A key Islamic supremacist mantra is "Islam will dominate" (see pictures here, here and here), and therefore the analysis by Steen Raaschou, editor of snaphanen.dk, is very precise. Translated from Snaphanen.dk, February 1, 2012: "A new term: Dominance crime":
The perpetrators take the victim's cell phone or a little cash, but many of these robberies are completely ridiculous when considered as property crimes. The victims are often beaten, in spite of their willingness to give their belongings to the robber. These robberies are actually harassment. There are also no traditional explanations for the many cases of stone-throwings against cars from bridges, 'meaningless' violence, vandalism and arson or the attacks on fire service and police.We must understand the phenomena properly: this kind of crime is mainly designed to establish or demonstrate superiority. And it is stemming from a culture whose primary concept of 'power' is identical with 'violence,' and whose only hope of being able to dominate in the West is to use violence. It's guerrilla warfare.
Part of the problem is that the phenomenon has not had a name, and therefore I propose that all these types of crimes, whose main purpose is other than the superficial (robbery, arson, violence), must be called: dominance crime.
In psychology the extreme need to dominate is called sadism.
Sadism is not merely a need to hurt. It is an abnormal need to dominate. The pain, verbal abuse and imposed restrictions are merely methods used to achieve the feeling of dominance.
We are all aware of it as a sexual dysfunction but it is also a personality disorder known as Sadistic Personality Disorder or SPD.
SPD is a need to dominate others. Key to that is for the dominated to know and aknowledge that they are dominated. Does that sound familiar? You bet your burka it does.
Psychologists and anthropologists have known for some time that it is possible, thru natural selection, for cultures to have different amounts of incedence of specific disorders. Extreme examples of this phenomena have been documented in populations that are georgraphically remote from others.
What happens is this. A culture values a trait. Those with that trait, thru natural (or unatural) selection have a higher chance of having offspring. As a result more people with that trait appear in the population and the expressions of that trait become stronger and stonger. The most extreme expressions of the trait are forms of insanity.
Of course it's not just biology. An individual interacts with their culture. But if that culture is geared towards extreme shows of dominance, because its been created by people who have a predisposition for displaying and valuing dominance, we see an echo chamber effect, with psychology/biology creating the culture and culture having an effect upon psychology/biology of the individual.
Did that make ANY sense? It sure wasn't easy to write.
A culture that engages in polygamy, where the most dominant men get most of the mates and less dominant men get mostly none, would exacerbate the increase in a population of those who have stronger and stronger predispositions to have a deep rooted pscychological need to show dominance.
Schizophrenia, autism and retardation are not neccessarily included in that theory as they can have other causes than just "natural" selection.
This is not the same as the "bell curve" nonsense. It is also not saying that humans are incapable of making rational decisions about their behavior. We do so thousands of times a day.
It is also not saying that only one people in the world experience this particular disorder. Mental disorders are merely extreme expressions ofthings we all have within us.
However it does appear to me that there is a direct relationship between islam, the culture developed under islam, and finally the results of polygamy and an increase in more numerous and more extreme expressions of sadism.
I remember going down an escalator. At the bottom stood a half-circle of Arab/Turkish young men, staring down everyone and trying to catch our eye. Off to one side stood a group of their (Danish) hanged-dog sad-looking girlfriends.
I looked straight down, I can tell you! Taking good care not to show any disrespect in passing as they moved slightly aside.
Guerilla warfare. .carried out by those with the mentality of baboons.
Well, that surely was a good theory of why some (or all) have a predisposition for "dominance" crimes. But if I may, let me give you a street definition. A cop for over 16 yrs. I've seen a lot of crime. If your theory is true, we should see these crimes spread evenly over all societies. But we don't. We see these crimes more predominately in Islamic societies. It's because of the sin nature, which Islam denies exists in the offspring they bring into the world. Their is a more simple reason. The doctrine of Islam which teaches that anyone that isn't a Muslim is of a lower class than they are. It is the manifestation of pride and "bullying". Islam appeals to bullies. Combine that with the teachings of the Koran and the Hadith and you produce a bully. They like it, it gives the a feeling of superiority and taken to the extreme results in crimes against persons. The persons who aren't Muslim's. Instead of condemning this behavior they praise it. You produce what you praise. Islam will destroy all people and cultures that submit. It's sin, and they like it, especially when you call it by another name.
61:9 "...that He (Muhammad) may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse" + 48:28 "...to proclaim it over all religion" + 9:33 "...prevail over all religions" 8:39 + 2:193 "...and religion should be only for Allah" + 3:189 "And Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth...."
ISLAM WILL CONQUER & DOMINATE THE WORLD
http://schnellmann.org/what-is-stealth-jihad.html
A few more points.
Mr. Raaschou is not coming out of left field. It is already known that the need to experience dominance over another is a (if not THE) motivating factor for rape.
Also Sadistic behavior includes manipulative behavior, forcing others to do things. So crimes involving this could also be considered dominance crimes.
And a third point. But it's a fairly large point.
Dominance crime is as old as any crime and like other forms of crime, murder, theft, adultery (ya ya I know that's not a crime) has it's roots in documented and very common primate behavior.
Primates are always engaging in behavior to express dominance that we would be consider to be completely illegal.
In Sicily they say "cumannari è megghiu ca futtiri" meaning "giving orders is better that f*cking".
Robert, in one of your post you have already highlighted how the protection granted by Muslims to non-Muslims is comparable with protection money of the Mafia.
These dominance crimes are the first step before requesting protection money.
Good term. I suggest it's political precursor is "INTIMIDATIONISM", meaning the act of demanding a change via a generalize threat of violence if it is not granted.
For example, when CAIR protests against a group or individual for telling the truth about Islam, it is doing so via intimidationism. It's not interested in civil debate, it only knows thuggery. Intimidationism in Islam is its pre-violence tactic for dominance and the political undergirding for small and large dominance crimes, ranging from muggings and rapes of non-Muslims, to 9/11 and beyond.
When will the political world recognize the scorched earth eradication of non-Muslims by Muslims practicing theological fascism? Shame on non-Muslims who visit Dubai and ignore its barbaric rules against "apostasy" and non-Muslims. Shame on the US Generals who support the Islamic supremacist constitutions they helped put in place in Iraq and Afghanistan. You did the enemies work.
These myriad examples of street crime with the aim of bringing pressure to bear on society are the actions of a bully. And the way to treat a bully is to show him you're not going to be bossed; in fact, he's going to be on the receiving end of defensive measures to stop his bullying.
Of course, Muslims carrying out Al Qur'an's mandate to take over societies and subjugate them will cry 'victim', but that shouldn't deter us from hitting them as hard, or harder in response to their attacks on us non-Muslims.
Don't like the idea? Then ask yourself what happened to societies that did not resist Islam just after its appearance. Do you want that fate for yourself and your children?
Good term. I suggest it's political precursor is "INTIMIDATIONISM", meaning the act of demanding a change via a generalize threat of violence if it is not granted.
For example, when CAIR protests against a group or individual for telling the truth about Islam, it is doing so via intimidationism. It's not interested in civil debate, it only knows thuggery. Intimidationism in Islam is its pre-violence tactic for dominance and the political undergirding for small and large dominance crimes, ranging from muggings and rapes of non-Muslims, to 9/11 and beyond.
When will the political world recognize the scorched earth eradication of non-Muslims by Muslims practicing theological fascism? Shame on non-Muslims who visit Dubai and ignore its barbaric rules against "apostasy" and non-Muslims. Shame on the US Generals who support the Islamic supremacist constitutions they helped put in place in Iraq and Afghanistan. You did the enemy's work.
Good idea, but as with the concept of hate crime the position of our spineless leaders and complicit media will be that only non-Muslims are capable of committing dominance crimes.
That third point is the key.
This is a behavioural trait that is primal in origin. Us human apes have taken the practice of dominance and intimidation to new and ever more sophisticated levels, regardless of culture or ethnicity. The propensity for envy and avarice are motivational factors not seen in the animal kingdom.
"we see these crimes more predominately in islamic societies" Well, i ask you where you racked-up your sixteen years of crime-fighting? Tehran? Marseilles? London? NYC? Figures/stats please.
To say that muslims commit more of these types of crime, at least here in the west, is a misonomer and attempting to back up this claim by quoting verses from the koran, or attributing it to a culture that is "geared towards extreme shows of dominance" is tunnel-vision.
This type of crime has no cultural boundries, it is what it is, illegal means of materialistic acquirement, its had a name in legal terms for a very long time, long before the influx of muslims, et al- robbery, with violence and its main construct is not "designed to establish or demonstrate superiority" nor is it "guerilla warfare". To say so is a conflation of staggering implausibility and utterly naive.
If this were the case, i could claim that the catholic church, thus all catholics, are responsible for the horrendous sexual-abuse of children and that dirty old vicars and priests everywhere use this as a nasty power-move to establish or demonstrate their superiority, backed-up by their superiors!
Whilst i'm no apologist for islam and its fundamental adherents, this kind of propoganda is a very long shot at demonisation and finger-pointing.
Come on Nicolai, you'll have to do better than this.
"Clown" warning, i guess.
Some say this term would quickly be used against non-Muslims. I say not if it is framed from its conception to apply to Islamic supremacism, as the term "hate crime" was crafted by the race industry to apply only to "white people".
Others say our legal systems are too crude to apply thoughtful analysis and this term would quickly degenerate into a catch-all term to abuse the system. I say our courts are not that crude and apply finely-honed argument daily on all manner of cases.
Don't feed the trolls. Tindrum has cast a wide net so as to maximize it's chance to derail discussion.
This page is about behavior that is sadistic in intent. According to forensic pscyhology, manipulation is a sadistic abnormally domineering behvior. Thanks for the concrete example tindrum.
In the institution, it is not a diagnosis that is dealt with, it is behavior...Those with a domineering attitude do what they are told or we have a private locked room with straps on the bed...In the institution, everyone is manipulating every one else...The staff is supposed to manipulate the patient...You seem to know about diagnosis, but have you ever worked in a mental institution? If not you can get similar experience if you visit a mosque...
Tindrum. .have you got the guts to touch on religion, rather than your safe-ground of 'culture and ethnicity' ?. .sheesh, educated as you are, I can't help but detect the likes of a. .of a Clive Stafford Smith in your argument.
I'll put in my two cents. It is Final Solutionism Crime (FSC) which seeks to create a worldwide caliphate.
No I have never worked in an institution. My hypothese were a synthesis of - oh, iswydt.
OT
I like its ring, Islam's Final Solution. That might make people sit up and listen.
Another term that might apply to the situation is territoriality: the establishment of an area controlled by a particular group rather than by the general government. We see this in the creation of Moslem enclaves all over Europe. Some features of this process are done "legally" and "peacefully", such as sending Moslem children to Moslem schools, and the petitions for Moslem-only days at public pools and for special arrangements -- prayer-rooms or prayer-breaks for example -- for Moslems in the work-place, at hospitals, at airports, etc. Other features are pursued criminally: the intimidation of non-Moslem residents and shop-keepers in the area via vandalism, arson, robbery, rape, etc.; and the harassment of the police and firefighters.
Once the Moslem enclave has been established, it can be used as a secure base for further enlargement.
It can also be viewed as a strictly materialist strategy: by these types of harassment, property values in the area can be driven down, and Moslems can snap up houses and shops at bargain prices.
LJ....
Don't get me started on religion. It's all supernaturalism as far as i'm concerned and is what plagues humanity. Here on JW, christian-fundamentalists show their true colours and indulge themselves in the christianity v islam argument; the old, 'my god's better than your god' scenario. Like two bald men fighting over a comb. The gloves come off but the blinkers go on. The seething Atheophobia of the christian right is tiresome and unproductive. As bad as the islamo-fascists we all recognise.
I took exception to this article because i viewed it as a piece of badly-executed propoganda that has no basis in the real world. I don't considerate it to have any merit whatsoever and wonder how the moderators even thought fit to publish such a transparently-obvious, barely-disguised, hate-filled-tract, of nonsense. But there you go....
Too often here on JW, ALL muslims come under an umbrella of hate and, objectively, the problem of jihad and islamic-supremacism is not consigned to ALL muslims; as Robert himself might say, it's islam, the koran and its interpretation that is the problem. Fighting hate with hate will get us nowhere and the above article does little other than perpetuate this standard.
There is too much of this hate-filled rhetoric on JW. My intuition is that new visitors to this site will be put off by the negative invective used and balanced discussion will eventually become impossible because the only people left commenting will be rednecks in their virtual foxholes.
My guess is you know nothing about forensic psychology, except that which you glean from the Dicovery channel or somesuch. And what you you're trying to state is more related to forensic PATH-ology.
Who's attempting to domineer here? Not i. Did you read something you didn't agree with? So you're reduced to aspersion and name-calling. This just CONCRETES my argument and the case for troll-ism, as per your interpretation.
I know a crock when see it and a crank when i hear him/her.
Do you honestly believe that islam and muslims are a powerful enough force to take on the west and subjugate it, once and for all?
It's an insult to the integrity of western nations to suggest that this may be possible. Islamic countries by their nature have neither the resources nor the strength to challenge all that the west holds dear; granted, some of them would like to think so but that's all it is, a pipe-dream. Centuries ago, this may've been a possibility but not now, not ever. It is an insult to the "blood and treasure" expended to suggest that islamic domination of the west could ever be a reality. Our convictions are too great to allow this scenario.
Outright war, militarily, with islam would be a turkey-shoot and western governments know this, hence the reticence of western nations to take up the sword. And this "jihad by stealth" theory is also a no-brainer because western-democracies are too entrenched in societal-freedom to give it up. Any 'infiltration' of free-society could only go so far and that rubicon is about to be crossed with the growing awareness of the 'free' people of this planet.
The last time an ideology attempted world-domination it was reduced to ashes by allied democratic force on a scale never seen before. Once again, western nations know this and appeasement has to be fully-exhausted before military action. Western governments would not wish to be responsible for another holocaust, historically. But i guess if they had to, they would. Or do you really know something they don't?
The paranoia and hyperbole surrounding this so-called global-threat seems to know no bounds and is almost laughable if it weren't so tragic that intelligent, free-thinking people could consider islam to be something it is not.
Islam will never, ever be able to dominate. This is the reality.
"Do you honestly believe that islam and muslims are a powerful enough force to take on the west and subjugate it, once and for all?"
Whether they can "subjugate it (the West) once and for all" remains to be seen. But, the STATED goal of islam is to subjugate the entire planet. Why should I not honestly believe them? And, I honestly believe they have over a billion people under their banner, and that islam is inherently violent and aggressive. And I'm sure that there are millions of muslims in Western countries today.
Then, considering their proclivity to multiply...
"The last time an ideology attempted world-domination it was reduced to ashes by allied democratic force on a scale never seen before."
And, do you recall what it took then to turn back that attempt? Row upon row of soldiers' graves bear testimony to the price paid. It should also be noted that at that time, we did not invite millions of our enemies into our countries to form fifth-columns, undermine our institutions and erode our freedoms and customs, let alone violently attack us from within.
"The paranoia and hyperbole surrounding this so-called global-threat seems to know no bounds and is almost laughable if it weren't so tragic..."
How many of those 3000 people murdered on 9/11 would have agreed with that statement on just the day before? I would suggest that just because we're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get us.
"Islam will never, ever be able to dominate. This is the reality."
Go tell that to ummah! You think that'll make them stop trying?
So, your message seems to be, "Don't take it seriously." Sorry, but I take it damned seriously, with no apologies to those who cry
"fool." Arrogance ("It can't happen here") and self-satisfaction ("It can't happen because we're too good") aren't going to cut it against the avowed enemies of Western civilization...
In Britain 'Dominance Crimes' are known as 'Street Jihad', and often involve extreme brutality by packs of feral Muslims against vulnerable kuffars: http://crombouke.blogspot.com/2010/01/muslim-street-jihad.html
Maybe call it:
Dome of the Rock Syndrome (DRS)
@ tindrum
Listen up! Islam is a military ideology dressed up as a religion. Being so, its 'soldiers' operate as though they are at war when they live in Dar al-Harb. That means putting pressure on the 'enemy' in any way they like; rape, robbery, intimidation, or through exploiting the host country's legal framework, and so on.
In the end, the birth rate of these 'soldiers' and their families will mean that they will exert a social/political force disproportionate to their number.
It's already happening.
As for how they take over a free society, you could educate yourself with a viewing of the following video. The most important 24 minutes of your dodo-like, naive life!
Three stages of Jihad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERou_Q5l9Gw
George, have you been reading my mind again? ; - )
I wonder if Islamic attacks on iconic symbols of kuffar civilizations, such as the Buddhas of Bamiyan and the Twin Towers, also count as dominance crimes over and above the usual Muslim need to kill kuffars?
CGW, I think a real mind-reader would tell us that our minds are pretty closely aligned on this. So, we really are paranoid "rednecks" and fools or the "Tindrums" of the world are deaf, dumb and blind. I'm betting it's the latter. And, I'm betting you are, too!
There is only one way to deal with a bully. Strike fast at a vulnerable area. Follow up until your opponents are on the ground..
Steen Raaschou is onto something.
Awhile ago, I came across the phrase 'din-e-ghalib', that is, 'the religion (or, perhaps, more properly, SYSTEM) of dominance'.
I believe it was coined by a Muslim, to describe Islam. I carefully wrote it down - in the flyleaf of my copy of Spencer's "The Myth of Islamic Tolerance" but I did not, alas, at that time, write down the reference.
It occurs in ex-Muslim Anwar Sheikh's essay for FaithFreedom, here:
"Since Islam is the Din-e-Ghalib i.e. the religion of dominance by God's will, Muslim minorities in non-lslamic countries do everything possible to harass, humiliate and harangue the host countries to practise their faith and culture..."
but he doesn't say which Islamic source or author coined it.
If someone else here knows the original source of that phrase and can provide author, chapter and verse, i would be grateful, and it would be useful also for others who read here.
Sorry, I omitted the link for Anwar Sheikh's little essay.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/AnwarSheikh/islamic_morality.htm
Way back in the early 19th century, other astute observers had also noticed the role played by raw power, or Will, in the 'theology' of Islam.
Here are some interesting excerpts from scholars consulted by the 19th century American abolitionist clergyman, James Freeman Clarke, when he was doing his homework on Islam. He wrote a book called 'Ten Great Religions' - the 11th chapter is called "Mohammed and Islam", and it is a scorcher. (It may be 'great' in terms of numbers and size of territory controlled, but I do not think that Mr Clarke - enemy of slavery - thought that Mohammedanism was 'great' in other sense). If you google about, you will find Mr Clarke's book online, in its entirety, thanks to the busy bees of 'Project Gutenberg'.
Anyway, here is part of what his 19th century readers learned about Islam when they read it.
From section 5, 'religious doctrines and practices among the Mohammedans':
"Two recent travellers, Mr. Palgrave and Mr. Vambéry, have described the present state of Mohammedanism in Central Arabia and Turkistan, or Central Asia.
"Barth has described it as existing among the negroes in North Africa.
"Count Gobineau has told us of Islam as it is in Persia at the present day.
"Mr. MacFarlane, in his book "Kismet, or the Doom of Turkey," has pointed out the gradual decay of that power, and the utter corruption of its administration.
"After reading such works as these,—and among them let us not forget Mr. Lane's "Modern Egyptians,"—the conclusion we must inevitably come to is, that the worst Christian government, be it that of the Pope or the Czar, is very much better than the best Mohammedan government.
**'Everywhere we find arbitrary will taking the place of law.** {my emphasis - dda}
“In most places the people have no protection for life or property, and know the government only through its tax-gatherers.
**“And all this is necessarily and logically derived from the fundamental principle of Mohammedan theology. God is pure will, not justice, not reason, not love.** {my emphasis - dda}.
'Christianity says, "God is love"; Mohammedanism says, "God is will.
" Christianity says, "Trust in God"; Mohammedanism says, "Submit to God."
'Hence the hardness, coldness, and cruelty of the system; hence its utter inability to establish any good government.
'According to Mr. MacFarlane, it would be a blessing to mankind to have the Turks driven out of Europe and Asia Minor, and to have Constantinople become the capital of Russia
.
'The religion of Islam is an outward form, a hard shell of authority, hollow at heart. It constantly tends to the two antagonistic but related vices of luxury and cruelty..."
And there is more, in section 6 .
'Mr. Palgrave, who has given the latest and best account of the condition of Central and Southern Arabia, under the great Wahhabee revival, sums up all Mohammedan theology as teaching a Divine unity of pure will.
'God is the only force in the universe. Man is wholly passive and impotent.
**'He calls the system, "A pantheism of force."
'God has no rule but arbitrary will.** {my emphasis - dda}.
'He is a tremendous unsympathizing autocrat, but is yet jealous of his creatures, lest they should attribute to themselves something which belongs to him.
'He delights in making all creatures feel that they are his slaves.
'This, Mr. Palgrave asserts, is the main idea of Mohammedanism, and of the Koran, and this was what lay in the mind of Mohammed.
"Of this," says he, "we have many authentic samples: the Saheeh [that is, the Sahih Hadith, such as Bukhari, Muslim, and Ibn Dawud - dda], the Commentaries of Beydāwee, the Mishkat-el-Mesabeeh, and fifty similar works, afford ample testimony on this point.
'But for the benefit of my readers in general, all of whom may not have drunk equally deep at the fountain-heads of Islamitic dogma, I will subjoin a specimen, known perhaps to many Orientalists, yet too characteristic to be here omitted, a repetition of which I have endured times out of number from admiring and approving Wahhabees in Nejed.
'"Accordingly, when God—so runs the tradition,—I had better said the blasphemy—resolved to create the human race, he took into his hands a mass of earth, the same whence all mankind were to be formed, and in which they after a manner pre-existed; and, having then divided the clod into two equal portions, he threw the one half into hell, saying, 'These to eternal fire, and I care not'; and projected the other half into heaven, adding, 'And these to paradise, and I care not.'...
""The Wahhabee reformer," continues Mr. Palgrave, "formed the design of putting back the hour-hand of Islam to its starting-point; and so far he did well, for that hand was from the first meant to be fixed. Islam is in its essence stationary, and was framed thus to remain.
"Sterile like its God, lifeless like its First Principle and Supreme Original, in all that constitutes true life,—for life is love, participation, and progress, and of these the Koranic Deity has none,—it justly repudiates all change, all advance, all development.
"To borrow the forcible words of Lord Houghton, the 'written book' is the 'dead man's hand,' stiff and motionless; whatever savors of vitality is by that alone convicted of heresy and defection...
And finally, in section 7, Mr Clarke observes:
"The merits and demerits, the good and evil, of Mohammedanism are to be found in this, its central idea concerning God.
" It has taught submission, obedience, patience; but it has fostered a wilful individualism.
" It has made social life lower. Its governments are not governments.
" Its virtues are stoical.
" It makes life barren and empty. It encourages a savage pride and cruelty. It makes men tyrants or slaves, women puppets, religion the submission to an infinite despotism."
I think the key insight is in that line from Palgrave, defining Islam as "A pantheism of force."
When Rowling had Quirrell recite, in the end of the first Harry Potter book, the creed he had learned from Voldemort - "There is neither good nor evil, there is only Power, and those too weak to seek it" - she did not know that she was providing us with a pretty good summary of the central animating principle of Islam: the adoration (and the pursuit) of raw amoral Power.
The irony is that by their supposed 'surrender' to 'allah', each male Mohammedan (and any Mohammedan vis a vis a non-Mohammedan) becomes a little tin allah, or perhaps a conduit of that amoral 'will of allah', free to exercise Power without restraint, as opportunity presents, toward any Designated Prey item.
In Islam, bullying behaviour is encouraged, codified and sacralised.
For example, from the canonical hadith collection, the Sahih Muslim:
It was also reported that it is forbidden to say salaam to Jews and Christians, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“Do not initiate the greeting of salaam to a Jew or Christian, **and if you meet them in the street, push them to the narrowest part of the road.”** {my emphasis - dda} (Narrated by Muslim, 2167).
More on Islam as a religion for bullies. A poster at jihadwatch, some years ago, sharing his personal experience and observations.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/muhammads-birthday-celebrated-in-german-protestant-church.html
hello123 | May 25, 2006 9:34 PM
The hard truth is that Islam is a bully ideology.
Similar to Naziism or Soviet Communism.
**When I have trained with Muslim Armies and lived around Muslim societies I have observed the bully mentality:** {my emphasis - dda}
'Any peceived weakness is despised.
'The "stronger" are expected to prey on the "weaker" (whether physical handicap, female, minority, etc.).
'If the "stronger" show mercy to the "weaker" they are perceived as weak.
'Insecure, truly weak men rise to the top by crossing all moral boundaries.
'**Islam allows men to cross all moral/ethical boundaries. In fact, it encourages this.** {my emphasis - dda; and this is what differentiates Islam from Judaism, from Christianity, from Buddhism and Hinduism - dda}.
'Despite the bully culture, Muslim males are generally some of the most cowardly men in the world.
'Muslims make awful soldiers because they are generally undisciplined and weak.
'The officers always expect special treatment and will not lead from the front. I don't know how many Saudi officers I have been around that expected others to carry their rucksack.
'I trained with the Israelis for about 6 months: The secret of Israel's success lies in the incompetence/weakness of conventional Arab, Muslim Armies. The IDF is not that good, but it's enemies really are that bad. Muslims just cannot fight.
'Suicide-Murder and throat-slitting (of unarmed POWs) are the most cowardly/weak actions a man can commit. They require absolutely no military skills and can be committed by pregnant women. In fact, many suicide-murderers are now men dressed as women. These operations require no risk of life or man-to-man combat. We don't praise those who commit suicide in the West, they are cowards.
'Muslim men driven toward these operations are usually small in stature, and have deep insecurity complexes. They are weak and cowardly. Committing suicide-murder is their one way to gain some perceived self-respect. They have no real reason to live, as they are usually losers in civilian life.
'Despite all this, many Westerners are terrified of the dreaded "Jihadists". They cower over the risk of offending Islam.
'This fear and respect shown to the weak Islamist bullies helps drive more bullying.
'These insecure, loser men are emboldened by every show of fear by the West.
'Giving in, by appeasing Islam, is the exact wrong action to take in the face of this threat.
'What we require is ruthless strength against weak, insecure men.
'When they are faced with opponents who show backbone and courage, they will fall apart.
'They will then prey on the next "weaker", which will be in their own Muslim society.
'We must start making fun of these cowardly losers. We, as a Western culture, must start making fun of Mohammed (9 year old sex partner, kept man, baby, etc. etc. This must be proclaimed throughout the world). We, as a Western culture, must boldly point out the ridiculous fallacies in the Koran and Hadiths: [he then gives a string of examples of these 'howlers' - dda] Jesus wasn't crucified despite all the secular historic documentation. The Jewish temple didn't exist despite all hard archeology and history. Mary was the sister of Moses, despite over 1000 years of separation. Gospels and Hebrew scripture are "true" and yet the Koran (written 600 years after the last New Testament writings) screws up everything.
'Islam is a friggin joke, and the Islamists are cowardly and insecure men. If those in the West would be bold, Islam would recede under the rock it came from.
'So what if they blow up a few more trains or buildings. We all have to die sometime. Wouldn't it be best to live and die brave and free?????? Actually, by showing courage far fewer of us would die.
Random thoughts."
Mr Sennels might like to translate that comment by 'hello123', from 2006, into Danish and circulate it more widely.
My suspicion is that if Israel and/ or the USA manages to turn Iran's nuke project, or the support structures for wsame, into a series of enormous smoking holes in the ground - and simply DOES IT, out of the blue, devastatingly and completely, and then says NOTHING afterward by way of explanations or apologies - the jihadists - including even the street jihadists and petty builies - will pull in their horns for a bit.
I have been reading your comments for a very long time. I am awed and humbled at the extent of your knowledge of islam.
Hats off to you.
Have you considered giving talks on islam like Elisabeth Sabbasitz-wolfe (not sure of the spelling, but you know who I mean).
You could spread this knowledge around because a lot of good folks in the west do not realise the harm that can be done to their society and way of life by islam.
They dismiss the threat of islam and think it is a harmless religion.
If ever this group is made aware of the huge threat that islam poses, the war with islam would be won.
Think about it.
Tin Drum, have you ever spent any time in The dar al Islam? Or in Trenton/Camden, NJ? Compton, CA? If so you would realize dominance crimes are practiced everyday in these towns. Films like Gran Torino aren't fantasies- dominance crime is a simple fact of life. Heck, come up here to the North woods and start spouting Globalist or government worship doctrines and see how fast you're dominated, LOL! Your 1st amendment rights stop at my property line.
I second that.