Latest Entry: American Pravda and New York's Sixth Crime Family     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« Perspective: Exposing the fraud of Barack Obama's "peace process" | Main | Michelle Malkin: Remembering Labor's Legacy Of Violence »

September 5, 2010

'Why we need be concerned, not only about building a mosque at Ground Zero in New York City, but anywhere'

Topics: Political News and commentaries, Understanding Islam

The reason is simple and straight-forward. As James Zumwalt explains, Muslims don't assimilate - they Islamicize. Muslims generally oppose assimilation (yes, there are indeed individual exceptions), grow their population at faster rates than native host populations, and unlike immigrants of other faiths, actually embrace "reverse assimilation" - the process by which the influence of the host population is eventually marginalized due to the disproportionately high growth of an immigrant population which then seeks to impose its beliefs on the host.

[...] What we fail to understand is that, to Muslims, becoming "part of something greater" means the natives surrender their individual identity and way of life to Muslims.

In 1948, the world community unanimously agreed to a UN declaration that human rights are universal. In 1981, Muslim countries distanced themselves from this, claiming Sharia law was controlling, thus limiting such rights primarily to Muslim men. That same Sharia law is now being applied in host countries - including the U.S. - under pressure from growing unassimilated Muslim populations.

Muslim supporters of the Ground Zero mosque raise the Constitution with one hand to claim religious freedom protects its construction. But, hidden in the other hand, is Sharia law - with its standard of human inequality - which they seek to impose, trumping the same Constitution they use against non-supporters. Mosque supporters need to understand they cannot have it both ways. We need to understand that as well.

Take the time to ead read it all ...

Related must-read: How to Stop Them:

We have to fight them, because their radical imams, mosques and schools threaten us; they constitute an assembly line for the next generation of home-grown American jihadi killers. But we can't ask the courts to silence them, because we want to maintain our 1st Amendment rights.

How, then, do we fight? There are three basic lines of attack. The first is to openly contest their odious doctrines and practices. As Manda Ervin said here yesterday, speaking in the name of Muslim women:

We want America to treat Islam like it treats Christianity and Judaism, and to stop exempting Muslims from requirements imposed on others. We want Islam to be challenged by the same questioning, criticism, and control that is applied to other religions. Please stop pampering Islam to appease the terrorists and dictators.
Amazingly, a lot of people act as if it is somehow improper for members of one religion to challenge basic doctrines of other religions, but not only is it proper, it is not nearly as rare as you might imagine. And a lot of what we want to challenge isn't doctrine, but practice.
Read it all ...

Posted by Richard at September 5, 2010 10:48 PM



Articles Related to Political News and commentaries, Understanding Islam: