Regarding Muslim Immigrants: Canada is One Very Sick Nation

Kathy Shaidle of Five Feet of Fury regularly recounts the sickness of Canadian officials in the face of a hostile alien culture, namely Islam.  Muslims in Canada commit violence and mayhem and are protected by the Canadian police and politicians.  Criticize or complain about Muslim mischief and you can be sued or even jailed.

Canada is the newest Muslim nation of the Middle East.  Nice going, castrated wimps.

Kathy tells about a man, David Menzies, who was assaulted by a hijab-wearing Muslim in a public square, for allegedly snapping a picture that included her in it.  She socked him in the face just before he was assaulted further by a motley mob of Muhammadan morons, insisting that he turn over his camera.  Menzies escaped the mob and ran to a group of Canadian (wimp) police, who refused to arrest the woman or do anything about the assault.

Read about it here and more about it here.

Canada practices, with enthusiasm, Auster's First Law: the more alien or dangerous a nonwhite or non-Western group reveals itself to be, the more our liberal society approves of it, accommodates itself to it, and prohibits any criticism of it.

Lawrence Auster: "Why I Will Tune Out the 9/11 Commemorations"

Auster's First Law: the more alien or dangerous a nonwhite or non-Western group reveals itself to be, the more our liberal society approves of it, accommodates itself to it, and prohibits any criticism of it.

Lawrence Auster gets it. Today he describes why he will not observe the 9/11 commemorations, and he has a point.

Why I will tune out the 9/11 commemorations - by Lawrence Auster

The September 11th attack on America, in which devout Muslim believers carried out the greatest single jihad raid in history, and Muslims around the world cheered and danced in joy over this great blow to the infidel, should have awakened America and the West to the nature of the 1,400 year old warrior religion of Islam. Instead, while triggering a “war against terrorism,” the 9/11 attack inspired liberal America to embrace and approve of Islam much more than it had done before. This unexpected and devastating outcome is perhaps the greatest single illustration of Auster’s First Law, which says that the more alien or dangerous a nonwhite or non-Western group reveals itself to be, the more our liberal society approves of it, accommodates itself to it, and prohibits any criticism of it. To speak the truth about the unchangeable Islamic command to wage eternal war by violence and stealth against non-Muslims and about Muslims’ 1,400 year long obedience to that command, is to place oneself outside the respectable mainstream. In America you don’t get put in jail for speaking the forbidden truth, you just lose your career. This is the reign of fear under which we live.

In sum, the result of 9/11 has not been Western self-defense against Islam, but the prohibition of Western self-defense against Islam. And all the official 9/11 commemorations, notwithstanding their patriotic appearance, will carry that message of American and Western surrender. And that is why they should be avoided.

I recently wrote about this same reign of fear, though it incorporates more than Islam, so this post really speaks to me.  Read it all here.

Geller and Spencer Denounce English Defence League

Per View From the Right, it appears that Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are distancing themselves from the English Defence League, alleging that the organization has been infiltrated by "neo-Fascists."  However, neither Geller nor Spencer cites any evidence to back up their claim.

The English Defence League is an organization that opposes the Islamization of Great Britain.

Lawrence Auster has the story here.

I support the English Defence League and will continue to do so unless strong evidence comes to light that the organization has become "neo-fascist," a term leftists use to describe anyone opposed to their destructive and suicidal policies.

Update:  EDL President Tommy Robinson has issued a public statement saying that no one expressing anti-semitic sentiments will be allowed to remain in the EDL.  Geller posts his statement here.  Robinson refers to the EDL Mission Statement.  Here is the Mission Statement from the EDL website (below the fold).  Does anyone see anything "fascistic" in it?

EDL MISSION STATEMENT

“The world is a dangerous place to live in; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” - Albert Einstein, refugee from Nazi Germany

People have been asking what the EDL is all about, what does it want to achieve, how will it achieve those things?

Well now the English Defence League has a Mission Statement......

(1) HUMAN RIGHTS: Protecting And Promoting Human Rights

The English Defence League (EDL) is a human rights organisation that was founded in the wake of the shocking actions of a small group of Muslim extremists who, at a homecoming parade in Luton, openly mocked the sacrifices of our service personnel without any fear of censure. Although these actions were certainly those of a minority, we believe that they reflect other forms of religiously-inspired intolerance and barbarity that are thriving amongst certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain: including, but not limited to, the denigration and oppression of women, the molestation of young children, the committing of so-called honour killings, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and continued support for those responsible for terrorist atrocities.

Whilst we must always protect against the unjust assumption that all Muslims are complicit in or somehow responsible for these crimes, we must not be afraid to speak freely about these issues. This is why the EDL will continue to work to protect the inalienable rights of all people to protest against radical Islam’s encroachment into the lives of non-Muslims.

We also recognise that Muslims themselves are frequently the main victims of some Islamic traditions and practices. The Government should protect the individual human rights of members of British Muslims. It should ensure that they can openly criticise Islamic orthodoxy, challenge Islamic leaders without fear of retribution, receive full equality before the law (including equal rights for Muslim women), and leave Islam if they see fit, without fear of censure.

British Muslims should be able to safely demand reform of their religion, in order to make it more relevant to the needs of the modern world and more respectful of other groups in society. It is important that they completely reject the views of those who believe that Islam should be taken in its ‘original’, 7th century form, because these interpretations are the antithesis of Western democracy. The onus should be on British Muslims to overcome the problems that blight their religion and achieve nothing short of an Islamic reformation. In line with this, we should do all that we can to empower those who are willing to take this path. We must also ensure that they do not fear reprisals from those who, in line with these 7th century interpretations, would force sharia law upon them.

The EDL calls upon the Government to repeal legislation that prevents effective freedom of speech, for freedom of speech is essential if the human rights abuses that sometimes manifest themselves around Islam are to be stopped.

We believe that the proponents of radical Islam have a stranglehold on British Muslims. These radicals dominate Muslim organisations, remain key figures in British mosques, and are steadily increasing their influence. Radical Islam keeps British Muslims fearful and isolated, especially the women that it encases in the Burqa. It misrepresents their views, stifles freedom of expression, and indoctrinates their children, whilst continually doing a discredit to those who do wish to peacefully co-exist with their fellow Britons.

(2) DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW: Promoting Democracy And The Rule Of Law By Opposing Sharia

The European Court of Human Rights has declared that “sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy”. Despite this, there are still those who are more than willing to accommodate sharia norms, and who believe that sharia can operate in partnership with our existing traditions and customs. In reality, sharia cannot operate fully as anything other than a complete alternative to our existing legal, political, and social systems. It is a revolution that this country does not want, and one that it must resist. Sharia is most definitely a threat to our democracy.

The operation of Islamic courts, the often unreasonable demand that Islam is given more respect than it is due, and the stealthy incursion of halal meat into the food industry, all demonstrate that sharia is already creeping into our lives. Resentment is already beginning to grow, and could create dangerous divisions if nothing is done. The primacy of British courts must be maintained and defended, fair criticism of religious and political ideologies must be permitted, and consumers must be provided with the information necessary to avoid halal produce should they wish.

Restaurants and fast food chains that do offer halal options should offer non-halal alternatives as well, in order to show respect for other people’s religions, customs, and possible concerns about animal welfare issues (surrounding ritual slaughter). No one should be made to consume halal produce unwittingly, so it must always be labeled - in supermarkets, in restaurants, in schools, and in hospitals - wherever it is available. Free choice in these matters is, after all, a fundamental human right for everybody, not just the Muslim community.

Sharia law makes a fundamental distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims, and the EDL will never allow this sort of iniquitous apartheid to take root in our country. The EDL will therefore oppose sharia appeasement in all its forms, and will actively work to eradicate the sharia-compliant behaviours that are already being adopted, and enforced, in our society.

(3) PUBLIC EDUCATION: Ensuring That The Public Get A Balanced Picture Of Islam

A central part of the EDL’s mission is public education. The British political and media establishment have, for a long time, been presenting a very sanitised and therefore inaccurate view of Islam, shaped by the needs of policy-makers rather than the needs of the public. This has acted as a barrier to informed policy-making and made finding the solution to real problems impossible. In pursuing this self-defeating and destructive policy, the Government has effectively been acting as the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether or not is aware of the predicament that it has put itself in, it has so far failed to honestly admit its failures.

We are committed to a campaign of public education to ensure that all aspects of Islam that impact on our society can debated in an open and honest way. Demonisation of Muslims, or of Islam’s critics, adds nothing to the debate. We believe that only by looking at all the facts can society be most effectively and humanly governed. If there are aspects of Muslim tradition that encourage the activities of Islamic radicals and criminals then these need to be properly addressed without fear of accusations of racism, xenophobia, or the even the disingenuous term ‘Islamophobia’.

The public must be provided with a more realistic and less sanitised view of Islam that allows it to ensure that decision-makers are held to account for their policy-making choices, choices that affect the harmony and security of the nation.

The EDL promotes the understanding of Islam and the implications for non-Muslims forced to live alongside it. Islam is not just a religious system, but a political and social ideology that seeks to dominate all non-believers and impose a harsh legal system that rejects democratic accountability and human rights. It runs counter to all that we hold dear within our British liberal democracy, and it must be prepared to change, to conform to secular, liberal ideals and laws, and to contribute to social harmony, rather than causing divisions.

(4) RESPECTING TRADITION: Promoting The Traditions And Culture Of England While At The Same Time Being Open To Embrace The Best That Other Cultures Can Offer

The EDL believes that English Culture has the right to exist and prosper in England. We recognise that culture is not static, that over time changes take place naturally, and that other cultures make contributions that make our shared culture stronger and more vibrant. However, this does not give license to policy-makers to deliberately undermine our culture and impose non-English cultures on the English people in their own land.

If people migrate to this country then they should be expected to respect our culture, its laws, and its traditions, and not expect their own cultures to be promoted by agencies of the state. The best of their cultures will be absorbed naturally and we will all be united by the enhanced culture that results. The onus should always be on foreign cultures to adapt and integrate. If said cultures promote anti-democratic ideas and refuse to accept the authority of our nation’s laws, then the host nation should not be bowing to these ideas in the name of ‘cultural sensitivity’. Law enforcement personnel must be able to enforce the rule of law thoroughly without prejudice or fear. Everyone, after all, is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law.

The EDL is therefore keen to draw its support from people of all races, all faiths, all political persuasions, and all lifestyle choices. Under its umbrella, all people in England, whatever their background, or origin, can stand united in a desire to stop the imposition of the rules of Islam on non-believers. In order to ensure the continuity of our culture and its institutions, the EDL stands opposed to the creeping Islamisation of our country, because intimately related to the spread of Islamic religion is the political desire to implement an undemocratic alternative to our cherished way of life: the sharia.

Our armed forces stand up and risk their lives every day in order to protect our culture and democratic way of life. They are also reflective of England’s diversity, and are a shining example of what a people can achieve when united together. The EDL is therefore committed to opposing any and all abuse that our men and women in uniform are subjected to, and will campaign for legal remedies to ensure that those working within these important institutions are not exposed to abuse or aggression from within our country.

(5) INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK: Working In Solidarity With Others Around The World

The EDL is keen to join with others who share our values, wherever they are in the world, and from whatever cultural background they derive. We believe that the demand for sharia is global and therefore needs to be tackled at a global as well as national level, so that this demand will never be succumbed to. The EDL will therefore have an international outlook to enhance and strengthen our domestic efforts, whilst at the same time contributing to the global struggle against Islamic intolerance of Western cultures, customs, religions, politics, and laws. The time for tolerating intolerance has come to an end: it is time for the whole world to unite against a truly Global Jihad.

Lawrence Auster Diagnosed With Pancreatic Cancer

Lawrence Auster, Blogger
View From The Right

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right has announced that he has metastasized pancreatic cancer.  He was diagnosed a year ago, and has been undergoing chemotherapy since then.

Auster has responded very well to the chemotherapy; numerous tumors in his body rapidly shrank and now are not visible at all.  However, that does not imply a cure, as the tumors are probably just microscopic at this point.  They could come back, but no one can predict when. Nevertheless, the medical treatment has undoubtedly prolonged Auster's life.

God bless you Larry and may you continue to beat the odds!

Read Larry's announcement here.

Please consider making a donation to View From the Right by clicking here.

Pro-Terry Jones Forces Begin to Coalesce; Ann Barnhardt Denounces General Petraeus and Senator Graham

Terry Jones, Last American Standing

With all the world demeaning Pastor Terry Jones as an "idiot," a "moron," or a "dope," some few voices are emerging to support Jones.  I am one of those voices.  One of the biggest voices is that of Lawrence Auster of View From the Right.

Auster mentions Ann Barnhardt of Colorado, who made a video response to General Petraeus and Senator Lindsey Graham, after the two called for restraint of the First Amendment with regard to Islam.  Barnhardt blasts both men with fury and righteousness, then reads hateful passages from the Koran, just before ripping out the offending page and burning it.  Her readings show why the Koran is such an evil book and why it deserves the flames -- it calls for murder, deceit, torture, rape and homosexual pedophilia.

This young woman does indeed have more balls than most men.  Her two videos are embedded below.

Lawrence Auster: Why People SHOULD Burn the Koran

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right is one of the few who "gets it" on Terry Jones and the Koran.  He writes:

The Koran is this monstrous book written by the mouthpiece of a sadistic god who calls for our destruction. What is the proper response on our part to this book? To reject it completely. To burn a copy of the Koran is a perfect symbolic expression of our total rejection of this monstrous book. This is what Jones understands and what so few others understand. And why don’t they understand it? Because they don’t totally reject Islam. Consider Robert Spencer. Does Spencer totally reject Islam? Not at all. For all his withering critiques of “supremacist Islam” (rarely or never of Islam itself), his writings assume a future in which Islam is allowed to remain in our society and keeps getting stronger and more numerous among us while we keep reading about it and debating about it and complaining about it and asking rhetorical questions about when it will reform itself.

The only viable response of the West to Islam is to reject Islam completely.  It has no redeeming qualities, no worth to the human race.  It is the warlord ideology of a long-dead barbarian pirate.  It's major contribution to civilization is millions of deaths.  We can no more make compromises with Islam than we can with cannibalism or human sacrifice.  Islam is the antithesis of civilization.  It must be separated, isolated and contained.

The Liberal "Script": Gun Violence Motivated by "Conservative Anger"

Lawrence Auster isn't always right.  I've been meaning to rebut his odd post regarding the term "Political Correctness," but the Arizona shootings pointed my attention towards more substantial fare.  However, Auster is usually right and is again this morning.  He writes:

EVEN AS THE LIBERALS' BIG LIE ABOUT CONSERVATIVES' RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MASSACRE IS BEING RAPIDLY DISCREDITED BY THE FACTS, THE LIBERALS CAN'T LET GO OF IT 

As reported in this morning's New York Times, the FBI has found written statements in Jared Loughner's home showing that he planned to murder Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, but has found no indications as to why he targeted her. The article goes on to mention Loughner's repeated disruptive behavior, in five classroom incidents involving campus police, which led to his being suspended from Pima Community College.

Notwithstanding the complete absence of any knowledge of Loughner's motives for seeking to kill Giffords, the Times ends the story with this:

Nobody knew for sure what compelled the gunman. Ms. Giffords, who represents the Eighth District, in the southeastern corner of Arizona, has been an outspoken critic of the state's tough immigration law, which is focused on identifying, prosecuting and deporting illegal immigrants, and she had come under criticism for her vote in favor of the health care law.

To repeat, there is no evidence that Loughner had any interest in the illegal alien issue or in Gifford's stand on it. Indeed, there is no more evidence that Gifford's position on the illegal alien law motivated Loughner's attack on her, than there is evidence that Giffords's position on Afghanistan or taxes or the funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting motivated his attack on her. Yet the Times couldn't refrain from tossing off the hint that Loughner shot Giffords because of her opposition to Arizona's controversial law on illegal aliens.

But here, I think, is the silver lining. That final, cheap-shot paragraph in the Times article may be the fading echo of the leftist media's attempt to blame the Tucson massacre on the right. The facts showing that Loughner was a mentally ill person who had nothing to do with conservatism have been widely disseminated. The left realizes that they can no longer sustain their Big Lie that Loughner was a conservative motivated by "conservative anger." But the skunks at the Times couldn't completely abandon their pet notion that the massacre was caused by right-wing hatred, since that charge, as Robert C. insightfully shows in the previous entry, is central to their own ideological identity. "To the believer," Robert writes, "the unfounded accusation itself is offered as a testimonial of belief to other fellow believers."

Liberalism, as I have said many times, is not about reality; it is about the perpetual reenactment of the sacred liberal "script" in which virtuous, inclusive liberals demonstrate their virtue by suppressing bigoted conservatives.

Auster's post is here.  He makes reference to an email written by one Robert C of Nashville, which is also worthy of a read, as it has insights into the workings of the liberal mind.