Political Correctness is the Incubator of Islamism

Amil Imani
Freedom of Iran



Political Correctness is the Incubator of Islamism

Time and again we are told by the politically correct “experts” not to worry about Islam posing a threat to our way of life. We are repeatedly lectured that only a very small minority of Muslims are troublemakers who are giving the peaceful masses of Muslims a bad name. We are also informed that the terrorists, who happened to be Muslims, are the disaffected and the young. And not to worry, since as the fire of youth turns to ashes of old age the rebellious will mellow, as they always have.

With heavy assurances like this, coming from so many know-it-all authoritative figures, we can sleep soundly without the aid of sleeping pills. After all, people reason that these pundits are “experts” whose job is to know and tell it like it is. Those who voice contrary views must be a bunch of racist, alarmist hate mongers. Who is right?

Wouldn’t it be more prudent to let the facts settle the matter, rather than blindly accepting either position? Of course it would, except for one huge problem. In the face of threats, people tend to go to the mind’s medicine cabinet and take a few denial and rationalization pills, in the same way that it is the aspirin bottle they turn to when a headache strikes. Why not? We are the Easy Species. We love effortless, quick and simple solutions. And that’s not invariably bad. It has given us all kinds of labor and time saving devices.

Yet, the Islam problem is very real and deadly. Neither the pronouncements of the experts, nor the tranquilizing pills of the mind can make it go away. It is here and it shows every sign of imposing itself on us. Let us look at some of the facts.

* Not every Muslim wears an explosive vest ready to detonate in the midst of a crowd of innocent civilians, yet there are more volunteers for the mission than there are explosive vests. The Islamic Republic of Iran, for instance, hasn’t even officially joined this form of jihad. Yet, by its own admission, it has over 10,000 volunteers trained ready to be deployed, and thousands more queuing to join in. This time around, the jihadists heading for Allah’s heaven might come fitted with nice little suitcases of dirty bombs instead of the bulky explosive vests. Recall that it took only 19 of these killers to launch the aerial mass murder of 9/11 that killed 3,000 people, shattered our open trusting way of life, and cost us billions of dollars.

* The jihadists are not confined to a minority of disaffected Muslim youth. How young are Bin Laden, his deputy doctor of death Al Zawahiri, mullah Omar of the Taliban, Khamenei and Refsanjani of Iran, just to name a few? How disaffected are they? Muhammad Ata, leader of the 19 airborne thugs and the decapitator of Wall Street Journal reporter Pearl were somewhat younger, yet well-healed and Western educated.

* Just coin some terms such as the “Melting Pot,” or “Multiculturalism” and you have the problem solved? Roll out the red carpet for the immigrant Muslims, treat them as you would your own citizens, give them stipends, medical care, and free education and they will integrate seamlessly into the society? No such thing at all. The idea of Melting Pot may work with people who come from different lands to make the new country their home. The Islamists, on the other hand, come with the belief that they already own the place and want to make it part of the Ummeh. Some forty percent of second and third generation Muslim Britons reject British democracy, express their allegiance to Islam and want to live under Sharia. So much for the Melting Pot comfort pill.

* The new Islamist arrivals take advantage of the provisions of the most benign system known to humanity, democracy, to implode it from within. Muslims, by sheer numbers, will soon be in a position to vote out democracy in many countries. They are already doing that in bits and pieces. They are imposing many of their values, in a number of societies, even while they are in the minority. Politicians, hungry for votes and devoted to the practice of political correctness bend backward to accede to Islamists’ demands.

* As for Multiculturalism, it is even more of a delusion than the Melting Pot myth. It is a second generation Comfort Pill. Since the Melting Pot proved to be worse than a placebo, the politically correct gave us the new pill. A glance at Europe shows how Multiculturalism in fact has served as the incubator of Islamism in no time at all. Europe’s Multiculturalism is rapidly birthing a Uniculturalism, if the Islamists’ medieval way of life can be dignified as a culture.

* Respect for diversity, separation of religion and state, freedom of belief and expression, are pillars of democracy, yet anathema to Islam. In no Islamic land do you find an ecumenical organization. It is only in non-Islamic countries that the shameless duplicitous Muslim, be he an imam, a mullah, or a regular run-of-the- mill faithful of Allah, meekly participates in ecumenical feel-good gatherings. * To Muslims, no other religion is deemed worthy of recognition, much less accommodation. There is not a single church or synagogue or a Buddhist temple in all of Saudi Arabia. They are barred. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s raft of genocidal pogroms includes the heinous practice of bulldozing even the cemeteries of its Baha’i religious minority. The Islamic tyranny of the mullahs imprisons Christian Iranians for celebrating Christmas. Egypt denies its own citizens identity cards for refusing to lie and fake their religious belief or disbelief. The ID cards are required for education, securing work, receiving medical care and just about every right of citizenship. Without it, a citizen is literally subjected to slow death.

* In Islam only Muslim men, and, to a lesser extent, Muslim women, are entitled to certain rights. All non-Muslims, including the so-called people of the book, namely Christians and Jews, are at best second-class subject, subjects who must pay the back-breaking Jezyyeh, poll tax, for their “sin” of not converting to Islam. So, as Islam makes its inroads in new lands, as its membership swells through explosive birth and conversion, secular democracies will be inevitably replaced by Islamism with its stone-age Sharia laws. The best offer that Islam will make is to spare the non-Muslim’s life if he puts on the heavy yoke of Jezyyeh for the rest of his living days.

* Not to worry about the horrific things that are happening on the other side of the world? If Muslims act heinously toward non-Muslims, it is just the way things are in those countries and it is hardly any of our business? This is the same attitude that set Islamization of Europe on a seemingly irreversible track. One European country after another is rapidly buckling under the weight of Islamism.

* Most importantly, not to worry about Islamization of our country? After all, Muslims are about 6-7 million minority in a population of nearly 300 million, you reason? That even a smaller number of these Muslims are hothead radicals, while the majority is just like everyone else? But small minorities can overwhelm the majority by use of coercion and deadly force. Islamists are notorious for their dedication to the use of force for achieving their aims. The Taliban were a very small minority in Afghanistan, the Islamists were a tiny faction in the 1979 Islamic Revolution of Iran. Both overwhelmed the masses and imposed their reign of terror. The terrorist Hamas is also a “minority” in number, yet it rules the Palestinian Territory. Hizbollah of Lebanon is a minority, yet it has taken the country to the verge of destruction.

* Islamists are Islam’s locomotive that takes the wrecking-ball Islamic train on its demolition course. Islam and democracy are incompatible. As democracies practice their magnificent accommodating belief, they knowingly or unknowingly lay the track for the advancing wrecking train of Islam. We, in the United States of America must resist Islamism while it is still gathering momentum, unless we wish to end up in the same fix as the Europeans.

* We, in the United States, further need to embark on a comprehensive legal, educational, and social campaign to eradicate the deadly plague of Islam. By effective action, we even save those peaceful Muslims from their own affliction. I am not hatemongering. I would love to see all Muslims become ex-Muslims and full-fledged members of a diverse tolerant democratic society. It is a statement of fact about what Islam is. Islam is a highly communicable pandemic violent disease that demands urgent and serious containment. Europe is already badly infected with Islamism. It is the coal-miners’ canary. It is telling us that the next stop is America. We must act and act now. We must not sacrifice our cherished way of life and the lives of our children at the altar of political correctness: the incubator of Islamofascism.

Back From The Brink?

Back From The Brink?

After a week of escalation, including battles with Israel, Hamas and Fatah stop just short of all out war. And Israel warns: “Be very afraid”.


Cockpit View of Israeli Airstrikes

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — The rival Hamas and Fatah factions reached a new cease-fire deal Saturday, after a week of deadly fighting, officials announced, pledging to pull fighters off the streets and exchange hostages.

Several previous truce agreements quickly collapsed in recent days, and it was not clear if this one would hold. As the agreement was reached, clashes erupted outside the home of a senior Fatah official in Gaza City, and security officials said several people were wounded. In another incident, the convoy of a Fatah-allied colonel in the Palestinian intelligence came under fire, but no one was hurt.

(Read More)

Posted by Pat Dollard 1 Comment

When War Is Just A Political Weapon…

When War Is Just A Political Weapon…

medal of honor

…people die and nations fall.

Everybody knows, that’s the way it goes.

Posted by Pat Dollard 0 Comments

Trutheriness and Ron Paul– 9/11 conspiracy theorists

The Oppressors’ Club

The Oppressors’ Club
The Human Rights Council is just one (entirely representative) part of the U.N.

By Anne Bayefsky

On Thursday, the United Nations elected new members to its lead human-rights protection body, the Human Rights Council. The so-called “reformed” agency (which replaced the thoroughly discredited “Commission on Human Rights”) will now include three new states with a special penchant for abusing human rights: Angola, Egypt, and Qatar. They join the likes of current members Azerbaijan, China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia.

In order to be elected to this U.N. club, these states had the onerous task of pledging to take human rights seriously. Angola pledged “to continue…mainstreaming human rights throughout the society [and]…promoting the rule of law, access to justice and reconciliation…” What Angola neglected to mention were some features of current conditions in the country, as recited in the recent State Department Human Rights report: “…the abridgement of citizens’ right to elect officials at all levels; unlawful killings by police, military, and private security forces; torture, beatings…corruption and impunity…” etc.

Egypt pledged to “preserve the freedom of the press, the independence of the judiciary [and]…fulfil…political, social and economic reform, anchored in the promotion and protection of human rights…” Mysteriously omitted from the Egyptian promise were, in the words of the State Department report: “…limitations on the right of citizens to change their government; a state of emergency, in place almost continuously since 1967; torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees;…arbitrary arrest and detention…restrictions on civil liberties—freedoms of speech and press…female genital mutilation,” etc, etc.

Qatar’s grandiose pledge read: “The State of Qatar pays great and increasing attention to the goal of promoting and protecting human rights,” and it pointed to its constitution, which “guarantees” “equality before the law, the prohibition against discrimination, personal freedom,” and a whole host of other rights. Among the other guarantees in Qatar, according to the State Department report: “citizens lack…the right to change their government peacefully…judicially sanctioned corporal punishments…freedoms of speech (including the use of the Internet), press, assembly, and association continued to be restricted…Discrimination against women…” And for good measure, according to the 2004 Criminal Code, “Individuals caught proselytizing on behalf of any religion other than Islam” are subject to “imprisonment of up to ten years.”

None of this made the slightest difference to the General Assembly members who elected the U.N.’s human rights watchdogs — 172 of the 192 members of the General Assembly voted for Angola, 168 for Egypt, and 170 for Qatar.

A week ago, another U.N. election stirred controversy when Zimbabwe was elected to chair the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development. The government of Robert Mugabe vies for the title of the worst example of unsustainable development in modern times, having raped and pillaged the vast human and natural resources of the country for decades.

However appalling these electoral results may be, it would be a serious mistake to take them out of context. The U.N. presents a broad array of elected officials governing its various agencies and bodies. Here, then, are the broader context and some of the illustrious members of U.N. institutions:

U.N. Disarmament Commission Vice-Chairman : Iran, Rapporteur ; Syria
Committee on Information: China, Kazakhstan
U.N. Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law Advisory Committee: Iran, Lebanon, Sudan
Commission on Social Development: North Korea
Commission on the Status of Women: Qatar, Togo, United Arab Emirates
Commission on Sustainable Development: Sudan
Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: Libya, Russia
U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Board: Bhutan, China
U.N. Development Programme Executive Board: Algeria, Kazakhstan
World Food Programme Executive Board: Zimbabwe, Sudan
International Labour Organization Governing Body: Saudi Arabia
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Executive Committee: Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan
U.N. Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT): Zimbabwe
Working Groups of the Human Rights Council on Arbitrary Detention and Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances: both groups have a member from Iran
General Assembly Vice-Presidents: Bhutan, Libya, Zimbabwe
Third Committee on Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Affairs of the General Assembly, Vice-Chairman: Belarus

The big picture? Not only do the human-rights abusers sit on the human-rights protection agency, the nuclear proliferators sit on the disarmament commission; the deniers of freedom of information sit on the public information committee; the international law violators sit on the appreciation of international law committee; the enemies of social development sit on the social development commission; the misogynists sit on the women’s rights body; the savage sit on the development commission; the criminals sit on the crime prevention commission; the forced abortionists sit on the children’s rights fund; the undemocratic are members of the good governance and sustainable development programme; the food crisis manufacturers are members of the effective food aid programme; the anti-free association experts sit on the labor-protection governing body; the refugee creators sit on the refugee protection executive committee; the agents of homelessness are members of the human settlements protection programme; the masters at arbitrary detention and involuntary disappearance sit on detention and disappearance prevention groups; those who systematically ignore the U.N. Charter sit as leaders in the assembly charged with promoting its respect.

Undoubtedly, there will remain those perpetual optimists who will fancy these examples as isolated incidents and hence will judge that U.N. camaraderie is worth the gambit with American taxpayer dollars. While they dream on, the Organization of the Islamic Conference just does the math. After yesterday’s Human Rights Council elections, they remain with a chokehold on the “reformed” human rights body by retaining a majority of each of the African and Asian regional groups, which in turn control the majority of the Council itself.

It isn’t a pretty picture. And it gets uglier every time the U.N. members — the majority of which are not full democracies — go through the pretense of holding elections. They’ve got the pledging down all right. Their resemblance to nations with rights, freedoms, or real democracy, however, ends there.

National Review Online – http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDM2NTQ2ODZmNDU3MTA2ZTBiNDFiNGExZWRjMWM2YjQ

Were Dems negotiating with terrorists?

Were Dems negotiating with terrorists?

James Lewis
What was Nancy Pelosi really doing in Damascus last month? Call me suspicious. But we know that Steny Hoyer, the House Democrat Whip, flew to Cairo at the same time. It’s on the public record that Hoyer talked with Muslim Brotherhood honchos in Egypt. The MB is the parent of Hamas and of much Salafist terrorism. It inspired Al Qaida. If you wanted to negotiate directly with a major branch of Islamist terror, you would fly to Cairo and tell the MB to spread the word to the shadow groups.

So if Hoyer is talking with the Muslim Brotherhood, what’s Nancy doing in Damascus at the same time?
Well, there are three things we know about Bashir Assad Jr., the dictator of Syria’s Baath paradise.

  • 1. Syria is a major transit point for terrorists heading to Iraq to drive car bombs aiming to kill American troops and Iraqi civilians.
  • 2. Damascus is headquarters to Hamas and other anti-Israel terror groups.
  • 3. Syria has a formal alliance with Iran, the biggest terror sponsor in the world, and regularly sponsors assassinations in Lebanon.

By talking with Bashir Assad, Nancy could send a signal to all those terror groups and their bosses. If you were trying to send a message to Al Qaida and the rest, you would do exactly what Nancy and Steny just did.
Question: Would Steny and Nancy, House Democrats who may not know Sunnis from Shi’as, do such a thing without the backing of the next Democrat President, Senator Hillary Clinton? There’s an out-of-power foreign policy establishment waiting — people who hope to go back to the center of power if Hillary or Obama win. They include people like Richard Clarke, Joseph Wilson IV, Sandy Burglar, probably Colin Powell. Even old Zbig Brzezinski. Nancy and Steny are therefore probably not acting alone.
So what was the message they might have sent to the terrorists? This is admittedly a guess. But remember that  Leftist paranoids who believe in the October Surprise theory for the Carter-Reagan election believe that what you do in a crisis is to fly over to the enemy and tell them to hold on until your candidate becomes President of the United States. You promise to be nice to them if your guy or gal gets in. Then if you win, you pay off the enemy, and achieve Peace in our Time.
A lot of Democrats believe that’s what the Reagan campaign did to Carter. Further, we know that Ted Kennedy sent messages directly to the Soviets during the Reagan years, and the Congressional Democrats sent delegations to Nicaraguan Communist Ortega during the Reagan administration.
Yes, privately negotiating with the enemy wihtout authorization violates the law. But nobody is going to enforce it in this Justice Department, which can’t even enforce election laws in Chicago and New Orleans.
My guess is that Nancy and Steny gave this message to the terror bosses:
“Hang on. Don’t do another 9/11 in the United States before we get into the White House in January, 2009. Then we’ll get out of Iraq, we will let Tehran have its nukes and missiles, and we’ll sell out our allies so fast it will make Saigon look like a day on the beach. The American people have practically forgotten all about 9/11. Just don’t attack the US to remind them, so we can be elected in 2008. We own the US media. Play along with us, and we’ll get out of the Middle East.”
I don’t know if it’s true. Call me suspicious or even paranoid. But would you be surprised? Isn’t it at least a possibility worth considering?
James Lewis blogs at http://www.dangeroustimes.wordpress.com/

Iran not seeking Israel destruction: Larijani

Iran not seeking Israel destruction: Larijani

 definition of taqiyya


Unabashed taqiyya. From Agence France-Presse:

SHUNEH, Jordan – Iran’s national security chief Ali Larijani on Friday denied Teheran was promoting the policy of wiping Israel “off the map,” blaming a deliberate distortion by the Western media.

Oh, but they are.

“Let me tell you one thing about taking Israel off the map. It was a by-product of the Western media,” Larijani told participants at the World Economic Forum on the shores of the Dead Sea in Jordan.

“Our president never talked about this issue,” he said of comments attributed to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, during a WEF session on steps to avoid fresh conflict in the Middle East.

Yes, he has.

Larijani’s remarks were in response to an appeal from Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erakat for the Islamic republic to abandon calls for Israel to be erased from the map.

“Talk about adding Palestine to the map and not cancelling Israel,” Erakat proposed as he addressed Larijani, prompting applause from the other participants.

Promoting “slow jihad”: First get a secure base of operation in an initial Palestinian state. Then chip away at the rest.

“All the nations on earth today talk about a two-state solution. Be involved,” Erakat said.


Larijani said the position of Iran’s firebrand leader was that “we cannot tolerate a state in which racism is practised daily,” in reference to Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and its Arab citizens.

By golly, we’re not going to stand by and let those apes and pigs act up!