Coalition of The Unwilling

The semantically unsound rubbish concept of “Islamophobia” disorients well-meaning people and incites them to spout illogicalities with a preacher’s righteousness.

“Islamophobia” contributes to the generalized befuddlement on the left about the faith in question and whether negative talk about it constitutes some sort of racism, or proxy for it.

It shouldn’t but it does.

204 authors to sign a letter dissociating themselves from PEN’s granting the Toni and James C. Goodale Freedom of Expression Courage Award to the brave, talented surviving artists of Charlie Hebdo.

The authors objecting did so out of concern, according to their statement, for “the section of the French population” – its Muslims – “that is already marginalized, embattled, and victimized, a population that is shaped by the legacy of France’s various colonial enterprises.”  A “large percentage” of these Muslims are “devout,” contend the writers, and should thus be spared the “humiliation and suffering” Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons allegedly caused them.

Bill Maher (who’s politics couldn’t be farther from mine) called Pamela Geller a “loon” but said, “This is America, do we not have the right to draw whatever we want?”

Maher brought up Charlie Hebdo and said he’s a little disturbed by the whole “soft bigotry of low expectations” when it comes to that magazine’s critics assuming that “Muslims aren’t able to control themselves.”

So since they got off on any provocation THEY perceive  we must their walk on micro eggshells and temper everything we do and say about them like they are a volatile  chemical ready to exploded at any second?

That’s crazy talk!

Islamic radicals kill people and it’s the people’s fault for victimizing their sensibilities!!!

The Nazis kill Jews and Homosexuals in the millions in WWI and it’s the  dead victims of the gas chambers and mass murders fault!!!

That’s how messed up the Left and The Leftist media’s brains are now.

So, why is there such a difference between the coverage of Christianity and Islam bashing? Why so much criticism against Geller for merely hosting this event? One shouldn’t have to question their right to speak, assemble, or carry a firearm. I don’t find questioning the why someone chooses to exercise laws codified in our Bill of Rights to be a discussion. In some cases, it’s a progressive exercise to put the Constitution of a graduated scale to put some amendments, likes the Second one, in the crosshairs for marginalization and elimination. These are rights that should be maximized in civil society. So, why do some members of the media have this appalling attitude? Maybe it’s because they know Islam has a problem, and it’s one that’s been present for a very, very long time (via NRO):

…The fury against Pamela Geller is motivated mostly by fear — by the understanding that there are indeed many, many Muslims who believe that blasphemy should be punished with death, and who put that belief into practice. It’s motivated by the fear that our alliances with even “friendly” Muslim states and “allied” Muslim militias are so fragile that something so insignificant as a cartoon would drive them either to neutrality or straight into the arms of ISIS.…

That’s why even the military brass will do something so unusual as call a fringe pastor of a tiny little church to beg him not to post a YouTube video. That’s why the president of the United States — ostensibly the most powerful man in the world — will personally appeal to that same pastor not to burn a Koran. They know that hundreds of millions of Muslims are not “moderate” by any reasonable definition of that word, and they will,in fact, allow themselves to be provoked by even the most insignificant and small-scale act of religious satire or defiance. After all, there are Muslim communities that will gladly burn Christians alive to punish even rumored blasphemy.

Our nation’s “elite” knows of the 88 percent support in Egypt for the death penalty for apostasy, and the 62 percent support in Pakistan. They know of the majority support for it in Malaysia, Jordan, and the Palestinian territories. They know that even when there’s not majority support for the death penalty for exercising one of the most basic of human rights — religious freedom — that large minorities still exercise considerable, and often violent, influence on their nations. The elite also knows this bloodthirstiness extends to supporting terrorists. The following Pew Research Center numbers should sober anyone who believes in the “few extremists” model of Muslim culture

Further, our elites also know that while ISIS’s brutality certainly repels many Muslims, it attracts many others — that there are Muslim young people who are so captivated by images of beheadings and burnings that they’ll defy the law and their own nations to make their way to the jihadist battlefronts of Iraq and Syria.

Unable or unwilling to formulate a strategy to comprehensively defeat jihad or even to adequately defend our nation, our elites adopt a strategy of cultural appeasement that only strengthens our enemy. Millions in the Muslim world are drawn to the “strong horse” (to use Osama bin Laden’s phrase), and when jihadists intimidate the West into silence and conformity, the jihadists show themselves strong.

Now, what happened in Garland shouldn’t drive us all to participate in a national campaign of “do your part, offend a Muslim, but some in the media–and in politics–need to quit with the political correctness sound bites and parsing of the First Amendment. There is no such thing as responsibility with free speech; that’s liberal code for don’t say things we don’t like. Exercise your speech with pride–and if it offends someone; politely remind him or her they have every right to voice why they think you’re wrong.  They can also express their views in a cartoon-format. (Matt Vespa and others) 🙂

Political Cartoons by Ken Catalino

Fitna: A Poke in Both Eyes is Worth Two in The Bush

Michael Ramirez Cartoon

Mischief in Manhattan: We Muslims know the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation
By Raheel Raza and Tarek Fatah

Last week, a journalist who writes for the North Country Times, a small newspaper in Southern California, sent us an e-mail titled “Help.” He couldn’t understand why an Islamic Centre in an area where Adam Gadahn, Osama bin Laden’s American spokesman came from, and that was home to three of the 911 terrorists, was looking to expand.

The man has a very valid point, which leads to the ongoing debate about building a Mosque at Ground Zero in New York. When we try to understand the reasoning behind building a mosque at the epicentre of the worst-ever attack on the U.S., we wonder why its proponents don’t build a monument to those who died in the attack.

New York currently boasts at least 30 mosques so it’s not as if there is pressing need to find space for worshippers. The fact we Muslims know the idea behind the Ground Zero mosque is meant to be a deliberate provocation to thumb our noses at the infidel. The proposal has been made in bad faith and in Islamic parlance, such an act is referred to as “Fitna,” meaning “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden in the Koran.

The Koran commands Muslims to, “Be considerate when you debate with the People of the Book” — i.e., Jews and Christians. Building an exclusive place of worship for Muslims at the place where Muslims killed thousands of New Yorkers is not being considerate or sensitive, it is undoubtedly an act of “fitna” (that is, “mischief-making” that is clearly forbidden by the Koran).


So what gives Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf of the “Cordoba Initiative” and his cohorts the misplaced idea that they will increase tolerance for Muslims by brazenly displaying their own intolerance in this case?

Do they not understand that building a mosque at Ground Zero is equivalent to permitting a Serbian Orthodox church near the killing fields of Srebrenica where 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered?

There are many questions that we would like to ask. Questions about where the funding is coming from? If this mosque is being funded by Saudi sources, then it is an even bigger slap in the face of Americans, as nine of the jihadis in the Twin Tower calamity were Saudis.

If Rauf is serious about building bridges, then he could have dedicated space in this so-called community centre to a church and synagogue, but he did not. We passed on this message to him through a mutual Saudi friend, but received no answer. He could have proposed a memorial to the 9/11 dead with a denouncement of the doctrine of armed jihad, but he chose not to.

It’s a repugnant thought that $100 million would be brought into the United States rather than be directed at dying and needy Muslims in Darfur or Pakistan.

Let’s not forget that a mosque is an exclusive place of worship for Muslims and not an inviting community centre. Most Americans are wary of mosques due to the hard core rhetoric that is used in pulpits. And rightly so. As Muslims we are dismayed that our co-religionists have such little consideration for their fellow citizens and wish to rub salt in their wounds and pretend they are applying a balm to sooth the pain.

The Koran implores Muslims to speak the truth, even if it hurts the one who utters the truth. Today we speak the truth, knowing very well Muslims have forgotten this crucial injunction from Allah.

If this mosque does get built, it will forever be a lightning rod for those who have little room for Muslims or Islam in the U.S. We simply cannot understand why on Earth the traditional leadership of America’s Muslims would not realize their folly and back out in an act of goodwill.

As for those teary-eyed, bleeding-heart liberals such as New York mayor Michael Bloomberg and much of the media, who are blind to the Islamist agenda in North America, we understand their goodwill.

Unfortunately for us, their stand is based on ignorance and guilt, and they will never in their lives have to face the tyranny of Islamism that targets, kills and maims Muslims worldwide, and is using liberalism itself to destroy liberal secular democratic societies from within.

Raheel Raza is author of Their Jihad … Not my Jihad, and Tarek Fatah is author of The Jew is Not My Enemy (McClelland & Stewart), to be launched in October. Both sit on the board of the Muslim Canadian Congress.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

I guess the piece’s authors are just “traumatized” Anti-Muslim bigots like the rest of us, huh? 🙂

“We have been able to deliver the most progressive legislative agenda — one that helps working families — not just in one generation, maybe two, maybe three,” Obama said.”This is exactly when you want to be president,” Obama said. “This is why I ran, because we have the opportunity to shape history for the better.”–in Hollywood very recently.

“The truth is that we’re a party of principle,”-Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the House’s only Muslim member.

The fact is, they have the legal right to build it, but that’s not the issue. But it is, for the fitna-Democrats and the guilt-laden “fairness” Democrats that they appear to be “tolerant”.

And anyone who disagrees with them is a bigot and religiously intolerant.

Sound familiar?

The issue is, just because you can, should you?

The answer is no.

But the Democrats and the liberals and the Mainstream media all want to argue legality because in this instance if they argue their usual emotion over logic they lose big time. So they’ve all turned into unemotional lawyers because if they don’t, they lose. And they know it.

You wanna know how bankrupt these people can be?

Let’s take Gettysburg. The site of the most famous, most important battle of the Civil War, one of the most hallowed places in all of America.

Some developers want to build a casino there!

“Preservation does not exist in a vacuum. Our local preservation work cannot thrive absent a local economy that helps induce and support it,” writes Brendan Synnamon, Gettysburg Battlefield Preservation Association. president.

A %&$%&%## Casino!!

I guess they’ll call the chips, Pickett’s Charge! 😦

“The GBPA’s reference to this debate as a ‘local issue’ is tragically out of step with the way most Americans view the Gettysburg battlefield.” — Opponent said.

Sound familiar??

Casino supporters say the resort’s location one-half mile from Gettysburg National Military Park presents no threat to the historical significance of the field where 172,000 Union and Confederate troops fought and nearly 8,000 died.

And building a Islamic Mosque (“community Center”) 2 blocks (which in New York is 1/5 of a mile) from Ground Zero where the very building they want to tear down was hit by debris from the South Tower is  a “show of tolerance” and a way to bring the community together.

Now that’s Fitna! 😦