That Day

Saturday

This is a video about one of the best things that happened on 9/11. Sometimes human beings are beautiful.

The Boatlift

The video is about 12 minutes long. It will remind you of that fateful day. Let us never forget.

Read more...

Why the Peaceful Majority Might be Dangerous

Thursday

The following is an article from Paul Marek (author of the outstanding piece, Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant). Reprinted with permission.

Mubarka is a Canadian born woman of Pakistani parents. She grew up in Toronto among other Canadian children and attended university where she received a degree in commerce. Today she holds a prominent position with a transportation company.

Mubarka used to be as mainstream as any Canadian young adult can be; in fact, those who met her for the first time may have been struck by her vivacious personality. Her effervescence went hand in hand with her distinct Asian beauty which she shamelessly displayed with stylish clothing including the occasional low cut top. Mubarka used to converse for hours over topics as varied as business practices in Canadian politics to contemporary music.

It comes, therefore, as a shock, when one learns what path Mubarka has recently chosen for herself. She will be wedding a Pakistani man...a devout Muslim, whom she has never met but who was chosen for her when she was an infant. Not only that, but she has donned the Hijab for the first time in her life and is strictly observing Muslim tenets. She has chosen subservience to a man and subservience to his religion over the gender freedom offered her by the Western democracy she grew up in, and she's done so without so much as a whimper of protest.

When asked why she has picked the life of Sharia, Mubarka simply states that it is as Muhammad would will, and that there is no greater prophet than Muhammad. When asked how she will raise her children, Mubarka makes it clear...they will be raised as Muslims first, and Canadians second.

Hardi is perhaps one of the most pleasant Canadian women anyone could ever meet. In her capacity as a caregiver of seniors, she is gentle, loving, and incredibly patient. She laughs deliciously at the kind of comical moments that only seniors can deliver and her mood seems to be permanently stuck on happy. Hardi is an angel.

Those who encounter Hardi for the first time will be struck not by her character, that comes later, but by the fact that she is virtually covered from head to toe by traditional Indonesian Muslim attire. She covers her entire body with colourful costume that leaves only her hands and face exposed. Hardi is devout, in fact, so devout that during Christmas any appreciation given her by way of gifting must be void of any reference to the season. Furthermore, during quiet moments when Hardi is free to discuss her Muslim faith, it becomes clear she believes wholeheartedly in the strict observance of Sharia. For her, Islam in its pure non-secular form, is truth.

Both Hardi and Mubarka present us with a perplexing conundrum because they are members of what has become known as the "peaceful" Muslim majority. They don't have a violent bone in their bodies, and are clearly law abiding and productive members of Canadian society. But, they are also both part of a very small minority within Canada where they and their fellow Muslims have very little effect on Canadian politics or on the evolution of Canadian cultural norms. What if though, Hardi and Mubarka were part of a Muslim majority where they and their co-religionists held the power?

Both women are Muslims first and Canadians second. No matter how much respect one may have for either woman's character, there is little doubt where either would place her loyalty if faced with choosing between the Canadian traditions of liberty for all, or Sharia. There is also little doubt that if they were part of a majority, they would acquiesce to the demands of the Muslim clerical class and choose Sharia for all Canadians.

It is therefore irrelevant in the grand scheme of things whether or not Hardi or Mubarka are "good" people; most people on the planet are, no matter their religion, race, or culture. What matters in the greater sense, is that as parts of the Muslim collective, neither woman would set aside her Muslim beliefs in order to safeguard and protect the full rights of non-Muslims to live as they choose. What's even more disturbing, is that both women have experienced the gender freedoms afforded them in Canada, yet both have voluntarily resigned themselves to the greater Muslim collective.

As long as each woman is part of a small minority within Canada, she offers Canada much; but once she becomes part of a significant minority, or heaven forbid, a majority, she becomes dangerous. Why? Because Muslims wherever they form a majority choose Islamic norms over the broader more tolerant standards of the West. If given a chance, as has been clearly demonstrated the world over, they would unravel hundreds of years of hard fought human rights gains and replace them with the medieval practices of their faith. As such, both Hardi and Mubarka are simply bit players in a monstrous and destructive Muslim vortex that would drag civilization backwards hundreds of years.

Read more...

A Liberal With Zero Tolerance For Islam

Tuesday

On the article, Muslims Are Not What Is Wrong With Islam, someone made the following comment:

I am a liberal with zero tolerance for Islam. Having studied this pseudo-religion for three decades, I can say with certainty that there is nothing positive or spiritual about it. Islam has no redeeming characteristics. It is simply a totalitarian, imperialistic ideology with a thin veneer of religion to dupe the ignorant and lull the complacent. I pity Muslims for having been brainwashed, but that doesn't mean that I think Islam should be tolerated in liberal democracies. It is completely incompatible with Universal human rights.

There's no reason why the percentage of liberals (at the moment, 51 percent) who understand the problem of Islam couldn't be as large as conservatives (82 percent) or even larger. If that seems hard to imagine, check this out: Liberals Can Remain Liberals and Still Recognize Islam as a Threat.

Liberals and conservatives may disagree on many things, but against Islamization, we can and should stand united.

Read more...

Help Tommy Robinson Protect Himself

Friday

For years, Tommy Robinson has been a tireless, outspoken critic of the Islamization of Britain. And he has been attacked in the media, jailed by the authorities (and thrown in with violent Muslim prisoners), he has been issued death threats, and been physically attacked by Muslims.

You can read about his tribulations here and here.

Robinson needs good legal representation and physical protection (a bodyguard). Three people decided to raise the money to help him, and they succeeded: The Glazov Gang's inimitable Jamie Glazov, the director of ACT! for Canada, Valerie Price and World Truth Summit founder, Elsa Schieder. You can learn more and contribute to Tommy's protection here: Help Tommy Robinson.

Valerie Price wrote the following:

Tommy Robinson personifies moral courage in an age when such courage is an extremely rare commodity, the possession of which can threaten one's life. He is one of the few who truly deserves the label of hero. He is my personal hero and yet it must be said that all he has done to become heroic is something that we all can do, should do, and must do: he has spoken the truth.

We live in so cheap and tawdry an age that all one must do to be a hero is speak the truth — and yet there are so few heroes. Tommy Robinson is that hero. He has done this at immense personal cost — to himself and to his family. Unlike other heroes, like Geert Wilders, Lars Hedegaard and Lars Vilks, he is not protected by his government with personal bodyguards. He is on his own. In fact, for speaking the truth, the British Government has turned him into “An Enemy of the State”.

One would think that the constant threats made against Tommy Robinson would wake people up to the true nature and lethal character of the enemy we face, when they are so threatened by the telling of the truth that they're willing to commit murder in response. Yet even as Tommy Robinson is defamed, vilified and marginalized, he is being proven right by the events of every day  and the light of the truth he tells shines more brightly all the time.

Please listen to this YouTube video and you will see his passion, his dedication, his bravery, his disgust with the system and how he is fighting for your children and your grandchildren as well as his own.

Originally they were asking for one-time donations, but some donors proposed a way of providing more protection against the ongoing threat of physical attacks, as well as attacks from the so-called justice system: Monthly donations to a fund for security, plus to keep the legal fund from going dry.

So now you have the option of an automatic monthly donation, setting whatever amount is comfortable for you. Everything goes 100% directly to Tommy Robinson.

Learn more about Tommy Robinson and donate to him here: Help Tommy Robinson.

Read some of the background of the legal and security fund for Tommy Robinson on The Gates of Vienna here.

The fundraising campaign was covered in The Huffington Post here.

Read more...

The Golden Rule in Islam

Thursday

Islam's apologists say that Islam just needs a reform. After all, Christianity and Judaism have been reformed. But the apologists never get around to saying what the reform would be.

There are many kinds of reform possible to Islam, but does anyone care if they reformed prayer by praying towards LA rather than Mecca? No. The only thing that kafirs care about is how Islam treats us. We want our treatment changed. We want political Islam reformed.

Islam's treatment of us can be found in one word — kafir. The Koran says that a kafir (unbeliever) can be robbed, killed, tortured, mocked, insulted, beheaded, raped, crucified and on and on. The Hadith and the Sira agree with the Koran. Every single reference to the kafirs is negative, offensive and hateful.

The word "kafir" illustrates both of political Islam's principles — submission and duality. The Trilogy (Koran, Sira and Hadith) says that every kafir in the world must submit to political Islam.

The Koran also establishes dualism with its ethical system. A Muslim is not to kill another Muslim; a kafir may be killed, or not. A Muslim is not to lie to another Muslim; a kafir may be deceived or not. And so on. Islam has one set of ethics for Muslims and another set of ethics for the kafir — dualistic ethics.

The later political Koran written in Medina frequently contradicts the early religious Koran written in Mecca. The Koran gives a rule for removing the contradiction by saying that the later Koran "abrogates" the early Koran. But the earlier Koran is still true; it was given by Allah. So in Islam both sides of a contradiction can be true. This gives Islam its dualistic logic. Our unitary logic says that if two things contradict, then one of them is false

This dualism accounts for the two types of Muslims — the good Muslim at work and the Taliban Muslim. Both Muslims are "real" Muslims. Dualism gives the "good" Muslim plausible deniability when they say that jihadists are not "real" Islam. Dualism means the "good" Muslims and the jihadists are just two ends of the same stick.

The Koran, Sira and Hadith are filled with demands for all kafirs to submit to Islam. Kafirs can submit by joining the religion or submit by being a dhimmi (an apologist). Either way, the Koran constantly demands that all kafirs submit to Islam.

So what kafirs want to reform about Islam is its principles of political submission and duality. What principle can be used to reform Islam? The key is how Islam treats the "other" — the kafir. The Golden Rule tells us how the "other" is to be treated. Every culture in the world has the Golden Rule as part of its heritage. But not Islam.

So what happens if we apply — treat others, as you want to be treated — to political Islam? All of the hurtful, hateful and harmful duality and submission disappear. What is amazing is how much of the Islamic doctrine goes away. About 61% of the Koran disappears. The Sira loses 75% of its words and 20% of the Hadith vanishes.

And those figures are low. All of the abusive words about women would go away as well. So the above reductions would be even bigger.

The Golden Rule even changes Hell. Islamic Hell is primarily political. Hell is mentioned 146 times in the Koran. Only 9 references are for moral failings — greed, lack of charity, love of worldly success. The other 137 references to Hell involve eternal torture for not agreeing that Mohammed is right. That is a political charge, not a morals failure. Thus 94% of the references to Hell are as a political prison for dissenters. The Golden Rule would empty the political prison.

Think how wonderful a Golden Rule Islam would be. No arguments, demands, accusations, law suits, threats, pressure, hateful speech, killings, or bombings. A Muslim could even be a true friend to a kafir. Islam would develop a sense of shame and admit to the terrible suffering of the 270,000,000 kafirs killed in jihad. A Golden Rule Islam would ask forgiveness about all the suffering of the dhimmis. A Golden Rule Islam would also admit to running the slave trade in Africa by killing and capturing the slaves they sold to the white slave traders.

Women would not have to be beaten and wear the hijab or burka. Honor killings would stop. Muslims could join us in the human race.

But all of those wonderful thoughts vanish when you realize what else it would mean to Islam. Mohammed had only 150 followers in Mecca after preaching the religion for 13 years. But when he went to Medina and became a politician and warlord, he conquered all of Arabia in 9 years by averaging a violent event every 6 weeks.

Duality and political submission were the principles that gave Islam its victory. Why would Islam drop the only principles that yielded success? Duality and political submission have crushed the world that believes in the Golden Rule.

CSPI could produce a Koran, Sira and Hadith that would use the Golden Rule. It would be a thin volume, but what Muslim would buy it?

- By Bill Warner
Copyright (c) http://www.politicalislam.com/
Copy and use as needed, give us credit and don't edit.
Original article

Read more...

Copyright

All writing on CitizenWarrior.com is copyright © CitizenWarrior.com 2001-2099, all rights reserved.

Article Spotlight

One of the most unusual articles on CitizenWarrior.com is Pleasantville and Islamic Supremacism.

It illustrates the Islamic Supremacist vision by showing the similarity between what happened in the movie, Pleasantville, and what devout fundamentalist Muslims are trying to create in Islamic states like Syria, Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia (and ultimately everywhere in the world).

Click here to read the article.


Citizen Warrior Heroes

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Citizen Warrior Heroes.

No More Concessions to Islam

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Visit the blog: Concessions to Islam.

  © Free Blogger Templates Columnus by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP