ISIS doesn't care how oppressive a freaking Sunni de facto dictatorship you already are. If you are not them you are conquest territory, period.
Now: the ISIS, in the optimism of their young existence and of their notable local military successes, brag that with allah's (small “a”) assistance they might get even to Rome. I do not think even the maddest of them thinks this realistic (although I am rather sure Pope Francis would welcome them in a spirit of dialogue and fraternity, inviting them to hold on to their Korans; and would be very surprised as they behead him); but boy, Mecca and Medina are a different matter altogether, and it is fair to say if ISIS manages the breakthrough in Iraq only the US military power can prevent them from going over Saudi Arabia with the steamroller.
It would be quite an irony, for one of the most stupidly repressive Muslim regimes of the planet, to go down in flames through the hands of Muslims even more “orthodox” than them; and to suffer countless episodes of atrocities and humiliation in the name of the very religion they so rigidly defend.
Quite the religion of peace, then…
At the cost of stating the obvious, I will point out that feasts like this one (or like Corpus Domini, or the feast of Christ the King) are there to put certain fundamental aspects of Christianity and Catholicism very forcibly in front of the faithful. The Holy Trinity is, clearly, indispensable component of every Christian thinking.
Still, one wonders how the message can get through, be interiorised and really made their own by the faithful, if the same Trinity is downplayed by the same Not-very-holy Father.
To say that Mohammedans believe in the same God as Christians is to deny the Trinity. To think that Jews do not need to believe in it to be saved is to deny it in a more subtle way.
Francis clearly baptises in the name of the Priest, the Imam and the Rabbi. To him, it's all pretty much the same, and the Trinity is rather an afterthought, something Catholics happen to believe, but which should not be seen as an indispensable component to try to understand God.
The relentless effort to make Christianity acceptable to non-Christians unavoidably creates a mish-mash of blasphemies, errors and utter stupidity that must be unacceptable to Christ, if Christ's words have to have a meaning and a purpose.
The result of this madness is a “one-world” religion… without the Trinity. But hey, we don't want such small details to get in the way of the understanding among the peoples, or the understanding between the Pope and his best buddy.
Soon the time will come when the Trinity, the Transubstation, and all other Christian or Catholic specific traits will be utterly ignored, or treated as an innocent quirk of the “One religion”. We are OK, but they are OK too. We have our own way and they have theirs. Proselytism is a solemn nonsense. Convert the other? No, no, no!
Therefore, today we celebrate the feast of the Holy Trinity; which, if what Francis says has some sense, means to him the celebration of an optional belief Catholics seem very attached to, but not an indispensable component of the belief in the One World God.
One week later, the controversy still rages about what the Imam has said in the Vatican; who is or is not a kafir; whether the verse was intended against Christians, and the like.
Another stunning example of the breathtaking incompetence, bordering on sheer idiocy, of the Bishop of Rome.
Do you think he learnt the lesson, and decided never again to host such a stupid gathering of heathens on the ground of the Vatican?
I doubt it.
Rather, he will likely react with another rant against those who have “certainties”.
And it came to pass in a Swedish discussion forum some people dared to… express their opinion and say the senseless immigration policy of that disgraceful country must come to an end.
The bitchy eunuchs of a Swedish magazine then proceeded to engage the services of a hacker, who managed to extract from “disqus” – the software platform used by the forum – the email addresses used by the posters. This was enough to identify the “culprits”, who were there “shamed” in front of the other eunuchs, amidst high-pitched cries of excitement. The security risk for the people involved is real, but eunuchs can be notoriously bitchy, so they don't care.
Now where I live there are several criminal offences in such behaviour – against Disqus and the posters alike -, and in fact even in this utterly perverted, sodomy-celebrating Country freedom of expression is still written rather large, and we have just gone through a huge mess – and jail sentences – just because of this kind of journalistic intrusion. Not so in Sweden, where apparently – I do not live there – the criminal law profile of the “hate speech” prevails over the spionage into people's lives, and to my knowledge the journalists involved still have breakfast in their own kitchen rather than – as it would be the case in a Mundabor's Sweden – in the jail's refectory pending investigation. The eunuchs in question are on the side of the Muslims, you see, and therefore on the safe side.
This from the background – that I have also read cursorily around – of a massive immigration of Muslims in the country, with the predictable effect of a chill sharia-wind now blowing and, apparently, also linked to an explosion of the number of rapes, for which Sweden is now allegedly a leading force in the statistics of the West. It would also appear the immigration of such a crowd led to the explosion of street violence and social unrest unknown in the history of a historically peaceful Country.
More background: this is apparently also a country so emasculated that it considers “discrimination” to have different prices for men's barbers and women's coiffeurs, with the absurd result that prices for both sexes must be the same; or, if you prefer to put it another way, it is considered sexual discrimination that Yul Brinner and Rita Hayworth pay different prices for their hair care.
If this is true, you can imagine the amount of effeminacy going around in this country; a people who have reduced themselves to such a degree of sissidom that they can't even resist being massively ripped off by women whenever they go to the barber will obviously be entirely unable to even think of keeping in their place – or block the ingress; or kick out those who are in already – a massive number of angry Muslims; Muslims to whom a country of eunuchs of this sort must seem, forgetting for a moment that they are actually Muslims, like Christmas and New Year. Sweden is the ideal bridgehead for them. Fortress Europe has its Swedish gates open, and “Allah u Akbar” written above them. I doubt the project will ever succeed – this level of extreme sissidom is a Nordic thing – but it's no good news anyway.
I remember writing once about the Swedish court that had ruled a Swedish mosque had the right to send up the muezzin in the early morning and wake everybody up. I wrote then that a country reducing itself to such a degree of effeminacy and Un-Christian stupidity deserves to pay the consequences of its own madness.
I say the same today: a country unable to switch on its collective brain deserves what it has brought upon itself: unrest, slavery, and rape.
Have your street burning and your car destroyed, Sweden. Have your women raped. Have your freedom of speech abolished everytime it conflicts with Sharia Law. Have your muezzin wake you up every morning. It serves you right. You deserve no better. You are reaping the fruit of your madness. You threw yourself out of the balcony, and now you have no right to complain the pavement is hard.
Get raped, Sweden.
Or switch your brains on.
How was it?
Oh, yes… (emphasis mine):
“Sharing our experience in carrying that cross, to expel the illness within our hearts, which embitters our life: it is important that you do this in your meetings. Those that are Christian, with the Bible, and those that are Muslim, with the Quran. The faith that your parents instilled in you will always help you move on.”
We already know that the Bishop of Rome is an expert in Jewish dietary and other rules; so much so in fact, that he insists his Jewish Rabbi, the pro-homo Skorka chap, follows them strictly, lest he should one day be tempted to convert to Catholicism (convert a Jew? No, no, no!).
It now appears Francis was given a rare opportunity to publicly learn the salient parts of the Koran in what impinges the “peace” element of the funnily named “religion of peace”.
It is good that the Pope is contradicted in public, and charitably helped to form sound opinions. If he does not want to learn in the privacy of his own desk, he will be forced to be taught in public.
Still, I somewhat doubt Francis will be a good pupil. To accept reality concerning Islam would stay massively in the way of the sugary “Lady Diana cum Nelson Mandela” image he is trying to promote.
Francis applies to Islam the same thinking that he applies to the rapid decay of Christianity in the West: if it isn’t convenient, it must be ignored or attributed to not having done enough. It’s never anyone’s faults, but Capitalism’s.
The last controversy about Obama choosing to keep God out of his rendition of the Gettysburg Address is another very telling indicator of how the mind (or what takes that name) of this man works.
Who would, believing in the Holy Trinity, do everything possible and impossible to expunge God from every public statement? Nobody, is the easy answer. Lame excuses of wanting to “respect” those who do not believe in God are as stupid as wanting to follow the rules of Ramadan so that the colleague near you is not offended at seeing you having lunch, but then again one like that would obviously leave God in the Gettysburg address so that the Christians are not offended, too.
It is evident to everyone with a brain that for a Christian to want to expunge God from the public sphere is tantamount to be ashamed of his faith; which no Christian could ever, in conscience, be, so that of this man we could only say that he has lost his faith.
We will, therefore, have to conclude that such a man is an enemy of Christianity, bent on sabotaging it from the comfortable spot of his convenient Christian facade.
Obama, the son of an early example of liberal college slut, certainly did not get any religious education from his mother, or from his anyway absent father. He grew up in a Muslim environment, and attended schools – I am informed – reserved to Muslims, which means he either was considered such, or was such, or certainly did not have anything speaking for his being a Christian. When millions in the West were listening to the bells of the local church, he heard – and stated he is still very fond of – the call of the Muezzin. When he went back to the US – after being abandoned by his mother, too; such are liberal parents – he was raised by his grandparents, and particularly his grandmother, whose liberal ideas are well known and, by the way, clearly shown in the daughter they raised.
But did young Barry improve when he went back to the “country under God”, the United States? Not really.
His Christian facade was the one of a rabidly racist preacher, Jeremiah Wright, a man from whom even Obama at some point had to distance himself, and only after repeated controversy. Is this a good Christian credential? Not likely.
Does he attend church now that he has – finally – canned Wright? Very rarely; apparently a couple of times a year, on those TV occasions. Does he defend Christian values? Never. He would have his daughters abort if they were “punished with a baby” (my words, not his: punished. with. a. baby), and what he calls Christian values are without exceptions the flags of the atheists and liberal culture, from de facto socialism to de iure sodomy.
Not a Christian, then, for sure. Certainly not a Muslim. A clearly thoroughly secular man, very probably as atheist as Stalin, with a cultural predilection for the religion in which he grew up (Islam, of course), and just that ridiculously thin varnish of Christianity that is necessary to become President in the USA.
A whitened sepulchre like few others on this planet, Obama incarnates the hypocrisy of the liberal classes, feigning some lip tribute to Christianity in abstract whilst trying to eradicate it from the planet in concrete.
Stalin was, at least, more honest.
The Gay President used to make a good show of his Christian credentials, something absolutely necessary to avoid the nation believing he is a Muslim.
In order to do so, he also staged a TV walk on Easter: look, look at your oh so Christian President going to Church and listen to the über-liberal preaching of the “progressive” proddie pastor!
It appears now, though, that the Gay President feels he does not need the alibi anymore.
He hasn’t been seen in Church for more than five months now . One wonders what excuse will the White House find for him, then five months is a darn long time even for a Proddie.
Security, perhaps? Ehy, by golfing this does not seem to be a problem? Is he afraid to hurt the sensitivity of atheists? This is more probable. Is he atheist himself, and having to choose would he rather pop in in a mosque, for purely cultural and sentimental reasons? Ah, I think we have it here.
In the meantime, “hope ‘n change” appears more and more isolated on Syria. A completely different picture from G.W. Bush, who in 2002 was called “isolated” when a dozen or more countries were ready not only to support the US military effort, but to put their soldiers where their mouth is and directly participate to the military effort after the invasion. I wonder how all those Democrats who called Bush “isolated” then should call Obama now.
The things you have time for clearly show where your priorities lie. The Gay President’s priorities seem to be so ordered that Golf is more important than religion; or golf is his religion; or, most probably, Obama is his religion.