News Ticker >
[ January 19, 2018 ]

Hugh Fitzgerald: Professor Ziedan on Saladin

[ January 19, 2018 ]

U.S. State Department Withholds Additional $45 Million From UNRWA

[ January 19, 2018 ]

Bangladesh: Man arrested for posting images criticizing Qur’an on Facebook

[ January 19, 2018 ]

Top ISIS leader is American, Zulfi Hoxha, who was in contact with Boston jihadis plotting...

[ January 19, 2018 ]

Netanyahu Visits India: Muslims Burn Israeli Effigies in Protest

[ January 19, 2018 ]

Dresden Burqa Workshop Goes Forth With Support of City Authorities

[ January 19, 2018 ]

Paris Metro Drivers Refuse to Stop at Certain Stations Citing Passenger Safety

[ January 18, 2018 ]

VIDEO Representative Scott Perry: “Credible Evidence” of “Terrorist Infiltration Through the Southern Border” Related to...

[ January 18, 2018 ]

VIDEO: “Palestinian” Muslims Beat, Torture and Threaten Greek Monks in Jerusalem

[ January 18, 2018 ]

Raleigh, NC Imam Warns: ‘If We Keep Sleeping,’ The Zionists Will Destroy Al-Aqsa Mosque And...

The Islam Name Game Must End

122

Western intellectuals and commentators refer to the enemy’s ideology as: “Islamic Fundamentalism,” “Islamic Extremism,” “Islamic Totalitarianism,” “Islamofascism,” “Political Islam,” “Militant Islam,” “Islamonazism,” “Radical Islam,” “Islamism,” etc….

The enemy calls it “Islam.”

Imagine, if during past wars, we used terms such as “Radical Nazism,” “Extremist Shinto” and “Militant Communism.” The implication would have been that there were good versions of those ideologies, which would have lead some to seek out “moderate” Nazis, “moderate” Communists, etc., in order to prove that it wasn’t the ideologies that were the problem, but just those who “perverted” them.

Those who use terms other than “Islam” to refer to the Islamic enemy’s ideology create the impression that it’s some variant form of Islam that’s behind the enemy that we’re facing. A term such as “Militant Islam” is redundant, but our politicians continue praising Islam as if it were their own religion. Bush told us “Islam is peace” — after 2,996 Americans were murdered in its name. He maintained that illusion throughout his two terms, and never allowed our soldiers to defeat the enemy. And then came Obama, who told us, from Egypt:

“I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

If only he felt that way about America.

Washington’s defense of Islam has trumped the defense of America and this dereliction of duty could well be called Islamgate. Islam is a political religion; the idea of a separation of Mosque and State is unheard of in the Muslim world. Islam has a doctrine of warfare, Jihad, which is fought in order to establish Islamic (“Sharia”) Law, which is, by nature, totalitarian. Sharia Law calls for, among other things: the dehumanization of all non-Muslims, in particular Jews and women; the flogging/stoning/killing of adulterers; and the killing of homosexuals, apostates and critics of Islam. All of this is part of orthodox Islam, not some “extremist” form of it. If jihadists were actually “perverting a great religion,” Muslims would have been able to discredit them on Islamic grounds and they would have done so by now. The reason they can’t is because jihadists are acting according to the words of Allah, the Muslim God. From the Koran:

“Slay the idolators wherever you find them…” Chapter 9, verse 5

“When you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads until you have made a great slaughter among them….” Ch. 47:4

Beyond the doctrine, there is the historical figure of Mohammad, who, more than anyone, defines Islam. How would you judge a man who lies, cheats, steals, rapes and murders as a way of life? This evil man is Islam’s ideal man, Mohammad. Whatever he said and did is deemed moral by virtue of the fact that he said it and did it. It’s no accident that the only morality that could sanction his behavior was his own. Nor is it an accident that Muslims who model themselves after him are the most violent.

For the thirteen years that Mohammad failed to spread Islam by non-violent means, he was not so much peaceful as he was powerless. It was only when he began to engage in criminal activity that he was able to attract any real followers. And it was with his criminal gang that he was finally able to gain the power he sought. But he wanted his moral pretense too, so he changed Islam to reflect the fact that the only way it could survive was through force. And so, acting on Allah’s conveniently timed “revelation” that Islam can and should be spread by the sword, Mohammad led an army of Muslims across Arabia in the first jihad. From then on, violence became Islam’s way in the world. And today, acting on Mohammad’s words, “War is deceit” — in the sense that Muslims use earlier “peaceful” verses from the Koran as a weapon against the ignorance and good will of their victims. In truth, those “peaceful” passages in the Koran were abrogated by later passages calling for eternal war against those who do not submit to Islam. How Mohammad spread Islam influenced the content of its doctrine and therefore tells us exactly what Islam means.

Note also that the only reason we’re talking about Islam is because we’ve been forced to by its jihad. And where are Islam’s “conscientious objectors”? Nowhere to be found, for even lax Muslims have been silent against jihad. But that doesn’t stop desperate Westerners from pointing to them as representatives of “Moderate Islam.”

Far from being a personal faith, Islam is a collectivist ideology that rejects a live-and-let-live attitude towards non-Muslims. And while the jihadists may not represent all Muslims, they do represent Islam. In the end, most Muslims have proven themselves to be mere sheep to their jihadist wolves, irrelevant as allies in this war. Recovering Muslims call the enemy’s ideology “Islam,” and they dismiss the idea of “Moderate Islam” as they would the idea of “Moderate Evil.” (But unfortunately, Ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who was a steadfast critic of Islam for years, is now a critic of “Islamism”, because, as she put it, “I grew up”. I say she sold out when she got in bed with the slick bs artist Maajid Nawaaz)

Islam is the enemy’s ideology and evading that fact only helps its agents get away with more murder than they would otherwise. Western politicians have sold us out, so it’s up to the rest of us to defend our way of life by understanding Islam and telling the truth about it in whatever way we can. If we can’t even call Islam by its name, how the hell are we going to defend ourselves against its true believers? One could argue that we’d be better off if the West would just choose one of the many terms currently used for the enemy’s ideology. For my part, I call the enemy what they are, “Jihadists,” and our response, “The War on Jihad.” But behind it all, it’s Islam that makes the enemy tick.
It’s important that we acknowledge Islam’s place in the threat we face and say so without hesitation. Not saying “Islam” helps Islam and hurts us. So let’s begin calling the enemy’s ideology by its name. Let’s start calling Islam “Islam.”


Below is my response to those critics, especially Muslims and Leftists, who make the issue about Muslims and not Islam; who always allege that critics of Islam are condemning 1.5 billion people, that Muslims are good people and innocent, etc., etc. So here’s an excerpt from my article My Name is Bosch and I’m a Recovered Muslim

For those who want to make this about Muslims and not Islam, here are some of my thoughts on that:

First, my name is Bosch and I’m a recovered Muslim, so I have some insight into this, coupled with the fact that I studied Islam as if my life depended on it after 9/11.

There is Islam and there are Muslims. Muslims who take Islam seriously are at war with us and Muslims who don’t aren’t. But that doesn’t mean we should consider these reluctant Muslims allies against Jihad. I’ve been around Muslims my entire life and most of them truly don’t care about Islam. The problem I have with many of these essentially non-Muslim Muslims, especially in the middle of this war being waged on us by their more consistent co-religionists, is that they give the enemy cover. They force us to play a game of Muslim Roulette since we can’t tell which Muslim is going to blow himself up until he does. And their indifference about the evil being committed in the name of their religion is a big reason why their reputation is where it is.

So while I understand that most Muslims are not at war with us, they’ve proven in their silence and inaction against jihad that they’re not on our side either, and there’s nothing we can say or do to change that. We just have to finally accept it and stop expecting them to come around, while doing our best to kill those who are trying to kill us.

Another problem with Muslims who aren’t very Muslim is that they lead some among us to conclude that they must be practicing a more enlightened form of Islam. They’re not. They’re “practicing” life in non-Muslim countries, where they are free to live as they choose. But their “Islam” is not the Islam. There’s no separate ideology apart from Islam that’s being practiced by these Muslims in name only, there’s no such thing as “Western Islam”.

Non-observant Muslims are not our problem, but neither are they the solution to our problem. Our problem is Islam and its most consistent practitioners. There is nothing in Islam that stays the hand of Muslims who want to kill non-Muslims. If an individual Muslim is personally peaceful, it’s not because of Islam, it’s because of his individual choice, which is why I often say that your average Muslim is morally superior to Mohammad, to their own religion. The very rare Muslim who helps us against Jihad is acting against his religion, but that doesn’t stop some among us from thinking that his choice somehow shines a good light on Islam. It doesn’t. A good Muslim according to us is a bad Muslim according to Islam.

To read my entire article, My Name is Bosch and I’m a Recovered Muslim, go here.

If you like this article, please consider sharing it as far and wide as you can. Thank you.

Pamela Geller's shocking new book, "FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA" is now available on Amazon. It's Geller's tell all, her story - and it's every story - it's what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

  • Mahou Shoujo

    There is only one type of muslim, read the qur’an for details, to sum it up, for those who don’t have the time, islam is the personification of satanic criminal insanity, with muslims coerced into submission or murdered for non compliance.

    • Trump can’t ban islam

      The USconstitution protects Islam and muslims. so you can’t put bacon in mosques because that’s a crime against Islam

      • Achmed

        Where does the Constitution of the United States of America protect moslems .. the vilest of ALL creatures?

      • Mahou Shoujo

        You can’t murder people for no reason other than they are not muslim, that is a crime against humanity. muslims aren’t human, so they cannot commit crimes, nor is it a crime to dispose of them.

        • Achmed

          Well spoken. Very well said.

      • Lynn D

        Actually, if you check back on the laws in USA, there was one passed in 1954 proposed by McCarron (or a name similar) that outlawed Islam in the USA,,I vaguely remember someone posting in this forum that the law was still on the statute books,

    • Suresh

      Agree. That is why America needs Trump now more than ever and he is not afraid to call out the son of bitches http://bit.ly/2xuQrzi

      If Left/Liberal pro-jihadi holdovers are purged from govt , judiciary things will improve and Trump can do better job to improve security.

      • Eva

        Google is paying 97$ per hour,with weekly payouts.You can also avail this.
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $11752 this last four weeks..with-out any doubt it’s the most-comfortable job I have ever done .. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !da195d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleHomeTubeCashJobsOpportunity/simple/work ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫:::::!da195luuuuu

    • Hussars2016

      But, the Crusades, yu’ know.

      • robert v g

        You A.H.

        • Richard

          Lighten up Francis, it was sarcasm. If you don’t get it, look at Hussars’s avatar.

        • Hussars2016

          You know the bible says some pretty nasty things too right?
          Remember it’s not all Muslims!
          Pray for Canada (or insert place name here).

          • Qur’an 18:86

            “You know the bible says some pretty nasty things too right?”
            But it nowhere commands eternal war until all the disbelievers are gone. And it doesn’t claim to be the perfect final words of god either.

          • Robert Batchelor

            Yes, only Islam commands eternal war on all the disbelievers. What a sick ideology. It only teachers hate and destruction. In the end, it will destroy itself.

          • b.a. freeman

            but if we don’t do something to stop it soon, it will first destroy civilization before it turns on itself.

          • Hussars2016

            well nobody’s perfect…except Mudhammed.

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            Yes, the Old Testament does indeed “say some pretty nasty things”. But then Christ came, and the Old is supplanted by the New.

            And you’re so right: “It’s not all muslims”. They’re just 99% of the population blowing up the world, raping children and torturing and killing women and non-combatants.

            Oh yes: We have to keep sight of that other 1%. Great point Huss. Keep ’em coming.

          • Hussars2016

            I don’t have the stomach to repeat all the leftist Islamic Apologist games they play.

          • Achmed

            Hello, Kath Brown, Esq. I must vehemently disagree. It is ALL moslems, the vilest of ALL creatures.

      • Lynn D

        Yes we know about the crusades, we have moved on from them by centuries, but the mussies are still sulking over them…If they want to relive the crusades, I’m sure there are many people( and numbers growing by the day worldwide) who would be only too happy to oblige them

        • Hussars2016

          The Crusades were a defensive war. See Bill Warner youtube,
          Actually m Obama’s answer to Islamic Terrorism which of course has nothing to do with Islam was always
          ..But the Crusades you know….

          • Qur’an 18:86

            My great, great, great,……………… …………………………………………………..
            great grandfather was killed by you Crusaders and we are never going to forgive or forget. So die all you kaffirs.

          • pipo

            It would have been better that your whole family was killed, so you could not have written this you muzzrat plonker.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            It would have been even better if you had first read the wisdom of Quran 18:86 and the scales of cluelessness would have fallen from your eyes. Here’s a bit:

            Pickthall: Till, when he reached the setting-place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout. We said: O Dhu’l-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness.
            Yusuf Ali: Until, when he reached the setting of the sun,
            he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: “O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness.”
            Muhammad Sarwar: to the West where he found the sun setting into a warm source (spring) of water and a people living near by. We asked him, “Dhu ‘l-Qarnayn, you may punish them or treat them with kindness?”
            Mohsin Khan: Until, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a spring of black muddy (or hot) water. And he found near it a people. We (Allah) said (by inspiration): “O Dhul-Qarnain! Either you punish them, or treat them with kindness.”
            Arberry: until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and he found nearby a people. We said, ‘O Dhool Karnain, either thou shalt chastise them, or thou shalt take towards them a way of kindness.’
            http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=18&verse=86

          • Robert Batchelor

            The only thing clueless is anyone that follows Islam.

          • b.a. freeman

            Q, it is pointless to argue with somebody who is intent on killing U, unless it is a delaying tactic, so i won’t bother. instead, since U and your fellow victims of muhammed, a sad, twisted psychopath, will probably murder *me* someday soon, since the traitors who are betraying civilization are refusing to use our collective power to defend us, i will take this opportunity to forgive U for my murder ahead of time. most likely, like a coward, U will attack me by surprise and cut my throat from behind, but be fore-warned, if U don’t get me with that first attack, i will turn and blow your brains out. i may be ruled by treasonous fools, but my eyes are now open to their treason and to the poisonous, vile cult of which U are apparently a dedicated criminal member, and i am prepared to defend myself if i get the chance.

            in the meantime, i encourage U to examine the bible and learn about what christianity really teaches from its scriptures, not from the words and actions of those who claim to be believers. that’s what i did with islam, and it’s how i learned that it’s a gangsta cult steeped in theft, mass murder, rape, and slavery. after all, would U not be better able to attack western civilization were U to know christianity, the ethos on which much of it is based? or perhaps U could learn about buddhism, or the bahá’í faith, or jainism, in order be better able to attack eastern civilization. before one can legitimately criticize another religion, it would make sense to learn about it in order to know what to criticize. otherwise, U’re just p**sing into the wind on these sites; dawa is for boobs.

          • b.a. freeman

            uhh… looks like i fired on a friend. sorry about that, Q, i haven’t had enough caffeine yet.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            Don’t worry, far worse things have been done on the internet, including some by myself before I got a bit more skilled in the necessary self-editing. One principle I have adopted is not to post a comment when one is just about falling asleep.

          • Achmed

            Hi, b.a. freeman. You have to read Qur’an 18:86’s comments. They are not the comments of moslem (the vilest of ALL creatures). Rather, they are the comments of someone that is against moslems. Perhaps, you are responding to a comment that was heavily laced with sarcasm. But, have no doubt, Qur’an 18:86 is the farthest, aside from me, from a moslem.

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            Of course they were defensive. Here’s my article on the matter: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/03/a_catholic_college_disses_crusaders.html

          • Hussars2016

            Thanks for the link and the article Kathy.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            I think it’s generally best to reduce the prominence of the “crusader” concept, because it gets used to promote a nonsense that Christians are evil warmongers who started it, while Islam is the [you know the rest already]. Better to teach people about the Apostles, who got killed rather than killing.

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            Totally disagree Quran.

            If we did as you suggested, we’d join in the revisionist history. Of course the muslims are going to lie about the Crusaders; they lie as a function of their “religion” (see: Taqqiya). But lies must be contradicted with the truth. The truth is that the Crusaders were heroic, and the truth is that the Crusades were a defensive war.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            Kathy, you are misunderstanding how the propaganda works. Sure if others mention the crusades you should point out that they were defensive and intended to protect from the jihadists who conquered the Christian lands. And point out the jihad was far larger as per http://www.PoliticalIslam.com BUT if you first mention or evoke Crusades, then most people will just have their false image of [Christians=warmongers] [Christians=oppressors of muslim victims] reinforced. This doesn’t help. And sure people who defend you are heroic but again that’s not how brainwashed people see it, they only see the “evil white people attacking innocent non-white victims”.

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            I see.

            So my free speech is to be dictated by taqqiya-spouting muslims intent on lying their heads off; or by fools indoctrinated with revisionist history.

            Got it.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            >Got it.

            No, you clearly have NOT got it.

            “So my free speech is to be dictated by taqqiya-spouting muslims intent on lying their heads off; or by fools indoctrinated with revisionist history.”

            No. It is not about “dictating of free speech”, rather it is about designing your communications rationally so as to take account of how your words get (mis)interpreted by those hearing them. And in the present context when you write the word “crusades”, most (brainwashed) people do not think “yes the crusades were a defensive reaction to the huge jihad”, but instead they think “yes that reminds me that those white christians were far more evil than the muslims they are constantly killing.” So for instance naming your pub “The Crusader” has that strongly negative anti-Kuffar effect.

            Only once that has dawned on you will you have “got it”.

            My impression is you are a bit autistic (or “aspergers”) – you firstly don’t understand this pragmatic communication point, and secondly the same with Esq. Clearly it has different connotation from that in UK 50yrs ago when any letter to a man included it. But even now in US people do not normally put that ending, because it’s “pedantic”, like people announcing themselves as “hello I’m John Doe PhD” – obsessed with their status sign (which aspergers often are).

          • Qur’an 18:86

            Esq.? That’s a suffix attached to male names, whereas Kathy is a female name. However, I guess it’s your choice!

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            Incorrect Quran.

            “Esq.” is the title suffixed to the name of those licensed to practice law, of either sex, in the USA. At one time, only men were permitted to do so. Thus it was historically suffixed only to masculine names; just as “MD”-medical doctor-was.

            Here in the USA, women were permitted to enter law school beginning in 1870, med school in 1847. So your observation is off by, oh, at least 150 yrs. or so.

            But yes, you’re right. It most definitely is “[my] choice”.

          • Achmed

            Hi, Kathy. It can be confusing. The term “Esquire” at one time represented a class, somewhere between gentleman and knight. It was widely used. Even in The USA (United Sharia of America) as recently as the late nineteenth/earlier twentieth century it was used by those that held state positions … predominately nonmilitary of protection or of higher estate. It wasn’t until the early Twentieth Century, that that the particular suffix Esquire (Esq) became almost the sole title of someone that had passed the Bar. Based on common usage it is fair to state that if the title appears after a person’s name, that person may be presumed to be a lawyer.

          • Achmed

            I guess it’s easier to type, and takes less space, than “Attorney-at-Law.

          • Kathy Brown, Esq.

            I don’t find it “confusing” at all.

            Merry Christmas to you and Quran!

          • Achmed

            No, of course a member of the Bar, in the US, would find it commonplace. However, for a lay individual, especially not located in the US, it can be somewhat confusing due to that term having a totally different use/meaning, in other times. You attorneys-at-law are just too damned intelligent … Merry Christmas to you as well. I lit my First Day’s candles on Wednesday … and that’s about as far as this half Scot / half Kraut goes … Looking forward to the twenty-fifth … I love Christmas and all the good and love that it represents. May you spend it with family and friends and may it be blessed.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            >”Incorrect Quran.”

            Ooh, Allah’s perfect quran has never been incorrect! Especially that outstandingly wise verse 18:86!
            (Please do read it before replying! Here’s link:)
            http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=18&verse=86

        • Kathy Brown, Esq.

          Lynn, no need to “move on from” the Crusades. They are a glowing wonderful part of our Western History, and they require praise and honor, not apologetics.

          But you are quite right in your second point: We certainly can “relive” them; and we should. Since we see on a daily basis that islam is continuing its jihad v all things judeo-christian/western, the Crusades are certainly once again very much needed.

          That-or we could adopt Red Bill De Blasio’s slave-view that “terrorist [read that as “islamic/muslim”] attacks in big cities are the new normal”. Uh…sorry Bill. As an original New Yorker myself, I’m not buying:https://youtu.be/QPZiAQ9bKbk

  • Tamara Hussey Jewer

    Beautifully said, thank you :)

  • SimonNorwich

    Imagine how much easier the whole problem would be to deal with if the “non-Muslim Muslims” simply called themselves something entirely different to “Muslim”. It could be done tonight, without costing a penny.

    • Qur’an 18:86

      You overlook that (a) the non-muslims “muslims” presume that they are the real muslims. and (b) even if they knew the truth they would be scared to death to admit it.

    • Jon MC

      The problem with that is that the “muslim Muslims” would promptly start slaughtering them.
      Apostasy from Islam (if openly declared) carries the death penalty.
      But you don’t even need to apostasise. All you need to do is to be “not Muslim enough” and “muslim Muslims” will declare “Takfir” and slaughter you (as happened to a Muslim Imam in Rochdale UK who wasn’t Muslim enough for a REAL “muslim Muslim”).

  • RCCA

    Milo got into an entertaining debate recently with a Muslim woman in Australia who tried to argue that he didn’t know what Muslims were really like; and then Milo asked her to name the five pillars of Islam and she couldn’t do it. So I agree with Bosch Fawstin on this point, she’d be considered a “bad Muslim” and yet she still identifies as a Muslim and feels compelled to defend her “religion.” She’s useless as far as the counter jihad movement is concerned, as are millions of other non-practicing Muslims. However, because they are Muslims and emotionally attached to that identity, any attempts to attack Islam per se is taken personally. They either will ignore your criticism or feel compelled to defend themselves. This is an endless and useless loop. It makes sense to me for the sake of expedience to refer to practicing and knowledgeable Muslims in a separate category, and “Islamists” is as good a word as any.

    “… Ex-Muslim Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who was a steadfast critic of Islam for years, is now a critic of ‘Islamism,’ because, as she put it, ‘I grew up.’ I say she sold out when she got in bed with the slick bs artist Maajid Nawaaz…” By grew up I think she means, she got practical. I don’t know about Maajid Nawaaz’s relationship with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I do think he is doing some useful things as a politician and political commentator, calling attention to the Muslim rape gangs and the need to speak honestly about them, for example, rather than caving to political correctness. I’ve seen Nawaaz described as a Muslim reformer, that is wrong, he is not.

    Bosch is an example of someone who knows Islam and decided he can not in good conscience remain a Muslim. That’s a brave position to take, I give him credit because just telling the truth is a life threatening condition in the crazy world of Muslims. But his solution to the problem, imo, an all out violent war against all Muslims, really doesn’t seem practical to me and perhaps reflects a deeply engrained Muslim mindset of which he is not aware which automatically looks to violence as a solution. I guess he doesn’t see how irrational it is to call for a world war in order to eliminate Islam when the vast majority of Muslims don’t actually follow Islam. The same can not be said for Nazis or Nazism.

    • john smith

      where did he call for war or blame all muslims, his cousins and parents are muslims

      • RCCA

        I suspect that Bosch has been thoroughly rejected by his family members who are practicing Muslims.
        Here’s what he said in his linked article:

        “Our altruistic concern for the future and well being of the Muslim world has come at the expense of American lives and treasure. We’ve placed the well being of “The Muslim World” above our own self-defense. We’ve placed today’s Big Lie, “Islam means peace”, above the truth we need to act on. We’ve placed the lives of Muslim civilians above the lives of our soldiers, placing them in absolutely unnecessary danger in order to protect innocent (or even guilty) civilians. Our Rules of Engagement might as well be renamed the Golden Rules of Engagement, as our soldiers have been forced to treat the enemy the way we’d like to be treated. And the enemy takes full advantage of that, as they do of all of the policies our morally vain politicians have concocted. We need to shift the focus onto our own well-being at the enemy’s expense for a change.

        We’ve tried everything since 9/11 except real war. War is the answer to Jihad.

        So who cares about Islam? Muslims, Jihadists, Islamophiles, Leftists who naturally side with anti-American ideologies, guilt-ridden fellow travelers who think America is usually in the wrong, and religionists who believe any religion is better than none. But since Leftists and Islamophiles usually know very little about Islam, who truly cares about Islam? Those who are at war with us.

        In the end, I care about Islam and the Muslim world as much as the Muslim world cares about America and the West. This is war. We can’t be on both sides. I’m not rooting for Islam or the Muslim world.

        I’m rooting for us.”

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      WRT your last sentence allah I can say is really? Prove that statement (i.e. that “the vast majority of muslums don’t follow islam” or that “the same can not be said for Nazis”. Let’s see some proof muslum apologist worm.

      • RCCA

        I think it’s time for you to change your underwear or bathe. Your odor is becoming absolutely unbearable, permeating cyberspace, and seems to be overwhelming your capacity to think.

        Most Muslims in the world became Muslims by virtue of being born in Muslim families. In contrast, WWII era Nazis weren’t around long enough in Germany to produce generations upon generations, they had to choose to be Nazis. The Nazi propaganda was something they embraced. I know, that degree of thinking is hurting your brain, but you asked for it.

        • IzlamIsTyranny

          I expected proof not rhetoric lying muslum sympathizing worm.
          I re-iterate prove to me your statement:
          “…the vast majority of muslums don’t actually follow Islam.”

          • Qur’an 18:86

            IiT- I have lived among Muslims for nearly 40 yrs. The majority of them are completely clueless about what the q says or about what M did. “Islamophobes” are far more knowledgable, as are ex-mus. When a mus gets round to actually reading their “holy” books, they either develop Sudden Jihad Syndrome or quietly become Ex.

          • IzlamIsTyranny

            Really? Then why do ALL f’ing muslum states. Every, last, f’ing one of them enforce islamic blasphemy and/or heresy laws?
            You don’t need to read the quranus and ahadith to know the vile, violent, Jew hating, totalitarian nature of islum. Your imam, mullah, ayatrollah can vomit the truth about islum allah over you. Any muslum states that provide any form of public education also feature islamic indoctrination.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            “Really? Then why do ALL f’ing muslum states”
            Yes “really”. If you spent a bit less time hyper-expressively typing and a bit more soberly reflecting, your comments might get more respect and be more worth replying to.
            Here’s a hint, though you probably need a PhD in rational reasoning to get it. The policy of “muslims states” is not decided by the kumbaya majority but by the most forceful minority. It in no way undermines my point which is actually a statement of many years’ experience unlike your kneejerking revelations.
            Another hint: The uk regime constantly go on about Islam being religion of peace, and only vanishingly few of the population speak out against that notion. It doesn’t follow that “therefore” the uk kaffirs all or mostly believe Islam is religion of peace.

          • IzlamIsTyranny

            R U trying to tell me muslums don’t run muslum states? Then who does? Djinns?
            R U trying to tell me ALL FIFTY-SEVEN f’ing muslum states are run by extwemists?
            Get bent.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            I’m half inclined to ignore IiT’s ill-mannered and sloppy comment here. However I will point out:
            1) Tatarstan has a long notable history of interfaith harmony between its “Muslim” majority and its non-Mus (basically Russ Orthodox) minority. There could be others. Chechnya appears to be very peaceful of late despite still having a “muslim” majority.
            2) In my very long experience of politics, ALL states (or with minimal exceptions) ARE run by fanatical extremists. If you haven’t noticed that then you’ve got to be seriously dim in one way or another. I wouldn’t know where to start with listing the evidence. How about “Refugees welcome” and its immediate adoption in practice. Oh but it was agreed at a referendum.

          • IzlamIsTyranny

            Why is it that whenever and wherever f’ing muslums take power freedom and liberty die — without exception?
            “Peaceful” does NOT imply free. Cuba was peaceful, but it wasn’t free.
            So retard, the f’ing “moderate”, “good” muslums have failed to gain power in all of the 57 states of the OIC eh?
            Take your puerile muslum apologia and piss up a rope.

          • Achmed

            Hell, Qur’an 18:86. Frequently, I agree with many of your comments. However, the one to which I am responding is truly that of a moslem loving, moslem worshipping islamophiliac. In my life, I had no exposure to a moslem, vile, foul smelling, filthy creatures that they are. Until, Desert Shield, where I was recalled to active duty .. and had to work with those creatures in the filthy squalor of sodomy ayrahbia. The absolute worst time of my life. They actually placed rocks, over their scat, in the latrines. Although, that was a rarity. Normally, the simply squatted anywhere and let loose. Then came relief, Desert Storm, where upon entering Kuwait, we could kill pretty much any moslem that we saw. Desert Shield was living hell. Desert Storm was glorious!

        • Qur’an 18:86

          I can assure you that choosing not to be a Nazi was not an easy option. Many secretly opposed. Any who were seen openly to oppose or question rapidly ended up neutralised anyway so what was the point. You ignorantly (or dishonestly) make it out like a choice to change from tea to coffee – “Oh I think I’ll wear my swastika badge today”.

          • RCCA

            I never said that everyone who lived under Nazism joined the party enthusiastically. What I said was they all knew what Nazism stood for. You can not say the same about people who are born into Muslim families, millions of whom never read the Qur’an, etc., never go to mosque, etc. They don’t know what Islam actually stands for. Even Bosch said the same, that he didn’t know anything about Islam until after 9-11. Only after that he decided to study his religion and decided he had to leave.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            “I never said that everyone who lived under Nazism joined the party
            enthusiastically. What I said was they all knew what Nazism stood for.

            And I wasn’t disagreeing with you on that. I was just pointing out the shortcomings of your words: “they had to choose to be Nazis. The Nazi propaganda was something they embraced.”

            They were under lethal pressure quite a lot more substantial than that against apostates (many of whom survive). Talking of “choosing to be Nazis” is not a good use of words in that context.

          • RCCA

            IOW, people made a calculated decision and chose to accept Nazism. To their everlasting shame.

          • Qur’an 18:86

            What did you do when you and your family were under threat of being tortured to death after being found guilty of sedition?

          • RCCA

            I’m eternally grateful that my ancestors had the foresight and courage to leave their homes and risk their lives to go to a place where they didn’t speak the language or know anyone, before their lives were under threat. But that’s not your question, which I assume is, what would I and my family do in that situation of being under threat? I’d find a way to fight back as long and as effectively as possible. I wouldn’t just acquiesce and accept the Nazi status quo — iow, go along to get along.

        • Achmed

          Hi there, RCCA. A moslem is a moslem is a moslem. They are ALL the same. Your stench is noxious, simply unbearable to the point one need not even access “cyberspace” to be revolted by such. I would state that you have the intellect of an aphid, however, that would be a grave insult to aphids. Rather, let’s just stick with the pure unadulterated truth: You have the Stanford-Binet score of a walnut. I would wonder what was “hurting your brain”. However, since it is obvious that you don’t possess one, that wondering is moot. You asked for it.

          • RCCA

            Who are you, IzlamisTyranny? Or just another uncreative jerk off like him? Either way, a waste of time. They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so thank you for that.

          • Achmed

            No reason to thank me for solely posting the truth about you. RCCA, it has become painfully obvious that your intellect is lower than an aphids. So, lets simply stick with a known truth: You, being the moslem loving, moslem worhshipping islamophiliac that you are, have the Stanford-Binet score of a walnut.

  • ALL Muslims worship the SAME coward women beater allah 40/2 -> https://quran.com/4/34

    • Qur’an 18:86

      I don’t. I worship Aisha as her name sounds cute.

      • Achmed

        Have something for a cute six year old, do you? (Sarc Button Now Off)

  • Zavrzlama

    I never needed a muslim to understand this. I made my own real life experiences and a long time ago came to the conclusion, that those muzzies that basically know nothing about the ideology they were born into, are the most peaceful, modern and human ones. The more a muslims knowledge about Islam increases, the more dangerous, intolerant, arrogant, ignorant, backward-oriented and evil he/she becomes. Just gives you proof enough that Islam by its very self is the core problem and not the people. Because if that ideology wouldn´t be so evil and hate-filled, people who follow it wouldn´t act like that.

  • JayPee

    The word ” allah ”
    existed before the so-called mohammad
    and even back to ancient pharaonic Egyptian times
    when the name was equated as the diametric opposite of the
    all-provident Sun g-d or Ra
    What do the trash of islam worship ?
    Come to your own conclusion.

  • Trump can’t ban islam

    the USconstitution protects Islam and muslims. so you can’t put bacon in mosques because that’s a crime

  • Sandydog

    The ongoing use of those terms/phrases has been abetted–to a great degree–by the very people who could have put a stop to such use long ago.

    I have seen too many television programs during which the term “radical Islam” could and should have been challenged on the spot by counter jihad luminaries–but were not.

  • Dennis

    Extremely enlightening article. Well stated and easily understood. Having been one of those who had hoped that moderate Muslims would take charge of their own religion and reform it to enable it to accept the good required and expected of a true religious belief system that places good morality first, after reading this article I believe that result will never happen simply because the very underlying basis for the Islamic belief system is too oriented to a political agenda and is therefore inherently dangerous and not reform able. The really scary part of that conclusion is what will be required to shut down those who consider their terror to be justified by that belief system. Obviously, we must now direct our attention and our efforts at what to do about ending the conduct that generates the horror promoted by this belief system. All of the free world efforts must be directed to that end. we must free ourselves of the politically correct do-gooders who do not see the reality espoused in this article. We must stand up for our civilizations with vigor and resolves. Unless we can convince Europe to also do so, they will be lost to history as we now see those nations crumbling and battling a belief system that ultimately intends to bury those civilizations. Wake up world!!!!

  • livingengine

    It is certainly no big deal, but when I went to hear Robert Spencer, the local TV news interviewed me. None of the snowflakes wanted to talk to them, so they came to me.

    During the interview, I said, “Everywhere Muslims are in the world they are fighting with their neighbors. Are they going to bring that here?” The reporter shot back with “But, what about the millions of Muslims who are not fighting them?”

    I do not remember what I said in response. I am sure I went along with her invitation to remember the nice Muslims, but I will not do that again. I have decided her question is as rational as asking what about all the cars that are staying in their lanes while a manic is about to run us over with his truck.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      But what about the millions of nazis who never hurt anyone? Should we have not gone to war against them?

    • Achmed

      The response should have been, “Show me one, single, solitary moslem .. .before you bandy about “millions”.

  • Rocinante44

    amen. and islam has no place in america

  • AlgorithmicAnalyst

    That picture looks more like Satan than anyone I’ve ever seen.

    • spfoam1

      His comments are very deceptive.

  • spfoam1

    “Beyond the doctrine, there is the historical figure of Mohammad…”
    The bulk of Islamic doctrine is about Mohammed, so he is not beyond the doctrine, he defines the doctrine. The bulk of Islamic doctrine is the Sira and Hadith, not the Koran.

    “Nor is it an accident that Muslims who model themselves after him are the most violent.”
    The primary responsibility of every Muslim is to imitate Mohammed in every way. Mohammed
    wasn’t always violent, therefore imitating Mohammed includes imitating his non violent behavior. That is a dangerous deception that we must understand.

    “And while the jihadists may not represent all Muslims, they do represent Islam. In the end, most Muslims have proven themselves to be mere sheep to their jihadist wolves, irrelevant as allies in this war.”
    All Muslims are commanded to wage jihad. All jihad is not violent, but all jihad advances Islam. The
    supporters (non violent jihadists) are as important as the warriors. The “sheep” may be irrelevant as allies, but they are not irrelevant as enemies. As in any war, there are more supporters than soldiers, and without them the soldier cannot wage war. As in any war, destroying supply and support is as important as killing the soldiers. In Islam, the sheep support the wolves.

    The choice for all Muslims, sheep or wolves, must be to leave Islam or die as a Muslim. The sheep in Islam walk away as the wolf stabs his wife to death, so what good are they to anyone besides the wolf?

  • Achmed

    ” … especially Muslims and Leftists, who make the issue about Muslims and not Islam; who always allege that critics of Islam are condemning 1.5 billion people …” Personally .. I CONDEMN (special emphasis added) ALL moslems … They’re all the same. The vilest of ALL creatures.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      It’s not my fault their religion is a Jew hating, totalitarian, mass murdering, fascist, violent, vile ideology. It’s also not my fault they continue to subscribe to it allah across the dying, atheist West.

  • Voytek Gagalka

    Islam is Islam. From whatever we might think about Erdogan, at least he is right on that and we better listen to him. You want to know your enemy? Listen to him! And BTW, “political Islam” is only a technical distinction (I hope, Dr. Bill Werner would not be offended by my definition) separating religious belief of Muslims (of which we who are disbelievers can safely discard) from those tenets which are vital to our survival, i.e., which pertain directly disbelievers.

  • Hussars2016

    Thank you for the clarification Pamela. However you must realize that Islam has nothing to do with Islam.

  • Proudcrusader

    Pity really, such a shame that so many for so long could go so far off that flat disc of a world of theirs…I wonder if the whale it’s positioned on has a name….

  • Alleged-Comment

    LIEberals always LIE. They change names but underneath are the same old characters of PAGANS called by various names: Communism: Lieberals: Demoncraps: Leftist: Progressives: Socialsim, Environmentalist, etc.

    They are all the same thing. PAGAN WORSHIPERS. Their father is SATAN. They are into lying and murder but it’s worse then that because their goals are two fold.

    Bringing human misery and suffering before you DIE! They don’t let you off so easily.

  • robert v g

    Thanks Bosch for being blunt & brave.I notice Islam is quite the opposite of Christianity & partly opp.of Judaism.

  • Richard

    I’m grateful for Fawstin’s perspective, however he writes as if he believes that Muhammad is an historical figure. Perhaps he does feel this way because his early years he was indoctrinated in Islam. Perhaps he has studied the historical record and come to this conclusion rationally. I know that Bosch is reformed and he is part of the counter jihad, and an effective part. It’s just that it’s so very likely that Muhammad did not exist, at least as portrayed by Islam. The hadith, the surah, all fiction.

    I liken it to King Arthur. We know Arthur became king when he pulled Excaliber from the stone. We know his queen was Guenevere, his wizard and mentor was Merlin, his squire was Perceval, his evil half-sister Morgana. His most loyal knight was Lancelot. We know all of these things, and yet we also know that Arthur did not exist. No matter how completely the legend is defined, it is only legend. There is perhaps a greater controversy over whether Muhammad existed but I believe he did not.

    • Achmed

      His most “faithful knight” was Lancelot, until Lancelot started porking Guinevere.

  • Michelle

    Islam is a violent supremacist warlord ideology which found religion(and its promises) useful to gain that extra 10ms in battle and to control and stifle the masses. It is NOT a religion as that implies that Muhammad and his arab historians told the truth. Any doctrine that has so much control over the secular life as the supposed religious is an IDEOLOGY. Its religious component is being hammered to death the (as above)to control the masses and to use a lever to exploit religious freedom laws in the west. Once this is realized the problem is solved. Do look at how the imams and the muslim leaders live! Ever seen a slim imam? They are no different to the medieval barons who controlled their serfs. This is the most critical failure of socialism as it refuses to accept this and still spouts the Marxist nonsense.

  • Drew the Infidel

    Along with “fundamentalist” and “extremist”, other red flag to watch for are “Asian”, “mental illness”, and “unnamed suspect”. As advised previously, treat all anomalies as raghead terror and then work back through the evidence to see if anything contradicts your theory. Much more often than not, your original assessment will prove out.

  • iprazhm

    The best and most honest article I’ve read on Islam. There are no moderate muslims because there is no moderate islam.

    • I call some Muslims lax in their practice. Devout Muslims who take their religion seriously support jihad.

      • iprazhm

        Devote muslims commit jihad. Lax muslims support it. If you don’t believe the Quran, there’s zero reason to be a muslim. The Quran orders jihad, subjugation, slavery, rape, murder, torture. There’s a reason satanists are satanists and it’s not because they don’t believe in satanism. All satanists may not participate in the actual sacrifice, or perform satanic rituals, but by being a satanist, they support the ones who do. That’s the whole point of being a satanist. Get it? It’s like saying you’re a vegan but you don’t eat vegetables or support the other vegans who do. It’s a very simple concept of belonging to a group, club or religion. You don’t join if you don’t support the mandates and ideology of the group, unless you are forced to. In America, you’re not forced to…yet. Islam is all about hate, suppression, violence and consuming what other people’s have, by force whenever necessary, until all are muslim. You should buy a translated Quran, or watch one of the many videos by ex-muslims if you’re having trouble understanding.

        • IzlamIsTyranny

          Hear, hear, well written sir!

      • Achmed

        ALL moslems (the vilest of ALL creatures) support violent jihad.

  • Gordon Miller

    I’ve heard that even if a muslim living in America represents himself as non-religious, his core loyalty is to other muslims who may or may not be true believers and even Islamists. This allegiance trumps any bond with America or its people. So, when the chips are down, how can they be trusted? While there may be exceptions, they can’t.

  • Raymond Hietapakka

    ..the radical muzzle’em cuts off your head, while the moderate muzzle’ems hold your feet and legs…

  • Philip Dyer

    A well written and very thought provoking article.

  • Bosch is exactly right. Mohammad’s imperialist example is clear. Islam is a warrior ideology.

  • Patriotliz

    I prefer to refer to ISLAM as IslamoNazism. Calling the enemy”Jihadists” like Dr. Sebastian Gorka…separates Islam into a Jihadi Islam and non-Jihadi Islam. It’s the ideology that inspires the Jihadists…and that ideology is Islam…but to drive home the evil political nature of Islam…IslamoNazism is the best label. Since “Nazi” is the favorite ad hominem attack by the Leftists to refer to any of their political opponents like Trump…I think it best to talk in a political language that their minds can comprehend.
    So why do Muslims who reject the violence of IslamoNazi ideology yet still call themselves Muslim—even when living in a non-Islamic state? Afraid of repercussions from their Muslim family? I have challenged both Gorka and Zuhdi Jasser about their pretending that there is a ‘kinder and gentler’ form of Islam just because there are “kinder and gentler” Muslims… on twitter and they just “blocked” me. They want to maintain that good Muslims can remake Islam…they can’t. You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/16766be9dd9d7d3240a8747c0f1402473a23d6358c35dbaf543494ba11f9c5dc.jpg

    • Achmed

      Better to just call them ALL moslems. A moslem is a moslem is a moslem. They’re ALL the same.

      • Patriotliz

        That’s the label for the followers of Muhammad’s Islam. Best to refer to Islam, the ideology, as IslamoNazism/Fascism, simply to wake up the uneducated as to what Islam really is…i.e., a theo-political totalitarian ideology. Actually not ALL Muslims are the same anymore then ALL Catholics are the same. There are Muslims by accident of birth who probably have no idea what’s in the Koran (maybe illiterate…like Muhammad himself) and who just go through the motions and don’t know how evil Muhammad was. Even if they did, there’s nothing they can do about it since in Islamic States apostasy is punishable by death. It is a societal “identity” which unfortunately gets interpreted by Leftists as a “race” in order to make any Islamophobe an automatic “racist.” Actually anyone who claims to be a follower of Muhammad’s hateful ideology should really be called a Mohammadan rather than Muslim in order to remove any “pseudo-race” connotations. Mohammadans are any followers of the different sects of Islam and the wishful-thinking reformists (referred to as heretics by the true believers of Islam). But all “Muslims” however provide “cover” for the “true” believers of Islam (soldiers of Allah jihadists and proponents of Sharia) either directly or indirectly. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/45c3b8e3528f917433c311874b2bd013758804b2bab49198dec097c2b6eca231.jpg

  • Jack

    With all due respect, and that is great, you are getting warmer.
    The “Name Game” you refer to is merely a symptom of the disease and, as you correctly deduce,
    is of no help to those of us who are aware of the true nature of this pack of murderers.
    I believe that too many are not aware of the true reason for the spread of this disease.
    The problem is that this disease is named improperly.
    It is named a “Religion”.
    This allows these marauders to get by with flaunting civilized society’s immigration and societal laws, demanding the overthrow of governments, murdering Christians and Jews and demanding that we pay for our own demise by showering them with non earned financial and physical benefits.
    We have designated countries as supporters of terrorism but allow terrorism to flourish in our own country under the guise of “Religion”.
    When this error is corrected Islam will no longer be able to hide under the religion umbrella and we will become legally empowered to reject this invasion.

    • Achmed

      Hello, Jack. Well spoken. Well said.

  • Randall Anderson

    Please caption the photo with Maajid Naawaz…he frequently appears on Foxnews as a ‘reformist’ and apologist for Islam…as if he doesn’t know THERE IS NO REFORM OF ISLAM…he becomes an apostate/heretic and earns the death penalty…the pic is not captioned,and so implies it is the author….

  • Poppey

    A first class appraisal.

    The name Mohammad must be rendered as socially unacceptable today as Adolf is. This will show we mean it.

  • Michael Jacobs

    Now, wait a minute. This is comparing apples and oranges.
    “Radical Nazism?” Yeah, that’s redundant. But “Extremist Shinto?” Now you’re just making stuff up, sir. Are you implying that the Shinto religion, in and of itself, was the cause of Japanese imperialism in the first half of the 20th century, and is so irredeemably tied to violent means that it should be universally condemned by all civilized nations? That is a step way too far, sir. If so, why did the US, and specifically Doug MacArthur, who was no wimp when it came to defeating an enemy, allow the Emperor to retain his throne, and Shinto to survive, after Japan’s total defeat and abject surrender? Because it was the RIGHT THING TO DO, that’s why. And it was also the right thing to do to obliterate Nazism wherever it could be found, because Nazism was a perversion of CHRISTIANITY which melded European-centric concepts of Western supremacy with racist pseudoscience.
    How about “militant Communism”? Yes, there certainly is such a thing, as distinct from general Marxist ideas and the many, non-violent movements Marx has spawned, including democratic socialism, which the Leninist Bolsheviks — yes, that’s who “radical Communists” are — considered their greatest enemies, because they had a version of Communism that was NOT violently revolutionary and destructive. For Pete’s sake, monks and nuns in abbeys and convents are “small-d” communists. The idea of shared living with no private property is not everyone’s cup of tea, but it is NOT necessarily violently revolutionary.
    Same with Islam. And for that matter, same with Christianity; do we condemn all Christians because of the Crusades? Or because of the Inquisition? Or because many heads rolled, of both Catholics and Protestants, during the Reformation?
    I think not. Distinctions and nuance are important. This article’s attempt to paint all of Islam as no different than Al-Qaeda and ISIS is using a steamroller with a sledgehammer instead of a precision-guided pinpoint attack on the actual threat of violent radical Islamism.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      The Crusades muslum apologist worm, was a response to islamic terrorism against Christians and enslavement of same.
      The Inquisition? Pfffft. It’s nothing in comparison to what the f’ing muslums have done in the 20th century alone. Millions of people were slaughtered by muslums for being kafur in places like the Sudan, Turkey/Armenia, E. Timor. And all of that is nothing in comparison to what muslums did in the Indian sub-continent, arguably the greatest genocide in the history of the world was committed by muslums in the Indian sub-continent and the slaughter has yet to cease.

      • Michael Jacobs

        I have no reason to disagree with your recitation of historical fact, but this is not just a numbers game. We are talking about attitudes, and what makes an acceptable versus unacceptable attitude for being considered part of an open, tolerant society. That’s the issue. I agree we should not ever “look the other way” about things that some Muslims do, or for which some offer support, which are hateful, violent, and oppressive, both of their own (for instance, FGM and honor killings) and of the Westerners they live among (for instance, mass rapes, not to mention terrorism). By all means, come down hard on any behavioral deviations in that regard which do not meet the standard we Westerners also apply to ourselves. But don’t tar all of Islam with the same brush. It is a diverse community just as Christianity is diverse. There are violent and hate-filled people who claim to be doing so in the name of their version of Islam, and so too there were among the Christians. And a “no true Scotsman” argument — “well, if they do that, then they are not real Christians” is just as invalid as clueless liberals like Kerry claiming “if they do that, they are not true Muslims.” I’m just saying we need to open our eyes, in BOTH directions; and avoid condemning people who have not personally done anything wrong, just because of the religion they profess. That is an unacceptable line to cross, in an open and tolerant democracy. Which, I presume, Mr. Tyranny, you would like to preserve, rather than seeing the West turn once again into an authoritiarian, theocratic polity as it once was, parallel but opposing to that authoritarian, theocratic polity which the Islamists are trying to restore, on their side.

        • IzlamIsTyranny

          “There are violent and hate-filled people who claim to be doing so in the name of their version of islam.” Um, Islum is inherently and voluminously devoted to violence fool. Their holey prophet for profit, the most perfect and best man in all of history, slaughtered his critics while raping, robbing and slaughtering his way across Soddy Barbaria. On the other hand, Yeshua, the Jewish carpenter and street preacher, never advocated for, nor participated in the murder of anyone for any reason. Your argument of false equivalence muslum apologist worm? FAIL.
          The West is ALREADY becoming authoritarian and theocratic fool! What do you call the disguised implementation of islamic blasphemy and heresy laws across the dying West? Freedom?

          • Achmed

            Hello, IzlamisTyranny. There is no reasoning with moslem loving, moslem worshipping islamophilacs. One cannot reason with something that has the intellect of an aphid. Or, in some cases .. significantly less than that.

          • IzlamIsTyranny

            I can only imagine what these islamophilic bastards will be doing once the muslums gain power — they have collaborator written all over them.

    • Achmed

      ” … and specifically Doug MacArthur, who was no wimp …” Dugout Doug, the Great American Chicken, was the most cowardly wimp to ever walk upon the face of the earth. Ask ANY (special emphasis added) WWII Marine (the few still alive). A coward that actually had a PR firm working for him. May that sniveling coward burn for eternity, suffering agony beyond human comprehension.

  • eaagle

    For anyone interesting in a real world example of what Mr. Fawstin is talking about, simply spend a weekend in Dearborn MI. Seriously. Wear a Cross. The more noticeable the better. Do NOT do this by your self. I have a large Templars Cross tattoo on the inside of my right forearm. I drew a lot of attention.

    These people are not radicalized. When I wore a long sleeved in garner no attention. When the Cross was visible they changed. This could be our future.

Pin It on Pinterest