Cordoba House: Monumental Incomprehension

The Ottawa Citizen published an article by Andrew Potter: A monument to modernity. I find that article to be a monumental exemplar of ignorance, prejudice & arrogance.  I will reproduce and analyze selected excerpts here. If you desire to read the entire article in context, use the link above.  

    Examine the article's sub headline.

  A mosque near Ground Zero would be the perfect rebuke to Islamic fundamentalists, and demonstrate the power of western liberalism

"Western liberalism" implies freedom of religion.  Religion implies anodyne, eleemosynary institutions with a spiritual mission. Islam does not fit that pattern. Islam is violent, at its core, by design.  It declares perpetual war against pagans, Jews & Christians.  The Muslim's mission is to fight in Allah's cause, to kill others and be killed.  The jihad imperatives linked above are confirmed by hadith and codified in Shari'ah [o9.8 & 9.9].

    Islam's mission is mercenary: the personal empowerment & emolument of its founder: "...The spoils are for Allâh and the Messenger...." , "...You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives),... ",  "The spoils of war were not made lawful for any people before us, This is because Allah saw our weakness and humility...",  "When Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests...".  Do you require more evidence?  If so,  post a comment requesting it.

    But jihad is the inner struggle against one's ego.  Yeah, right. Islamic law tells us exactly what it is. "Jihad means to war against non-Muslims,
and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion...."

    "Fundamentalists" are not at issue, neither  are "extremists" nor are "radicals".  Only "believers" are significant to this debate. The ignorant fools who will not read the Qur'an do not know what believers do.  Unfortunately, that information is crucial.  I will quote Surah Al-Imran 110 in its entirety, including the translator's parenthetical & bracketed expressions, because it is crucial to  comprehending the critical concept involved.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

The first bracketed expression identifies the antecedent of the personal pronoun: believers.  Believers are the best of people who enjoin the good and forbid the bad.  To discover the full importance of this ayeh, we must turn to the hadith, one of which explains it explicitly. "...the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam". The believers bring us with chains on our necks until we convert.  What part of this do you not understand?

    Surah Al-Anfal begins with  the disposition of spoils and then defines believers.  Context is required for clarity.

8:2. The believers are only those who, when Allâh is mentioned, feel a fear in their hearts and when His Verses (this Qur'ân) are recited unto them, they (i.e. the Verses) increase their Faith; and they put their trust in their Lord (Alone);

8:3. Who perform As-Salât (Iqâmat­as­Salât) and spend out of that We have provided them.

8:4. It is they who are the believers in truth. For them are grades of dignity with their Lord, and Forgiveness and a generous provision (Paradise).

    Fearing  Allah is a reference to obedience-- to the jihad imperatives. Spending is a reference to participation in Jihad "with your wealth and your lives".
Dignity, forgiveness & generous provision are references to the Mujahid's reward. Once again, full context is required.

3:169. Think not of those who are killed in the Way of Allâh as dead. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision.

3:170. They rejoice in what Allâh has bestowed upon them of His Bounty, rejoicing for the sake of those who have not yet joined them, but are left behind (not yet martyred) that on them no fear shall come, nor shall they grieve.

3:171. They rejoice in a Grace and a Bounty from Allâh, and that Allâh will not waste the reward of the believers.

    Another ayeh states the definition with great clarity.

49:15. Only those are the believers who have believed in Allâh and His Messenger, and afterward doubt not but strive with their wealth and their lives for the Cause of Allâh. Those! They are the truthful.

    There are no extremists, only believers. There are no moderates, only hypocrites, who  shirk jihad.  They are described in another hadith. "...During the last days there will appear some young foolish people who will say the best words but their faith will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have no faith) and will go out from (leave) their religion as an arrow goes out of the game. So, where-ever you find them, kill them, for who-ever kills them shall have reward on the Day of Resurrection."


    Next, Potter accuses conservatives of having more in common with Muslims.

...revealed the basic mean-spiritedness of contemporary American conservatism. But more tellingly, the dispute has revealed the way in which conservatives have more in common with Islamic fundamentalists

Notice how we are labeled as mean-spirited. Is it possible that our LibTard is the mean spirited one?

fat, dumb fish like Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich swimming happily into the barrel to be shot

How did he describe Palin & Gingrich?  "fat, dumb fish"; implying suckers. As a conservative, I demand moral clarity. I will not vote for either of them because they attach unnecessary adjectives to Islam but I do not call them suckers, I call them RINOS and I do not advocate shooting them. .

    Potter invokes  an authority figure to sum up the argument.

Atlantic magazine editor Michael Kinsley probably summed it up best in a widely-circulated blogpost this week, where he asked, "Is there any reason to oppose the mosque that isn't bigoted, or demagogic, or unconstitutional?"

    The proposed Ground Zero (Park 51) Mosque is a symbol of Islamic triumph & supremacy; a place where Muslims will go to curse us and pray for our defeat five times each day.  It will be a place to celebrate and inculcate the damnable doctrines which impelled the "magnificent 19"  to attack us. It will serve to raise the morale of  our enemies, aiding in their recruitment & fund raising efforts.   There is nothing bigoted about opposing the Mosque on these grounds.

    Is there any reason to support the Mosque that is not demagogic?  LibTards  claim constitutional grounds  of religious liberty while in fact, they seek the votes of Muslims while they calumniate conservatives.  If their conduct is not demagogic, what is?

    How can it be unconstitutional to deny the enemy, which has declared and is prosecuting  asymmetrical warfare against us, the "right" to plant their flag of triumph and erect a recruiting center at ground zero?  The  First Amendment's free exercise clause protects legitimate religions, not mercenary & martial war cults which seek to subvert our system and enslave us.
   
    Potter exposes abysmal ignorance of Islam.

The defining characteristic of Islamic fundamentalism is not its hostility to Christianity. Muslims are pretty convinced God is on their side, and they would easily win an even fight between competing religions. But when it comes to the fight between Islam and modernity, it's another story. The rise of Islamic fundamentalism over the course of the 20th century was driven largely by a growing fear of the secularism, individualism, and consumerism of the modern West.

Islam is intolerant. It demands a global monopoly on faith & practice.  Cursing us begins in the last two ayat of the first surah. Allah commands warfare against us in the ninth surah, and immediately thereafter curses us.  Convinced they can win?  Allah had to reduce a promised 10: kill ration to  2:1 because the Muslims could not cut the mustard.  So "fundamentalism" is a response to our modernity?   LibTards might suffer less embarrassment if they would research before they write.

    The Qur'an is given and accepted as the literal word of Allah, passed to Moe through Jibril.  It is given as the  perfected, final word.  "...This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islâm as your religion.... "  What part of that don't the LibTards comprehend?  Moe had something definitive to say about the issue.  "Allah will raise for this community at the end of every hundred years the one who will renovate its religion for it. ".

    LibTards can not comprehend the fact that  Moe's preaching & practice set the standard of Islam, Muslims are commanded to obey what he preached and emulate what he did.  Offensive conquest, genocide & terrorism are normative Islam, not extremism.

    Potter is generous in exposing his irrationality.

But beyond that, what makes western civilization so powerful is precisely the  fact that people here are free to think, say, and do just about anything.

    This issue boils down to the right to  hold and propagate a conviction that one has a divine commission to conquer and subjugate the entire world, to kill all who resist, rape their widows,enslave their orphans and seize their property.   LibTards can not comprehend the fatal fact that  extending rights to Islam abrogates  all our rights.  Waging war against disbelievers is part of Islamic worship.  It is mandatory, not optional.  LibTards can't comprehend that fact.   Even if they would read the Qur'an, hadith  & Islamic law they would never get a clue.


    Potter is  was not satisfied with that, he continued exposing his irrationality and ignorance.

It is hard not to conclude that the reason conservatives are so upset by the proposed mosque is that they don't have much faith in their own culture

A Muslim who can afford them is allowed to have four wives.  That special privilege, in addition to their large population base, gives them a high reproduction rate.  They can and will out breed us as they are doing to Europe.

    Our culture is superior, but LibTards can't admit that fact.  They are hung up on multiculturalism, blindly assuming that all cultures are equal.  They resist any and all attempts to protect and preserve our culture.   What happened to the Christian and Zoroastrian cultures in Persia, Ethiopia, and other cultures in the surrounding region?  What happened to the Hindu & Buddhist cultures in India?

    Was Churchill conservative? Did he have confidence in his culture?

No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.
-- Sir Winston Spencer Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

    Potter exhibits the hallmark of a damned fool.

Imagine a society that could not just permit, but actually encourage Muslims to build a mosque a few blocks from Ground Zero. How fearsome would that be?

    Letting yellow jackets build a nest in your  bedroom would not be a sign of strength, it would be a sign of idiocy.  Put away all spill, choke and fire hazards before clicking the next link. I want you to see what Potter wants to invite to  ground zero. Revolution Muslim