Here on the fifteenth anniversary of the attacks on the United States by Islamic terrorists and the start of the latest iteration of the Islamic jihad upon the West after a lull of about 200 years, we at Bloody Nib Manor find ourselves wondering why, in view of the on-going attacks and terrorist acts in the West committed by "radicalized" Muslims the faith has been given a pass by liberal politicians and the media.
The usual explanation is that the "radicals" do not represent Mohammedanism (nota bene: this writer does not refer to the religion as Islam; he refers it to Mohammedanism because Muslims consider Mohammed the perfect man and attempt to worship him, though they deny it, by living and thinking as did he) as a whole and that Mohammedanism is a religion of peace and that only about ten percent of the total of the Mohammedan world is "radicalized." If one takes a low figure of the number of Muslims in the world of 1.6 billion adherents or the high figure of 2 billion of the benighted that means, on the low end, there are, according to the media, about 160 million to 200 million Mohammedans who wish very ill on the West and on non-Mohammedans. That is more people who fought under arms during World War Two; a war that was fought on at least three continents with probes onto another three.
The liberal and middle of the road politicians, the liberal press, and the liberal portions of Christianity seem to think, because they have no idea of history, the value of reading history and source documents, or even listening to or reading the statements of Mohammedanism. The, for the want of another and better term, liberal cohort of the West insists that a statement by a a Mohammedan civil rights group which cares more for it's prosperity and religious influence reflect true Mohammedanism. In other words, despite the evidence that at least ten percent, if not more, of the followers of Mohammad want nothing more than all nations to be governed by Sharia Law and will kill and terrorize to meet that goal, the liberal cohort believes, or pretends to believe that Mohammedanism is nothing much more than a Middle Eastern version of Unitarian Universalism with some odd thoughts about how women can dress. After all Amish and Hasidic women dress a bit odd in the modern world. Why not Mohammedan women walking around in duffel bags under the threat that if they show a naked arm they will be whipped? The world is just a wacky place.
Years ago (1996) the Catholic writer Peter Kreeft (a convert from Protestantism to Roman Catholicism), wrote a book entitled Ecumenical Jihad. It is a book that this writer is sure that he'd much rather forget. The rough premise of the book was that all religions should get together in a loose way and fight against secularism in the world. He actually made statements that Hindus could see Christ in Hinduism and that Buddhists can see Christ in Buddhism and that Mohammedanism can see Christ in the Koran. In toehr words, the book was a big Kumbaya fest against secular humanism and religion, any religion is much better than cultural atheism. But Mr. Kreeft, who up until the attacks against the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, spent more time attacking Protestantism than he did Mohammedanism, did not do his reading of history and talking to those who are not Mohammedans who have lived under the rule of Mohammedans. He based his thoughts on an Egypt, a Turkey an Iran of the 1960s and 1970s when the leaders of those nations, as bastards as they may have been, were trying to direct their nations from out of the the cover of the Koran.
If Mr. Kreeft had done his due diligence in research instead of carrying a grudge against Calvin and Luther and Stephan Waldo he would have spoken to Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists, Baha'is and Christians who lived under Mohammedan rule. And he would have found that Mohammedanism is intolerant to anything outside the teachings of an Arab epileptic pedophile who claimed to channel the words of God. But Mr. Kreeft wrote the book twenty years ago, so may be excused for being so damn naive. After all, and it pains this writer to write this, there is a portion of the Catholic Church that is more than willing to overthrow some of the basic tenants of their faith to get more people in the pews.
And all the above is just to state that if a Catholic theologian teaching at a Catholic college who is "supposed" to know better, it's no wonder that the media (a pretty lazy bunch for the past 60 years) fall into the same trap.
The intelligent and interested person would, in deciding what to make of Mohammedanism, would look at history and talk to non-Mohammedans who had lived under Mohammedans. Let's cut down the potential interviewees further. Let's look at monotheists who were not Mohammedans,
Did the Christians and Jews thrive, or even maintain, under Mohammedan rule in Spain and southern France or in North Africa? No, they did not. Those Jews and Christians who were willing to deny their faith in action, in not in fact, may have escaped the burdens of Mohammedanism and may have thrived, but those person were few and far between. The average farmer or tradesman was at the beck and call of the most low-born Mohammedan and had to basically hide his worship of the One True God.
The Sikhs in suffered mightily under Mohammedanism and the Mughal dynasty. The Sikhs were constantly attacked by the Mughals and only when they had had enough of that nonsense did they take up arms to protect themselves and become a warrior class in India. Mohammedanism is one of the reasons that the Sikhs supported and fought for the the English Raj in India. It was not a matter of conquest of the Mohammdeans as much as it was a matter of protection against them.
The Baha'i religion was founded in Persia in the early 19th century. Some people consider them a form of reformed Mohammedanism. Others, including their spokesmen, don't. But the fact of the matter is that the Baha'is have been terribly persecuted in Iran and any other Mohammedan nation. An Indian friend of this writer states that the Baha'is are "soft" and thus easily subjected to bullying by the followers of the Arabian trader. It turns out that the safest places for a Baha'i adherent are the U.S and Canada, Europe and Australia and Israel. They are not safe in their own home.
This writer proposes that there be established an organization of non-Mohammedan monotheistic religions. It could be called something like the Association of Non-Mohammedan Monotheistic Faiths. The purpose of this organization would be to promote the liberty of those faiths and argue against the spirit of easy ecumenicalism that put forth by the media and much of the established church. All of these faiths, while being monothiestic (as is supposed to be Mohammedanism), have suffered under the rule of the adherents of Mohammed.
There has to be a push-back against Mohammedanism. And a strong push back. If there isn't Mohammedansim will use lawfare and warfare to change the nature of the nation and and the values that true peaceful monothiests hold dear.
To be short, we will be under their thumb.
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Saturday, September 10, 2016
Who Ya Callin' Deplorable, Willis?
We here at Bloody Nib Manor are trying our best to ignore the presidential campaign. There is no good candidate, in our opinion, and we sometimes find ourselves wishing for a monarchy with a strong parliament to act against the wishes of the monarch. But we have a strong president with a mostly lap dog legislature. To the residents of the Manor, including the staff, the choice between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump is like the choice between one having one's tea sweetened by a spoonful of dog poop or a spoonful of cat poop at the local ABC tearoom. In other word's, it's time to go to the George and Dragon and drink a whole lot of the local beer because the nation has gone stark raving mad in nominating Ludwig II or a Borgia to be president of the nation.
Having said that, it's an awful thing that Mrs. Clinton has called one half of the supporters of Mr. Trump, "deplorable" as well has other denigrations such as racists and nationalists.
Let us face facts. There are supporters of Mr. Trump who are awful people. The type of people you wouldn't want to stand behind at the 7-11 or Wal-Mart because they have swastikas tattooed on their noggins and are wearing Doc Martin boots. But there are a whole lot of supporters of Mrs. Clinton who walk around the streets wearing tee-shirts bearing the image of Che Guevarra (Cuba's and the left's favorite mass murderer) or Lenin or Stalin. Does one make a man a racist and not the other a Communist of the worst sort?
No presidential candidate can prevent the oddest assortment of people from supporting him of her.
But here's the point. A lot of the people who Mrs. Clinton described as being "deplorable" are the working middle class---men and women who are skilled workers and who see their jobs going to China or Vietnam or Pakistan and who would like to live out their working lives with the idea that they will have a job next week instead of coming into work on a Monday and finding that their job is now being done by a girl named Yuja or a man named Tran or Mohammed in a land far, far away. The whole "We are the world" joke goes okay when one is selling Coke. But it doesn't go so well when one is trying to make the rent.
Mrs. Clinton's comments about the "deplorable" reminds one of Mr. Obama's comment about "bitter clingers." In other words, more than a half of the nation really do not deserve to live in their nation.
Mr. Trump, as a little Nero that he is, at least pretends to pay attention to the working class and the working middle class. Note that this writer has written that Mr. Trump "pretends." Mrs. Clinton doesn't even pretend. She, like many other pols, seem to think that a nation can be made on thinking and no product i.e., Silicon Valley.
This is simply not true. Things, actual things that can be held in one's hand, real things like cars, soap, food, watches, tents and knives and so forth make real money. The rest, the investors and so forth, play with play money that can crash an economy because it's based on nothing at all much like Kim Kardashian. There is no there. It's as empty as a Nebraska cornfield in the dead of winter. It is sweat and blood that makes money. Not ideas despite what the popular press says. If Zuckerberg or Gates or Jobs had had only ideas they would be sitting in their mothers' basements while working at Starbucks as bad baristas and thinking of their ideas. It's the men and women who build the computers and chips that make them wealthy. No computer equals no Microsoft and no Apple and no Facebook.; And yet these jokers have deigned themselves as sort of Masters of the Universe and are not slow to betray their countrymen by sending the jobs to a nation that is just plain bad and awful.
So those are the deplorable. The people in the U.S. who just want to work at a job and be left alone by the government. They are the "bitter clingers" who cling try to cling to their jobs while the jobs are being sent to parts unknown and the religion that they and their forebearers from time immemorial and the right to defend themselves from criminals and the state.
Mr. Trump is an idiot. He always will be a self-absorbed idiot. We, at the Manor, will not vote for him. But Mrs. Clinton is worse simply because she thinks that she knows how to run one's life better than one does.
Needles to say, neither one will be invited to the autumn ball at Bloody Nib Manor.
Having said that, it's an awful thing that Mrs. Clinton has called one half of the supporters of Mr. Trump, "deplorable" as well has other denigrations such as racists and nationalists.
Let us face facts. There are supporters of Mr. Trump who are awful people. The type of people you wouldn't want to stand behind at the 7-11 or Wal-Mart because they have swastikas tattooed on their noggins and are wearing Doc Martin boots. But there are a whole lot of supporters of Mrs. Clinton who walk around the streets wearing tee-shirts bearing the image of Che Guevarra (Cuba's and the left's favorite mass murderer) or Lenin or Stalin. Does one make a man a racist and not the other a Communist of the worst sort?
No presidential candidate can prevent the oddest assortment of people from supporting him of her.
But here's the point. A lot of the people who Mrs. Clinton described as being "deplorable" are the working middle class---men and women who are skilled workers and who see their jobs going to China or Vietnam or Pakistan and who would like to live out their working lives with the idea that they will have a job next week instead of coming into work on a Monday and finding that their job is now being done by a girl named Yuja or a man named Tran or Mohammed in a land far, far away. The whole "We are the world" joke goes okay when one is selling Coke. But it doesn't go so well when one is trying to make the rent.
Mrs. Clinton's comments about the "deplorable" reminds one of Mr. Obama's comment about "bitter clingers." In other words, more than a half of the nation really do not deserve to live in their nation.
Mr. Trump, as a little Nero that he is, at least pretends to pay attention to the working class and the working middle class. Note that this writer has written that Mr. Trump "pretends." Mrs. Clinton doesn't even pretend. She, like many other pols, seem to think that a nation can be made on thinking and no product i.e., Silicon Valley.
This is simply not true. Things, actual things that can be held in one's hand, real things like cars, soap, food, watches, tents and knives and so forth make real money. The rest, the investors and so forth, play with play money that can crash an economy because it's based on nothing at all much like Kim Kardashian. There is no there. It's as empty as a Nebraska cornfield in the dead of winter. It is sweat and blood that makes money. Not ideas despite what the popular press says. If Zuckerberg or Gates or Jobs had had only ideas they would be sitting in their mothers' basements while working at Starbucks as bad baristas and thinking of their ideas. It's the men and women who build the computers and chips that make them wealthy. No computer equals no Microsoft and no Apple and no Facebook.; And yet these jokers have deigned themselves as sort of Masters of the Universe and are not slow to betray their countrymen by sending the jobs to a nation that is just plain bad and awful.
So those are the deplorable. The people in the U.S. who just want to work at a job and be left alone by the government. They are the "bitter clingers" who cling try to cling to their jobs while the jobs are being sent to parts unknown and the religion that they and their forebearers from time immemorial and the right to defend themselves from criminals and the state.
Mr. Trump is an idiot. He always will be a self-absorbed idiot. We, at the Manor, will not vote for him. But Mrs. Clinton is worse simply because she thinks that she knows how to run one's life better than one does.
Needles to say, neither one will be invited to the autumn ball at Bloody Nib Manor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)