Lestat wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2011 at 12:21pm:



AN excellent example of how the swivel eyed jihadis exploit democracy to provoke - but when growled at, they squeal about democracy.

None of this great awareness of democracy is evident when Islam is criticised. Then it's burn and kill and go apesh!t. For the jihadi sons of Mohammed, it is aLways different standards.

Only the swivel eyes are a constant.

Jihadis exploiting democracy, within non-moslem jurisdictions.

[Moslems just can't help themselves, they have to.]



COMMENT;

continue to accede to, and appease moslem demands for a 'cultural' 'accommodation' of the moslem community, the Slow Jihad will continue, apace.

After all, if the non-moslem jurisdiction is itself, slowly empowering moslems, and acceding to its own slow ISLAMISATION, why should the moslem community complain???

But eventually all good things must come to an end!

A 'Tipping point' will eventually be reached, where many persons within the non-moslem jurisdiction will begin to recognise what is happening;
i.e.
The slow [Jihad] ISLAMISATION of the non-moslem jurisdiction has progressed to the point, where the moslem community has achieved a measure of empowerment, and some real political influence, upon 'public policy' within the wider non-moslem jurisdiction.



ISLAM IS A PHILOSOPHY WHICH SEEKS TO ESTABLISH AND EMPOWER A LEGAL APARTHEID, WHICH FAVOURS MOSLEMS

When the time is appropriate, and propitious to themselves, moslems begin to agitate for special concessions in law, which are available to, and apply to, only moslems.
And many persons within non-moslem jurisdictions now begin to recognise, that what moslems desire and aspire to, is a legal duality within the wider non-moslem jurisdiction.
Non-moslems begin to realise that what moslems really want, and what moslems are insisting upon [as a right], is (a) legal apartheid, where some laws apply to, and favour only moslems.
Non-moslems begin to realise that what moslems seek is a law sanctioned discrimination, against non-moslems, an injustice [placed upon, suffered by non-moslems, to the cost of non-moslems, and their culture].

The 'Tipping point' has been reached for moslems.
When the moslem community sees that there is a new widespread opposition to making special concessions in law [exclusively for the benefit of moslems], the moslem community will start using words like, 'discrimination', 'intolerance', 'bigotry', 'racism', 'oppressing moslems'.

When the 'Slow Jihad' becomes ineffectual, the moslem community will abandon the 'Slow Jihad'.
And a new 'Hot Jihad' will ensue, due to the 'oppression' of moslems by non-moslems [defending their cultural mores].

e.g.
Live in peace till strong enough to wage jihad, says UK Deoband scholar to Muslims
London, Sept.8 [2007]
A Deobandi scholar believes Muslims should *preach* peace till they are strong enough to undertake a jihad, or a holy war.
Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani was quoted by the BBC as saying that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, *only until* they gain enough power to engage in battle.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2409833.ece


December 31, 2007
Pakistani cleric: "We want Islamic law for all Pakistan and then the world. We would like to do this by preaching. But if not then we would use force."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/019399.php


DEFINITIONS;

Slow Jihad = = Is where an informal truce with non-moslem jurisdictions is maintained, by moslems living within those non-moslem jurisdictions.
This truce will be maintained, so long as non-moslems continue to accede to empowering moslem influence, within the non-moslem jurisdiction.

Tipping point = = This is the point where moslems within non-moslem jurisdictions abandon Slow Jihad, for Aggressive Jihad, and/or Hot Jihad.
i.e.
The 'Tipping point' is the point at which 'moderate' moslems 'revert to type' and become good moslems.
It is the point at which moslems abandon the pretence of their tolerance of the authority of the non-moslem jurisdiction.
It is the point at which moslems reveal themselves to be, what they are, what they have always been,
...good moslems.

Once the 'Tipping point' has been reached, moslems engage in;
Aggressive Jihad = = Where moslem communities engage in 'justified' open criticism of, and aggression towards, non-moslems, for their 'oppression' of, and 'discrimination' against moslems.

Hot Jihad = = Open violence against non-moslems, hot fighting in Allah's cause.

Hot Jihad = = where moslems revert to, and reveal, what and who, moslems have always been;
Good moslems.



There are no 'moderate' moslems.

Because,  ...there is no moderate ISLAM.

Soren wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2011 at 9:38am:


Not exploiting Soreass...just exposing your hypocricy. And you dimwitted fools make it far to easy.

Though I'd hardly expect you to understand...thats the beauty of it. You play into our hands, and your too dumb to know it.

Keep up the good work Soreass....

Lestat wrote on Mar 24^th, 2011 at 8:03am:



Many people like Lestat would propose that people who claim to embrace democracy, must therefore also embrace all other political systems, because they must prove their commitment to democratic ideals of tolerance and freedom of expression, and that they extend principle of freedom, and justice to all others.

They would propose that the who embrace democracy, must prove that they are 'tolerant' of all other men [and women].




Such 'logic' is like proposing that because we humans are animals, that we must treat all 'creatures' equally, no matter their specific habits and specific 'inclinations' towards other creatures.

And perhaps down at the zoo, perhaps we should propose that wolves and sheep could be kept together in the same enclosure ???

And perhaps those who vehemently  argue for the tolerance of all other 'creatures' should, perhaps, go to a crocodile park and jump the fence, and so thereby express their 'tolerance' of the crocodiles, by warmly embracing them.
Perhaps such people could start their expression of creaturely 'tolerance', by seeking to embrace 1st the leader of the crocodiles [i.e. the largest crocodile].
/sarc off



We all understand that in the world of animals so 'creatures' have differing characteristics and 'inclinations' towards other creatures.
Therefore some creatures wisely choose to separate themselves from other creatures.





And even though i consider myself to be a tolerant person, i would not wish to associate closely, with some others,
NOT EVEN with those 'wolves' who were wearing sheep's clothing.

That, is not an expression of intolerance.
It is merely an expression of my sanity, in recognising that some creatures prey upon other creatures, and that likewise, some men, choose to prey upon their fellows.



+++

And imo, all moslems are fascist ideologues, because;
All moslems, themselves, choose to embrace a philosophy [ISLAM] which tells moslems that it is 'lawful' for moslems, to kill human beings who do not believe, as they believe.

And imo, a group of people who embrace the ideals of democracy, and another group of people who embrace the ideals of fascism, cannot co-exist together.

Foolosophy wrote on Mar 24^th, 2011 at 3:51pm:



Damned if i do, and damned if i don't.





Just for you Foolosophy....

Matthew 11:16
But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows,
17  And saying, We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented.
18  For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil.
19  The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.

Yadda wrote on Mar 25^th, 2011 at 7:49am:



Yadda,

Thanks for that citation

DOnt forget to turn the other cheek and to give away ALL of your assets to the poor for they will inherit the earth

mozzaok wrote on Apr 29^th, 2011 at 12:03pm:



We all love a bit of reflex equivocation, Mozz, but to equate the supporters of the headhackers with the bra-burners is comparing bombs with boobs. The jihadis go around 'death to those who disrespect islam' plackards while the girls went around topless, demanding that everybody make love not war.
You must be extremely inattentive not to see glaring differences but to come up, instead, with the lazy 'it's all the same' argument.