A Religion of
Peace and Tolerance!
January 12th, 2006
|
 |
|
Islamic symbol |
|
Ibrahim
Hoopercrit of
CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) says Islam is a
religion of peace and tolerance. The Grand Imam of Al-Azhar
University in Cairo, Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, says Islam is a
religion of peace and tolerance.
John Esposito, Professor of International Affairs and Islamic
Studies at Georgetown University, says Islam is a religion of peace
and tolerance. Could they be wrong: these Three Wise Men? Okay,
maybe they are not so wise, but there are three of them. How about
Athos, Porthos, and Aramis, the Three Islmo-teers; or better yet, in
the absence of incense and myrrh but not smoke and mirrors—Larry,
Moe and Curly?
First things
first: If Islam is a religion of peace then Hitler’s Das Reich
Division was an SS athletic club that traveled across Europe
entertaining non-believers with fireworks displays. What Mohammed
did to the original occupants of Mecca and Khaybar was what SS
Gruppenfuhrer
Jurgen Stroop did to the Warsaw Ghetto in 1943 though no one
referred to him as the merciful and the beneficent. The Spanish
Inquisition took f ewer lives in 350 years than Islam’s Islamo-fascist
terrorists take in an average 12-month spree. Oh, sure, Islam is a
religion of peace—and Billy Martin never got into a barroom brawl
after nine innings of kicking dirt on some blind bastard’s shoes.
Peaceful
religions don’t destroy giant Buddhas; they don’t turn churches and
synagogues into stables—yet that is precisely what happened in
Bosnia and Kosovo. Martyrs willing to die for a peaceful religion
don’t tear pages from the Holy Book of another religion to use as
toilet paper—yet that is precisely what happened when Islam’s moral
and mental cretins invaded the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.
No peaceful religion would tolerate such behavior on the part of any
of its flock; it would not cheer them; it would condemn them. For
the record, Islam expended far more energy cheering the blasphemers
of the Church of the Nativity than condemning them.
No member of
Saudi Barbaria’s Royal Family ever traveled to Europe or Washington
bearing an olive branch. When they visit the dar al-harb they bring
petrodollars to build hate-spewing mosques and Mad-Rats-Asses
schools and to endow Middle East Studies programs so dhimmis like
John Esposito can act learned while dispensing propaganda that would
have had Joseph Goebbels snickering. There are former Muslims who
insist Islam is not peaceful, never has been, and insist further
that Islam is not a religion. But that can be left to a further
debate.
Second
proposition: Is Islam a tolerant religion? It depends on what one
means by tolerant. College freshmen should ponder this while
watching Fahrenheit 9/11 and then try to define tolerance. A
million dead Christian and animists in Sudan answer the tolerance
question with an emphatic NO! If fact, Al Capone had more tolerance
for Bugs Moran than Sudan’s Islamic Misanthropic Theocrats have for
animism. A religion that eschews a spiritual world including rocks
and cornstalks yet believes trees will tell them where the Jews are
hiding so that they can kill them, is not only ridiculous, it is
absurd. A five-year-old dhimmi who puts his faith in Tinker Bell is
further along the road to tolerance and sanity than someone who
believes in jinns and stoolpigeon trees.
And how tolerant
is Islam of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) when the
Qur’an says 5:35 “Believers, fear Allah and seek the way to
approach Him, striving hard, fighting Jihad (that word again!)
with all your might in His Cause that you may be successful. As
for the disbelievers (previously defined as Christians), if they had
everything on earth, two times over, to give as ransom for the
penalty of the Day of Doom, it would never be accepted from them.
Theirs will be a painful torment. They will desire to get out of the
fire, but they shall not be released from it. They shall have an
everlasting torture.”
Pat Garrett was more tolerant of Billy the Kid; Richard Nixon
was more tolerant of Woodward and Bernstein;
Andrew Jackson was more tolerant of John C. Calhoun and he would
have hung Calhoun if he had had the chance. Go back to: “It would
not be accepted of them.” This is what defines Islam—tolerance
without acceptance.
Garrett not only
tolerated Billy Bonney, he accepted him as a youth who had gone
wrong; Nixon may have despised Woodward and Bernstein, but he
accepted them for what they were—journalists; Jackson knew, by the
Eternal, that Calhoun was a politician and a damn good one—almost as
good as Old Hickory. Without acceptance toleration is a sham. The
Qur’an consigns all non-believers to a painful torment and that
includes John Esposito.
Article 18(a) of
the
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam says: “Everyone
shall have the right to live in security for himself, his religion,
his dependents, his honour and his property.” Article 19(a)
says, “All individuals are equal before the law, without
distinction between the ruler and the ruled.” Article 22(a)
says, “Everyone has the right to express his opinion freely in
such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the
Shari’ah.”
Shari’ah?
Does
Tweety Bird smell a rat?
Article 24
says,
“All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this
Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah.”
“I
did! I did smell a rat!”
Oh, yes—a
large rat; a very large rat, an intolerant rat.
There is no
tolerance for non-Muslims in Islam—there is no acceptance, only an
everlasting torture.
Nikita
Khrushchev said he would bury the West; he was an honest man. Iran’s
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has also promised to bury the West; he is also
an honest man, but probably insane. Someone should give him a copy
of Nikky’s memoirs. It would advance the cause of world peace and
tolerance if Hoopercrit, Tantawi, and Esposito would say what they
really mean. How long could it take—ten seconds? What are they
afraid of? No matter how harsh, no matter how unyielding, the Qur’an
will back them up 100 percent and the Free World would still
tolerate them. Is that so bad? Well, yes, for those who want to be
masters of the world, tolerance is not enough—they must be accepted!
By
Denis Schulz
Freelance Writer
Contact Denis
Keywords and misspellings: politics poletics
democrat demoncrat republican izlam muslim muzlim islimic mohammed
muhamed muhammed |
RSS Feeds to Commentary New
