Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Friday, June 4, 2010

Making The World Safe For Apostasy

A terrific article from Gates of Vienna, which begins:

Even if he is not strictly speaking a Muslim, President Barack Hussein Obama has an Islamic background and is a famous sympathizer with Islam. He received an Islamic education as a child in Indonesia, and seems to identify with Muslims when implementing what passes for his foreign policy.

Modern American policy towards Islam — especially that subset of Islam which avowedly intends to destroy the United States and the rest of the West in the name of Allah — went though several stages of development. It began as avoidance under Bill Clinton, escalated to denial under George “The Religion of Peace” Bush, and has now reached its full flower under the Obama administration. If the country continues on its present course, it is headed for full Islamization and cultural dhimmitude.

We have reached a point where nobody in public life who values his career prospects dares to mention the word “Islam” in connection with terrorism or mob violence. “Jihad” has officially been ruled out of the lexicon by the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The word “terrorism” itself is discouraged, because too many people have come to associate it in their minds with Islam, for some strange reason.

We are so far down the rabbit hole that returning to a state of denial would be an improvement.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In her book The Death of the Grown-Up, Diana West examines the cultural infantilization which has allowed the West to become such easy prey for Islamic expansionism. A suicidal policy of mass immigration driven by the ideology of Multiculturalism leverages the demographic advantage of Muslims, but to guarantee an Islamic ascendancy we had to abandon “discrimination” and all the other virtues that formerly guided Western Civilization.

Ms. West was writing in 2007, before the Husseinization of America, but everything she said in her book is even more relevant today than it was back then. In her final chapter she gets to the heart of the matter...
***


Read the rest.

17 Comments:

Blogger Taylor H said...

Political correctness will be he death of us unless we act now.

June 4, 2010 at 4:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...and is a famous sympathizer with Islam. [...] seems to identify with Muslims when implementing what passes for his foreign policy."

If you sympathize with Buddhism, do you occupy Tibet? If you sympathize with Judaism, do you occupy Israel? This makes no sense. If you sympathize with a religion, you don't militarily occupy its territorial birthplace. Judging from where the dollars go and who the saber rattling supports, the US sympathizes with Judaism. That support is too consistent across administrations to be just a personal choice of any particular president or party. There are people running things in the US; don't confuse them with the talking head hired to read speeches on TV.

The national policy you're misidentifying as sympathizing with Islam is actually a catch-and-release program that protects violent criminals from the defenses of their victims. Violent predators are protected from being discouraged by concealed weapons, while entrepreneurial healthcare workers are threatened with prison. The government is doing everything it can get away with to both injure the peaceful and nurture the violent predators. The national policy of the last several decades is not pro-Muslim, it is anti-civilization.

How much crime do you think we'd have if the rapists, the home invaders, the gang bangers, and the guy with the bomb in his underware were simply executed on the spot by whoever encountered them first? What if concealed handguns were as common as cell phones? What if the guy on the street who kills the rapist-in-progress was treated in the newspaper like the guy who gives the Heimlich to the choking victim? Why would we need a government after peace broke out?

June 4, 2010 at 5:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The solution is simple. But it would take someone with REAL stones to impliment (not the current crop of PC limp-wrists in DC):
1-MIRV tipped ICBMs.
2-Point to Mecca, Medina and other important Islamic mosques and shrines. Especially the Wahabbi ones in Saudi Arabia.
3-Deliver message,"Go home and leave Israel and the West alone. One peep of anything, we launch. This is NOT a threat. It is a PROMISE."

End of message. 'Nuff said.

B Woodman
III-per

wv: "quitin" As in, I ain't, until I'm finished.

June 4, 2010 at 5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To Anon above,

Fuck you, shill. Anyone calling for nuking anywhere is a nihilistic provocateur. You're also a hypocrite, as after the place you want nuked gets it, you'd be crying when your neck of the woods is attacked/nuked in retaliation.

June 4, 2010 at 10:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't turn this blog into another muslim hating piece of trash.

As Christian morals gradually lose influence here in america we have a decline away from civilization. You can see this clearly in B Woodman's comment above where he advocates the mass murder of civilians.

If we want western civilization to continue we need to respect and uphold the rights of life, liberty, and property. And turn away from those who advocate murder of innocents and theft from the productive.

III

June 4, 2010 at 11:01 PM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

All:

Islam's 1300-year record, from the initial predations of Big Mo in the 7th century AD to those of his present-day adherents, speaks for itself.

If naifs wish to pretend that it is something other than just another murderous collectivism, that's their choice.

Just as it is the choice of those anti-collectivists who call for its root-and-branch extirpation, via any means necessary.

June 5, 2010 at 1:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

B. Woodman:
I grow weary of the "kill them all, let God sort them out" mentality.

The history of Islam not withstanding, we, as the heirs to Western Civilization should strive to keep from slipping into the muck of barbarism. After all, we wont be any different then that barbarians if that happens.

Torture is wrong. Murder of innocence is wrong. Just because other may engage in such filthy activities does not make it just for us to step down to their level.

Call me naif if you will, Concerned America but i have principals that will not be compromised.

This following quote comes from the article linked to at the top of today's post, titled: Monasteries....near the end of the article

'One is left to wonder if Vico’s description of the “barbarism of the intellect,” which he considered more sinister than physical material barbarism of old, is indeed an appropriate designation for such a sad event.'

KPN3%

June 5, 2010 at 12:15 PM  
Blogger Concerned American said...

KPN:

I respect your perspective. I truly do.

But I would ask you to consider what should be done if, in fact, expansionist Islam is incompatible with fundamental individual human rights.

On current course and speed, most of the flaccid West (including much of this country) will fall to Team Mo within my lifetime (and I'm already in the 3rd period of this hockey game).

That will leave most of the world (and its 21st-century technology, at least for a while) in the hands of benighted folks who believe that
- woman are property
- those of Abrahamic heritage must pay the jizya or convert
- those not of Abrahamic heritage must convert or die.

That outcome, according to my principles, must be opposed and ultimately thwarted by any means necessary, up to and including the use of WMD.

And please remember -- the global conflict that may open as soon as the next few weeks will feature at least as many moral and ethical compromises as did the last go-round, with its mass aerial bombing of civilians by all combatants, routine genocide and/or ethnic cleansing, biological warfare, and military/political alliances with mass murderers more bloodthirsty than the ostensible enemies.

With all due respect, this child of the Pacific war believes it is better to prevail and be ashamed than to be murdered.

Let's hope that I am not alone.

June 5, 2010 at 2:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

TO:
Anon 10:25 & Anon 11:01,
Who is calling who what?
I signed MY name, who are you?

I am NOT advocating first strike. I am advocating self-defense in aiming at the ONLY thing these miserable little sheetheads and their sycophants (such as yourselves) seem to care about, their Holy Shrines and Mosques. They obviously don't care about life, or the good opinion of others in the Western civilized world. No give-and-take in the fair marketplace of ideas and ideals for Islam. It's their way or the sword (no highways).

Western civilization via Europe has been at war with Islam since Islam's start. The Crusades were as much a retaliatory self-defense attack against Islam
as anything else you read about in the PC-biased history books.

Or are you two the type who would not bother to defend your property, let a burglar and arsonist break into your home, steal everything and burn it down -- but then NOT file a police report because it would label the Bad Guys with a negative name. Boo F***n' Hoo.

Anon 11:01, you are obviously no III-per. Have you read Mike V? Do you even know who he is? Please, name his blogsite for me? Or did you just copy that "III" off someone else's post, thinking it would make you kewl & give you cred? Please don't insult me or my intelligence any further by using it at the bottom of your posts.

And to you, Anon 10:25, what would you do? Wait until an Islamist actually exploded an actual nuke within the US? And then cry "Why didn't someone do something to stop this?" Islam has already proven their intent with 9-11. It is only by the grace of God, some policies enacted by fair-to-middlin' Bush, and alert citizens, that we haven't been hit again, and harder.

I have always enjoyed the Golda Meir quote, “We will have peace with the Arabs when they love their children more than they hate us”
You may take from that whatever message you will. I have mine.

B Woodman
SSG (Ret) US Army
III-per

Now go away, children, you're bothering the adults.

June 5, 2010 at 2:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

William F. Buckley felt that America had to turn itself into a totalitarian bureaucracy to fight the Soviet Union. He also worked for the Christians In Action secret police. All of this makes him a Fascist, a nationalistic socialist.

"But I would ask you to consider what should be done if, in fact, expansionist Islam is incompatible with fundamental individual human rights."

It is. As is expansionist conservative constitutionalism. The armed demand that women wear tents in public isn't all that much different than the armed demand that women don't have abortions; war is just another big government program. The solution to terrorists is to individually locate them with police work, try them in front of a jury, and then, if guilty, execute them.

"And please remember -- the global conflict that may open as soon as the next few weeks will feature at least as many moral and ethical compromises as did the last go-round, with its mass aerial bombing of civilians by all combatants, routine genocide and/or ethnic cleansing, biological warfare, and military/political alliances with mass murderers more bloodthirsty than the ostensible enemies."

Libertarians know that War Is the Health of the State.

June 5, 2010 at 4:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Concerned American,

Thank you for your thoughtful response to my comments. You articulate from the perspective of an individual not someone who suffers from group-think mode, as do many here, especially those with military backgrounds.

I will endeavor to answer your main question: "what should be done if, in fact, expansionist Islam is incompatible with fundamental individual human rights." Though it is difficult to answer fully in the short space allowed in the comments section.

As a demonstration of my respect for your opinions, I will tell you that I would be willing to engage in an open dialog with you via email if you will commit to not sharing my address without first getting my permission. I have been reading WRS for over 4 years and have come to appreciate your level-headed-ness and fairness. I value my privacy and care not to have my name and other info broadcast across the blogosphere.

My response to your question:
Start by putting in place a rational immigration policy that remains consistent regardless of what party is in power...and if it "discriminates" against certain individuals so be it. That is the function of a gate-keeper entity; to discriminate with regard to whom we will allow to come to our country.

The same should go for American foreign policy as well. We have a willie-nillie foreign policy that is inconsistent at best and not effective at serving the interests of America as envisioned by the Founders. That is to say, trade and commerce with all and protection of our system and our way of life. Surely you would not say that having military bases in 184 countries around the globe is beneficial to the interests of the American people. We should not be flexing our might and exporting "Democracy" through nation building. To the contrary, we should be exporting our goods and technology and demonstrating the superiority of our brand of liberty and way of life.

Please remember that the criminals who were responsible for the attack on 9/11/2001 where all here on expired visas. The very agencies who were charged with the duty to "keep us safe" failed (perhaps willfully for a desired end). NSA, FBI, CIA, etc. all failed. In the aftermath no heads rolled. No one lost their job. Instead all of the alphabet soup gang got more money, bigger budgets, congress voted to violate the Constitution in the name of national security by suspending the writ of Habeus Corpus, spying on the citizenry, rounding up people who may or may not have had anything to do with terrorism, committing acts of torture and on and on. Are we better off for that? I doubt it.
...CONTINUED NEXT COMMENT POST >>>

June 5, 2010 at 6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

.... CONTINUING:
If Western governments had not adopted the open borders policies they now embrace we would not be looking at expansionist Islam here or in Western Europe. I suspect it is part of the lager game played by the international elites to debase our system from within and subject us to being serfs on the global plantation.

I said in another comment that MULTI-CULTURALISM = MARXISM. Divide and conquer...keep us squabbling among ourselves and we will be distracted from what the real game is. Blood (as in kin and ethnicity/religion)and soil (as in country/homeland/way of life) are things people will fight for. Worth fighting for. Global Democracy is not if one understands it to be a lie. We can no sooner force our way of life upon the rest of the world, just as Islam will not force its way of life on the rest of humanity. What we should be doing is showing through justice and fairness and equality that we are better and we have the path worth following. Of course, when we export the filth (MTV, conspicuous consumption, lack of faith/morality, etc.)and obscene ideas of huge international corporations we should not be surprised when some people object. Indeed when some would call us "the great Satan".

I am not an apologist for Islam. I regard them as backward and barbaric. Neither will I apologize for the actions of the State of Israel. I am in my mid-50's and cannot remember a time when these to factions of the descendants of Shem have not been throwing stones at one another. I suspect it may have ended some time ago had it not been for the U.S.A. funding the military build-up.

Please keep in mind some of what Israel has done. They acquired nukes before anyone knew about it and refuse to sign on the non-proliferation treaties that the rest of the world community has. If Israel is entitled to a homeland, are not the Palestinians? Was it not an act of hubris for Western governments, France, England, U.S. to just divvy up land and give it to one group and not another? Could it be that this might be a part of the friction between the West (particularly the U.S.) and the tribes of Mohammad? I am not saying I have the answers to all these questions. Having said that I will say that U.S. policy abroad has often been based on deception. Furthermore, the government of the U.S. is largely beholden to huge money interests like the military/industrial complex that Ike warned us of. Should the government not be more concerned with what is best for America and her people and not so much what might be best for the profit margins of huge corporations that serve mammon?
...CONTINUED >>>

June 5, 2010 at 6:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...CONTINUING:
To your comment:
"And please remember -- the global conflict that may open as soon as the next few weeks will feature at least as many moral and ethical compromises as did the last go-round, with its mass aerial bombing of civilians by all combatants, routine genocide and/or ethnic cleansing, biological warfare, and military/political alliances with mass murderers more bloodthirsty than the ostensible enemies."

I would merely point out something from Nietzsche; "BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU FIGHT MONSTERS, LEST YOU BECOME ONE."

The devils bargain of collaborating with the likes of Stalin, among others, was what brought forward the mess we have inherited in many ways. Europe was overtaken by the socialist anyway and we are well along the same path.

The Federal Government of the U.S. has demonstrated plenty of lies and abuse of power so why should we be so willing to accept what they tell us today on anything that pertains to current events?

I for one do not condone most of what passes for "fighting to preserve our freedom". I don't want anyone to murder or torture in my name.

It is difficult to keep a train of thought without being able to review what I have written heretofore, as it has already been submitted to the moderator. I hope you will keep that in mind as you read my comments.
As well any spelling or punctuation errors.

Respectfully submitted,
KPN3%

June 5, 2010 at 7:02 PM  
Anonymous JESSE SCHIFF said...

Jesus Christ.

http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?topic=1629.0

The lines are drawn here. B Woodman and Concerned Provocateur are just that. They keep saying nuke the Middle East now before it's too late; better safe than sorry; better a bunch of dead other people than living in fear (as if that's the only choice). Are these guys living in Israel, paranoid all their neighbors are about to murder them?

'Middlin Bush' saved us? Well then Obama certainly took that torch and is continuing to save us, as his policies are just a continuation of Bush's (minus nuclear disarmament). I think by "us" he means Israel, as the U.S. steamrolls some of its uppity neighbors one by one. Every Islamic terror attack on the U.S. turns out to be a false flag organized by a faction in the intelligence world using radicalized Muslims who do indeed want to blow up people. See both World Trade Center attacks, Osama in Afghanistan when the USSR was occupying it, those FBI plots that utilize semi-retarded Muslims to frame. Plots like those don't happen without significant National Security holes and material support from above magically appearing. See all the war games going on on 9/11 and NORAD standing down- all tracing back to commands given by Cheney. See the group of semi-retarded Muslims getting fake (and real) bombs from FBI informants.

Look at that link up there and look at these lowlifes trying to stoke the flames of WWIII online. Mike V is a provocateur who calls people collectivists while accepting disability checks (sure, ONLY disability checks from the gov he pretends to rally against). He has the perfect excuse never to put himself in actual danger but call others to, on his behalf.

Congrats to everyone here who isn't an Israeli shill, but what are you scared of? I'll use my real name because I'm not scared of cowardly scum who will just pass my name along to their bosses and then to some piece of shit who lives near me- if that. Most likely it'll be another list for "that day" that keeps us all questioning whether we should voice our concerns publicly with our own names. That's truly pathetic and keeps anything from getting done out in the open or people becoming leaders- which is a symptom of a counter intelligence operation.

June 5, 2010 at 7:14 PM  
Anonymous JESSE SCHIFF said...

I forgot to mention, I'm the Jesse in Boston, MA. Try googling me and check out my video page.

June 5, 2010 at 7:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Jesse Schiff,
Maybe I didn't make myself clear on a point. If so, my fault. Others are accusing me of saying "nuke 'em first."
#1 - WHo said anything about nukes? Not me. HE (High Explosive) rounds will work just as well against Sacred Sites and Mosques, with a lot less side effects and mess.
#2 - As I said the first AND SECOND times, I do NOT advocate first strikes, or preemptive strikes. I advocate self-defense strikes. With the reasons and reasoning as laid out in my second posting.

As for Mike V's taking of SocSec, why shouldn't he? He's paid enough into it in his working lifetime. Why shouldn't he get at least a little bit of it back out?
And as for being a provocateur, you obviously haven't read much of his site. "No Fort Sumters." Yes, he pokes, prods, and provokes -- but with only legal and Constitutional means, and at Gubbment entities that are trampling on our God-given natural rights, as codified and written in the Constitution.

I don't know if Mr Schiff's letter is ignorance, willful ignorance, or troll-ism. But at least he put his name to his post. That says to me that there is still hope.
I don't mind disagreeing, and agreeing to disagree. But at least do it from the standpoint of reading and understanding ALL that i write, not picking and twisting.

B Woodman
III-per

June 6, 2010 at 6:20 AM  
Blogger sofa said...

Their only service to the community may be as examples. Like Neville Chamberlain.

June 7, 2010 at 12:07 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home