Thursday, 26 February 2015

A “target”?

It’s said that taking part in the war against IS barbarians will make New Zealanders a “target.”

Because, supposedly, people are only a “target” for Islamic barbarians if the barbarians are attacked by the people’s governments.


Then why was a Japanese journalist executed by Islamic State thugs, when Japanese armies hadn’t left their shores since 1945?

Why is Islamic State calling for their followers to launch attacks against famously neutral Switzerland?

Why were New Zealanders in Bali a target for Jemaah Islamiyah fully a year before New Zealanders joined the war in Iraq?

Why were Australians, a year before that same war?

Not to mention several thousand entirely innocent bus and train riders in London and Madrid and office workers in New York.

You can keep asking questions like that, but the truth is non-Islamic countries and non-aggressive non-Islamic folk are not targets because they’re going to war with Islamists. Because they’re not.  And because the truth is much, much simpler, which is this: Islamists are going to war with us because we are non-Islamist.

That’s it. That’s it right there.

Because that’s the real message of their “religion of peace” – a message evident from the history of Islam, from its birth to its Barbary Coast bandits and right up to its modern-day barbarians --  that “peace” in their eyes is only possible after all who don’t follow their prophet are subdued.

Understand that, and you’ll understand you’re already a target anyway.


  1. The term "Islamist" needs to be dropped. There is no such thing.

  2. Islamists are going to war with us because we are non-Islamist.

    That’s it. That’s it right there.

    I have said this before also.
    Here in New Zealand we are not at war with Islam - but Islam is at war with US!
    It is in the same respect as the quote: You may not be interested in politics - but politics is interested in you!

    New Zealand needs to start protection our way of life by stopping muslim immigration until such a time as muslim terrorism stops - which means never.

  3. "Islamists are going to war with us because we are non-Islamist"

    And yet we've been non-Islamist the whole time since Adam and the war kinda just kicked in following the recent decades of our initiating force on their turf.

  4. Devout Muslims are warring against us, not because we are non-Muslims, but because Muhammad taught them to war against us. As for the notion that it all started a few decades ago, it isn't true. Jihad against unbelievers has existed since Muhammad started it. The Crusades were a response to Jihad.

  5. Richard "As for the notion that it all started a few decades ago, it isn't true."

    You must admit a notable spike, say, since the time Rambo III was made?

    Where's your jihad in, say, the 1930s then? Where's President Lincoln vs The Muhammadans? Where's Blackadder and Queen Elizabeth uncovering an Arabian gunpowder plot with the help of Lord Flashheart? Where's Avicenna handing The West back their lost copy of Aristotle's works.....laced with anthrax?

  6. Jihad has always waxed and waned throughout the history of Islam. The Ummah is currently going through a position of strength, so it is on the march. PC mentions the Barbary pirates, which is pre-1930's. The last major jihad massacre was the Armenian genocide in 1915, also pre-1930's. The 400 years of jihad prior to the Church finally having had enough, and taking action with the Crusades, was also pre-1930's. After the break up of the Ottoman Empire the Muslim Brotherhood was established (1928), a Jihad organisation - pre-1930's. Its aim was, and still is, to reunite the Ummah under a Caliphate. It is from this jihad organisation that modern day groups like Al Qaeda were spawned. There is a tension between the more violent groups and the Brotherhood, over the speed that they'd like to establish the Caliphate. The Brotherhood are more surreptitious and covert, preferring a slow infiltration and change, or what is called the Stealth Jihad. Many of the more violently inclined jihadists though despise that, and want to hurry things up. IS fits fairly and squarely in this camp. Regardless which camp has the better tactics, and despite the tensions, they both work in unison towards the same goal. The dominance of Islam on the world.

    You mention Avicenna, which apologists for Islam often do to convince non-Muslims that Islam is okay. But Avicenna, to the extent that he was an independent thinker, was contrary to Islam. In times when Islam is on the march, Avicenna would be put to death as an apostate. That is the requirements of Muhammad himself. There is no room for independent thought in Islam. Human activity is either halal, or haram, in accordance with the Qur'an, Hadith and Sunnah.

    That you, a supposed freedom lover, is constantly making excuses for a totalitarian system, is testament to how well you've been indoctrinated with PC nonsense. As I think I've said to you before... you are the perfect example of why we are losing.

  7. To dissent isn't "to make excuses" for the object of your fear. Nor is being skeptical of your claims to be "indoctrinated with PC nonsense." Insults and attacks like this are supposed to do what? Change my mind? Appeal to reason and evidence? You reckon "we are losing" because of a lack of understanding which you can offer and the course of action that suggests to you is ramming it down unbeliever's throats? This is the Taliban of debating styles.

    "Jihad has always waxed and waned throughout the history of Islam"

    **Slaughter and conquering** has always waxed and waned throughout the history of **humans** while only the excuses and pretenses endlessly change. Jihad is a little drop in a vast bloody race-spanning ocean. You haven't discovered or accepted some exceptional pattern of human brutality, you've found the rule and mistakenly attributed it all to one towel-head and his book. At best, one broken culture scapegoated by you for all the other broken cultures into which you pour all your fear and loathing.

    Extraordinary claim, to say these twits represent anything different to what every other race has done or still is. You haven't accomplished that by answering me that Turks were homicidal in 1915. Who on Earth wasn't at that time, or others?

    You say they hate us because we're free? I say, "heck they must have really went us for Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, and The Industrial Revolution!" Then it becomes they do war on us because we are non-Islamist so I say, "weren't we always?" And you come back with, "Well, it waxes and wanes..."

    What else you got?

  8. I didn't say they are doing it because we are free. I said they are doing it because that is what Islam has taught them to be. The jihad is not a problem with Islam, you say. It's a problem with humaness. That only confirms for me that your head is full of moral equivalency PC mush. Gregster has it right when he calls you the maggot champion.


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.