See other Editorial Articles
Title: What Do Muslims Want?
Source:
National Review
URL Source: http://article.nationalreview.com/? ... hlYzEwYzkwYzc3YTQ2OWQxMjJhMTE=
Published: Apr 9, 2007
Author: Raymond Ibrahim
Post Date: 2007-04-10 03:29:47 by mirage
Keywords: None
Views: 981
Comments: 82
All humans generally live according to some set of priorities. A person may make a priority of health, of pleasure, of study, of almost anything, really. But it is practically a law of nature that a person must make a priority of something. Even those who lead unstructured existences unconsciously live according to some set of unarticulated priorities, if only according to something so basic as the primal need for food, drink, and shelter. For many people, religious practice — striving to obey God’s commandments — is a high priority, the highest, even. Yet this priority can come into conflict with the character of the society in which one lives. This is undoubtedly the case for devout Muslims who voluntarily relocate to Western nations. This invariably will compromise what many of them profess to be their ultimate priority: living in accordance to the divine laws of Allah (i.e., sharia — most of which is derived from the words and deeds of seventh-century Mohammad). Some of these Muslims arrive in the West and don’t want to compromise. Consider some recent news stories: A few Muslim cashiers working at Target stores in Minneapolis are refusing to scan customer purchases that may contain pork. Instead of swiping the products themselves — which is their job — they are inconveniencing the customers or fellow employees by having them do it. Muslim cab drivers have long been discriminating against customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. Officials at the St. Paul International Airport estimate that, on average, alcohol-bearing customers seeking cab rides are denied 77 times per month. Some blind customers have also been turned down on account of their seeing-eye dogs. Muslims in Seattle have requested (and been granted) regularly scheduled hours for their exclusive use of public pools; an all-Muslim-girls basketball team at a Chicago university demanded that men be barred from attending their matches; some 200 Muslim women signed a petition at a Michigan fitness center demanding separate workout times for men and women, or at least the erection of a screen divider between the men’s and women’s section (which was granted). All of these issues revolve around the Muslim desire to live according to Allah’s laws — which, among other things, ban contact with pigs, dogs, and alcohol, and have rigid social guidelines, especially concerning interaction between the sexes. From a religious point of view, the anti-social behavior of these Muslims can be, if not excused, then certainly understood. They are doing only what their religion commands them to do. And their refusal to compromise on these points demonstrates that adherence to the commandments of Islam is a priority of the utmost importance to them. However, if living in strict accordance to sharia is the first priority of some Muslims, one wonders: Why have they voluntarily come and immersed themselves in infidel countries that do not recognize sharia law and, indeed, allow many things that run counter to it, such as the selling and consumption of alcohol and pork and the liberal intermingling of the sexes? Most of the Muslim countries that Muslims abandon for the West are much more conducive to the Muslim lifestyle and uphold many if not all aspects of sharia law. Yet, each year, thousands of supposedly “ultra-devout” Muslims forsake these countries and, of their own free will, come and surround themselves with wine-imbibing, swine-eating libertines. Why? It is for the same reason that everyone else comes to the West — for the “good life.” They come in order to be prosperous and to enjoy opportunities, security, and equality the likes of which they could never have in their own countries (ruled quite often — no surprise — according to sharia). The vast majority of Muslims emigrating from the Islamic world do not leave due to necessity — say, oppression or starvation. No, they come to the infidel West solely to prosper materially. But why are Muslims of the “ultra-pious” variety seeking after material comfort in the first place — especially when doing so will almost certainly undermine their professed desire to live strictly according to the sharia? Coming to live in a democratic country composed of some 300 million infidels is bound to affect any Muslim’s observance of sharia. These pious Muslims risk coming into daily contact with, not only pork, alcohol, and dogs, but all sorts of other defilements: flamboyant homosexuals, scantily clad women (who are often in positions of authority!), gamblers and usurers, to name a few. Are they not concerned that they, or especially their children, might become contaminated by the licentious and seductive practices of the infidel West? If their priority is truly to strictly follow sharia, should they not remain in their Muslim countries of origin, which, if not as prosperous as the West, are definitely more conducive to the Muslim lifestyle? Or, could it be that, despite all the ruckus (and subsequent headlines) made by these Muslims, living in accordance to Allah and his sharia is not their first priority, after all? At least, not to the degree that they would be unwilling to put this priority at substantial risk for the sake of living the good life, in a strictly secular and materialistic sense. Furthermore, if common sense does not dissuade them from relocating to the West, the very sharia they claim to want to closely observe should. For instance, if pork and alcohol are condemned (e.g., Koran 5:4; 2:219), voluntarily living among infidels, idolaters, and atheists is looked on no better. The Koran declares: “O you who believe! Take neither Jews nor Christians as friends…whoever among you turns to them is one of them” (5:51). There are countless verses and traditions, in fact, that make it clear that Muslims are to be in a constant state of animosity toward non-Muslims, waging war through tongue and teeth in order to spread Islam, and, when finally in a position of superiority, discriminating against those who refuse to convert (see, for example, 3:28, 5:73, 5:17, 9:5, 9:25, etc). When the Meccans persisted in their unbelief, refusing to accept the prophet-hood — and subsequent authority — of Mohammad, he finally abandoned his kinsfolk with these parting words, which some Muslims believe still define the proper relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims: “We [Muslims] disown you [non-Muslims] and what you worship besides Allah. We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us — until you believe in Allah alone!” (60:40). So why are some Muslims making public scenes here in the United States over scanning bacon or transporting customers with sealed bottles of wine in their luggage while at the same time freely choosing to live with — and of course benefit from — those whom they are commanded to hate and wage war upon, or at the very least, disavow and be clean of? “Straining out a gnat while swallowing a camel” has long been a sure sign of hypocrisy. All Muslims who freely migrate to the West must understand that they can’t have it both ways — that they can’t have their cake and eat it, too. They must choose between either strictly upholding the laws and customs of 7th-century Arabia (in which case they should remain in their “sharia friendly” countries of origin) or, if prosperity and comfort is their first choice, let them relocate to the West, but prepare to assimilate — that is, compromise — to some degree. It’s a simple question of priorities.
Poster Comment: An interesting take on "multiculturalism" and the clash of societies.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: mirage (#0)
Naw- just reichwinger hate mongering. Moslems have to be demonized. Not just "terrorists"- but all of them. The hate has to be for Moslems in general because the reichwingers have a lot of killing of innocents planned for the Moslem world.
This is the answer to the question. "Movin' on up..to the East side" to have the control to discriminate [as the Israelis do against everyone else in Israel.] In short, a quest to snatch power from the controlling culture, who, it seems, is more than willing to relinquish it, even though that power forcibly snatched it from those who came before.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Just more anti-Muslim propaganda to make us fear the ones residing in this country. As far as the quotes go, similar quotes can be found in the bible, but that doesn't mean all Christians or Jews focus on the more violent parts found throughout the bible. One could point out that the OT implies it's okey to own slaves, since it outlines how they are to be treated. I remember before Islam was such a big threat, when I lived in Houston for years where I encountered Muslims who lived there. They didn't impose their values on anyone, and I worked with an Iranian guy who I got to know who told me Islam teaches peace and wants people to obey God, he was not a wild-eyed fanatic but a very intellligent and kind person. No one was alarmed by their presence in our country, they were not known for commiting crimes, they were not seen as a threat and in fact there were many Saudis living there who were very strict in their beliefs but did not bother anyone. At the same time there was an ultra orthodox Jewish community who abided by strict laws as well, they also did not eat pork, did not drive on the Sabbath and so on, and like the Muslims they didn't bother anyone, they simply practiced what they believed and if anything just appeared to be a bit strange, as they dressed differently too. No one regarded them as a threat either. At that time there were no editorials being written about how Muslims will not mix, about how they have ways too strange, they were just seen as another culture out of many living in Houston. If anyone is to blame it should be our immigration authorities and our govt who have been importing all sorts of peoples of various cultures into our country for decades now and promoting multiculturalism. If they are going to do this they should not scapegoat innocent people who happen to be Muslim because of our current WOT.
If you want to single out a group out and make them an "other" all you have to do is cobble together a few anecdotes like this article does and then slub it off as being the norm. It isn't. The crap about the cab drivers "discriminating" against alcohol users and carriers for example. That was one anecdote from one city- which they attempt to pass off as some sort of endemic problem all over the country. It is a lie. And by the way- these cab drivers- IF they are refusing to transport users and carriers of alcohol - it is their effing business and that of the companies they work for. Funny how "conservatives" all of sudden ain't so happy about the free market when it comes to Islamics. If the most strict Islamic guy in the world comes here and lives his life according to sharia law and doesn't want to handle pork or drive alcohol users and grows a beard- and keeps company only of those who believe as he does- that is fucking business- hell- if he calls for America to become Islamic- that is his g-damn right. Now- if he engages in law breaking- that is something else entirely. But until then- NR should shut the fuck up and start to adhere to some of the principles they ONCE said they believed in. Pathetic cowards and Fearmongers.
You don't know what you're talking about. I owned and drove taxis for years, and there is not one "free-market" taxi in the United States. All are heavily regulated by the goverment. I guarantee you those airport taxis have a monopoly at the airport and outside taxis cannot sit there and pick up passengers. If calling an outside taxi is allowed, there is only one small area, probably enough for two cars, that they can come to. Then the caller has to find that area, which is usually located in a hard place to find. You're saying those customers have to stand there until a driver will take them. What if they don't want to take someone is a wheelchair? That's okay, right? These drivers should be fired.
"Be convinced that to be happy means to be free and that to be free means to be brave. Therefore do not take lightly the perils of war." -- Thucydides
That's not how I take this article. I take it more as "We didn't have a lot of muslims until recently and now there are all these stories....so we're going to encourage them to assimilate and realize they are not in an Islamic country." That's not fearmongering. Its common sense. The article also acknowledges that the first duty of a muslim is to live according to the Koran -- but when that comes into conflict with society at large, who must 'give'? Do we tell the public they must accomodate the ultra-orthodox or do we tell the ultra-orthodox to accomodate the rules of society? That's my takeaway from this article. Obviously you are getting something different from it.
Press 1 to proceed in English. Press 2 for Deportation.
Agreed. Multiculturalism is being utilized as a wedge in America through demonization of some groups and protection of others. Selective prosecutions, hate laws, and acts such as those permitted against the two border patrolmen for doing their jobs are a few of the ways that the controllers use your tax dollars to destroy the country. I read an article yesterday sent to me by a friend that details the deaths of a couple by a drunk illegal alien. The article mentioned that the drunk invader's "public defender" refused to comment on the case or the fact that his client had 14 prior arrests for DUI. Not only are "taxpayers" funding the housing, medical and food needs of illegals that could give a shit about our culture, they're paying for their lawyers too. My reply to my friend expressed my disdain for the system that should have its ass sued off for releasing this illegal alien threat to society repeatedly after someone in the system was convicted of negligent homicide. I then added that my friend should also be sued for financially supporting the system that failed so miserably and actually "CONTRIBUTED" to the deaths of these two innocent people.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
And this remark here, thrown in with no substantiation is suppose to make us think they are heartless as many of us love dogs. Muslims believe dogs are unclean, I read Mohammad did not like dogs so that became part of the religious beliefs, though dogs have been used in the mideast for herding and as seeing- eye dogs in modern times, they're just not allowed as pets among devout muslims. The National Review has turned into a neocon propaganda rag.
and ... WND, NEWSMAX.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
No- my "take away" from this article is that it is a fearmongering piece of gargabe designed specifically to arouse hatred and suspicion of ALL moslems with idiotic and selective quotes from the Koran and anecdotal boogeyman stories (Let's take a gander a the Talmud or the Rapture nutter bibles shall we?) and questions their motives for coming here (it clearly implies "they" are invading.) Here's the deal NR- if a Moslem breaks the law- prosecute him. Anything else? Deal with it. They don't have to change a fucking thing about themselves if they don't break the law. You don't like Moslems and how they live- don't deal with them. Don't ride in their cabs, don't go to their restaruants. It's called the market. Is this yet another principle "Conservatives" are pissing on- capitalism?
Call the cab company and get them fired. Don't cry to daddy government like a bitch liberal. And it ain't the fault of Moslems cabs are regulated by the goobermint.
The American Orthodox Jewish community asks for accommodation and usually gets it. I'm sure you all know what an "eruv" is, right? Santa Monica, CA recently agreed to erect an eruv so Jewish folks can enjoy the beach while following the holy commandment to "remain in their homes" (wink wink) on the sabbath! The study included the possibility that an eruv wire could prove hazardous to birds, but the "community" is willing to pay to minimize the risk. Of course if it becomes apparent that the risk cannot be completely eliminated or even minimized to acceptable levels, then the birds will have perish so Jews can go to the beach while remaining in their homes!(?) "NEWS FLASH! MAN EATEN BY SHARK IN HIS HOME (SORTA) ON SABBATH!" The day I see a news article that juxtaposes Muslims asking for accommodation along side the actual numbers and locations of existing eruvs in the country, then I'll consider the proper groundwork for fair discussion to be in place. Until then it's just another anti-Muslim hit piece. In fact if Jewish taxi drivers found it objectionable to transport liquor or seeing eye animal companions, they'd probably be permitted to discriminate. Senor Yertle is correct too. If every cab on the airport stand is operated by an observant Muslim (and that is not only possible but on some days quite likely) then the effect is all customers observe sharia whether or not they are Muslim unless steps are taken to minimize abuse, such as firing the drivers. But, in the interest of balance ask yourselves this: What are the odds that a law would be passed to minimize abuse by religious Jews, or that a cab company would fire a Jew for such abuse of customers? And, how would those Muslim taxi drivers like it if there are special cab stands for customers who simply don't want to patronize schmucky Arabs? Imagine walking out of an airport terminal and seeing signs that read "Muslim taxis to the left others to the right"? How would observant Muslims feel about that, especially if news stories portrayed them as intolerant religious zealots and every non Muslim customer avoided them? They'd better be careful what they wish for because they may get it, and all that comes with it!
I actually knew some Jewish cab drivers (yes, Jews drive taxis). They never discriminated. None of us did, except when we thought the pick-up was dangerous. We had some Muslim drivers, too. They didn't discriminate, either. For one thing, they would have been fired for refusing to pick up a seeing-eye dog, or take someone who had booze in their groceries. There is also the fact the other drivers would have given them a really hard time. Very hard. Years ago, two American drivers were sitting in my back seat. Each weighed about 250 pounds. There was a tiny little Eithopian driver inbetween them, whose nickname was "Itty-Bitty." I looked at him, grinned at the drivers, and suggested we should cook and eat Itty-Bitty, although he wouldn't make much of a meal. He knew we were joking, but he was a little afraid of us. Generally, we policed ourselves. What's happening at that airport is a failure of everyone involved to police the situation. The other drivers, the government -- everyone.
"Be convinced that to be happy means to be free and that to be free means to be brave. Therefore do not take lightly the perils of war." -- Thucydides
That was my thought when reading that article, the company probably wouldn't be too happy about that. Also the part about muslim cashiers at Target refusing to ring up pork, don't think that would go over with management too well either. That article was an obvious hit-piece. Also there are billions of Muslims in the world living in many countries with vastly different cultures. The article seems to want readers to think they are all dangerous Arabs.
ROTFLOL!!!
A few Christian pharmacists working in America are refusing to dispense Plan B-- "abortion in a pill". Ergo, they are obviously anti-American jew haters who want to take over America.
Supporters of Bush and the Iraq war for Israel and oil are traitors to America and they hate American troops.
In fact if Jewish taxi drivers found it objectionable to transport liquor or seeing eye animal companions, they'd probably become getaway drivers for ADL bombing missions or chauffers for elitist bankers.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
The stories I could tell you about driving a taxi. I had to keep a diary. I once picked up an old guy from the hospital who asked to smoke. I said sure, I don't mind. He lit a cigarette, took a big drag, then informed me his doctor had just told him he had lung cancer. But I'm not giving up, no sir, he told me. I got to stay around to torment the old lady! I burst out laughing. Couldn't stop, in fact.
"Be convinced that to be happy means to be free and that to be free means to be brave. Therefore do not take lightly the perils of war." -- Thucydides
And the Zionist federal media keeps the anti-Muslim hit pieces coming. It is now common knowledge among the idiot American masses that had we not invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his fleet of ocean going battle camels would have landed in Jacksonville and would have conquered and controlled way past St. Louis by now.
Supporters of Bush and the Iraq war for Israel and oil are traitors to America and they hate American troops.
I've always thought that if someone tried to invade the U.S. they'd be met at the beach by 100,000 guys in pick-up trucks and after ten minutes the sand would be strewn with empty shotgun shells and beercans. Then everyone would go home.
"Be convinced that to be happy means to be free and that to be free means to be brave. Therefore do not take lightly the perils of war." -- Thucydides
Unfortunately too many Americans actually believe this.
And they are impossible to reason with, as FOX news et al would not lie to them.
You and I know that would happen--and if the battle went any distance inland, there'd be a American ambush wainting behind every bush, wall, tree and rock. Here is a question: would, then, those of us Americans be called "insurgents?"
Supporters of Bush and the Iraq war for Israel and oil are traitors to America and they hate American troops.
Danny Glover's campaign in NYC was because blacks have trouble flagging cabs but, most people don't understand that nig....I mean, African Americans don't tip and they commit the majority of assaults and robberies. If I saw an eekwal waiting to head up to 139th street and a businessman with luggage I'd take the airport run over the Harlem trip. Could you blame me? Even if I don't get tipped at the airport (which is unlikely unless that passenger is black too) I probably wouldn't be robbed or murdered when I arrive. But, Harlem is dangerous and the cops attitude seems to be, "Hey you drive a cab so you should expect it".
“Straining out a gnat while swallowing a camel” has long been a sure sign of hypocrisy. All Muslims who freely migrate to the West must understand that they can’t have it both ways — that they can’t have their cake and eat it, too. They must choose between either strictly upholding the laws and customs of 7th-century Arabia (in which case they should remain in their “sharia friendly” countries of origin) or, if prosperity and comfort is their first choice, let them relocate to the West, but prepare to assimilate — that is, compromise — to some degree. It’s a simple question of priorities. I'm always amused when someone criticizes the devout for trying to find a path to God, which is, after all, our highest calling in life. I mean, really. Isn't it offensive when some Jew refuses to take off his beanie and walks around with curls on the side of his head and refuses to eat anything you offer him because it isn't "kosher"? I mean, what's up with that? And isn't it inconvenient when some foreigner Boodist shaves his head and wears a weird robe and sandals even in winter time, and they won't even step on a cockroach? A lousy cockroach! Or when some flaky Amish chick want to wear headscarves and hand woven clothes and won't drink soda or even drive in a car? But she still shows up at Wal- Mart, doesn't she? Or when some Baptist weirdo won't have a beer like normal people? I mean, these fuckin' weirdos who won't blend in and stuff. They got the wrong priorities, man.
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Absolutely on target.
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Most people charged with crimes in this country get either court appointed lawyers or public defenders. You prefer a system without them? Fine. Get ready to build even more prisons.
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Here is a question: would, then, those of us Americans be called "insurgents?" If an invasion comes from without, you can bet that it will be with the full support of our national Vichy government, and that it will be US draftees who are going up into the hills of tennessee after patriots. And yes, they will call us "insurgents".
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
I agree. I am not impressed by their religious and social intolerances any more then those of cops who steal people's pipes and plants and allow liquor stores to remain unmolested.
I gotta wonder what is wrong with you. Did your parents drop you on your head? Were you raised in some throwback hillbilly white trash Atlanta Ghetto? What on earth makes you think that posting "nig... I mean African Americans" is going to gain you anything but scorn from anyone anywhere? This is just flamebait from a keyboard bigot who wouldn't have the courage to say something so deeply offensive in front of his target audience. I'm embarrassed for you.
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Actually, I consider that a courtesy.
Remember the movie Groundhog Day? Good flick. What if instead of waking up over and over to the same day, time went on, but everyone in the town suffered from a recurring amnesia? And what if instead of falling in love, Bill Murray's protagonist wanted to be mayor? That'd be a neat movie.
Gets my respect. Plenty of people think like that all the time, producing heavy self-regulatory activity in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. That section of the brain is heavily involved in Newspeak. A man who doesn't need "respect" is a dangerous dawg. All that has to happen is for him to not get struck by lightning, and he undermines the Prevailing Righteousness. Friend of a friend uses the n-word all the time. This bothered my friend's wife a lot. She got all in a huff over it, and the guy liked to tweak her. One day she screamed at him, and he slightly relented: "O.K., O.K. I promise I won't use it around your black friends." (Which of course just made her madder. :)
Remember the movie Groundhog Day? Good flick. What if instead of waking up over and over to the same day, time went on, but everyone in the town suffered from a recurring amnesia? And what if instead of falling in love, Bill Murray's protagonist wanted to be mayor? That'd be a neat movie.
What n-word?
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Without public defenders / yes ... without Illegals / yes, that too !!! Public Defenders are known as public pretenders for very good reason. Our judicial system is way broke, there is no justice for the common people and to imply otherwise is disingenuous.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Allah needs to lighten up on his followers - they deserve a break.
OR ... they don't have to live here. They weren't born here, they are guests even if they become citizens. Their citizenship is based upon the privilege granted to them by a federal judge. People born here have a "birthright". There is a major difference.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
As they should be; they are "passenger cars." Now, the question you need to ask is why does your state issued certificate of title bear the term "passenger car" when you do NOT haul passengers for profit? Write DMV (or the state agency which issues those registrations) and ask them why they have falsified the records. BTW, falsification of records is a federal crime under Title 18 United States Code.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
It's also a state crime in every state of the union !!!
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Our judicial system is way broke, there is no justice for the common people and to imply otherwise is disingenuous. So better they have no defense at all? Did you know that it was public defenders who got cases re-tried or investigated and exonerated something like five death row guys in Illinois? That's five guys who'd be dead under your "non-disingenuous" system. The reason they call Public Defenders "Public Pretenders" is because it rhymes. And it's cute. And private lawyers profit from the notion. Public defenders are under paid and have a higher caseload than private lawyers, so in some areas they lose more cases. But you want to see real incompetence? Look at the leaches who get on the private bar appointment lists who sleep through capital cases. As for the illegals, I'm all for closing the borders. But nobody in the political world seems to have either the clout or the balls to do it.
It is not a Justice System. It is just a system.
Time for RICO suits to begin. Failing that, the solution will come from the muzzles of our rifles, and some good stout rope.
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
The difference is between the person who follows his path without dragging people along with him -- and those who wish to drag everyone with him. Prohibition is a fine example of Baptists dragging everyone else along for the ride. Is that "just fine" or is it not?
Press 1 to proceed in English. Press 2 for Deportation.
Comments (42 - 82) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: mirage (#0)
(Edited)
"What Do Muslims Want?"
There are countless verses and traditions, in fact, that make it clear that Muslims are to be in a constant state of animosity toward non- Muslims, waging war through tongue and teeth in order to spread Islam, and, when finally in a position of superiority, discriminating against those who refuse to convert
In a CorporoFascist capitalist society, there is no money in peace, freedom, or a healthy population, and therefore, no incentive to achieve these.
- - IndieTX
"Peace? There's no money in peace! What we need is a war!"
--Three Stooges
#3. To: mirage, Burkeman1, IndieTX (#0)
“We [Muslims] disown you [non-Muslims] and what you worship besides Allah. We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us — until you believe in Allah alone!” (60:40).
#4. To: Diana (#3)
#5. To: Burkeman1 (#4)
And by the way- these cab drivers- IF they are refusing to transport users and carriers of alcohol - it is their effing business and that of the companies they work for. Funny how "conservatives" all of sudden ain't so happy about the free market when it comes to Islamics.
#6. To: Burkeman1 (#1)
#7. To: YertleTurtle (#5)
I owned and drove taxis for years, and there is not one "free-market" taxi in the United States. All are heavily regulated by the goverment.
#8. To: Burkeman1 (#4)
Some blind customers have also been turned down on account of their seeing-eye dogs.
#9. To: Diana (#8)
The National Review has turned into a neocon propaganda rag.
#10. To: mirage (#6)
#11. To: YertleTurtle (#5)
#12. To: mirage, Diana, Burkeman1, IndieTX, Yertle Turtle, noone222 (#0)
(Edited)
All Muslims who freely migrate to the West must understand that they can’t have it both ways — that they can’t have their cake and eat it, too. They must choose between either strictly upholding the laws and customs of 7th-century Arabia (in which case they should remain in their “sharia friendly” countries of origin) or, if prosperity and comfort is their first choice, let them relocate to the West, but prepare to assimilate — that is, compromise — to some degree. It’s a simple question of priorities.
#13. To: HOUNDDAWG (#12)
In fact if Jewish taxi drivers found it objectionable to transport liquor or seeing eye animal companions, they'd probably be permitted to discriminate.
#14. To: YertleTurtle, Burkeman1, mirage, HOUNDDAWG, noone222 (#13)
We had some Muslim drivers, too. They didn't discriminate, either. For one thing, they would have been fired for refusing to pick up a seeing-eye dog, or take someone who had booze in their groceries.
#15. To: YertleTurtle (#13)
Years ago, two American drivers were sitting in my back seat. Each weighed about 250 pounds. There was a tiny little Eithopian driver inbetween them, whose nickname was "Itty-Bitty." I looked at him, grinned at the drivers, and suggested we should cook and eat Itty-Bitty, although he wouldn't make much of a meal. He knew we were joking, but he was a little afraid of us.
#16. To: Diana, mirage, IndieTX (#3)
A few Muslim cashiers working at Target stores in Minneapolis are refusing to scan customer purchases that may contain pork.
#17. To: YertleTurtle (#13)
In fact if Jewish taxi drivers found it objectionable to transport liquor or seeing eye animal companions, they'd probably be permitted to discriminate.
#18. To: Diana (#15)
ROTFLOL!!!
#19. To: HOUNDDAWG, Diana (#12)
Until then it's just another anti-Muslim hit piece.
#20. To: wbales (#19)
ocean going battle camels
#21. To: wbales (#19)
It is now common knowledge among the idiot American masses that had we not invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein and his fleet of ocean going battle camels would have landed in Jacksonville and would have conquered and controlled way past St. Louis by now.
#22. To: wbales (#19)
#23. To: YertleTurtle (#20)
U.S. they'd be met at the beach by 100,000 guys in pick-up trucks
#24. To: YertleTurtle, mirage, Diana, Burkeman1, IndieTX, noone222 (#13)
I actually knew some Jewish cab drivers (yes, Jews drive taxis). They never discriminated. None of us did, except when we thought the pick-up was dangerous.
#25. To: mirage (#0)
Author: Raymond Ibrahim...
#26. To: Burkeman1 (#4)
But until then- NR should shut the fuck up and start to adhere to some of the principles they ONCE said they believed in. Pathetic cowards and Fearmongers.
#27. To: noone222 (#7)
Not only are "taxpayers" funding the housing, medical and food needs of illegals that could give a shit about our culture, they're paying for their lawyers too
#28. To: wbales (#23)
You and I know that would happen--and if the battle went any distance inland, there'd be a American ambush wainting behind every bush, wall, tree and rock.
#29. To: YertleTurtle (#5)
"These drivers should be fired."
#30. To: HOUNDDAWG (#24)
most people don't understand that nig....I mean, African Americans
#31. To: bluedogtxn (#25)
Isn't it offensive when some Jew refuses to take off his beanie and walks around with curls on the side of his head and refuses to eat anything you offer him because it isn't "kosher"?
#32. To: bluedogtxn, HOUNDDAWG (#30)
What on earth makes you think that posting "nig... I mean African Americans" is going to gain you anything but scorn from anyone anywhere?
#33. To: Tauzero (#32)
Friend of a friend uses the n-word all the time.
#34. To: bluedogtxn (#27)
You prefer a system without them?
#35. To: mirage (#0)
All of these issues revolve around the Muslim desire to live according to Allah’s laws — which, among other things, ban contact with pigs, dogs, and alcohol,...
#36. To: lodwick (#35)
Allah needs to lighten up on his followers - they deserve a break.
#37. To: YertleTurtle, Burkeman1 (#5)
there is not one "free-market" taxi in the United States. All are heavily regulated by the goverment.
#38. To: BTP Holdings (#37)
#39. To: noone222 (#34)
Public Defenders are known as public pretenders for very good reason.
#40. To: noone222 (#38)
It's also a state crime in every state of the union !!!
#41. To: bluedogtxn (#25)
.
.
.