West: "In not discussing the roots of terror in Islam itself, in not learning about them, the multicultural clergy that shepherds our elites prevents us from having to do anything about them"

Bis, bis.

As a regular Townhall reader, I was delighted to see this posted there this morning. Anyone know if it is also in the Washington Times?

Multiculturalism is the ex-post justification for a perceived disaster of incalculable magnitude. Having watched Yugoslavia explode, the Soviet Union implode, and the death of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, you might have thought politicians would have learned................they just ignored historical example and took a leap in the dark.

The scheme might have worked if the birthrates had not remained at stubbornly high peasant levels and had adjusted downwards to match indigenous rates...........but advanced Western society with health care, nutrition and transfer payments has created an imbalanced demographic profile with monoculture in many schools as local areas are increasingly dominated by non-native language groups.

Multicultural is what happens when a group of foreign tourists look around your town; monoculturalism is when they bring their family and friends and start to occupy whole sections of town.

You said it Voyager (trekkie?). But if we point that out to them, we are "racists". :-/

Voyager,

For the most part, I have little problem with the wonderful multicultural rainbow of races and cultures coming to the West to rub shoulders with us.

All the other hues -- Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Sikhs, non-Muslim Africans, non-Muslim Asians, Latinos -- are for the most part fine.

It is only one hue of that multicultural rainbow that is a problem: Muslims.

We should not be opposed to multicultural mixing. We SHOULD be opposed to the "ism" called Multiculuralism which irrationally would prevent us from seeing that Muslims are, in fact, multiculturally intolerant and hostile to all the modern Western secular values that nourish multicultural openness and rights.

Ironic isn't it? The ism of Multiculturalism actually defends a system (Islam) that is hostile to multicultural values!

"Liberalism is a mental disease." -- Mike Savage

Ibn Rushd......not Star Trek...........90 ± 10 Astronomical Units (AU).Voyager is reaching the edge of the solar system. This is no Christopher Columbus false call, mind you. Eight billion miles from the Sun, Voyager's 26-year journey has made it the farthest-reaching spacecraft in the solar system and it is about to set a new record.

Mike Savage - you might think it is Multi-Culti but when you have 80.000 Muslims in a population of 550.000 it seems pretty monocultural in parts and very foreign

Test Ignore

EPG beat me to it, I just mailed this to RS.
Notice I didn't say "Islamists." Or "Islamofascists." Or "fundamentalist extremists." I've tried out such terms in the past, but I've come to find them artificial and confusing, and maybe purposefully so, because in their imprecision I think they allow us all to give a wide berth to a great problem: the gross incompatibility of Islam -- the religious force that shrinks freedom even as it "moderately" enables or "extremistly" advances jihad -- with the West.
Some are beginning to get it.

Metaxy: "All the other hues -- Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, Sikhs, non-Muslim Africans, non-Muslim Asians, Latinos -- are for the most part fine."

King: So, it seems that as you all get more and more frustrated the more you cut to the chase. We're now dissecting the hues of people and placing a lable of "good", "bad", or "fine, for the most part." You're a bigoted & racist asshole, Metaxy - that has become the most crystal clear thing about reading these threads. You've managed to sink beneath those whom you hate. Ironic, isn't it?????

There is also the lashing out against multiculturalists & liberals, whom you also take issue with.

Metaxy: "The ism of Multiculturalism actually defends a system (Islam) that is hostile to multicultural values!"

King: You haven't the slightest idea what a multiculturalist is or you would not make such a stupid statement. As I have said before, the key thing that defines a true multiculturalist is our keen ability to not paint with broad strokes. We're able to see the forest for the trees. We're able to identify the rotten apples and are more than willing to rid ourselves of them, while preserving diverse integrity. We're able to be pragmatic in getting to the root of a problem. You're too busy grading the hues of people to notice.

This column will be included in the "Anti-Jihadist" anthology, due out after Islam is defeated. Will Pigs Fly before the New York Times prints an essay like this?

I can't even talk to a friend about this anymore, he still says, "It's not Islam. 90% of Muslim's are peaceful and don't care about Jihad."

I thought London would change his mind, but nope.

This is how surreal this whole "There's no Elephant in the room" business is. The day when the London terror attack happened, I turned on AIR AMERICA to listen to what their spin was going to be. Guess what? On the Al Franken Show, in mid-afternoon, hours after the London terror attack, Franken was discussing some Bush, White House scandal.

Talk about sci-fi. What planet are some people on. I just don't get it.

Nuh, that is a shame. I don't even bother talking about it anymore. No one gives a sh$t. There was a guy in my Islam class at the uni 2 years ago (this was the day before Bush's timeline ran out, 48hrs) and he said "it's all about the oil". I knew there was no hope for that class, so I shut up the entire time. Needless to say the prof was beyond hope, as I got a low grade overall. What a loser, and he's still there.

I don't know whether or not to tell my family that we're next (Canada). This is scary. Which city are they going to hit?

Something I have observed about the left, "tolerance" is only extended to those who think like them.

Carolyn is right, I watched last week the new movie put out by Academic Bias.com and there was a Sikh fellow who was a "conservative" (their term). He was lambasted because of his words. He said in the movie that if he had toadied the left line, he would be accepted and they would be "multicultural" and he would have a place. But because he didn't tow the line, he didn't have a place.

Just think about us whities who are looked down upon because of our skin, let alone being Sikh or anything else.

Ibn and Nuh: I wouldn't get too disconsolate King Electron seems quite persuaded by your arguments

At this moment in Britain, the Islamic population are feeling the heat, what with bombings and the rest of the compassionate side of Allah. Far from bad publicity, all this is good publicity for islam, as it raises the profile of Islam even higher then it already is, as a consequence of 9/11. Surely even our dhimmi press can understand this?

In any case, whatever the bad press that Islam is getting, Islamists, and here I mean virtually all Muslims, take the long view. And I mean the really long view. In about a 100 years or so, we will see the same thing here in the West, as is happening in Bosnia, Kosovo, Kashmir, Philippines, Thailand etc. The US will not be an exception. In fact the US is the primary objective.

People live and travel in fear, as Muslims living among us, are the most likely to be active in terrorism. A whole society (all the West) is terrorised and life made difficult, just to keep Muslims here. The very presence of Muslims in airplanes is a cause for alarm. When is that Muslim man or burqa-clad woman going to explode? It just puts you off your in-flight meal or movie.

Our civilisation is dying right at this moment, as freedoms we have taken for granted, are slowly strangled in the name of security. In the end, our whole way of life will be changed, Western nations de-stabilised and finally, we will strangle our civilisation just to keep a few million Muslims here. It is far far too high a price to pay.

The whole purpose of this Jihad is to raise the profile of islam and muslims and make islam pre-eminent. To defeat the jihad we have to atleast start thinking of a separation. Islam and the democratic way of life cannot co-exist. We will destroy civilisation in the attempt.

Have to agree with the points reared about leftism: there is only tolerance for those who agree wholeheartedly. The rest get labelled "racist" or "imperialist", either by leftists themselves or by those crowing the same line and calling for the same thing, which appears to be the destruction of Western civilization. I wonder how they'd feel about living in an islamic nation, with it's tender care of women and homosexuals and apostates - and Christians and Jews, come to think of it. Then again, Shiites like KT (who engage primarily in name-calling) are just as bad. Ah well. If multiculturalism is being used as an excuse for sharia and islamofacism, then it ceases to be a leftist doctrine, in my book, and becomes a facist one.

Is there anywhere a thinking leftist can go to express rational perspectives?

Imam Geoff

Good to see you back, Geoff. We have been missing your fatwas and humor. ;)

King Tolerance,

You are putting words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say that I rate mankind by hues. Nowhere did I say I rate mankind according to "good" / "fine for the most part" / "bad".

All I said was that the rainbow of cultural hues that constitutes mankind is, apart from that one totalitarian system Islam, fine for the most part.

Geoff,

Read the Liberals Chris Hitchens, Paul Berman, Camille Paglia and David Horowitz for analyses of how diseased Leftism has become.

That's why I like to use two words to distinguish:

Liberals -- support progressive modern Western secular values like women's rights, tolerance for gays, support for freedom of thought & expression, sexual insouciance in society (within reasonable limits), etc.

Leftists -- for some insane reason (that has complex historical roots) support the above values while at the same time defending that totalitarian anti-liberal system Islam.

From thread above:

King to Metaxy: "You've managed to sink beneath those whom you hate. Ironic, isn't it?????"

It is truly a low blow to be told you have sunk below the level of a Muslim...! Even you (a Muslim) acknowledge Muslims are low by attempting to make this an insult. Is it even possible to sink below the level of a Muslim? I doubt it...

Furthermore, positing for a moment that your assessment of Metaxy is accurate (that he/she has sunk even below the level of a Muslim in terms of bigotry and intolerance) to call it "ironic" is a ludicrous misuse of a word... The definition of ironic is "poignantly contrary to what is expected..." I think you are suggesting that Metaxy has become even more bigoted and intolerant than a Muslim (which hardly seems possible to me, but anyway...) This is the opposite of "ironic" -- it is EXACTLY what one should expect from infidels who soberly acquaint themselves with Islam. Intolerance of Muslim intolerance doesn't place the infidel below the Muslim. To not tolerate bigots is to be just and righteous.

Please go to shoebat.com or P4 of the Sunday Express in the UK.

Tawfik Hamid says that the majority of muslims are passive terrorists.

He also says that there are no moderates in the muslim world. You are either religious or not religious.

He also says that Islamic leaders reject terrorism because they fear revenge attacks.

Please Robert, print this here at DW.

jsla:

The self-proclaimed King is a moral equivalencer who understands nothing about tolerance. He accuses the bloggers here of being no different from the people who defamed Jews in the prelude to the Holocaust, completely failing to appreciate that where European Jewry posed absolutely no threat to the safety and security of the countries they had called home for centuries, we have, in our midst a sizable component of the Muslim community who are extremely hostile and dangerous. (quite a disconnect from someone who lost family in Bergen-Belsen.) He also issues said pleas on the behalf of those hostile persons, asking us to understand what may motivate that hostility, what feeds their "grievance".

Chris Hitchens put it well, writing on July 8, what the grievances of the jihaddists are and why we must fight them and why the jihaddists will lose (because there is no political solution that will appease them):

"The grievance of seeing unveiled women. The grievance of the existance, not of the State of Israel, but of the Jewish people.* The grievance of the heresy of democracy, which impeds the imposition of sharia law. The grievance of a work of fiction written by an Indian living in London. The grievance of the existence of black African Muslim farmers who won't abandon lands in Darfur. The grievance of the existence of homosexuals. The grievance of music, and of most representational art. The grievance of the existence of Hinduism. The grievance of East Timor's liberation from Indonesian rule. All of those have been proclaimed as a license to kill infidels or apostates or just anyone who gets in the way.

For a few moments yesterday, Londoners received a taste of what life is like for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, whose Muslim faith does not protect them from slaughter at the hands of those who think they are not Muslim enough or are the wrong Muslim."

* I note the reference to Israel and Jews because Hitchens was once close buddies with Edward Said, close enough to have co-written a book detailing the suffering of the Palestinians, so it is quite an observation to note.

One of the most dangerous canards being followed in the West (separate from the fatuous notion that Islam is a religion of peace) is that hopelessness and nihilism is what motivates the Islamic terrorist. George Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, and Daniel Pipes all embrace the fantasist idea that strong doses of good ol' American optimism and democracy will fix what's ailing Islam...

But we must believe the thralls of Islam that Muslims are fired by extemeley fervent hopes -- although this 'hope' doesn't fall neatly into western notions of hope, nevertheless they are a hopeful people. Set aside for a moment the glaring flaws of their religion and the revulsion many of us feel -- Set aside our deepest intuition that the manifold ugliness of Islamic cultures are an indication of how threadbare their supremacist ideology truly is... They should be believed when they unversally and mindlessly express the hope that Islam will dominate the world.

They cause terror attacks not because they are hopeless -- They cause terror, promulgate lies, distort reality, indoctrinate their followers to hate 'the other,' attempt to destroy discourse, deflect criticism, and blame the victims of their hatreds BECAUSE IT WORKS! It has been working for 1350 years -- why abandon it now?

I am a patient man, and can wait a while to see if experiments such as Iraq and Afghanistan work -- but my intuition tells me that we're dealing with cancer and precancerous tissue with regards to Islamic culture -- there is very little sign of healthy tissue anywhere in the 'ummah...' The time may come when the Doctors give the prognosis that Islam is a little other than a cancerous tumor and must be removed from the body of larger humanity. Amputation is never a nice option, except when it's necessary in order to allow the patient to survive... So a question of great moment suspends out there for the time being, is Islam a curable patient, or is Islam a cancer for humanity that must be removed?

jsla -- "Intolerance of Muslim intolerance doesn't place the infidel below the Muslim. To not tolerate bigots is to be just and righteous."

Leftists like King Tolerance go through an amazing contortion of logic in their thought process. I will attempt to describe its perverse nature step by step, using this example of tolerance:

1) Tolerance is good; intolerance is bad.

(So far, everything's fine.)

2) Tolerance is so good we should not be intolerant of people or cultures who are intolerant, because by being intolerant of them, we become like them.

(This has logic and is true to a certain extent -- it forms the basis of American laws of allowing a wide latitude to freedom of thoughts & expression of groups inimical to American values. However, everyone agrees there is a line that has to be drawn beyond which the ideal of Tolerance should not be extended, and that Tolerance cannot be an absolute imperative allowing even systems that seek to destroy that same Tolerance, as in the phrase "The US Constitution is not a suicide pact". The question is -- where to draw that line?)

3) Whenever the West expresses intolerance for any thoughts & expressions of intolerance among non-Westerners, this should not be tolerated, and when it is resisted (even violently) by non-Westerners and their Western Leftist supporters, that is a good thing.

(Thus, in the little curlicue of the #3 torsion of logic, we see what is behind the Leftist idolization of Tolerance and demonization of Intolerance: it is not the values themselves they are standing firmly upon: behind those values is the real value beneath it all: a Manichean vision of the innocent, victimized Che Guevarist now also Jihadist "revolutionary" Third-Worlder fighting for an ideal Utopian justice against the intrinsically evil Americano-Zionist Capitalist Empire -- and against such a monumental evil against humanity, any method is legitimate. The Leftist, like the Muslim, draws the line separating the West from the Rest.)

Metaxy:

Your discourse on tolerance reminds me of a book A.S. Neille, the founder of the "free school" movement felt the need to write in response to the "free-for-all" schools that supposedly adopted his principle of the "self-regulated child", entitled, "Freedom, not License". His central theme was that freedom has its limits, that he had rooms with beat-up furniture in it for kids who wanted to rough-house, but when they were guests in his parlour, they were to behave accordingly, and if someone wanted to practice the trumpet all day long instead of working on math or whatever, that was fine so long as they did their trumpetting out of earshot of others.

So, just as freedom has its limits and responsibilities, so does tolerance, and living in a tolerant, free and open society.

Carolyn and Meta: thanks, peeps.

KT: you smell like poop.

And Allah knows that.

Imam Geoff