Tuesday, 26 September 2006

"Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards."

A question for you: Who said this?
We are living in dangerous and potentially cataclysmic times. There will be no significant material and economic progress [in Muslim communities] until the Muslim mind is allowed to challenge the status quo of Muslim conventions and even their most cherished shibboleths. Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilisation whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.
Answer here, at Crusader Rabbit. I'm sure you'll be as surprised as I was.

LINKS: "....The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism" - Crusader Rabbit

RELATED: Religion, War, Politics-World


  1. Good Lord (Carey)! I always thought he was your typically painful wishy-washy Anglican.

    Just goes to show that common sense does, sometimes, prevail.

  2. Like you (sometimes), I have consistantly stated that I think all religionists are nutters - Christians, Jews, Muslims, whatever.

    But unlike you - my contempt of religion doesn't turn into racism.

    Like many, this blog is basically a museum for every anti-Muslim stereotype and caricature that exists. Each day, one can read about how primitive, violent, deceitful and generally horrible Muslims are.

  3. Well what do you actually suggest, PC?!

    Do you think we should wipe out Muslims wherever we find them? Because frankly that seems to be the mindset that Crusader Rabbit (whoever the hell they are) is edging towards.

    It's one thing to say the West should defend itself (and it should). It's another thing entirely to essentially call for total war on an entire religion.

  4. We all usually pretend that this is about geopolitical strategies and complex tactics --but for huge numbers, it is about a simple desire to destroy what they consider evil - Muslims. That's reality.

    I don't think PC is, at heart, a small, angry, petty man filled with enormous amounts of hatred. But he mixes with those who are. And you are judged by those you associate with.

  5. Michael Fasher26 Sep 2006, 20:20:00

    Spot on Islam is is evil to the core and its demise cant come soon enough,that day will come when individuals wake up one morning thinking Ï cant belive that shit my parents tried to feed me".But untill then it remains a mortal threat to the west.
    A comparisontomake that might offend some peaple is with the death worshiping shinto relion of Japan wich had its own suicide bombers who were aguably more militarily effective than the islamic variety and were laid low by conventional and nuclear weapons then stripped of state sponseship and sanktion
    Another example was the celtic druids who had particularly barbaric practice of human sacrefice and were targeted by the Romans.
    In any war with Americas self declared islamic enemies jehadist muslim imans should be targeted first in their mosques and homes.In order to keep American casualties to zero unconditional surrender should be demanded.If this is not forthcoming conventional strikes on urban targets primarily relious and political leaders but selected rural targets such as military,nuclear or terrorist training camps shouldbe subjected to nuclear strike to demonstrate the willingness to use nuclear weapons..Each falure to surrender after a desegnated time would notch up the nuclear strikeshitting targets with less concern for civilian casualties.
    Once surrender is acheived the top relious and political leaders in these police states would be given the same treatment as nazis and japans war leaders which would mean some would be heading for the firing squad.
    Like Japan and Germany in WW 2 it would be assumed that the civilians were willing co conspiritors with these tyrants and not poor oppresed victims and they would be ruled by a military leader while a "denazification"process took place and all state sanctioning and funding of islam and any islamic laws are repealed.
    If there is to be a public education system the curriculum would be heavy on science such as evolutionary biology and astronomy/cosmology/astrophysics although i prefer private education.
    Sudan and Iran first
    then Saudi Arabia and Syria.
    And given that north sudan has particularly brutal lately and were linked to a terror cell in new york in the ninetiesthey would get the roughest treatment and how many times does Iran get tohave a "death to america day"(no kidding)
    No doubt some you fucking soft cocks have a problem with that but the öld school aprouch should do the trick

  6. So PC, what do you think of Michael's solution?

  7. michael fasher26 Sep 2006, 22:03:00

    Ëxtremism in the defence of liberty is no vice moderation in the pusuit of justice no virtue.
    Barry Goldwater

  8. Your'e not fooling anyone.

  9. Do you appeasers not think that Islam is an approaching darkness that threatens everything we hold dear?

  10. michael fasher27 Sep 2006, 20:01:00

    A Comparison between the great Barry Goldwater and the snivilling Lyndon Bird Johnson is in order.
    Barry Goldwater wanted to use nuclear weapons against north vietnam which would be entirely just whereas LBJ disgustingly called a bombing halt.We now know in hindsight that 3 million peaple in cambodia and vietnam would be killed by the communists vindicating Goldwaters view that the communists shouid have been wiped out.In one responce tosomebody complaining that he was to extreme he said he cared more for one american soldier than hanoi,now theres a great politition!!

  11. michael fasher27 Sep 2006, 20:17:00

    self sacrefice by the way is no damm virtue ,to expose troops to danger when an enemy can be subdued by use of any weapon is immoral self sacrefice.The message to every totalitarian islamist state that the life liberty and the pusuit of happynese protected for EVER american citizen and serviceman and woman and that any threat will be taken seriously.
    General Patton had a great qoutation"the purpose of war isnot todie for your country but to make the other guy die for his",hire the movie

  12. "Do you think we should wipe out Muslims wherever we find them? Because frankly that seems to be the mindset that Crusader Rabbit (whoever the hell they are) is edging towards."

    Well, blah, if you are able to read that into what I write, it says far more about your mental processes (or lack of them) than it does about me.
    I advocate the destruction of radical islam, no more, no less. And in self-defence. If the jihadists were to cease their bombinmgs, hangings, mutilations and stonings tomorrow, I'd be perfectly prepared to live alongside them in peace.
    That simple enough, clear enough and unequivocal enough for you?

  13. "But unlike you - my contempt of religion doesn't turn into racism."

    Islam is not a race. It's either a religion or in the case of radical Islam, an ideology.

  14. You know, if the adherents of radical Islam only numbered a few thousand or so I think there would be consensus on what the best approach would be and that would be round ‘em all up. Yet because they number in the millions things are different. Of course vast numbers of them makes capitulation an attractive option to some.

  15. The trouble is that so many people think that the types of society that exist where Islam is dominent could never happen in the West. I have yet to find a single lefty or wishy washy appeaser who has said that they would like to live in Iran, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (out of a Western compound that is). How lefties can support rights for women and tolerance, and at the same time support an ideology that subjugates women, minorities and other beliefs is beyond - well - belief. It would be like saying that you hated Nazism but at least they made the trains run on time which makes it all OK.

  16. BS: on why lefties support women's rights in the west while sympathetic to regimes hostile to women elsewhere, etc.

    Simple, Brian. The age-old strategy of my enemy's (USA) enemy being my friend.

    They just can't bear to be seen to be supporting the US.

    I'm always reminded of Churchill's definition of an appeaser/apologist: 'someone who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last'.

  17. blah said...
    [So PC, what do you think of Michael's solution?]

    Michael's solution is too extreme, however, I would support such situation if US has been declared war on by a Muslim country.

    I don't like Muslim attitudes of trying to dominate the world. I support of what the US is currently doing, and that is to confront them any where they are trying to spread terrorism against the West.

  18. The problem is Islamic terrorism but longer term the general creeping of Islamic influence in Western countries.

    Germany has just cancelled a play due to muslim sensibilities and a french teacher has just gone into hiding for criticizing Islam.

    Add these to the long list of problems with Islam in the west and in general and its clear there's more trouble ahead.

    Parts of England will be under Sharia law within a few decades.

    It's amazing how far some people will go to try and deny what's before their eyes.

    Criticizing any culture, belief or custom apart from Western and Christianity is anathema to many.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.