Video: “Islam in Europe”
posted at 3:17 pm on August 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
It’s Pat Condell, known to the blogosphere for his pointed YouTube criticisms of Islam — one of which left Berkeley’s Peace and Justice Commission in need of smelling salts — and less known for his pointed YouTube criticisms of Christianity. Here’s his YT page; “United States of Jesus” looks like a humdinger.
The occasion for this rant is the almost unbelievable ban imposed by the mayor of Brussels on an anti-shari’a demonstration scheduled for 9/11 of this year. Not banned: a Truther demonstration scheduled for 9/9. Condell’s had about enough. Haven’t we all.
Here’s his video response to Berkeley from a few months back, in case you missed it at the time.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: [1] 2 »
“We reject sharia not because it is different, but because it is barbaric.”
Amen.
CrimsonFisted on August 18, 2007 at 3:34 PM
This fellow is a wise and well-spoken man.
I only hope this is the start of a ground swell.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 3:39 PM
I don’t care if he criticizes all religions at least he has the “Gumballs” tm. to Criticize ALL of them if he kowtowed like some I’d would even listen to him. Other than that good quotes. good stuff.
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on August 18, 2007 at 3:40 PM
Another jem: “Cultural sensitivity be dammed. Some things are more important”.
BadgerHawk on August 18, 2007 at 3:40 PM
“wouldn’t listen to him…”
Yeesh
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on August 18, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Islam should be banned in all democratic societies not because it is barbaric, (which it is) but because it is intrinsically ant-democratic. At it’s very core it is against all that we in the west hold sacred, you know those little things like:
Freedom of religion
Freedom of speak
Freedom of association
Freedom of the press
Equal rights
Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment
Maybe in a 1000 or so years Muslims will have civilized them selves and their religion of head chopping to a point where we might redress the ban.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 3:47 PM
what would this entail?
zane on August 18, 2007 at 3:50 PM
I love the comment about the French, regarding stoning and adultery. I don’t think he’s in the majority in Europe, at least for now. Will they reach consensus and stand up for their culture and Western civilization in time? Considering the demographic time-bomb that’s ticking, I’m not optimistic.
liberty on August 18, 2007 at 3:51 PM
Oh Gosh not Pat Condell! He’s a wacko. But on this point he’s right and I agree with him. But his other video’s are just outlandishly opposed to ANY religion at all in the public marketplace of ideas.
df4jc on August 18, 2007 at 3:52 PM
Liberals are so arrogant that they think islamofascists just have to experience the liberal experience and they’ll drop their bombs and join in a big love fest with the infidels.
csdeven on August 18, 2007 at 3:53 PM
If Europeans are intolerant of sharia law, then why does it have such a foothold over there? Though I admit they have a pretty good strong hold here in Michigan, upper New York, and parts of NYCity.
Blake on August 18, 2007 at 3:53 PM
He’s not saying anything new. Judging from his you tube page he pretty much detests anybody of faith. He’s a broken clock. He just happens to be correct at the moment.
Guardian on August 18, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Poetically said. As General Petraeus works in Iraq to drive wedges between the Sunis and AQ, Islamists are working here and in Europe to drive wedges into our “political sensitivity’ to slowly make sharia law part of our culture.
Driving wedges works both ways. Every little wedge we can drive into natural cracks in the wall of Islam is helpful. The good news is that our wedges are lubricated with a better life. Their wedges are driven with hate and fear. Cold Chardonnay anyone; or would you rather be beaten up for drinking cold water?
It will be a long war. Who wins will depend on who fights.
TunaTalon on August 18, 2007 at 3:55 PM
Many things he says are right. However, not all religions are a cancer upon society.
boomer on August 18, 2007 at 3:57 PM
Wow, he was awesome for the first 4 minutes, but then…
pedestrian on August 18, 2007 at 4:07 PM
He goes off the deep end the last minute or so. I really think that if Europe survives this attack, it will be the same way it survived WWI and WWII–the U.S. will have to bail them out. It’s perversely comforting that they are on the leading edge of kowtowing to radical Islam; hopefully we’ll have time to come to our senses, prepare for the battle, and fight it over there.
windbag on August 18, 2007 at 4:11 PM
It was, the guy does not know as much about our society as he thinks he does.
boomer on August 18, 2007 at 4:14 PM
So the mayor of Brussels is a dhimmi. Nothing new there. Ayaan says in her book that the mayor of Amsterdam is called “The Sheik” because he kisses so much muslim ass. The mayor of London is a dhimmi AND a commie. Eur-rope-istan is doomed.
Tony737 on August 18, 2007 at 4:15 PM
The thin end of and ever thicker wedge. I like that phrase very apropos.
I like the major portion of what Condell says certainly the part about growing a spine, after all of the the flys in all of the ointments,(as he calls it) it’s actually the Judeo Christian theology that creates the fabric of the civilized society he praises and wants to keep.
Yes there has been a violent, corrupt past to Christianity but modern free society was fated to come of it.
The secret ingredient is the embedded mechanism that encourages forgiveness versus vengeance.
Forgiveness has closure, vengeance has no end.
So, personal faith, for the sake of our values must be maintained at a level that also maintains the societal fabric of that which was intended by our founding fathers and mothers.
Compare the morals and freedoms in our society to theirs.
Regardless of your conviction or lack thereof, regardless of your passion or your desire to be passionless; tamper with the weave in our fabric at all of ours peril.
IMHO
Speakup on August 18, 2007 at 4:16 PM
Well said. It has always amazed me that Europeans allow Muslims use activities that took place over 500 years ago to justify their actions. But they will not back the Jews based on events that took place 60 years ago.
Zaire67 on August 18, 2007 at 4:19 PM
ive seen some of his other stuff in the past…
this one was good tho.
same here.
trailortrash on August 18, 2007 at 4:20 PM
If history is a guide towards the future.
Then a stoning is in Europe’s future.
Kini on August 18, 2007 at 4:24 PM
“…we’ve… in Europe… have forgotton …freedom’s… true value… Let’s prove to the American that we still have a spine in Europe.”
Them’s fightin’ words.
Let’s hope.
profitsbeard on August 18, 2007 at 4:34 PM
You missed his best video. Both of them can be found here.
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 4:38 PM
Good question.
I guess the answer is , what ever it takes!
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 4:39 PM
“He can criticize other religions, but I’ll be damned if he criticizes mine!”
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 4:40 PM
zane-
Enforcing The Smith Act of 1940.
profitsbeard on August 18, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Are people seriously talking about banning an entire religion?
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 4:44 PM
Well said for the most part.
Yakko77 on August 18, 2007 at 4:46 PM
All religion needs monitoring and criticism, but islam requires eradication to extinction.
BL@KBIRD on August 18, 2007 at 4:54 PM
A religion is a belief system that is practiced by a group of people that entails worshipping a deity or deities, and following a certain dogma.
While Islam has similarities to a religion it is fundamentally a doctrine of domination. Their soul purpose in life is to kill. convert or extort for the prophet Mohamed in the name of a god they call Allah.
In their way of thinking not even your thoughts are off limits to their wrath. Ask Theo Van Gogh.
It is completely incompatible with a free secular society, especially one that cherishes freedom of religion. Islam’s ultimate intent is seditious to the very ideas we hold sacred.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 5:04 PM
if not eradication then absolute isolation.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 5:05 PM
The sad thing is you really believe all that crap. You honestly believe every Muslim wants to kill you and take over America. You honestly believe that all Muslims are terrorists. It’s pathetic really and ignorant to boot.
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 5:08 PM
In this video a very astute lady tells it like it is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 5:10 PM
I understand you may think I am nuts. But I think it is beyond the scope of my responsibility as a citizen to have to separate the good ones from the bad ones…
Our government should protect us from crap like Islam.
This is not just average abhorrent behaviour. This is a doctrine these people follow. They are head choppers and want to dominate the world.
I was sitting in a hookah café playing dominos in Bahrain. I got into a very enlightening conversation with a retired Arab man. He had been a sailor and had seen much of the west. This was just after the first Gulf war so our conversation drifted to that subject. He told me, with absolute conviction that he was grateful that it was the west that had all the military power. He said that if his people had it they would destroy the world.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 5:21 PM
He said “vote whore.” That’s funny.
Uh … is he serious about polygamy being legal in Germany only for Muslims?
Please tell me he made that up.
Professor Blather on August 18, 2007 at 5:28 PM
Muslim men don’t have wives, they have slaves that bear them either sons or more chattel.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 5:33 PM
So we ban a religion - ban an ideology - because we cherish freedom?
Um … no. No points for you. That’s the kind of talk that liberals think is common among conservatives, and its the kind of talk - thankfully rare - that makes me understand where liberals are coming from.
I understand your point. But banning anything isn’t much of a way to create freedom. Liberals would use that precise language to explain why we should ban guns, for example - to make us all free from violence.
Right? Uh … no. It pains me to ever agree with Non-Factor, but he is 100% right here. Simplistic, sophomoric solutions (nuke them all!) may be emotionally satisfying, but not only are they never, ever effective in the real world … they also turn you into exactly what you claim to hate.
Modern Islam is a problem. Generalizing about all the billion plus Muslims - or attempting to eradicate a religion and call that “freedom” - is not the solution. And even if you could pull it off, the solution is worse than the problem.
There are good conservative solutions. Yes, kill the terrorists, hunt out the bad guys, and if we have to turn a few countries into smoking holes, fine. But in most of the world, the solution will be reforming economies, turning them into job creators and centers for cultural and educational advancement, giving Muslims everywhere a chance to actually live in the 21st century.
Please stop comments about “banning” religions (or any other thought or expression). All you just did was make Non-Factor feel smug, and guarantee that your comment will end up on some liberal blog somewhere.
As for you, Non-Factor - in this comment, to a degree, you’re guilty of the same damn thing:
No, kid. “People” are not serious. Don’t generalize and don’t lump together. It’s exactly what SitRep is doing.
HE may be talking about banning a religion. Argue with him. Assuming everybody else thinks the same is just as bad when you do it as when he does it.
Think, people. Think. It ain’t that hard.
Professor Blather on August 18, 2007 at 5:38 PM
Jesus wept. Where is Allahpundit when you need him.
What happened to this once fine blog? It’s becoming a parody of conservatism. Come on! “Eradication” of a billion people?
Professor Blather on August 18, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Professor if it wasn’t hard we would have more of it.
Stereotypes make thinking easier. Even the brightest Professor can’t individually understand every Muslim in the world. However, using a single stereotype for over one billion people makes this complex world way too easy to understand.
If all Muslims are the same and UBL is a Muslim, then we should kill them all. That’s some easy thinking there. The type of easy thinking that could lead to genocide in the world and the complete loss of moral authority here.
How about we spend less time complaining about wedges driven into our society, and drive a few more wedges into cracks in the wall of Islam?
TunaTalon on August 18, 2007 at 5:56 PM
I don’t believe all Muslims are out to get us. However, I would question their leadership and clerics. For that matter, I would question the leadership of non-Muslims that tend to capitulate to Muslim demands:
Cabbies that refuse to transport you because you have booze or pork
Foot baths in colleges and airports
God or Allah help you should you criticize anything Islam
and It goes on and on.
Whereas it is in vogue to Christian-bash everything from saying Merry Christmas to praying in pubilc because someone might find it offensive. Where secular progressives slam the separation between church and state in your face on a almost daily basis.
Yet, we are lead to believe somehow that western culture is somehow offensive to Muslims and must make amends.
Yet, somehow Sharia law is not offensive?
Like I said, I don’t care what you are. Just don’t try to shove it down my throat. That goes for Bible thumpers also.
Kini on August 18, 2007 at 6:00 PM
I don’t get your point here. Are you claiming that these guys who want Islam banned aren’t people? I’m in no way generalizing. People on this thread flat out stated that Islam should be “eradicated,” and I simply asked if they were serious.
Oh I get it, I said “people” when you think only one guy was advocating Islam be banned. The thing is it wasn’t just one person, it was “people.”
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 6:02 PM
Professor B.-
“Islam” is an ideology. It can be eradicated.
Muslims are the people. Don’t mistake the two.
You can eradicate communism and not hurt a fly.
Or a former communist.
The belief system’s crumbling into history’s dustbin need not harm a soul.
“Islam”, at its most devotional, is a form of intensive cult-brainwashing. (They kill you if you leave it, which defines “cult” to me.)
Once “Islam” ends, the Muslims will wake from this demented 13 century-long dream of a pedophile warlord.
And they, and we, will all be better off for its dissolution.
The sooner the better.
(Their tilework is nice, but the Italians do it just as well, and don’t want to slice your head off if you draw a human face on one.)
profitsbeard on August 18, 2007 at 6:07 PM
Kind of like the immigration debate. Seal the border first, then we’ll talk about assimilating the rest.
First kill the millions that want to hurt me, then we’ll talk about assimilating the rest.
JiangxiDad on August 18, 2007 at 6:10 PM
“An equal opportunity offender.”
Indeed.
These men, such as Condell & Hitchens are rabid anti-theists, so be careful what you wish for - or choose as your ally.
That having been said, I would like to say a few words about islam; If I may.
locomotivebreath1901 on August 18, 2007 at 6:12 PM
I know that is sounds oxymoronic to say what I said but I am trying to make a distinction between a religion and an organization that wants to kill or convert us.
If there was this organization that made snuff films and they where operating all over the world but not in America. But they made it a practice to rape and kill little girls. And they even took to mutilating the genitalia of little girls and enslaved people. And incarcerated and beheaded people just because they did not want to join there organization.
Would you want this organization to set up shop here in the U.S.?
If your answer is yes, then by all means let’s embrace Islam, because this, my friend is what they do ever f*kin’ day.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 6:15 PM
Hey Allahpundit,
I just clicked on the preview button and it showed a post that I will post next month. Can you turn it down about 45 days?
Thanks
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Certainly it’s true that not every Muslim wants to kill, convert, or enslave all unbelievers and place the world under Koranic law. However, it’s also true that not every Christian fails to covet his neighbor’s wife or refrains from taking the Lord’s name in vain. Unfortunately, I fear the former have far too much in common with the latter; that formally speaking, they are perhaps just a bit lazy.
The Christians who take their religion most seriously are out in the third world running orphanages. The Muslims who take their religion most seriously are out in the third world running, funding, or attending terrorist training camps. That’s not a distinction to be taken lightly.
Blacklake on August 18, 2007 at 6:26 PM
Seems your argument is more a matter of degree. Nuke as few countries as possible, instead of all of them huh?
JiangxiDad on August 18, 2007 at 6:30 PM
Unfortunately there are those who want to lump all religion in the same basket even though there are vast differences between, say, Christianity and the islamic religion. Some of those folks want to rid the world of all religion because they don’t agree with it. That is why they don’t want to make that distinction.
boomer on August 18, 2007 at 6:33 PM
Great stuff until the end. Can’t say that I agree with the “ban on all religions” crap. America as well as Europe was founded on Christianity and it’s principles. It is why America is great. Getting rid of this aspect of our society would only hasten Islam’s takeover. Why do you think Islam has spread so quickly and vastly in Europe?
Trtle2001 on August 18, 2007 at 7:11 PM
Hilaire Belloc wrote in 1938:
“Will not perhaps the temporal power of Islam return and with it the menace of an armed Mohammedan world, which will shake off the domination of Europeans — still nominally Christian — and reappear as the prime enemy of our civilization? The future always comes as a surprise, but political wisdom consists in attempting at least some partial judgment of what that surprise may be. And for my part I cannot but believe that a main unexpected thing of the future is the return of Islam”.
VinceP1974 on August 18, 2007 at 7:45 PM
I wonder what Nonfactor’s opinion of National Socialism would have been in 1937? Just another political ideology to be discussed in the local beer garden?
Make no mistake about it Nonfactor, Islam is not just another religion. It is without question a political ideology. It is a political ideology that like National Socialism or Stalinist Communism has at its root the conquest of the entire world.
And you my friend would find yourself on the wrong end of a Sharia judges order for beheading long before any Christian or Jew and at best perhaps one single step behind your friendly neighborhood homosexual.
But please in all absolute moral authority continue to defend those who would execute you faster than they would a hooker drug pusher murderer or rapists.
Let me make something perfectly clear to you, something I somehow suspect that you will never understand under any circumstances.
Dead men do not get to decide from whence comes absolute moral authority. Dead men do not get to decide, well anything at all. The dead cannot call anyone to account for anything. The stories of the dead are written by the living, and the living write those stories as fits their political and religious ideologies.
Islam is a genuine bona fide case of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. Individual Muslims may well not be evil or want personally to kill or enslave all that refuse to submit to Islam. But if you foolishly and naively believe that Islam as a whole does not want, nay even demand this of all of its practitioners than you have very badly deceived yourself.
The reactionary drive to outlaws Islam is not one to abolish a religion, to believe this is to subscribe to a mind boggling degree of self inflicted stupidity worthy of well anyone arrogant enough to state uncategorically that they know for a fact whether God exists or not.
No the reactionary drive to outlaw or ban Islam is a desire to bring about a cessation of a violent homicidal political ideology whose self defined declared purpose is nothing less than world domination and the extinction of any individual group or ideology that apposes that dominion.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 7:51 PM
I suspect you’re kidding.
Of course, he was talking about the religion, not its people. We wouldn’t want to make any absolute statements without a billion qualifications beforehand, would we NonFactor? My, what a self-censoring, ball-less people we’ve become.
PRCalDude on August 18, 2007 at 7:56 PM
It’s important to say, for those slow-learners who still don’t get it in light of overwhelming evidence, that Islam is not just a religion. It’s a political system also. Muslims date their calendar “A.H.”- after hijrah, when Mohammed became the political ruler (dictator) of Medinah. Islam is more than happy to allow to to practice your religion, in a severely dumbed-down form, as long as you pay a crushing jizyah. After all, who do you think funded Islam’s ‘expansion’ if not for the dhimmis?
PRCalDude on August 18, 2007 at 8:01 PM
No shit? Did I just get accused of being a Nazi? All because I’ve shown shock in people’s willingness to ban an entire religion. Doriangrey, you’ve outdone yourself, bravo you Nazi-loving, Jew-killing, Islam-hating, son of a bitch.
It’s pathetic how conservatives truly believe America to be susceptible enough to a complete takeover by radical Muslims. I guess you guys think it’s a good point to be made which is why you repeat it ad nauseum, but it isn’t, it’s an insane hypothetical wet-dream of the radicals.
Defend those who would execute me? Where have I done that? Please, show me where, and after you’ve finished combing my posts and don’t find a sentence corroborating your straw man, let me know how much of a jackass you feel like.
I’ve read the rest of your post, it’s not even worth responding to.
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 8:11 PM
The idea of banning an ideology or eradicating a belief system is insane. There truly is nothing more to say.
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Fine. I’m insane.
Now, onto the merits of banning Islam. No more CAIR appearances on television, with honest Ibe condemning the latest episode of Islamophobia. No more obnoxious looking mosques and Islamic centers spouting hatred at the West. No more Islamic ‘charities.’ No more weekly reports of a newly-busted terror cell.
PRCalDude on August 18, 2007 at 8:20 PM
…………………..bravo
RushBaby on August 18, 2007 at 8:33 PM
Actually, the title of this piece accurately describes him as equal opportunity offender - and with good reason.
A perfect example is his distorted views on this video -
What about the jews - as an atheist, he likes the jews best arghhhh.
heroyalwhyness on August 18, 2007 at 8:43 PM
I wonder what nonfactor’s view of this is:
Talk about fighting against ideologies and religions.. that’s the very mission of Islam yet some people rather complain about those who fight against these vile islamic doctrines rather than the doctrines themselves and those who follow them. What cowards.
Yes nonfactor… YOU… coward.
VinceP1974 on August 18, 2007 at 8:49 PM
Hey you guys,, sima da na. Sim ma da na.
Y’all don’t need to start issuing fatwas on each other.
I simply pose this question,
Wouldn’t allot of problems vanish if this culture of death called Islam was not practiced here.
Please, Please don’t think that I don’t want people from the middle east here.
I just don’t want ‘em cutting off my head every time I turn around.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 8:52 PM
Did men and women talk of banning Islam in Spain and Italy 1400 years ago? If they did were they shouted down by those who argued that assimilation and inclusion would prevent their nations falling to the power of the Caliphate? Were these same men and women called insane?
But I’m sure it couldn’t happen again and of course Iran only wants nuclear power for electricity generation.
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it!
Buzzy on August 18, 2007 at 8:52 PM
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 8:13 PM
Nothing could possibly be further from the truth. The idea that all ideologies or religions are equal and deserving of equal protection is what is insane. The very idea that you could suggest otherwise suggests that either you are playing devils advocate or truly should not be allowed a voice in any discussion of public policy.
Contrary to the position that you are posturing not all ideas are good, in fact their are just as many idea’s that very much should be banned from public discourse as their are ideas that should be protected.
I seriously doubt that for even one second you would support the idea of making public sporting spectacles out of executions, let alone be willing to argue the case in any public forum. Likewise do I doubt that you would condone a reality based television game show that involved the abduction and violent rape and then murder of prepubescent children.
Dont bother claiming that these idea’s have no relevance to the notion that certain ideologies or religions should be banned. The purpose of bringing idea’s such as this up is to demonstrate that there are indeed idea’s that do not under any circumstances deserve to be given any credence or ever brought into the public square for discussion.
Oh and the point of using theses specific examples is that neither of these idea’s would be particularly offensive to a Wahhabist or Islamic extremist, both of these suggestions are in fact minor variations on accepted forms of capital punishment within Wahhabist or Islamic extremist ideology.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 8:53 PM
Yes, well done.
Precisely. Thank you Profitsbeard!
heroyalwhyness on August 18, 2007 at 9:05 PM
Just like Nazism, Marxism, cannibalism, Macintosh computers, and NAMBLA.
Islam is not compatible with a free society.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 9:11 PM
I was agreeing with this guy all the way up until the last minute. When he started blaming all religion for the misdeeds of Islam, I could agree with him no more. As I’ve argued before, Islam is not a religion, its a death cult. Yet all religions are taking a hit because of Islam. We must learn the difference between “Religions” and “death cults.” They are polar opposites and it’s wholly unreasoned to blame “Religion” for acts committed by a “death cult.”
Maxx on August 18, 2007 at 9:13 PM
Having a belief or ideology is one thing, acting on it is another. You can’t ban or eradicate a belief, especially in a society like the one we live in. Period.
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 9:15 PM
Nonfactor on August 18, 2007 at 8:11 PM
Sigh…….And you wonder why people disagree with you so much. Perhaps it’s because you being sooo much more intelligent than all the rest of us mere mortal humans gleen nuance where there isn’t any nuance. I never accused you or even implied that you were a Nazi, what I very obviously suggested was that like Neville Chamberlain Joesph Kennedy or Charles Lindberg you would have found National Socialism a topic worth discussing undoubtedly quite politely with the likes of Joesph Gerbils.
So what you are saying is that Thomas Jefferson Benjamin Franklin and James Madison were insane radicals suffering from wet-dreams and delusions? Or are you just suggesting that they were pathetic? Because all three of those illustrious gentleman voiced exactly such beliefs. Nor am I willing to believe that the citizens of todays United States are any nobler or wiser than Jefferson Franklin or Madison were.
If you really need to have that explained to you than all I or anyone else can do is pity you. Never the less I shall make one simple attempt to do so.
Any attempt to equate equal rights protections or privileges to any individual, group or organization that is attempting to destroy you or your civilization or way of life is an act of defense of those attempting to destroy you, your civilization or way of life.
I dont feel even remotely like a jackass, but I do profoundly pity both you and the culture that produced defenders of itself like you.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Do not even attempt to educate the naive who think that islam is nothing more than a religion with a few bad apples. They are so emotionally invested in that ideal that they refuse to open their eyes to what is happening. That meme about a few bad apples has been taught and followed and it has led to the creeping sharia that the west is under now. Islam is not a religion. It is an ideology and a system of government. It needs to be banned, and islamic immigration banned, in all western nations and all free societies before the tenets of islam become law in our own countries by virtue of nothing more than the influence of sheer numbers.
Do not think for one second that the west is so strong and free that it can humor this creeping sharia, and that we, in turn, should humor the islam in our midst as a harmless idiosyncracy of multiculturalism. All nations, all empires eventually fall. And they fall because of demographic change, the cultural makeup of the population changed enough that the rot from within allowed enemies from without to come through the gates. It happened to the Roman Empire. Rome lasted 1000 years. It was supposed to last forever. It fell and we had 500 years of dark ages as a result. America, France, parliamentary Europe, all the nations we cherish as being the First World, have lasted only about 230 years yet they are now at the same cultural devolution point that Rome was at when Rome was sacked. Our world may last another 50 if nothing is done.
jihadwatcher on August 18, 2007 at 9:18 PM
I was amazed the first time I went to Pakistan. When I got to my hotel in Islamabad,
I called for room service to get some scotch. Boy! I had to go down to the front desk where they made multiple copies of my passport and made me fill out several documents declaring that I was Christian and that I was an alcoholic and that I needed the booze for medicinal reasons. Once all that crap was done I ordered a pint of the sh#ttiest rotgut hooch on earth I think it was Murray brand. It is made in Pakistan. A Christian kids had to bring it to my room.
After that trip I made many trips to various Islamic Sh*tholes the only one that was not awful was Indonesia. It is very nice there. I developed a theory that the more desolate and hard the climate the more severe the zealotry.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 9:22 PM
You speak the absolute truth my friend.
Tolerance is not a virtue but a crutch for the weak of mind.
Tolerance requires no discernment only acceptance.
The tolerant will always be dominated by exactly what ever they tolerate.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 9:30 PM
Should 7,000,000,000 cannibals decide they had to leave their countries of origin due to religious or financial hardships and plead to immigrate to the United States, would we be asked to do so out of religious tolerance and comply? Would the rest of the world condemn us if we didn’t? Would that group be offered assistance, welfare, education, unlimited building of religious centers to further their goals and the importation of thousands of family members, plus their religious leaders, from their countries of origin? Should those religious leaders be allowed to challenge established laws that are counter to the Constitution of the United States of America? What is the threshhold?
The banning of what we understand to be religion is one of the most serious issues we may be facing. To allow a group to challenge the very base of what we call religious tolerance vs. the need to protect and defend those principals we must live by in order to protect and defend society as a whole is going to make each of us reach into our very souls.
24K lady on August 18, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Sounds like Hitchens with a lower BAC.
…
And thanks for the Preview button.
The Monster on August 18, 2007 at 9:37 PM
Hmmm, my last response to Nonfactor keeps falling afoul of the filters…
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 9:39 PM
profitsbeard on August 18, 2007 at 4:41 PM
Sounds like CAIR could use a health does of The Smith Act…
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 9:43 PM
Islam, the religion of hate.
Hot Air the Blog of hate.
No thanks to either.
TunaTalon on August 18, 2007 at 9:45 PM
You are correct in that.
But I think what some others here know is that the door is open and it ain’t gonna get any better till something is done. What exactly has to be done, I don’t know but there are mosque all over America now and these people are drilled daily that we need to die in the named of Allah. No Sh*t Really! We have been tolerant and as far as I know the only death caused by reaction to 9-11 here was a Sikh guy that got whacked. ( the irony there being that Sikhs are like sworn enemies of Islam. And wonderful people I might add)
Why there has not been tons of suicide attacks on our soil post 9-11 is due to many factors:
1. The FBI immediately got real busy rounding up suspects.
2. Allot of Muslims are loving their freedoms in America and don’t want to rock the boat.
3. Me and about 50 million other extremely well armed gun aficionados might frown on it. And they know that.
Maybe we are okay here but Europe is screwed.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 9:46 PM
Brilliant.
Black Adam on August 18, 2007 at 9:48 PM
Grass is actually hard to grow. You have to feed it, water it and mow it regularly. A healthy lawn is naturally free of weeds. Dense grass being the best protection against them since they get chocked out naturally.
If you neglect a lawn the grass begins to die rather quickly and it leaves plenty of space for weeds to grow. Weeds, by their nature, quickly multiply and left unchecked come to dominate the landscape.
Europe has all but killed it’s millenniums old lawn which for centuries protected it against destructive weeds. The answer isn’t to further kill the grass and hopefully get the weeds too. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, soil abhors barrenness. The solution is to start taking care of the grass again.
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 9:54 PM
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 9:54 PM
And the very best way to take care of the grass is to use weed specific defoliants and fertilizers. Encourage/fertilize the grass that you want to grow and kill the weeds you don’t want to grow. There is no other way to do it.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 10:02 PM
That is true!
But often times a prudent horticulturist has to de-thatch. But some times there is a pathogen that is in the soil. In that case the sod must be eradicated entirely and destroyed. Once that is done the soil must be sterilized by pasteurization and only then can a healthy lawn grow.
I also recommend a little pre-emptive baylaton for brown patch before the longer wet days of fall come.
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 10:04 PM
Actually, the best way is to just take care of the grass. Focus on the grass and it in turn keeps out the weeds.
Europe’s lawn is very sick. They killed their grass thinking they didn’t need it anymore. Now their lawn is full of weeds and soon it will be all weeds. Then they’ll wish they hadn’t killed all their grass.
America’s grass is green and lush. Not perfect by any stretch but good enough to keep the weeds well under control. Unfortunately there are some people who want to kill the grass here just as others like them have done in Europe. Let them take a hard looks at Europe’s sick lawn and realize they can have grass or weeds because nature will never allow them to have the barren soil they prize.
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 10:15 PM
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Frequent fertilization aeration and weed defoliation is the best way to take care of the grass. But then I only worked my way through college as a landscaper so what would I know.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 10:22 PM
Professor, I’m not defending the statement, but I think BL@KBIRD was trying to say, the “religion” of Islam should be eliminated, not the people.
Maxx on August 18, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Drastic measures may be in Europe’s future. From this far away it difficult to see how much grass remains and whether care and feeding will cause it to grow and spread again.
America’s lawn is healthy and deeply rooted. We just need to continue to care for it and keep people from damaging it in the delusional quest for barren soil.
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 10:26 PM
That is taking care of the grass. I think your missing the analogy.
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 10:27 PM
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 10:27 PM
Or not, but perhaps just overly fixating on the defoliation of undesirable weeds aspect.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 10:29 PM
This weeds analogy has gotten out of hand and it is misplaced. Weeds will always overwhelm grass. They can suck the nutrients and moisture from the grass because their roots go much deeper than sod. Just taking care of the grass will NOT keep the weeds under control. You must kill the weeds. Only by killing the weeds will the grass not be overwhelmed.
jihadwatcher on August 18, 2007 at 10:39 PM
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 10:04 PM
I have a Bermuda lawn but my neighbour has a St Augustine lawn as you know St Augustine tends to send out long runners. And since he wont mow regularly and keep his lawn fed healthy it will go to seed and the seed, along with the runners are encroaching rapidly.
Mr. BigOldDog, I want to keep my Bermuda what do I do, short of building a wall?
Should I enforce the laws already on the books?
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 10:42 PM
jihadwatcher on August 18, 2007 at 10:39 PM
Yes and we speak in analogies because many cannot stomach the reality of what it means to “Kill the weeds” especially when the weed’s in question are somebody else’s religion/political ideology. Sadly they cannot grasp the idea that ban Islam does not mean murder all Muslims or even drive all Muslims out of the country. All it means is to make it illegal to practice a religion/political ideology whose unequivocally stated goal is the destruction of the United States Constitution and the subjugation of the American people.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 10:47 PM
TheSitRep on August 18, 2007 at 10:42 PM
I would recommend a virtual wall comprised of a strong general defoliant along the demarcation line and a specific defoliants within your yard to deter any volunteers (wind born seeds) that might illegally cross your border.
doriangrey on August 18, 2007 at 10:52 PM
Condell is just one of the bigots… when he’s focused on one particular target, which happens to be a pretty nasty customer, he sounds half-reasonable. But he’s just an equal-opportunity hater.
Nonfactor just manages to get people to respond, despite the futility of the action. That’s even less easy to figure out.
Yeah, NF. There’s no threat that can harm us, we’re inveeeeencibull. You probably said that about the Soviet Union, if youw ere out of diapers back in the day.
Catch up, everybody, it’s just the LLL way of making itself feel brave while denigrating its oposition for being “cowards,” an appelation that far more obviously fits someone who chooses to fight against people who are no real threat to them (Republicans) instead of opponents who pose an actual physical threat (Islamists and terrorists).
Go ahead, NF. Rage against your daddy, he’ll make it all better anyway.
Merovign on August 18, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Congress shall make no law…
Christianity has been and will remain the natural check to the spread of Islam.
The Europeans have done their best to destroy their Christian roots. And, like nature abhorring a vacuum, Islam has rushed in to fill the void. Now they’re in deep doo-doo….
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 11:07 PM
I hope your right BigOldDog, but Christianity is getting a black eye because of the acts of the Islamofascist. If haters of religion like Pat Condell have their way, there will be no Christianity (at least openly) to check Islam.
Maxx on August 18, 2007 at 11:23 PM
That’s why these barren Earth madmen better wake up and get smart before they wind up living through their worst case scenario.
TheBigOldDog on August 18, 2007 at 11:32 PM
And how would this be achieved without destroying the very constitution you wish to save? The fight against Islamofascism is vital to the survival of our culture and our way of life; but banning Islam is insane, and will have no serious effects on eliminating Islamic terrorists. If anything, it’s playing into their hands: eradicating Islam is exactly what they are claiming we aim to do.
Unfortunately, what we seem to be seeing is the return of Bircher rhetoric, just with communism replaced by Islam. Just as the marginalising of the John Birch Society was vital to the revival of the Republican party and the winning of the Cold War, so is the curbing of eliminationist rhetoric to the winning of the war against Islamofascism.
jic on August 18, 2007 at 11:47 PM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »