Communist Manifesto speaks to elimination of LOYALTY OATHS...
Liberalism is #islamINCARNATE Quran 2:225;
"Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts".
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2009/04/09/muslim-lies-learn-how-to-recognize-taqiyya-islamic-art-of-deception/
[Which means that Muslims can say and lie about one thing while they mean something totally different. ]
I have read about the paradoxical alliance between Islam and the left for years. I have even written about it -- at some length, in fact, in my newest book Scarlet Letters. But it was only a few weeks go that I got to see up close the mechanisms that...
March 31, 2016
An Up-close Look at the Liberal-Muslim Alliance
I have read about the paradoxical alliance between Islam and the left for
years. I have even written about it -- at some length, in fact, in my
newest book Scarlet Letters.
But it was only a few weeks go that I got to see up close the
mechanisms that allow people who celebrate homosexuals to find common
cause with those who, when the law allows, happily sever their heads.
As a result of my book, I was invited to sit on a panel titled “Muslim in the Metro,”
an event sponsored by an enterprise called American Public Square and
televised in edited form -- fairly, I must say -- on the regional PBS
channel here in Kansas City, KCPT.
There were five panelists -- myself, a Republican state rep from Kansas, a
fiftyish Muslim woman in the diversity business, a U.S. attorney
appointed by Obama, and a female Muslim college student who used the
word “microagression” as something other than a punch line to a joke.
The moderator was also a former Obama appointee.
I would use names, but I am confident if American Public Square ran a
comparable event in other cities, the four Muslim advocates -- the
moderator included -- would espouse almost identical views. They
represent a type. So too did the overwhelmingly liberal audience. I
could have written their questions for them.
TheseAmerican Public Square debates feature an active online fact checker
and a civility bell. I was a little queasy about the civility bell, but I
welcomed the fact checker. He proved to be my greatest ally.
The state rep did a fine job. As an elected official he had to be a little
cautious, but he made his case about terror and immigration well.
My strategy was a little different. Knowing that I was not about to
convert anyone, I thought I could at least confuse the audience members
with the truth, and the truth is that their affection for Islam makes no
apparent sense. This proved to be a difficult assignment, and here is
why.
The left has a unique ability to deny the obvious.
In attempting to establish my premise, I said to the panel, “Muslims are
culturally very conservative around the world,” adding rhetorically, “Is
that fair to say?”
This premise struck me as inarguable. My fellow panelists felt otherwise.
The two women, both wearing Hijabs, and the moderator all shouted out
“No” or some variant. Said I, “When it comes to issues like family,
women, abortion, gay rights, you’re telling me they’re not
conservative?”
The moderator admonished me. “Jack,” he said, “you’re asking a question,
and they didn’t give you the answer you want.” He then challenged me to
make my case or move on.
Knowing there was a fact checker, I pulled out my one file card and read
through the numbers from Pew Research Foundation, a liberal but
generally reliable source. When asked about gay rights, 87 percent of
Germans approved but no more than 9 percent of Muslims in any country
surveyed and as little as 2 percent in some.
On the question of whether a women should always obey her husband, 87
percent of Muslims approved. On the question of whether apostates should
be executed, 56 percent of Muslims who approved of Sharia law said yes.
Asked whether they held “highly unfavorable” views of Jews, 99 percent
of Jordanians and 100 percent of Lebanese sad yes. The fact checker
could not deny what I was saying.
My fellow panelists could and did. They protested that these attitudes did
not reflect American Muslims, but I had to repeat that I began my
discussion by saying these surveys were done in the countries that
comprise our immigration pool, and that the threat of immigration
motivated the anti-Muslim sentiment about which they complained.
The left instinctively denies the worth of America.
I did concede that American Muslims were likely more moderate in their
views. This relative moderation, I argued, reflected the “palliative
effect of American culture on Islam.” This comment drew boos from the
audience. From the left’s perspective, nothing America does is
palliative.
The left controls the debate.
When I added, “If you go to Cologne, Germany you’re going to meet people who
haven’t had that [palliative] experience,” the moderator insisted that I
stick to local issues. Europe seemed particularly off limits. Although
this was billed as a nonpartisan event, it proved to be no more
nonpartisan than PBS in general or CNN or NBC or the New York Times. The moderator unabashedly took sides.
The left inevitably falls back on false moral equivalence.
Indeed, from the Muslim women and especially from the U.S. Attorney, there was
so much talk of Timothy McVeigh, Clive Bundy, the KKK, the Sovereignty
movement, and even the mid 19th-century Know-Nothing Party, a latecomer
might have thought the event about Christian terrorism. Of course, in
none of these conversations did the moderator insist the speaker
restrict himself to local issues.
The left is plagued with cognitive dissonance.
I kept returning to the transparently separate standards liberals held
for traditional Christians and traditional Muslims. I pointed out, for
instance, that the Kansas City Star designated a prominent
liberal pastor a “drum major for justice” for his denunciation of the
Christian right as “a threat far greater than the old threat of
Communism.”
The fact checker confirmed that to be an exact quote. And the threat the
pastor alluded had nothing to do with violence. No, what troubled him
was that Christian conservatives were running for office. They were
"anti-pornography," he warned, and opposed -- he noted daintily -- a
woman's "having a say about what goes on in her own body."
Had he said something half as outrageous about Muslims, he would have lost
his pulpit, if not his head. Focusing his spite on Christians, however,
got his speech excerpted in the New York Times and won him the Harry S. Truman Good Neighbor Award.
The alliance validates the left’s moral superiority.
At one point, the older Muslim woman claimed to have been so appalled by
the “anti-Muslim” tenor of the Republican debates that she would not let
her children watch them. Echoed the U.S. Attorney, “Their children see
grown men espousing hate.”
Bingo!There was the money quote. Indeed, if there is one shared feel good
experience among leftists of all stripes it is the imputation of “hate”
to others. Author Shelby Steele coined the phrase “zone of decency” to
describe the sacred preserve in which progressives imagine themselves
clustering. By aligning themselves with Muslims, liberals assure
themselves a place in the zone and “decertify” those not quite so keen
on self-destruction.
Did I mention that the left denies the obvious?
My opponents on the panel repeatedly insisted that terrorists did not
represent Islam. “You have places called the Islamic State,” I
countered. “These guys think they’re the real deal.”
“What one chooses to call oneself is not necessarily the only test we have to
apply,” said the moderator who had long since abandoned anything
resembling neutrality.
“There is an element of disingenuousness about this conversation tonight,” I
replied. I pointed out that there are millions of Muslims who subscribed
to ISIS or who supported ISIS “To make believe that there is not a
religious thread to this,” I concluded, “is to deceive ourselves.”
“What’s disingenuous is to blithely say there are millions,” the moderator
snapped back. He then made the fatal mistake of asking for a fact check
on my numbers. Said the fact checker, “Pew says 63 million Muslims
support the Islamic State in the eleven Muslim countries polled.”
“That,” I said with my final words, “is a lot of Muslims.”
years. I have even written about it -- at some length, in fact, in my
newest book Scarlet Letters.
But it was only a few weeks go that I got to see up close the
mechanisms that allow people who celebrate homosexuals to find common
cause with those who, when the law allows, happily sever their heads.
As a result of my book, I was invited to sit on a panel titled “Muslim in the Metro,”
an event sponsored by an enterprise called American Public Square and
televised in edited form -- fairly, I must say -- on the regional PBS
channel here in Kansas City, KCPT.
There were five panelists -- myself, a Republican state rep from Kansas, a
fiftyish Muslim woman in the diversity business, a U.S. attorney
appointed by Obama, and a female Muslim college student who used the
word “microagression” as something other than a punch line to a joke.
The moderator was also a former Obama appointee.
I would use names, but I am confident if American Public Square ran a
comparable event in other cities, the four Muslim advocates -- the
moderator included -- would espouse almost identical views. They
represent a type. So too did the overwhelmingly liberal audience. I
could have written their questions for them.
TheseAmerican Public Square debates feature an active online fact checker
and a civility bell. I was a little queasy about the civility bell, but I
welcomed the fact checker. He proved to be my greatest ally.
The state rep did a fine job. As an elected official he had to be a little
cautious, but he made his case about terror and immigration well.
My strategy was a little different. Knowing that I was not about to
convert anyone, I thought I could at least confuse the audience members
with the truth, and the truth is that their affection for Islam makes no
apparent sense. This proved to be a difficult assignment, and here is
why.
The left has a unique ability to deny the obvious.
In attempting to establish my premise, I said to the panel, “Muslims are
culturally very conservative around the world,” adding rhetorically, “Is
that fair to say?”
This premise struck me as inarguable. My fellow panelists felt otherwise.
The two women, both wearing Hijabs, and the moderator all shouted out
“No” or some variant. Said I, “When it comes to issues like family,
women, abortion, gay rights, you’re telling me they’re not
conservative?”
The moderator admonished me. “Jack,” he said, “you’re asking a question,
and they didn’t give you the answer you want.” He then challenged me to
make my case or move on.
Knowing there was a fact checker, I pulled out my one file card and read
through the numbers from Pew Research Foundation, a liberal but
generally reliable source. When asked about gay rights, 87 percent of
Germans approved but no more than 9 percent of Muslims in any country
surveyed and as little as 2 percent in some.
On the question of whether a women should always obey her husband, 87
percent of Muslims approved. On the question of whether apostates should
be executed, 56 percent of Muslims who approved of Sharia law said yes.
Asked whether they held “highly unfavorable” views of Jews, 99 percent
of Jordanians and 100 percent of Lebanese sad yes. The fact checker
could not deny what I was saying.
My fellow panelists could and did. They protested that these attitudes did
not reflect American Muslims, but I had to repeat that I began my
discussion by saying these surveys were done in the countries that
comprise our immigration pool, and that the threat of immigration
motivated the anti-Muslim sentiment about which they complained.
The left instinctively denies the worth of America.
I did concede that American Muslims were likely more moderate in their
views. This relative moderation, I argued, reflected the “palliative
effect of American culture on Islam.” This comment drew boos from the
audience. From the left’s perspective, nothing America does is
palliative.
The left controls the debate.
When I added, “If you go to Cologne, Germany you’re going to meet people who
haven’t had that [palliative] experience,” the moderator insisted that I
stick to local issues. Europe seemed particularly off limits. Although
this was billed as a nonpartisan event, it proved to be no more
nonpartisan than PBS in general or CNN or NBC or the New York Times. The moderator unabashedly took sides.
The left inevitably falls back on false moral equivalence.
Indeed, from the Muslim women and especially from the U.S. Attorney, there was
so much talk of Timothy McVeigh, Clive Bundy, the KKK, the Sovereignty
movement, and even the mid 19th-century Know-Nothing Party, a latecomer
might have thought the event about Christian terrorism. Of course, in
none of these conversations did the moderator insist the speaker
restrict himself to local issues.
The left is plagued with cognitive dissonance.
I kept returning to the transparently separate standards liberals held
for traditional Christians and traditional Muslims. I pointed out, for
instance, that the Kansas City Star designated a prominent
liberal pastor a “drum major for justice” for his denunciation of the
Christian right as “a threat far greater than the old threat of
Communism.”
The fact checker confirmed that to be an exact quote. And the threat the
pastor alluded had nothing to do with violence. No, what troubled him
was that Christian conservatives were running for office. They were
"anti-pornography," he warned, and opposed -- he noted daintily -- a
woman's "having a say about what goes on in her own body."
Had he said something half as outrageous about Muslims, he would have lost
his pulpit, if not his head. Focusing his spite on Christians, however,
got his speech excerpted in the New York Times and won him the Harry S. Truman Good Neighbor Award.
The alliance validates the left’s moral superiority.
At one point, the older Muslim woman claimed to have been so appalled by
the “anti-Muslim” tenor of the Republican debates that she would not let
her children watch them. Echoed the U.S. Attorney, “Their children see
grown men espousing hate.”
Bingo!There was the money quote. Indeed, if there is one shared feel good
experience among leftists of all stripes it is the imputation of “hate”
to others. Author Shelby Steele coined the phrase “zone of decency” to
describe the sacred preserve in which progressives imagine themselves
clustering. By aligning themselves with Muslims, liberals assure
themselves a place in the zone and “decertify” those not quite so keen
on self-destruction.
Did I mention that the left denies the obvious?
 | |
| Taqiyya > taught to MAFIA, who Taught Alinsky, who taught Liberal | sBLACKS |
My opponents on the panel repeatedly insisted that terrorists did not
represent Islam. “You have places called the Islamic State,” I
countered. “These guys think they’re the real deal.”
“What one chooses to call oneself is not necessarily the only test we have to
apply,” said the moderator who had long since abandoned anything
resembling neutrality.
“There is an element of disingenuousness about this conversation tonight,” I
replied. I pointed out that there are millions of Muslims who subscribed
to ISIS or who supported ISIS “To make believe that there is not a
religious thread to this,” I concluded, “is to deceive ourselves.”
“What’s disingenuous is to blithely say there are millions,” the moderator
snapped back. He then made the fatal mistake of asking for a fact check
on my numbers. Said the fact checker, “Pew says 63 million Muslims
support the Islamic State in the eleven Muslim countries polled.”
“That,” I said with my final words, “is a lot of Muslims.”
No comments:
Post a Comment