Will the EU confront Islamism
By Ted Belman
THIS VIDEO ILLUSTRATES THE PROBLEM AND POSES THE CHALLENGE
Bruce Bawer recently wrote An Anatomy of Surrender, and concluded that, motivated by fear and multiculturalism, too many Westerners are acquiescing to creeping sharia.
-
[..] Call it a cultural surrender. The House of War is slowly—or not so slowly, in Europe’s case—being absorbed into the House of Submission.
The Western media are in the driver’s seat on this road to sharia. Often their approach is to argue that we’re the bad guys. After the late Dutch sociologist-turned-politician Pim Fortuyn sounded the alarm about the danger that Europe’s Islamization posed to democracy, elite journalists labeled him a threat. A New York Times headline described him as marching the dutch to the right. Dutch newspapers Het Parool and De Volkskrant compared him with Mussolini; Trouw likened him to Hitler. The man (a multiculturalist, not a Muslim) who murdered him in May 2002 seemed to echo such verdicts when explaining his motive: Fortuyn’s views on Islam, the killer insisted, were “dangerous.”
Perhaps no Western media outlet has exhibited this habit of moral inversion more regularly than the BBC. In 2006, to take a typical example, Manchester’s top imam told psychotherapist John Casson that he supported the death penalty for homosexuality. Casson expressed shock—and the BBC, in a dispatch headlined imam accused of “gay death” slur, spun the controversy as an effort by Casson to discredit Islam. The BBC concluded its story with comments from an Islamic Human Rights Commission spokesman, who equated Muslim attitudes toward homosexuality with those of “other orthodox religions, such as Catholicism” and complained that focusing on the issue was “part of demonizing Muslims.” [..]
Tommorrow in Israel is the start of Yom ha Shoa veh Gevura. HOLOCAUST MARTYRS AND HEROES REMEMBRANCE DAY in Israel and I am reminded the role of Europe for the catastrophe inflicted on the Jewish People of Europe. In that light I can’t say I would be sorry to see Europe succumb to Islam. They didn’t want their Jews let them have Muslims instead God must really be a practical Joker. In the vernacular Fuck Europe!
I love Canada and Netherlands. They are nice tolerant countries. It’s hard to explain to their tolerant Jews why should we rid Israel of Arabs and deviants. It’s like talking to people from another planet. Isn’t a tolerant all-permissiveness a better policy?
No. Permissiveness knows no boundaries. That’s especially a problem when tolerance is coupled with formal justice and moral subjectivism. Justices ask, Why not? and cannot find rational answer; irrational answers are not codified. Tolerance started with accepting other religions and not ostracizing homosexuals. The sphere of tolerance was continuously expanded. Tolerating all religions, why not tolerate Islam? Tolerating homosexuality, why not accept gay unions? Soon their countries are flooded with Muslim immigrants and the cornerstone institute of family is undermined by same-sex marriages. Judges will find no reason to prohibit polygamy and the only reason I’ve heard against bestiality is animal rights; shouldn’t rape a sheep, you see. Faced with obvious immorality, leftists either have to admit their policy of tolerance wrong, or embrace the deviations as beneficial. Sure they prefer the last option. Thus school courses on homosexuality and hysteria about AIDS frightening decent people out of single bars – for they don’t know that AIDS is restricted to homosexuals and drug addicts. Tolerance is a policy of no barriers, and such policies are prone to exploitation. Canada had no problem with massive immigration from many countries until Arabs flooded it. Tolerance benefits generic societies in perhaps 99% of instances, but inability to confront vaguely defined evil in 1% of cases brings societies down. Intolerant societies are much more durable because they are conservative. All innovations have to pass through the barrier of initial hostility – or be tried elsewhere. Intolerant countries are not on the edge of social experimentation and generally are moderate economic performers, but they are safe and comfortable to vast majority of their citizens.
Israel tried tolerance with her Arabs – but the tolerance only provokes them. They exploit Israeli tolerance by massive illegal construction, tax evasion, crime, and disloyalty. The line between tolerance and weakness is too fine for a state to dance.
Israel cannot be tolerant. She must be a Jewish country. That’s her reason for existence. Think of it as a zoning regulation. Arabs, homosexuals, and Peace Now members can live thirty miles away from their current residences – in Jordan or Lebanon. Or in Canada, if it would have them.
permissive unto death