Islamo Fascism

Clash of Culture Reaches Bulgaria

Published by Papa Giorgio

Hat Tip, Worldwide Liberty. It looks like there was a mix of people finally fed up with the loud speaker blaring five times the day in their town/city and the large sit-ins taking over the streets. Not only are there regular citizens, but also some nationalists… unfortunately. In other video you can see that the agitating group is small and are most probably a racist group. That being said, when you invade one culture to the extent Islam does without adopting said culture, there is a backlash of sorts. Actions taken by the citizenry [good or bad] to stem the tide of Islamofascism is a net good and is preferable to Sharia. For example, the Crusades were not the best of political or religious operations to say the least of them, however, they did stop the spread of Islam similar to America and Europe stopping the spread of Communism during the cold war (WWIII). [Which is why Podhoretz calls this war WWIV.] Here is the desription from the video linked:

Muslim prayer is blasted across a European Christian Capital. This is Sofia Bulgaria and the Sofians have had enough of Islamists not sticking with praying in their mosques. They behave as if 2011 is medieval Ottoman Empire where Christians were slaves under dhimmitude where public life was a religious Apartheid Society favoring Muslims over everyone.

Public Space should be respected, but these Islamists show none of it, also instead of praying inside the mosque, they pray outside to take over the street, like they have taken over streets in European capitals like Paris, Moscow where Islamic considerations trump public space for all. In Paris Islamists have their thugs enforcing their takeover of the street and the police just stands there n take it, not enforcing the established laws.

Well, these Bulgarians have had it, unfortunate that the police and politicians don’t fix things, corrupts SOBs, so the spotlight is taken by the loudest far right groups who are then used by the Islamists to try to ridicule all criticism as “racist” and “hooligan” as if it’s racist to say public space belongs to all, not only to muslims? Bulgarians in vid tear apart a Turkish Fez, head dress for the evil Ottoman Turks. Give Kurds basic rights before you say anything about Bulgaria!

Bring an end to Islamic Apartheidism! No special rights for muslims! No dhimmitude and effendis! No tolerance for the fundamentalists!

You have to understand a bit the history as well in a few of these countries. These were havens of sorts for the Dhimmi of years past. So they have a natural aversion to extremism:

After 1453, the Muslim Ottoman Empire in Turkey tolerated religious differences. Jewish and Christian communities existed in great numbers, and were allowed to establish their own community governments, their religious heads being responsible to the Sultan for the behavior of the community. However, the Islamic principle of Dhimmi prevented their full equal treatment with Muslim citizens. With the coming of Islamic “ethnic-religious nationalism” in the 19th century, the safety of these minorities was further compromised, and most fled to newly-established nation-states like Armenia, Bulgaria, and Greece, leaving modern Turkey 99% Muslim. In the 1920’s women were granted the right to vote, Islamic dress was banned, and Turkey began its romance with Western progress.

(Islam Watch)

There seems to be a deep root of radicalism as well that have led to whole mosques being raided and many arrests (see embedded story in graphic at top of page). There is more to this story as well, that is, forced conversion to Islam. Jihad Watch writes,

And aggressive Islamization, “no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256) notwithstanding. “Bulgaria MP Yanev: Numerous Southern Villages Are Converted to Islam by Force,” from Novinite (Sofia News Agency), March 3 (thanks to Twostellas):

Despite Bulgaria’s European Union membership, some regions of the country need a second liberation from Ottoman yoke, the Bulgarian Member of the Parliament (MP), Yane Yanev, stated, cited by the Bulgarian news agency, BGNES.

Yanev, who is the leader of the opposition “Order, Law, Justice” Party (RZS) spoke Monday in Blagoevgrad as reported by the local BGNES correspondent.

The leaders of RZS visited Monday several villages in Southern Bulgaria to meet with alarmed teachers and parents, who have presented concrete evidence of the imposed conversion to fundamentalist Islam in the region.

The example of the village of Ribnovo, in the Gurmen municipality, has been presented as the most striking one. In Ribnovo, the school principal, Feim Issa, had imposed full dictatorship on the teaching staff, forcing them to wear traditional Muslim clothes, and encouraging female student to the same. Issa has been illegally appointed as principal with help of the local mosque’s leaders and is actively supporting the religion teacher at the school, Murat Boshnak. Boshnak is, reportedly, an individual with suspicious past and unclear educational background. He is not holding even a Bulgarian high school diploma, but has graduated from a religious school in Skopje, Macedonia. Ribnovo residents allege that Boshnak has specialized in Saudi Arabia and is forcefully making parents to sign requests for their children to study the Islam. He is also demanding that children address him as “aga’ instead of “gospodin” (Mister), had prohibited girls from attending the last prom in civil attire and issued a ban on celebrations. Boshnak later organized a trip to Turkey with funds from an Arab foundation. Only one girl had attended the prom. Parents, who refuse to follow the fundamentalist rules, are being cursed during services in the local mosque.

…(read more)…

So with that in mind, watch the following video with a bit more understanding.

Christians and Muslims clash in downtown Sofia

A female Member of Parliament was hit in the head by a rock thrown from Muslims in front of a Mosque, during a protest Friday. Patriot groups staged a rally against Muslims blaring the call-to-prayer five times a day over loudspeakers.

Violent clashes begin at 50 seconds mark.

The news report is in Bulgarian, of course. But it’s pretty easy to catch the gist of the events.

We Know What Causes Radicalism-Now Lets Do Something About It

Published by Papa Giorgio

National Review has posted an excellent article on the causes of radical Islam:

The Coordinates of Radicalism: Sharia compliance correlates with violent attitudes among American Muslims.

…..The authors found that 51 percent of the mosques featured severely violence-positive literature; an additional 30 percent distributed moderately violent tracts; and 19 percent offered nonviolent materials. What’s more, there was a strong correlation between sharia-compliant behavior and the presence of severely violent (as well as moderately violent) tracts. And while the mosques that were not as sharia-compliant (e.g., mosques that did not segregate the sexes during prayer or enforce straight prayer lines) featured less in the way of violent materials, the percentages of even these mosques that had violence-positive literature on site was disturbingly high. (See Table 2 of the MEQ essay.)

The second, related correlation the study examines is between the presence of violence-positive materials at a given mosque and the recommendation of these materials to worshippers by the mosque’s imam — a direct promotion of violent jihadism. To cut to the chase, if these materials are on site, the imam is nearly always found endorsing them. The more observably sharia-adherent the imam, the more certain this conclusion. For example, 93 percent of imams who sported the traditional full beard were found to recommend violence-positive literature. Nonetheless, more than three-quarters of imams who did not manifest similar indicia of sharia-compliance were still found to endorse the pro-violence literature if it was on site.

Perhaps the most jarring finding in the study involved mosque attendance. As the authors observe, “mosques that contained written materials in the severe category were the best attended, followed by those with only moderate-rated materials, trailed in turn by those lacking such texts.” We are not talking small divergence here: Severe-material mosques were found to have a mean attendance of 118 worshippers at services, while no-violence mosques had 15. The moderate-violence mosques came in around the middle, at 60.

In this aspect of the study may lie whatever modest silver lining there is. The Kedar-Yerushalmi survey examines what goes on in the mosques. It does not account for what happens outside the mosques or for how many American Muslims actually attend mosques with any regularity. That is to say, the fact that only 19 percent of mosques actually reflect what Islamic apologists portray as a vibrant, predominant brand of “moderate Islam” does not necessarily mean that only one in five American Muslims is a moderate.

Thousands of Muslims pray privately, as Islam permits. They visit mosques rarely, if at all, and when they go it is more for social or cultural purposes than for instruction. If they are Westernized, pro-American Muslims, they may resist the mosques precisely to avoid the influence of rabble-rousing clerics who have been recruited or trained by Saudi-backed Muslim Brotherhood elements. The study does not account for these Muslims. Their number would edge up the percentage of Muslim moderates, perhaps considerably.

But that is not the Islam Muslims are getting in American mosques. In sum, the study shows: The more sharia-compliant the mosque and its imam, the more virulently anti-Western is apt to be the Islam being preached there. Nor can it be ignored that this promotion of a pro-violence and anti-Western Islam in more than 80 percent of American mosques is of a piece with polling conducted of Muslims living in Islamic countries. As Messrs. Kedar and Yerushalmi remind us, a 2007 survey conducted by WorldPublicOpinion.org found that substantial majorities in Morocco, Egypt, and Pakistan — and a majority even in reputedly moderate Indonesia — favored the implementation of sharia law and the insulation of their countries from Western values.

It is time to stop pretending that there is some other cause for this. Many things can prompt a tinderbox to conflagrate, but it has to be tinder in the first place. Islam is the tinder. We can hope that brave Muslim reformers can build on the small but far from invisible havens where a nonviolent, pluralistic Islam has taken root. But to deny an obvious nexus between the mainstream Islam of the mosques, the violent jihadism of the terrorists, and the stealth jihadism of Islamist organizations is to remain willfully blind.

…(read more)…

PART 2

PART 3

More Islamo-Fascist Craziness

Published by Papa Giorgio

Libertarian Republican reports on this disturbing — but all too often — criminal act condoned by one of the worlds largest religions:

Alleged Murderer says she violated Sharia law; has no regrets

From Eric Dondero:

Katya Koren was 19. She lived in a village in the Crimea. She liked fashion and wearing Western clothes.

Early reports suggested that the teenage Muslim girl was beaten to death because she participated in an American-style beauty contest. Now more confirmation.

From the London Daily Mail, June 6, “Muslim girl, 19, ‘stoned to death after taking part in beauty contest'”:

Police have opened a murder investigation and are looking into claims that three Muslim youths killed her, claiming her death was justified under Islam.

One of the three – named as 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev – is under arrest and told police that Katya had ‘violated the laws of Sharia’. Gaziev has said he has no regrets about her death.

Watch Media Expunge Islamic Attempt to Bring Plane Down (yelled Allahu akbar 30-times)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Gateway Pundit notes the AP expunging of the chant. The AP reported:

Crew members and passengers wrestled a 28-year-old man to the cabin floor after he began pounding on the cockpit as an American Airlines flight approached San Francisco, the third security incident in a day on U.S. planes, authorities said Monday.

The man was yelling unintelligibly as he brushed past a flight attendant about 10 minutes before American Airlines Flight 1561 was due at San Francisco International Airport Sunday night, Sgt. Michael Rodriguez of the San Francisco police said.

A male flight attendant tackled the suspect, who carried a Yemen passport, and other crew members aided as the suspect banged on the cockpit door.

“He asked for help; a couple of passengers joined in,” Rodriguez told The Associated Press. “They were able to get him to ground and a flight attendant put him in plastic handcuffs.”

The Boeing 737 carrying 162 people landed safely at 9:10 p.m. and the man was taken into police custody.

He was identified as 28-year-old Rageit Almurisi. Though he carried a Yemen passport, it wasn’t clear if his nationality was also Yemeni, Rodgriguez said.

Update from LR:

From NBCBayArea.com:

Wright said al-Murisi never spoke to him directly but said “Allahu akbar” some more 30 times during the duration of the flight.

The mainstream media is still searching for a motive.

Osama a Progressive/Lefty?

Published by Papa Giorgio

This is some info that I sympathize with people on, and do not mind — and accept with all best intentions w– when someone responded to me, “Bin Laden Anti gay, pro fundamentalist religion! OMG, he must be a Republican!” I can understand where such a statement left on my Facebook comes from. I was amazed myself when I found out that Fred Phelps — of the Westboro Baptist Church/Cult — was a lifelong Democrat and ran for Democratic office many times. What elicited such a post on my Facebook? It was a linked article from Eric Dondero over at Libertarian Republican (A defunct blog, sadly):

Seems that the very worst suspicions about Bin Laden of conservatives and pro-defense libertarians may have just been confirmed.

More intelligence from his compound has just been released. We are learning that the Al Qaeda leader was a fan of AntiWar activists in the West, listened “constantly” to elitist liberal taxpayer-subsidized Western media, was vociferous in his anti-Capitalist views, and rooted for the Democrat Party in US politics.

From the NY Times “Bin Laden’s Secret Life in a Diminished World” May 8:

In 2007, he complained that Democratic control of Congress had not ended the war in Iraq, a fact he attributed to the pernicious influence of “big corporations.” In other messages he commented on the writings of Noam Chomsky, the leftist professor at M.I.T., and praised former President Jimmy Carter’s book supporting Palestinian rights.

(SEE ALSO: Osama’s tootsies: BBC, Chomsky, Carter and Democrats)

This is a tough subject for those who have not read on the topic… and… unfortunately they never may due to many of the authors being from a conservative point of view. This viewpoint (conservative) has nothing to do with the truth of the position of said authors. The reader must see for themselves if the facts used in the books are true or not. For instance, did American Leftists support the fascists in the build up to WWII? (Only later supporting Stalin in his “Stalinism”):

  • The introduction of a novel term like “liberal fascism” obviously requires an explanation. Many critics will undoubtedly regard it as a crass oxymoron. Actually, however, I am not the first to use the term. That honor falls to H. G. Wells, one of the greatest influences on the progressive mind in the twentieth century (and, it turns out, the in­spiration for Huxley’s Brave New World). Nor did Wells coin the phrase as an indictment, but as a badge of honor. Progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis,” he told the Young Liberals at Oxford in a speech in July 1932. Wells was a leading voice in what I have called the fascist mo­ment, when many Western elites were eager to replace Church and Crown with slide rules and industrial armies.

Liberal Fascism, p. 21; more on this can be found in a post entitled, “Mussolini Defines Fascism: Does the Left = Communism? And The Right = Fascism?” Read more: RPT Margaret Sanger and the Racist History of Planned Parenthood (Black Genocide)

In another post that deals with this seemingly cultural/opposite ends is one that deals with homosexuality and the Muslim areas of the Middle-East, I end this post with this section trying to explain this seemingly oxymoronic positions held be progressives:

Is there a history of the New Left and this wanting of Islamo-Nazi type regimes that denigrate women and lift rape of young men to new levels? We read just a bit from David Horowitz’s intro of his book, Unholy Alliance:

A further irony of these complaints was that the shah had been, in fact, a modernizer who promoted education and the equality of women. His social progressivism was the very cause of the Islamic revolution that overthrew him. President Jimmy Carter’s liberal aversion to the shah’s authoritarian rule helped to undermine his regime and pave the way for the reign of the Ayatollah Khomeini and the Islamic revolution. While American radicals welcomed the revolution of the ayatollahs, their regime was far more reactionary and repressive than the government of the shah, and it both created and inspired the Islamic radicals who confront America as enemies today.

Why has the American Left made alliances of convenience with Islamic radicals who have declared war on the democratic West and whose own values are reactionary and oppressive? Why have American radicals actively obstructed the War on Terror, thereby undermining the defense of the democracies of the West? Why have liberals opposed Operation Iraqi Freedom, whose goals are the overthrow of tyranny and the establishment of political democracy and human rights—agendas that coincide with their own? Why have Democrats turned against the policy of regime change, which they had supported during the Clinton administration in both Kosovo and Iraq? Why has the Democratic Party declared political war on the president’s war and thus made foreign policy a point of partisan conflict for the first time since the end of World War II? What does this fracture of the American consensus mean for the future of America’s War on Terror?

These are the questions the current inquiry seeks to address. In doing so, it necessarily must confront others: What is the nature of the American Left? How does it think about the world? How did it come to ally itself with Islamic jihad? How significant is the threat posed by its opposition to the War on Terror? How powerful is its presence in the Democratic Party? What is its role in shaping the American future?

These are great questions. I think the book that answers them more fully in a short and concise manner can be found in the chapter entitled “The Red-Black-Green Islamic Axis,” in the book by Melanie Phillips — The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle Over God, Truth, and Power. While my small quote from Melanie does not do her thesis justice, it is a key connecting point in my minds eye:

These curious coalitions are frequently explained as merely opportunistic alliances, where certain groups make common cause with ideological opponents in pursuit of the shared aim of bringing down Western society. This explanation surely is only partly correct. What these various movements have in common goes much deeper: they are all utopian. Each in its own way wants to bring about the perfect society, to create a new man and a new world.

Each therefore thinks of itself as progressive; the supporters of each believe themselves to be warriors in the most noble of causes. The greens believe they will save the planet. The leftists believe they will create the brotherhood of man. The fascists believe they will purge mankind of corruption. And the Islamists believe they will create the Kingdom of God on earth.

What they all have in common, therefore, is a totalitarian mindset in pursuit of the creation of their alternative reality. These are all worldviews that can accommodate no deviation and must therefore be imposed by coercion. Because their end product is a state of perfection, nothing can be allowed to stand in its way. This is itself a projected pathology. As Eric Hoffer suggested in The True Believer, the individual involved in a mass movement is in some way acutely alienated from his own society, an alienation to which he is completely blind. Projecting his own unacknowledged deficiencies onto his surroundings, he thinks instead there is something wrong with society and fantasizes about building a new world where he will finally fit.” This belief that humanity can be shaped into a perfect form has been the cause of the most vicious tyrannies on the planet from the French Revolution onwards.

As Jamie Glazov notes in his book United in Hate, the totalitarian believer publicly denies the violent pathologies within the system that he worships. Privately, however, these are what drew him towards that system in the first place because he is aware that violence is necessary to destroy the old order so that utopia can arise from its ashes. Pretending he is attracted to “peace,” “justice” and “equality,” he actually stands for their opposite. He needs to empathize with the “martyrs” and the downtrodden in order to validate himself vicariously. The Third World, intrinsically noble since it is uncorrupted by the developed world, provides an apparently inexhaustible supply of such validation. That’s why the image of the Palestinian youth armed with only a slingshot touches the radical soul so deeply, and why the radical does not want to hear—why he even denies—the guns that are ranged just behind that youth as he throws his stones.”

Later, after following through with the history of the coining and idea behind the term “Westoxification,” she has a fabulous paragraph that puts in a pretty bow why the Progressive Left so often finds solace in these radical views you would think it would reject:

The Islamists committing mass murder in New York’s Twin Towers or a Jerusalem cafe really do believe they are fighting for justice and to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth. The communists and the fascists really did think they were ending, respectively, the oppression and the corruption of man. The environmentalists really do think they are saving the planet from extinction. The radical left really do think they will erase prejudice from the human heart and suffering from the world. And those who want Israel no longer to exist as a Jewish state really do believe that as a result they will turn suicide bomb belts into cucumber frames, and that they are moving in the way that history intended.

Mona Charen wrote a book dealing with this very issue of the Liberal Democrats during the cold war, an excellent book. Take note of the worldview difference that I build up to, and this is key to understanding why the Chomskies and the Zinns of the world as well as the organized revolutionary groups and unions have in common:

“With a President in disgrace, the antiwar Democrats in Congress could have their way. Starting with the 1974 budget, they refused to allocate another penny to Southeast Asia, and forbade US military action “in or over” Indochina. So much for the threat of air strikes to punish North Vietnamese violations of the peace treaty. It wasn’t enough that U.S. soldiers were out of it. The Democrats in Congress wanted the North Vietnamese to win. And they soon got their way.” ….  “The victorious Khmer Rouge (Red Cambodians) rolled into Phnom Penh and began a systematic war on the entire population so savage that it almost defies description. Estimates of the number of dead range between 1.5 and 2 million out of a nation of 7 million. At least one million were executed and another million died of starvation and disease that were the direct consequences of government policy.” ….  “Under Mao Tse-Tung, an estimated 65 million Chinese were killed by execution, torture, and starvation. Vietnam is held responsible for one million deaths. North Korea is believed to have murdered 2 million. And so the Cambodian ordeal stands out only in proportional terms. The Khmer Rouge were not qualitatively different from other Communists, but they were more rushed. Communists have often been called “socialists in a hurry.” The Khmer Rouge were Communists in a hurry.” ….  “Right-Wing Isolationists of the 1930s had wished to keep America out of foreign entanglements on the grounds that we were too good for the world. Post-Vietnam liberal isolationists saw the world as too good for us.”

(Mona Charin, Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First, pp. 48, 55, 65, 81.)

So, as these pieces come together you can see why someone like Osama can feel at home with the likes of revolutionary/leftist figures and groups and anti-war movements (which are really Marxist based of Islamo-fascist based – like the Palestinian movements or A.N.S.W.E.R.). Of course I have read the books I mention herein, so I am working from a knowledge base much different than your typical person, especially one who enjoys Chomsky’s and Zinn’s writings. Here is the entire chapter from Melanie Phillips books where she tries to explain the issue in whole: I highly recommend this book. As an agnostic, she has a fair view of this program the Left calls egalitarianism. This egalitarianism trumps their placatory stances on homosexuality, women’s rights, and the like.

Egyptians Burn Down the Two Biggest Christian Churches in Cairo-12 Dead-200 Injured

Published by Papa Giorgio

From Libertarian Republican:

Two of Cairo’s largest Churches were burned to the ground last night by Salafist Muslim mobs. There are reports that the Egyptian Army stopped firefighters from entering the premises of one church until it was completely burned down. Other reports that the fires started by Muslim Youth throwing molotov cocktails.

As described the Seattle Post-Intelligencer (via the AP):

Muslim mobs set fire to a church and a Christian-owned apartment building in a frenzy of violence that killed 12 people and injured more than 200.

Muslim youths attacked a large crowd of Coptic Christian protesters…

Hours earlier, mobs of ultraconservative (sic) Muslims attacked the Virgin Mary Church [also known as the Hanging Church] in the slum of Imbaba on the opposite side of the Nile. The attack was fueled by rumors that a Christian woman married to a Muslim man had been abducted by the church. Residents said a separate mob of youths armed with knives and machetes attacked an apartment building several blocks away with firebombs.

…(read more)…