«(...) Islam was created as a tool for expansion and political power. Unlike other religions that focus on individual, his spirituality and salvation, Islam focuses on world domination. It’s a perfect ideology for anyone who wishes to manipulate the gullible masses and make them do his biddings. Hitler admired Islam for this very reason. This is what he said, “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness….”5 (A. Speer, Inside the Third Reich, pp. 142-143)/(...) We are not blaming the Muslims for anything, except ignorance. We are blaming Islam. Our enemy is this evil ideology not its followers whom we see as its main victims. We are fully aware of the tireless struggle of our people throughout these 1400 years for democracy, reform, rationality and modernity. Why none of these efforts succeeded? It’s because Islam does not allow any change. In the long run all reforms fail. There is no basis for freedom and democracy in Islamic thinking. Islam and democracy are mutually exclusive. As long as Muslims believe in Islam, there can be no reform. Every attempt to reform Islam has and will fail. (...) Why the leftists welcome any criticism of Christianity, but they cannot tolerate criticism of Islam that is a thousand times worse? Why they defend the Islamists and want them have all the freedom to promote their doctrine of hate, under the guise of multiculturalism, (as if Islam is a culture) but they cannot tolerate the ex-Muslims to criticize it?/ I do not understand what makes the leftists tick and what to make of their double standards in regards to Islam.We are against Islam for the same reason that we are against Nazism, communism or any nefarious doctrine that is based on hate.We do not oppose Islam because it claims to be a religion. We oppose it because it is divisive and evil. Now I would like you to explain why you think criticizing a doctrine, whether good or evil, should not be allowed? The leftists have no problem criticizing Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or any religion. Why they have no tolerance for the criticism of Islam? (...) Why the lefties and the liberals welcome criticism of any faith, but get hot under their collar when someone criticizes Islam, and then attack that person accusing him/her of racism, intolerance, xenophobia, Islamophobia and what not? Could it be that Bertrand Russell was right when he said there are similarities between Islam and bolshevism because both are totalitarian? In The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism, published in 1920, Russell wrote, “Bolshevism combines the characteristics of the French Revolution with those of the rise of Islam….Marx has taught that Communism is fatally predestined to come about; this produces a state of mind not unlike that of the early successors of Mahommet….Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Mohammedanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism. Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Mohammedanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual, concerned to win the empire of this world”. Is this not the reason for this inexplicable love affair between these two strange bedfellows? In their lifestyle, the liberals and the Muslims could not be farther apart. You love free sex, accept homosexuality, allegedly promote equality between genders, etc., while Islam stones adulterers and gays and regards women as chattel. As a matter of fact, once Muslims come to power, the very first people they will slay will be people like you. Only after they are done with you they will go after the followers of other faiths. Despite that, lefties and Muslims are bedfellows. The leftists of all variations, from International socialists (communists) to national socialists (Nazis) to the run of the mill socialists and liberals, like the Democrats in USA, the NDPs in Canada, and the Labours in UK, including the feminists, always back the Muslims. (...) Ask the Iranian leftists who supported the Islamists during their revolution and see what they got out of that deal. Ask Maryam Namazi who is a commie what deal her group got after they helped Khomeini to power. Ms. Namazi is no longer under any delusion. She is now an ardent anti Islam activist. (...) how can you explain the disinterest of the feminists in the plight of the women in Islamic countries? How can you explain the lack of interest of the Amnesty International, an organization dominated by leftists, to which you belong, in the rights of the minorities and apostates in Islamic countries, and why the same organization is so concerned about how America treats the terrorists who plot to kill her citizens by thousands? How do you explain these disparaging priorities? Why the leftists exercise this much double standards and duplicity when it comes to human rights? Why do they wreak havoc if a Muslim is denied to disregard the rules of the company where she works and decides to wear her veil of shame to thumb her nose at us, or stop in the middle of the work to pray, or refuse to serve alcohol in the restaurant that she works, but they are silent when Muslims burn churches in Islamic countries and kill Christians, Hindus and apostates? Why do you defend the Muslims to use tax funded universities and other public institutions for their payers, and decry schools that say Christian prayer? Why Amnesty International, civil libertarians, and other leftie and liberal dominated organizations don’t make a squeak when Islamic countries abuse the basic human rights of non-Muslims in their midst?»
nem a morte nem a vida, nem os anjos nem os principados, nem o presente nem o futuro, nem as potestades, nem a altura, nem o abismo, nem qualquer outra criatura
8.6.09
Aliança natural - III
Este postal consiste em citações de um diálogo na internet entre Ali Sina, ex-muçulmano, e Pete Rottier, Doutorado em História da Ásia Central e serve, para além de prosseguir com a série Aliança Natural, para apresentar o sítio fundado por Sina, sítio que reúne, entre outros, um número considerável de pessoas na mesma situação que ele, pessoas que, educadas muçulmanas, abandonaram o Islão devido à sua essência expansionista e violenta, bem expressa no Corão e na Sunna, relatada nas hadith.
As citações provêm da réplica de Sina às questões levantadas por Rottier em resposta à primeira abordagem deste ao desafio que Sina lançou aos muçulmanos.
Nesta parte do diálogo, Sina dirige-se a Rottier intrigado pela persistente apologia do Islão por parte dos esquerdistas.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário