tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post5587712378128417571..comments2023-06-29T13:25:30.567+02:00Comments on The Editrix' Roncesvalles: It's Islam, Stupid! -- ReduxThe_Editrixhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07529769143608862966noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-60218807562943183462010-08-07T01:01:37.813+02:002010-08-07T01:01:37.813+02:00The_Editrix said…
Chris, I think Fabio gives the a...The_Editrix said…<br /><i>Chris, I think Fabio gives the answer to the question why liberals, artists, atheists, homosexuals, favour Islam over a traditional Christian society. They are not really into freedom, but into control.</i><br /><br />Ah of course! Ironically I had a debate several months ago with someone saying that conservatives (particularly far right) want to control our lives. Which I said, “And liberals (particularly the far left) doesn’t? I went on to list all the things from what I can eat to what I can say as different ways liberals want to control my life. Of course the answer to me was that it’s for my own good.<br /><br />As for Palin she has become damage goods thanks to the media and I very much doubt she will be able pull enough Independent voters to win a Presidential election. Actually when she ran with McCain in the 08 election she kind of became a third party candidate in a two party race. But that’s just my opinion.Universal Realisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01663172615308776839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-60980281412372375092010-08-06T22:59:34.256+02:002010-08-06T22:59:34.256+02:00Bruce, I quite liked Palin when she first entered ...Bruce, I quite liked Palin when she first entered the political stage and found the quips at her lack of education petty, snide and mean. In the meantime she turned out to be a conservative bluff package and, worse, got much too big for her boots. I guess that is what will happen with most women in high offices. Their disposition of being footling will mostly get the better of them. Hillary Clinton and Angela Merkel (the latter more than the former) are notable exceptions. (That refers to their personal style and demeanor, not to their politics, of which I disapprove.)The_Editrixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529769143608862966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-80285429686076258532010-08-06T22:07:59.047+02:002010-08-06T22:07:59.047+02:00Fabio, I understand your point. I had never heard...Fabio, I understand your point. I had never heard of her before and I doubt my American readers have, so I thought it would be a good idea to show yet another phoney face of "modern", "moderate" Islam. My adding of those details about Bedawi took some clout off the excellent points you made. I saw that as soon as the entry was online.<br /><br />Chris, I think Fabio gives the answer to the question why liberals, artists, atheists, homosexuals, favour Islam over a traditional Christian society. They are not really into freedom, but into control. That's why people are usually not into just one "progressive", politically correct cause, but usually into all of them. A leftist will be as well feminist, into "equal rights" for homosexuals, vegetarian- or veganism, teetotalism (which, funny enough, doesn't extent to drugs), "animal rights", the cult of man-made climate change, agnosticism or atheism, "progressive" pedagogy and art, gun control, anti-racism and a rabid egalitarianism, and and and... In fact, it is all about control. They are abhorred at the thought that anybody anywhere on this earth might have fun. Wholesome fun, above all. They'd ban heterosexual sex, if they could. They want people sick of body and soul, helpless and frightened.<br /><br />And that is exactly what Islam wants as well. They are mutually compatible and each faction think they can control the other.The_Editrixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529769143608862966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-6629516082676116552010-08-06T15:32:46.156+02:002010-08-06T15:32:46.156+02:00But you must also may want to take in consideratio...But you must also may want to take in consideration Zeinab Bedawi’s employer which I take it that is the BBC. See they may want to have a Muslim friendly Presenter/Interviewer and they are encouraging her to be so. Not saying she isn’t willing to do so but the BBC may want it so to look Muslim and immigrant friendly. Why? Perhaps so they don’t get death threats or maybe they are hedging their bets on the future population demographics. <br /><br />On another thought, I think it’s amazing that Liberals who tend to defend women’s rights, artist, artistic expression, music, Atheism, gays, individuality, teenager’s freedoms, sex, drugs and rock and roll would not see Islam as a threat to their freedoms. Liberals have no problem declaring Christianity as an oppressive religion and want it remove from all government and public events. Yet when it comes to Islam they roll over. <br /><br />Don’t they realize Islam particularly fundamentalist Islam are against women’s rights, artist, artistic expression, music, gays, individuality, teenager’s freedoms, pork, alcohol, sex, drugs and rock and roll? <br /> <br />Liberals would not like an Islamic government, particularly artist, atheist, gays, women and teenagers. <br /> <br />I remember when the show South Park was threaten if they showed an image of Muhammad and either the network or the show decided to censor the show. I really thought this would wake up the young people to the danger of this kind of ideology but no. If a group of Christians threaten South Park for show Jesus it would be ignored and young people would be criticizing Christian.<br /> <br />How many times do we hear about a westerner especially female in an Islamic country ending up getting arrested by the religious/moral police for kissing, not dressed appropriately, or just sitting with a male co-worker in public. But western Liberals just don’t believe it can happen in the western countries. Yet we already seen Muslim cab drivers refuse people if they are carrying a bottle of alcohol or refusing to allow blind people with guide dogs because Islam states dogs are unclean. <br /> <br />Then again a heterosexual male wouldn’t have it to bad. Men could be men again, Kings of their castles. Now if that doesn’t get feminist to fight against Islam I don’t know what will. LOL!! <br /> <br />For me not being allow too have bacon is enough to keep me from becoming Muslim. LOL! Actually I’m serious about that.<br /> <br />But seriously, westerners believe it won’t happen in their country and any liberal or freethinking person would not want it to happen.Universal Realisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01663172615308776839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-65649459456086096472010-08-05T08:44:15.932+02:002010-08-05T08:44:15.932+02:00Bruce: I would say that it is more a matter of ins...Bruce: I would say that it is more a matter of instinctive distrust of the free motion of others. Historically, Muslim governments tended to co-opt the leadership of dhimmi groups; to this day, for instance, the Ecumenical Patriarch is not just an appointee but an employee of the Turkish state. One may see a similar position, for instance, in comparatively high-ranking Copts such as Boutros Boutros-Ghali. People like that will never ascend to the top of Egyptian society, or of any other Muslim country, but they are there to give the whole dhimmi leadership a stake in the power structure, and to neutralize them when at any time dhimmi groups are being persecuted, oppressed or expelled. The lesson has been learned and internalized very well: to this day, the Christian leadership of the Arab Middle East is incapable of recognizing any enemy but Israel, and Christians like Saib Erekart are actually among the most active and aggressive members of the Arab leadership, ignoring as if beneath their notice the ethnic cleansing of Christians that is going on all the time under their feet.<br /><br />Of course, in Dar-El-Harb the power relationships are different, but the policy - indeed, the instinct - is the same: identify and co-opt areas of societal leadership that think more of their own position in society than of the collective interest. And manipulate them. Of course, the dhimmi leadership is in turn convinced that they can manipulate the Muslims. And the question is, who will win?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-28103232078340754132010-08-05T06:45:44.990+02:002010-08-05T06:45:44.990+02:00I want to underline that the point of my note was ...I want to underline that the point of my note was not so much to attack the graceless Bedawi (if it had not been her, it would have been someone else) so much as to describe the realization I had about the mechanism of validation by vanity and self-righteousness by which Western elites become joined at the hip with Muslim mobs. This is an important fact, which you yourself saw, with justified rage, in the bizarre behaviour of the execrable Frank Henkel.<br /><br />I would go further and say that the result of the prevalence of soixante-huitards in the current social leadership has led to a situation where democracy - by which I mean the mechanism which leaves ultimate political power in the hands of the adult people - is resented, placed under surveillance, and under constant attack. That is the common, radically mutual interest that joins Islam and the current Western elites; and that is why the Western elites genuinely do not feel under threat by Islam. They regard Islam as an ally in the placing under control of all "unprogressive" elements. And control is the essential thing.<br /><br />After all, that generation was quite clear about its goals right from the start: "We shall make a new world". This was a straightforward claim for political power - how else was a "new world" to be "made"? Or as an Italian singer put it: "We shall make a revolution, but not a single cannon shall be fired". Convenient, too, since firing cannon - going to war - has two major flaws: it requires sacrifices and courage, and it is uncertain in its results. Plenty of revolutions have been crushed. No, this self-declared founding aristocracy of a new world, intending to make a civilization that would be different from anything their fathers had ever imagined (except when they had imagined it), went about it the safe way, by colonizing institutions and corporations.<br /><br />An essential help in this was the pre-existent evil that is the institutional structure of parties. I do not have enough words to say how much I hate parties and party mentalities. I think it may be shown that it was intended from the beginning to occupy the space of democratic politics, denying access to it to anyone who was not an apparatchik (and by the way, God be praised for the fractiousness and breakability of Italian parties, which has saved us from the dreadful destiny of two- or three-party rule). These were peculiarly suited to being colonized by soixante-huitards, and colonized they were - along with trades unions, charities, institutional bodies and the judiciary.<br /><br />That explains why the elites are so committed to contrasting goals such as feminism, gay rights, and the promotion of Islam. They are not really goals, they are means. In one way or another, they are intended to limit the space of public debate, of free deliberation, of citizen intervention. What Islam and gay rights activists have in common is their commitment to the politics of offence, to demanding that anyone whose views they find offensive should be silenced by force, and ultimately that any law whioh offends them should be suppressed. This places power in the hands of minorities and away from the mass of the people. Elections will increasingly become an empty ritual - unless somewhere a political leader emerges who can not only break the stranglehold of the culture of offence, but also have the nerve to impeach and send to jail those judges and civil servants who have used their position to rewrite the laws and oppress opponents.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-24869060995130308582010-08-04T02:41:40.629+02:002010-08-04T02:41:40.629+02:00The commenter whom your post was based on said tha...The commenter whom your post was based on said that the BBC announcer was knocking PoD publishing (e.g. Lulu) probably due to her Muslim faith. There are probably lots of such books, but the only one I can think of offhand is Moon-o-theism. It's commonly mentioned on blogs. In fact, infidels might start referring to Islam more as Moon-o-theism than by the word Islam:<br /><br />http://www.google.com/search?q=moon-o-theism&hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbs=blg:1&source=og&sa=N&tab=wbAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-8531335593160218292010-08-04T00:12:56.406+02:002010-08-04T00:12:56.406+02:00So right! One can argue that Islam isn't a rel...So right! One can argue that Islam isn't a religion to begin with but a totalitarian political ideology. "Allah" is not the God of the Bible.The_Editrixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529769143608862966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18369530.post-77167737621891491462010-08-03T19:35:36.220+02:002010-08-03T19:35:36.220+02:00What really is disgusting is when women survivors ...What really is disgusting is when women survivors of attempted honor killings come to the West to have prosthetic ears and noses installed, and facial reconstructions done, etc., and then they STILL stand up for Islam and say how good and right it is. They blame everything bad on tribal customs. What a crappy religion is it that can't break down and amend bad tribal customs after a thousand years. That's why Christians should try to convert Muslims since Islam isn't doing them any good.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com