So, is this is an authentic view of Islam?
Earlier today I read that Ballroom Barry is doubling down on his demands that Americans open their hearts and homeland to 100,000 Syrian refugees. In his brief Easter remarks Obama said:
“We have to wield another weapon alongside our airstrikes, our military, our counterterrorism work, and our diplomacy,” Obama said. “And that’s the power of our example. Our openness to refugees fleeing ISIL’s violence. Our determination to win the battle against ISIL’s hateful and violent propaganda – a distorted view of Islam that aims to radicalize young Muslims to their cause.”
Shortly after reading that, a veteran friend out in Guam sent me this refugee pic:
Notice the obvious, that it’s wet, possibly snowing; and the coats, hoods and hands in pockets convey that it’s uncomfortably cold as well. Then notice the less evident fact that the woman is shoeless, unlike any of the seven males. Also distinct from any of those males, she is carrying two small children with the toil of her burden shown in the distressed expression on her face. Notably, hers is the only face showing any strain within the group. Seven healthy, future American males but not one will share the weight of the small children with this woman, much less see to it that she has proper foot wear.
Obama says that ISIS presents a distorted view of Islam so I’m compelled to ask, “Mr. President, is this an authentic view?”
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: Politics
To paraphrase Mike Meyers,
“How about NO, ya crazy Kenyan bastard?”
10 months. Just 10 months.
Word.
Is everyone in our congress to so freaking STUPID, or are they just all obama ass kissing puppy dogs? The S.O.B. is getting enough of his scum sucking buddies in to take over America! WAKE UP CONGRESS!!
I think they are are both f’n stupid and ass kissing puppies waiting for table scraps to be dropped. And I think that about both sides with very few exceptions.
Fuck. No.
Apparently B. Hussein 0bama & Company want to do all they can to turn every bit of the USA they can into a filthy, crime-ridden third world hellhole.
Ask anyone in Maine how well the little enclave of Lewiston is working out. Ditto our friends in Dearborn, Minneapolis, etc…
Exactly. He wants the U.S. to become as Muslim as Iran. That’s what Muslims do. They use lies, friendship, power, force, anything they can to force the rest of the world to become Muslim, and Obama is no different from any other Muslim. There is no “moderate Islam”. The “radical Muslims” are the true believers, and they are charged by the Quran to destroy not only all the infidels but all the “moderate Muslims”.
May I add my FUCK NO…as well. When he says he wants to take in only Christian refugees or other “infidels” being slaughtered by ISIS and their Syrian supporters coming here on the down low, then I might start listening to him, until then he can kiss my ass in the county square!
Every photo I see repeats the same meme Poe, the supposed tolerance that I should be showing for this culture routinely exhibits behavior that any American feminist would be screaming about should a white male behave in such a fashion.
Our friends on the left have been so brainwashed into fears of being labeled racist that the mere idea of calling islam out for its’ anti-woman, anti-human rights stance gives the poor bastards the shakes.
Some cultures need to find their way into the history books, it happens throughout the history of mankind. Usually accompanied by violence, but ultimately a culture is destroyed or assimilated and history moves ever forward. Islam has as much validity today as the Greek god cultural icons of ancient times. Any society that legally treats some members as second class citizens is a society that needs to be altered, peaceably where possible but altered nonetheless.
To sit idly by while one bears witness to injustice is to be no better than the Europeans or worse, journalists.
VOV, you really can’t use the term ‘racist’ in context with Islam.
Islam is not about race. There are plenty of people of all races and ethnicities who are muslims.
Islam, and especially radical islam, is about religion disguised as politics and nothing else.
I agree PH2 but many who subscribe to the fantasy of islam are of darker coloration and our liberal friends believe those who don’t like muslims don’t like dark skin. They forget there are a great deal of very white muslims in the world, here in Boston they learned that lesson rather tragically at the Marathon.
One need only look at those liberal sites discussing Trump’s calls for denial of entry to muslims and see hundreds of claims of “racism”.
I’m merely offering an explanation for why otherwise vehemently vocal advocates of women’s rights sit silent on the topic of islam’s rampant, systemic, and generational suppression of female equality in their culture.
‘They forget there are a great deal of very white muslims in the world….’ No argument there, VOV. And, no, you will never hear any noise from so-called feminists about the abuse of women by that culture.
My point is that religion is being corrupted into politics, and has been for a very, very long time by this particular group who label themselves muslims, and by other ‘religious’ groups as well. It isn’t something new. We’re just seeing it in our period of history.
If a woman is forced to wear a burka, hijab or any clothing, then I’d be for punishing, just as I’d be for punishment if a woman is forced to wear shorts or a minskirt. However, if a woman wants to wear a burka or veil on her own free will, then we have no right to tell her that she can’t just as we don’t have a right to tell a woman she can’t wear a mini-skirt.
I don’t want women forced to wear a burka or minskirt, but I also don’t want the govt. telling a woman she can’t wear a burka, veil or miniskirt if she wants to just because some people are offended by it.
Yeah, I had to have that conversation with a friend of a friend a few months back. “By the way, I roll my eyes when they say not liking Muslims is ‘racist’.”
“But, then what are you?”
“They can say you’re anti-islam or you just don’t like muslims. But you aren’t Racist.”
“ohhhh. huh.”
I say totalitarianism/politics disguised as a religion.
Distorted? No Barry, it’s islam. No distortion necessary.
Dropping in my ten cents again. A muslim group in a town to the north of me was outdoors over the weekend handing out food (fresh vegs and pastries) to people living in a food desert. I didn’t know there was one up in that area. It seems disingenuous of the reporter to use that term, because there are many, many food stores in that town easily reached by public transportation. So my guess would be that it was more of an attempt by this particular group to show that they are not part of the radical end of Islam. That’s fine by me. I hope they maintain that attitude, but I wonder if they’d say the same things when faced with the slaughterhouse that is ISIS/Daesh, or if they would turn away someone who said he was Jewish. ISIS/Daesh is using religion as a political force. Anyone who disagrees with them and won’t knuckle under is on the same shitlist that Pol Pot concocted when he sent the Khmer Rouge rampaging through Cambodia, recruiting children to kill off anyone who was educated, their own parents – whatever, but basically anyone who wouldn’t fit that mass murderer’s idealistic fantasyland. I think the Gang of Four in China were close to that bad, but Stalin – well, ol’ Joe had it down pat. If you so much as blinked the wrong way, you were dead meat on a fork. And the graves of those dead meats are slowly being discovered, excavated, and the dead meat identified. 20 million Russian citizens died because of political ideology. 2 million native Cambodians died for the same reason. 14 million Europeans, 6 million ++ of them Jewish or of Jewish descent, died for the same reason. This all happened in the 20th century. Islam is nothing more than a political force using religion as an excuse to destroy free will and progress. That is not what religion is about. When a bunch of ravening butchers like ISIS/Daesh take advantage of a society in turmoil to do what Pol Pot and Stalin did, it is politics… Read more »
Your numbers are quite low compared to best estimates from a true intellectual giant who studied the matter for decades, Ex-PH2. The late R. J. Rummell estimates that China under Mao was responsible for the murder of nearly 77M of its own citizens (either directly or via starvation induced by deliberate policy); the USSR, around 62M; and the Nazis, just under 21M. Nationalist China (10+M) and Imperial Japan (just under 6M) round out the top 5 of murderous regimes in history.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
Those numbers exclude wartime casualties. They represent the number killed as the result of deliberate government policy – or, if you prefer, “murder by state”.
Those are not “worst case” numbers. Those are regarded as best estimates, and appear to be roughly 1/2 way between best- and worst-case numbers.
And they’re for the 20th Century only.
The common thread concerning all those murderous states is that they were authoritarian, non-democratic regimes that stifled internal dissent with an iron hand.
In contrast, I’ve done a “quick and dirty” worst case estimate on deaths due to religious wars throughout history, and added to that the worst-case estimate for deaths due to colonialism. That number, while huge, comes to a far smaller total.
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=59617#comment-2533787
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll
The total from just the top 3 murderous states in the 20th Century alone (Communist China, the USSR, and Nazi Germany) tops the combination of religious wars throughout history plus colonialism.
Religion hardly seems to be the “number one threat” to humanity in terms of the perpetration of state-sponsored murder. Rather, that number one threat appears to be unbridled power granted to authoritarian regimes – who then use state-sanctioned murder on an industrial scale to consolidate and retain power.
Well, I was trying to avoid estimates, best or worst case, Hondo.
I doubt we’ll ever know the full extent, including how many people have simply disappeared in North Korea and will likely not be found until the entire Kim dynasty is destroyed.
In some cases, the full account will never truly be known.
Wasn’t arguing with you as much as trying to point out the huge, horrific scope of Communism’s industrial-scale political murders. You’re correct in stating that the true total will probably never be known.
However, IMO it’s worth noting that three absolute dictatorships – the USSR, the PRC, and Nazi Germany – together murdered more people by government action outside of war in less than one century than the sum of (1) all religious wars in history and (2) colonialism combined. And of those 3 dictatorships, two were officially Atheist – and one was either effectively Athiest or officially Pagan.
For me Hondo in those cases you cite there was a religion involved and that religion was the state…you either worshipped the state and recited the appropriate hymns or you found your way to a work camp or death squad….as you correctly point out the biggest common denominator was a totalitarian state that refused to allow dissent and found dissenters to be worthy of imprisonment or death.
When comparing the dark age religions to modern times though one thing is true, at the peak of the religious wars nothing (except maybe the plague) was killing more people than religion. Given the opportunity religion is no less totalitarian than any other despotic state and no less capable of killing hosts of people. The fact that the weapons they used were far less lethal and there were far less people doesn’t negate the reality that religion also found the best means of suppressing dissent was death.
Sheer numbers are indeed weighted to modern communists or democratic socialist regimes, but it’s not due to a lack of trying on the part of religion so much as a lack of technology to carry out their wars with more lethal efficiency.
Any doctrine that teaches people that those who are different are not to be accepted as equals is a doctrine that no longer deserves the merit of a modern society. Whether that doctrine is political or religious in nature is irrelevant they are doctrines without value.
Religion didn’t bring us knowledge of the earth as a sphere nor did it challenge us to walk on the moon, but it did indeed teach some of us to fly into buildings…
I would disagree, VOV. While one can argue Communism as a religion, officially the USSR and PRC professed atheism. And if I recall correctly, the party membership in each was hardly universal (though it did form the “ruling class” in each dictatorship).
If anything, I think the fact that those two nations and Nazi Germany (which rejected current religions in favor of either effective Atheism or corrupted Norse-style/Old German Paganism) were the principal murderous states of the industrial age is significant. Yes, industry enabled industrial-scale murder (literally). But I hold that the rejection of any social restraints provided by Western and Eastern religions by the USSR, the PRC, and Nazi Germany played a part in the bloodletting as well. Indeed, most religions appear IMO to act as a restraining influence on outright slaughter and genocide.
Islam is IMO somewhat a different case. It espouses both the concept of jihad and the union of church and state – then joins that combination with an expansionist imperative that is also part of the religion itself. That combination appears to me to remove the restraints (albeit perhaps weak ones) that other religions impose on their societies.
IMO, Huntington was right.
Two articles of note – The New York Post reports that contrary to what the Senate was told when the Iran treaty was announced, Iran WILL be allowed access to US banks via Hong Kong intermediaries with the administration’s full blessings
http://nypost.com/2016/03/27/obamas-next-gift-to-iran-means-breaking-another-promise-to-america/
The WaPo questions if Tammy Duckworth stated she had “signed on” to admit 200,000 Syrian refugees. Seems like we are bending over (and not in a good way) to accommodate the jihadists.
We may not be at war with them, but they sure seem to be at war with us…
Yes, Poetrooper: that is indeed an accurate picture of Islam. Islam is a highly male-centric religion and culture that (in its more traditional versions) treats its female adherents like crap – indeed, much like property. They thus as a society throw away close to 50% of their society’s intellectual capital (a few women do make an impact, but far fewer than in the West). It’s believed by some that that is a major part of the reason why Islam has stagnated for the past 500 years or so while the West continued to advance. Islam the religion does not appear to recognize either the legitimacy of the principle of separation of church and state, OR the principle that religious freedom is a human right. In their worldview, the perfect world is one ruled by an Islamic theocracy – such as was the case regionally under Islam’s “glory days” of the various Caliphates. Non-believers within their Caliphates are second class citizens, or dhimmi. They’re not at all considered equal to Muslims – in either religious, cultural, or human terms. Historically, some Caliphates have treated their dhimmi residents well; others, not so much. Da’esh and other radical Islamic wannabe-states fall squarely in the “not so much” category. Radical Islam expresses this fact openly, and seeks to do two things. First, it seeks to implement a modern-day Caliphate ruled by Islamic rulers and governed under Sharia. Second, it seeks to expand the borders of this Caliphate as far as possible – by force if necessary. The fate of the Yazidi and various minority Christian groups under Da’esh indicates their plan for “unbelievers”. Not all Muslims are intolerant Radical Islamists, just like not all Christians support the positions espoused by the intolerant idiots at Westboro Baptist Church. However, Islam does seem to have a far larger proportion of radicals willing to commit terror than most if not all other major world religions and cultures. And with nearly 2 billion adherents worldwide, if even 1% of Muslims are radical enough to provide active support for those committing despicable terrorist acts, that’s a problem. My guess… Read more »
Careful now, some liberals will be concerned that you don’t understand that all societies are worthy and comparable even if they aren’t…..
Islam needs to be destroyed, 1.6 billion worshippers notwithstanding any religion whose premise is founded on the words of a man whose idea of a proper wife was a 9 year old has long outlived any usefulness in a modern world.
I’m no fan of any religion but islam is currently the biggest threat to the world since the rise of the nazis…and deserves to be treated with about the same respect as the nazis. We’ve passed our Chamberlain moments thanks to our current administration of pacifist clowns thinking a few drone strikes will somehow alter the course of this virus from spreading across the oceans and infecting the entire world with it’s anachronistic world view.
If 1% of muslims are a problem (and like you I think the number is higher) those 99% who aren’t actively engaged in killing the 1% are complicit by virtue of their inaction. It’s no different than the populations of Japan and Germany doing nothing to stop the murderers ruling their nations…
This next attempt to stabilize the region had better be a real attempt or we may indeed suffer the dhimmi status you mention. I prefer we slaughter tens of millions in the ME before losing anyone else in the US.
We need to unleash the great satan they claim us to be and make the sands of the middle east run red with their blood. Then perhaps those still alive might be interested in learning a new path, if not let them join the millions of dead lying rotting on the sands.
It’s almost an hour long, but worth every minute. It will also run your blood cold – so grab a sweater.
Truth in labeling:
The word “Islam” means “submission”, the submission of the slave to th master.
Muslims are slaves of Allah. All else are slaves of Muslims.
The clear, explicit, and well defined intent is that you, and everyone else, submit.
No.
Carrying a baby is beneath a Muslim male as is picking up trash, cleaning their latrines in their European refugee shelters, defending their country etc
I was just having this discussion with a shipmate not long ago. No self/national pride, no sense of duty to defend or take back their homes… nothing. Men old enough and fit enough to fight but don’t and never will. And we can depend on them to come here and contribute? Nahhh, sorry. Not gonna happen. Not in 10,000 lifetimes.