HILLARY CLINTON FINALLY FIGURES OUT THAT MUSLIMS DON’T LIKE THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM CHALLENGED………

Clue to the clueless. It has nothing to do with any fear of losing their beliefs, but that criticism of Islam is forbidden, especially by the non-Muslim, on pain of death. Criticism of Islam and its leaders translates to a total rejection of the sharia, and therefore an anathema to the mohammedan. Shillary still doesn’t get it, still stuck on stupid. KGS

Clinton Suggests Islamic Governments Fear Debate

by IPT News • Dec 19, 2011 at 9:30 am
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hinted at Islamic fear of a religious debate at an international conference last week on religious freedom, according to Neil Munro of the Daily Caller. The effects of the first phase of the “Istanbul Process,” a multinational debate on balancing religious freedom and the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation’s [OIC] demand for an end to all criticism of Islam wrapped up behind doors without clear results.

“I mean, every one of us who is a religious person knows that there are some who may not support or approve of our religion. But is our religion so weak that statements of disapproval will cause us to lose our faiths?” Clinton asked in what Munro termed a “daring and novel” rebuke of Islamic governments. “And so there is no contradiction between having strong religious beliefs and having the freedom to exercise them and to speak about them and to even have good debates with others,” she added.

More here

Written by KGS

2 Responses

By joy52 Dec 20, 2011

Maybe on the way to having to admit the there is no challenge to or debate in islam, the superior one, Hil had to bring this up. I hope somebody set her straight. At some point, even if it is in her last seconds, I hope she realizes how for unimportant fleeting political gain she sold out America, the Constitution, women, gays, free speech, children’s rights, and non-muslims–animals, even. I had the impression she wanted to leave her mark on history. Little did she know she would become a hand-maiden to the downfall of this country. In her travels, did she notice no islamic country respects her because she is a woman? Is this the legacy she wanted? History will remember.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

There’s No Common Cultural Legacy For The Alt-Right

Still, is there something to it? Is there a common heritage that will cover El Greco and Hume and Dostoyevsky? Is there one that can include the Jacobites and the Jacobins? There is, but it is not racial, and white supremacists reject it because it rejects them. The unifying heritage of Europe is religious and philosophical. It is Jerusalem and Athens, in one famous formulation. Christian religion and Greek philosophy, filtered through Roman law and culture, are the foundation of European culture. The tensions, agreements, developments and settlements between these have shaped the Western world, and these roots of Western civilization are not congenial to white supremacy.

Christianity is universal in its message and Jewish in its origins. For centuries after its founding, Christianity’s center was the Mediterranean world, including Asia Minor and North Africa. Christianity has never been defined by race, and locally-grown racist heresies are only sustainable among those ignorant of Christianity’s teachings, origins and history.

Greek philosophy is likewise ill-suited to serve as a basis for white identity. It is either too universal (addressing the human condition in general) or too local—none of us live as citizens of an ancient Greek polis. Later philosophical developments in Europe, such as the philosophies of the Enlightenment, likewise tend to be too universal for white supremacists seeking a tribal identity. As for the scientific revolution that developed within Western culture (albeit with much borrowed from outside Europe), math doesn’t care what color someone is.

"More here"

War is being waged against Western culture from within which is in essence a war against Christianity and its moral origins in the Hebrew Bible. By attacking these Biblical foundations in the name of reason and human rights, the culture warriors of secularism are sawing off the branch on which they sit. The only way to defend Western civilisation is to reaffirm and restore its Biblical foundations. My argument is a development of ideas I first explored in my 2012 book The World Turned Upside Down: The Global Battle over God, Truth and Power.

We are living in an era which extols reason, science and human rights. These are said to be essential for progress, a civilised society and the betterment of humanity. Religion is said to be their antithesis, the source instead of superstitious mumbo-jumbo, oppression and backward-thinking.

Some of this hostility is being driven by the perceived threat from Islamic terrorism and the Islamisation of Western culture. However, this animus against religion has far deeper roots and can be traced back to what is considered the birthplace of Western reason, the 18th-century Enlightenment.

Actually, it goes back specifically to the French Enlightenment. In England and Scotland, the Enlightenment developed reason and political liberty within the framework of Biblical belief. In France, by contrast, anti-clericalism morphed into fundamental hostility to Christianity and to religion itself.

“Ecrasez l’infame,” said Voltaire (crush infamy) — the infamy to which he referred being not just the Church but Christianity, which he wanted to replace with the religion of reason, virtue and liberty, “drawn from the bosom of nature”.

Perfecting society

But this Enlightenment did not remove religion so much as pervert it. It took millenarian fantasies, the idea that the perfection of the world was at hand, and it secularised them. Instead of God producing heaven on earth, it would be mankind which would bring that about. Reason would create the perfect society and “progress” was the process by which utopia would be attained.

More here"

“I think that we should correct the vocabulary that we use, and call a spade a spade. It is all about Jihad, the Islamic effort to spread Islam globally”:

Terrorist attack – should be called Military Jihad.

Incitement – Media Jihad.

Al-Jazeera – Media Jihad Channel.

Imposing Sharia law – Judicial Jihad or Legislative Jihad.

Boycotting Israel (BDS) – Economic Jihad.

Emigration to EU and US – Emigration Jihad / Hijra Jihad.

Building mosques, Islamic education institutions – Cultural Jihad.

Halal food – Dietary Jihad.

Hijab or Niqab – Clothing Jihad.

Activity of MSA – Academic Jihad.

Activity of CAIR – Political Jihad / Public Jihad.

Collecting money for Islamic “charities” – Financial Jihad.

Political correctness – Submission to Jihad.

J Street, Peace Now, JVP and their likes – Jewish Useful Idiots who Serve Jihad.

Iran deal – Western Support for Nuclear Jihad.

Clinton Suggests Islamic Governments Fear Debate

Share this:

Written by KGS

2 Responses

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply